Daniel, Chapters 13 & 14

[HARK!]

The question was - what was the oldest texts that first century readers like Josephus had access to.

Why would that matter? If Yahshua quotes it as scripture; it's scripture. It doesn't matter how old your copy is. Did Josephus accept Yahshua's canon? If not; then I'm not interested in his opinion of what defines the Canon.

 

[BobRyan]

That's not true. You might want to look a little deeper into that subject. We don't have the autograph manuscripts; but there is evidence that at least some of them were not written in Greek.

It is true we don't have autographs for any book in all of scripture - but it is clear that when in the text of scripture the author is said to "translate" in the text saying what something means in greek or Hebrew saying that someone started speaking in Hebrew - they were writing in Greek. Jesus says to the dead girl in Hebrew to arise, and His statement "My God My God why hast thou forsaken Me" is in Hebrew and the author then translates it for the reader - so the reader was clearly reading in Greek.

Letters intended to go beyond Judea to all Christians -- would most certainly not be Hebrew.

 

[BobRyan]

Why would that matter? If Yahshua quotes it as scripture; it's scripture. It doesn't matter how old your copy is. Did Josephus accept Yahshua's canon? If not; then I'm not interested in his opinion of what defines the Canon.

Did Josephus have a phrase "Jesus' canon" in anything he wrote? His statement about no-change and the texts kept in the temple do not say "about which only Jesus knew" or any such thing. It is just a statement about which books were being tracked in the temple and which were not.

NT letters were written to NT Christians in all of the Roman empire - so they had to be in Greek and would be quoting the Greek OT when quoting the OT. But that would not have "changed the content" of the Hebrew Bible being kept in the Temple since the days of Ezra.

so my question for you is still this.

1. Did Daniel switch from writing in Hebrew in Chapter 12 - to then write in Greek in Dan 13 - when writing to his 6th century B.C. Babylonian contemporaries?
2. Do any of your sources argue that Daniel 13 is to be dated older than the 3rd century B.C?

Doesn't this help explain why Jerome who wrote the Latin Vulgate for the Catholic Church insisted that Dan 13 is not canonical?

======================

The history of the book of Daniel in the 6th century B.C is much less convoluted if we consider that Daniel wrote his text in two different languages, Aramaic and Hebrew. And copies were in Hebrew and Aramaic - until in the 2nd century we see Greek chapters added.

And so around that same time - 2nd century B.C. we also get a Greek translation of the OT Hebrew Bible with other books added.

 

[HARK!]

Did Josephus have a phrase "Jesus' canon" in anything he wrote? His statement about no-change and the texts kept in the temple do not say "about which only Jesus knew" or any such thing. It is just a statement about which books were being tracked in the temple and which were not.

I remember this example right off the top of my head. It's just one of numerous examples of when Yahshua and his disciples quoted scripture that didn't bear the seal of approval from Josephus:

(CLV) Ju 1:14
Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesies to these also, saying, "Lo! the Lord came among ten thousand of His saints,

(CLV) Ju 1:15
to do judging against all, and to expose all the irreverent concerning all their irreverent acts in which they are irreverent, and concerning all the hard words which irreverent sinners speak against Him."

Enoch 2:1-2 Behold, he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnal for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him.

Should we toss out the book of Jude; because he was quoting scripture outside of the scriptures accepted by the imposters?

 

[BobRyan]

I remember this example right off the top of my head. It's just one of numerous examples of when Yahshua and his disciples quoted scripture that didn't bear the seal of approval from Josephus:

(CLV) Ju 1:14
Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesies to these also, saying, "Lo! the Lord came among ten thousand of His saints,

(CLV) Ju 1:15
to do judging against all, and to expose all the irreverent concerning all their irreverent acts in which they are irreverent, and concerning all the hard words which irreverent sinners speak against Him."

Enoch 2:1-2 Behold, he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnal for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him.

Should we toss out the book of Jude; because he was quoting scripture outside of the scriptures accepted by the imposters?

Should we toss out Titus 1 because Paul quotes a source not in the Catholic Apocrypha or the Hebrew Bible?

========================

so my question for you is still this.

1. Did Daniel switch from writing in Hebrew in Chapter 12 - to then write in Greek in Dan 13 - when writing to his 6th century B.C. Babylonian contemporaries?
2. Do any of your sources argue that Daniel 13 is to be dated older than the 3rd century B.C?

Doesn't this help explain why Jerome who wrote the Latin Vulgate for the Catholic Church insisted that Dan 13 is not canonical?

The history of the book of Daniel in the 6th century B.C is much less convoluted if we consider that Daniel wrote his text in two different languages, Aramaic and Hebrew. And so then the copies were also in Hebrew and Aramaic - until in the 2nd century we see Greek chapters added.

=====================

1. I don't see any way around that.
2. The reason that some folks (not talking about you or me) do not want Daniel written in the 6th century - is that it is irrefutable proof of inspiration predicting many centuries into the future. And it identifies certain characters as bad actors.

 

[HARK!]

NT letters were written to NT Christians in all of the Roman empire - so they had to be in Greek and would be quoting the Greek OT when quoting the OT. But that would not have "changed the content" of the Hebrew Bible being kept in the Temple since the days of Ezra.

You said that all scholars agree on this. You are incorrect. Like I said before; you might want to dig a little deeper into this subject.

Here is just one source form an extensive amount of evidence contained in my notes.

https://www.hebroots.org/hebrootsarchive/0001/000126_e.html

 

[BobRyan]

You said that all scholars agree on this. You are incorrect. Like I said before; you might want to dig a little deeper into this subject.

Here is just one source form an extensive amount of evidence contained in my notes.

https://www.hebroots.org/hebrootsarchive/0001/000126_e.html

Thanks - that is an interesting link.

When I read this

Matt 27:46
46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lema sabaktanei?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”

and the suggestion is that all of it was Hebrew -- to start with ... if that were true -- how in the world could you have "That is -- “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” in Greek added if the reader is Hebrew?? It makes no sense to offer a greek translation for your Hebrew reader as you write your text in Hebrew.

If that "Eli Eli" text were GREEK and then "That is - My God My God.." were Hebrew then that would fit with the entire letter being in Hebrew and just having that one translation from the Greek back to Hebrew as if Christ was speaking Greek on the cross.

But the text clearly shows Christ speaking Hebrew on the cross - and then Matthew has to translate it into Greek for the reader. How to get around that?

No matter how you try to fix that - once you do - then the reader is still reading Greek.

(So one fix might be to argue that this phrase is added later by someone who is re-translating a Hebrews text of Matthew into Greek for the reader - but this opens the door for that same person who is inserting text... to then take OT quotes from the Hebrew to the greek form for the reader as well). Other scholars argue that Matthew is writing Greek text but using Hebrew idioms for the sake of accuracy since the conversations he is writing about - are all in Hebrew.

 

[HARK!]

1. Did Daniel switch from writing in Hebrew in Chapter 12 - to then write in Greek in Dan 13 - when writing to his 6th century B.C. Babylonian contemporaries?
2. Do any of your sources argue that Daniel 13 is to be dated older than the 3rd century B.C?

Information is difficult to find on Qumran. Many suspect that information has been intentionally suppressed.

Studying this topic is difficult. I just came across the information regarding Daniel recently. I haven't had time to do an extensive study on this particular facet of the Qumran scrolls; therefore I created this thread to get a jumpstart on the subject.

Out of the thousands of fragments found at Qumran, only 27 were written in Greek. What evidence do you have that 4Q551 was written in Greek.

 

[BobRyan]

Out of the thousands of fragments found at Qumran, only 27 were written in Greek. What evidence do you have that 4Q551 was written in Greek.

I have never argued that the only texts that existed at that time were Greek, but the text - if it was in Septuagint - would have been Greek.

 

[HARK!]

Should we toss out Titus 1 because Paul quotes a source not in the Catholic Apocrypha or the Hebrew Bible?

I'm not familiar with that verse; but the answer is still emphatically NO.

Like I said before, Yahshua himself quoted scripture that cannot be found in the Rabbinic Canon. If Yahshua quotes it as scripture; it's scripture. He knows our Father's word better than Josephus, all the Rabbis, the imposter Priests before the fall of the Temple, the Church Fathers, the Pope, and Martin Luther all rolled into one. Argumentum ad populum gets nowhere with YHWH.

 

[HARK!]

I have never argued that the only texts that existed at that time were Greek, but the text - if it was in Septuagint - would have been Greek.

As I recall the Septuagint was written as Yah's people were being infiltrated by Hellenists; as the Zadok Priesthood was being ousted from the Temple. If I recall correctly the oldest Qumran manuscripts date to that same time. I'm not sure why we keep coming back to this Hellenist translation.

 

[HARK!]

and the suggestion is that all of it was Hebrew -- to start with ... if that were true -- how in the world could you have "That is -- “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” in Greek added if the reader is Hebrew?? It makes no sense to offer a greek translation for your Hebrew reader as you write your text in Hebrew.

The vast majority of the Qumran scrolls were written in Hebrew Some were even written in Paleo Hebrew. A minute number were written in Greek. This seems blow the doors off of the argument that the Hebrews were generally writing in Greek at that time.

Now riddle me this: why would a Hebrew, who spoke and wrote Hebrew, write a letter to the Hebrews, who spoke and wrote Hebrew, in any language other than Hebrew?

 

[HARK!]

Should we toss out Titus 1 because Paul quotes a source not in the Catholic Apocrypha or the Hebrew Bible?

If we should; should we throw out the scripture that Yahshua spoke of too?

Here is the smoking gun, that blows away the notion, that post temple Rabbis get to decide what is Canon.

(CLV) Mt 22:29
Now, answering, Jesus said to them, "You are deceived, not being acquainted with the scriptures, nor yet with the power of God.

(CLV) Mt 22:30
For in the resurrection neither are they marrying nor taking in marriage, but are as messengers of God in heaven.

Where can we find this scripture in the Septuagint?

Here is one place it can be found:

Enoch 15:7

spiritual, living the eternal life, and immortal for all generations of the world. And therefore I have not appointed wives for you; for as for the spiritual ones of the heaven, in heaven is their dwelling.

Jerome is an authority for this division, he (Luther) cited St. Jerome, who in the early 5th century distinguished the Hebrew and Greek Old Testaments,[4] stating that books not found in the Hebrew were not received as canonical. Although his statement was controversial in his day,[5] Jerome was later titled a Doctor of the Church and his authority was also cited in the Anglican statement in 1571 of the Thirty-Nine Articles.[6]

Yahshua trumps Jerome.

 

[HARK!]

Doesn't this help explain why Jerome who wrote the Latin Vulgate for the Catholic Church insisted that Dan 13 is not canonical?

Enoch is not in the Latin Vulgate either. I've dismissed Jerome as a reliable witness. His opinions might have some value; but his opinions don't trump the evidence.