Jason Hare wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 12:16 am
Do we think this conversation can be had without getting into personal theology?
What do you count as “personal theology”? Like when Isaac Fried speculated “may well mean the coming to an end of the monarchy.”? And you responded “An interesting perspective.”? Or where you wrote, “I think that's how most take it. Onias III, if I remember correctly.”? How are those specific examples not “personal theology”?
Jason Hare wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 12:16 amI really am trying to just stay out of it. Please, try to tread lightly. This passage is clearly controversial. Let's not try to use it as a proselytization springboard.
For me, the questions are:
• What does the text actually say?
• Can the text be correlated to history?
• What about various theories concerning the text? Can they be supported by what the text actually says?
Jason Hare wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 12:16 amWe all have different views of Messiah and such, and it'd be nice if we didn't get into polemical wars on these subjects.
Who’s in a “polemical war” on this subject?
Let’s take the common theory that Messiah would be cut off after 69 sevens. That means that Messiah would be killed during the 70th seven, which was also a time of war and destruction. What textual support is there for that theory?
Are verses 26b and 27 descriptions of separate events, or of the same event? Does not the form of והגביר indicate that verse 27 is a continuation of verse 26b?
How closely does this prophesy correlate to history? Connected to this is how much can we trust the interpretations of modern historians? Take for example the date of Jesus’ birth—originally set for year 1, now many historians conclude was year 7 BC, is that the last word or can we conclude that even that date could be revised by new discoveries? What about other dates posited by modern historians?
What about the time periods mentioned in verses 25–26a, are they consecutive (as apparently most people interpret them) or concurrent? What evidence for either is there in the text? Can those two time periods be correlated to history? To other accounts in Tanakh?
I personally didn’t mind the excursion into the book of Revelation, because there are theories that connect it to one interpretation of verse 27. However “beast” is not interpreted in Revelation, so we look to where it is interpreted, and that is in other chapters of Daniel, therefore take the interpretation from Daniel. But when we take the interpretation from Daniel, how does that not impact those theories of a connection between Revelation and Daniel 9:27?
I can go on and on, but all of these questions I raise are derived from the three questions that I list above.
I don’t see how any of these questions are polemical or a “proselytization springboard”.
And I don’t mind you adding your own personal opinions, your “personal theology”, to the discussion.
Karl W. Randolph.