Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Classical Hebrew morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Post Reply
kwrandolph
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by kwrandolph »

Jason Hare wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:27 am Karl,

You know exactly what I was saying, and it was not out of line to remind people that pluralism and non-proselytization is the forum standard.
Where have I objected to this standard? In fact, did you not notice what I wrote in my last message? Let me repeat it, “This forum has a policy for not proselytizing. That does NOT mean that we cannot put forth our views and understandings, rather on religiously controversial issues we don’t insist that our interpretations are the only ones acceptable.”

But when you write, “Yet you demonstrated in the discussion of Isaiah 7 that the passage's meaning has less importance for you than your religious views from beyond that passage.” that is a personal attack. That is proselytism on your part. I don’t mind it if you post your interpretations based on your religion, but don’t misrepresent mine.

Do you object that I call you out as having a religion? And that it influences you in your understanding of controversial passages? Even dictionary.com in its definitions #1, 2, 3 and 6 fit even atheism as religion https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion# . Since by definition you have a religion, why object when I call you out as having an interpretation based on your religion? After all, in a FYI I admitted to my religious presuppositions, not for purposes of proselytism (I figure that those on this forum are educated and already know the different teachings), but to try to avoid misunderstandings.

By the way, the Isaiah 7 prophesy is written in such a way that it rules out neither an immediate fulfillment, nor a fulfillment seven centuries later.
Jason Hare wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:27 amYou know precisely what I was saying, and these attacks are out of place, no matter what you think of me personally.
What attacks?

Karl W. Randolph.
User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by Jason Hare »

What attacks?
:roll:
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian
User avatar
Kirk Lowery
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 12:03 pm
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by Kirk Lowery »

Gents,

Discussion of intertestamental relationships including prophecy (single or double) has long been ruled as "off topic", precisely because it requires a set of hermeneutical assumptions and because folks have a hard time being civil. That's no surprise, since many of those assumptions are heart-felt.

So...let us return to the original poster's question of pronominal antecedents. That will be constructive. Let our emotions rise on that question! :twisted:

Kirk
Kirk E. Lowery, PhD
B-Hebrew Site Administrator & Moderator
blog: https://blogs.emdros.org/eh
kwrandolph
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by kwrandolph »

Kirk Lowery wrote: Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:56 am Gents,
Thanks for intervening.
Kirk Lowery wrote: Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:56 amDiscussion of intertestamental relationships including prophecy (single or double) has long been ruled as "off topic", precisely because it requires a set of hermeneutical assumptions and because folks have a hard time being civil. That's no surprise, since many of those assumptions are heart-felt.
Does that include references to the Talmud, Averoës, Rambam, Rashi? Or how about references to that religious theory, not science, based on the religion of two centuries ago German Rationalism—that religious theory that goes by various names such as “Higher Criticism”, “JEPD Theory”, “Form Kritik” or whatever its nom du jour is today?

Does it also rule out references to history?

I thought people on this forum were stable enough that they don’t get their panties all in a bunch when they hear ideas that differ from their own. But from what you say, I was wrong.
Kirk Lowery wrote: Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:56 amSo...let us return to the original poster's question of pronominal antecedents. That will be constructive. Let our emotions rise on that question!

Kirk
If we limit ourselves to Tanakh only, I think that question has been fully answered. Personally, I’m satisfied with that answer.

What about people who have heard other connections such as Talmud or New Testament and are wondering if those connections are valid?

Karl W. Randolph.
User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by Jason Hare »

Kirk Lowery wrote: Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:56 am Gents,

Discussion of intertestamental relationships including prophecy (single or double) has long been ruled as "off topic", precisely because it requires a set of hermeneutical assumptions and because folks have a hard time being civil. That's no surprise, since many of those assumptions are heart-felt.

So...let us return to the original poster's question of pronominal antecedents. That will be constructive. Let our emotions rise on that question! :twisted:

Kirk
Precisely what I meant. We need to be careful when dealing with certain passages because the emotional weight that they carry can lead to places we don't want to go. That's what I meant to say (because the discussion of this chapter was touching on the border of where we shouldn't be).

It would be nice to be able to steer discussion (the job of a moderator—though my perspectives on how a forum should be managed are probably my "religion," as are my views on social and human rights, my opinions about the proper way to wash the dishes and perform housework, as well as my philosophy on ethics in the workplace) without getting kickback and argumentation from users.

I will agree with Karl that the beneficial discussion of the OP's question has been met, and anything further seems less beneficial.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian
Kenneth Greifer
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 3:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by Kenneth Greifer »

If it is ok, I have an opinion about this. I understand that sometimes there are prophecies mentioned in the Hebrew Bible that were actually fulfilled in the Hebrew Bible, so they aren't really controversial. Maybe people could just not discuss how other prophecies were fulfilled or not outside of the Hebrew Bible or after it was written. You can discuss the meaning of the verse without discussing if it was or was not ever fulfilled in any way because that isn't necessary in order to understand the Hebrew.
Kenneth Greifer
User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by Jason Hare »

Hi, Kenneth.
Kenneth Greifer wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 12:45 pmIf it is ok, I have an opinion about this.
Absolutely. We all have opinions on the meaning of the text. I wouldn't expect anyone to not try to figure out the meaning of any passage in the Bible. Everyone has their opinion, of course.
Kenneth Greifer wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 12:45 pmI understand that sometimes there are prophecies mentioned in the Hebrew Bible that were actually fulfilled in the Hebrew Bible, so they aren't really controversial. Maybe people could just not discuss how other prophecies were fulfilled or not outside of the Hebrew Bible or after it was written. You can discuss the meaning of the verse without discussing if it was or was not ever fulfilled in any way because that isn't necessary in order to understand the Hebrew.
Right. That's what we expect. We should be able to have a discussion about the text without it going into personal theological conclusions. Everyone has their opinions, but we should draw the line where it goes beyond the meaning of the text into drawing conclusions about personal faith. That's always been the expectation at B-Hebrew and at B-Greek.

Either way, don't be discouraged from participation. That wasn't my intention at all. We can talk about all the passages of the Bible, but there are passages in which personal faith often determines the understanding of the passage – and in such passages, we should be aware of the plurality of those who participate in the form (or the possibility of bringing in new forum users).
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by SteveMiller »

ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am
SteveMiller wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 11:22 pm Jer 29:10 was given right after Jeconiah was taken captive, which was the beginning of the 70-year captivity (29:1-2).
So from the giving of that word until Cyrus is 69 years, not 49.
You need to remember that the dates that are in the bible not always the same as the dates according to the historians.
yes. I do not trust the ancient dates from historians.
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am But still... it fits in both views.

The prophecy to Jer. about rebuilding Jerusalem should start when the temple is destroyed, right?
There is no need to assume that. Jer 29:1-2 says when Jeremiah gave the prophecy. At the beginning of the 70 year captivity.
Isaiah gave prophecies about the rebuilding of the temple and Jerusalem, long before it was destroyed.
(As far as I know, Isaiah did not even prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, but he prophesied in detail about its restoration.)
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am In Jer. 51:12 it is said that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple in the 19th years of his ruling.

The Prophecy of Jer. says that Jerusalem will start to be built after 70 years of Babylon Ruling. (29:10)

Now take these 70 years minus 19 years = 51
and that is the time that is counted according to the bible.
***
And if you'll go to the Historians...
Then the temple was destroyed in -586
The Cyrus Cylinder is in -538
=48
Thanks, David. That is helpful to me to see this timeline, but that is the time from the destruction of the temple to Cyrus, not from Jeremiah's prophecy to Cyrus.
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am According to the context, this whole chapter starts with the fact that Daniel reads Jer. prophecy and starts asking this question. (Daniel 9:2).
Jer. prophecy about restoring Jerusalem is the basis of this whole thing.
agreed
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am Notice also that in Jer. 29:10 it is called דברי הטוב (my good word)
good point but weak.
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am And once again I have to say that seeing this דבר linked to any word that would come in the future is not reasonable because it leaves Daniel clueless even though he was precious to God and Gabriel was sent to give him the answer.
SteveMiller wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 11:22 pm I don't know why you are so dismissive of Cyrus' proclamation but give this one serious consideration.
I dismiss any future event to be seen as this דבר.
As I said before, it turns these words to Daniel into vain words.
As I said before, you make an excellent point that Daniel was to understand this prophecy.
(I added what you said to my notes in BibleWorks.)
Cyrus' proclamation came shortly after this, and it was a monumental miracle.
Daniel would understand this as the beginning of the 70 weeks.
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am And also, Daniel seeks to find When will Jerusalem will be built, right?
So what is the answer that you propose?
You propose that Gabriel came and started telling him things that would start to happen when Jerusalem will be built.
But WHEN it will be built?
Daniel does not ask, When will Jerusalem be built? He already knows that from Jeremiah's prophecy.
Daniel prays for God to act to fulfill His promise. In other prayers prophets ask How long? When?
I don't see that question anywhere in Dan 9. The requests in Daniel's prayer are vv16-19:
for God to turn away His anger from Jerusalem, to cause His face to shine upon His desolate sanctuary, to forgive, and to do what You had promised.
The answer through Gabriel tells Daniel that there will be a word to restore Jerusalem. It will be unmistakable.
And you will know that what you have prayed has been answered.
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am
SteveMiller wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 11:22 pm Why is this reading not possible?:
From the going forth of the word to bring back and to build Jerusalem until Messiah, Prince is 7 weeks + 62 weeks.
She shall return and be built, the street and moat, but in the distress of the times.
And after the 62 weeks, Messiah will be cut off and have nothing.
According to how you write it, (if you see it as one person) it means that the same Messiah came and gone at the same time.
You say that from time X until the Messiah there would be 7+62=69 weeks.
And then you say that after the 62 weeks (which is the 62 in 7+62) the Messiah will be cut off.
So it means that his coming and cutting off are at the same time?
both events would happen in 69 weeks after time X?
Does that what you mean?
Yes, that is what I mean.
Jesus' ministry was less than 7 years. So His ministry started in the 69th week and ended at the end of the 69th week.
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am (not to mention ignoring the split of 7+62 as if it isn't really written).
As I said before, the 1st 7 weeks accomplish the anointing of the holy of holies and the sealing of the vision and prophet.
If it should be translated:
From the going forth of the word to return and to build Jerusalem unto messiah the prince are 7 weeks.
And [then for] 62 weeks she shall return and be built ..
If the above is the meaning, then the "and 62 weeks" line should start with a waw consecutive.
But, I would have expected the middle of v26 ‎
וְהָעִ֙יר וְהַקֹּ֜דֶשׁ יַ֠שְׁחִית עַ֣ם נָגִ֤יד הַבָּא֙
to also have started with a waw consecutive, since it comes after the messiah being cut off.

David, Thank you for the time you spent talking to me on this. I always learn a lot from you.
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
kwrandolph
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by kwrandolph »

I have problems with the following, and those are linguistic, not religion.
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am You need to remember that the dates that are in the bible not always the same as the dates according to the historians.
yes. I do not trust the ancient dates from historians.
I’ll second that distrust of dates from the historians. They can be as much as a decade off even as late as the Roman period, much worse earlier.
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am But still... it fits in both views.

The prophecy to Jer. about rebuilding Jerusalem should start when the temple is destroyed, right?
Not necessarily.

Jeremiah 25:8–14 says nothing about rebuilding Jerusalem. Only after the land had been depopulated that it would be 70 years before God blesses the land again. How soon was the land depopulated after the destruction of the temple? My reading of Jeremiah is that the depopulation happened only a few months after the destruction of the temple, if even that long.

Jeremiah 29:10 the people will be returned to the land. Again no mention of rebuilding Jerusalem.
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am I dismiss any future event to be seen as this דבר.
As I said before, it turns these words to Daniel into vain words.
As I said before, you make an excellent point that Daniel was to understand this prophecy.
(I added what you said to my notes in BibleWorks.)
Cyrus' proclamation came shortly after this, and it was a monumental miracle.
Daniel would understand this as the beginning of the 70 weeks.
Really? Seeing as the Jeremiah prophesies cited above lack any mention of rebuilding Jerusalem, how would he see Cyrus’ proclamation as a start of the 70 sevens prophesy? Especially, according to Ezra, Cyrus’ proclamation extended only to the rebuilding of the temple which included some support structures?
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am And also, Daniel seeks to find When will Jerusalem will be built, right?
So what is the answer that you propose?
You propose that Gabriel came and started telling him things that would start to happen when Jerusalem will be built.
But WHEN it will be built?
Daniel does not ask, When will Jerusalem be built? He already knows that from Jeremiah's prophecy.
Where in Jeremiah’s prophesy?
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm Daniel prays for God to act to fulfill His promise. In other prayers prophets ask How long? When?
I don't see that question anywhere in Dan 9. The requests in Daniel's prayer are vv16-19:
for God to turn away His anger from Jerusalem, to cause His face to shine upon His desolate sanctuary, to forgive, and to do what You had promised.
The answer through Gabriel tells Daniel that there will be a word to restore Jerusalem. It will be unmistakable.
And you will know that what you have prayed has been answered.
Daniel wants to see Jerusalem rebuilt, but he’s not promised that it will happen in his lifetime. Rather he’s told to know and understand from the command to rebuild the city itself to the destruction of the nation is 490 years (70 sevens). From recorded history, Cyrus did not command the rebuilding of the city.
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm Jesus' ministry was less than 7 years. So His ministry started in the 69th week and ended at the end of the 69th week.
The text doesn’t say that. Rather it says that after the 62 sevens, in other words, during the 63rd seven, that Messiah would be killed (cut off). Or if you say 7 + 62 = 69, then after the 69th seven, during the 70th seven is when Messiah would be cut off. אחר when preceding an event refers to afterwards, following.

In Daniel 9, verse 24 refers to the whole 490 years. Verse 25 mentions two time periods—one 49 years until an anointed national leader (not necessarily Jewish), one 434 years.for rebuilding the city. Verse 26a refers to Messiah being killed after the 434 years, in other words sometime from 435–440 years. Verses 26b–27 detail the destruction of the city, temple and nation with enough detail that it fits the historic records of the Roman suppression of the Jewish revolt.

I haven’t given an interpretation of the passage, other than noting that the last verse and a half fit the description of the Roman suppression of the Jewish revolt. I see nothing in the passage that indicates that the 490 years are anything other than one unit not to be split. I see nothing in the passage that connects it with Cyrus or Daniel. I see nothing in the passage that the two time periods in verse 25 must be consecutive. Those are my conclusions based on linguistic analysis.

Karl W. Randolph.
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Dan 9:26-27 antecedent of He shall confirm a covenant

Post by SteveMiller »

kwrandolph wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 2:19 pm I have problems with the following, and those are linguistic, not religion.
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am But still... it fits in both views.

The prophecy to Jer. about rebuilding Jerusalem should start when the temple is destroyed, right?
Not necessarily.

Jeremiah 25:8–14 says nothing about rebuilding Jerusalem. Only after the land had been depopulated that it would be 70 years before God blesses the land again. How soon was the land depopulated after the destruction of the temple? My reading of Jeremiah is that the depopulation happened only a few months after the destruction of the temple, if even that long.

Jeremiah 29:10 the people will be returned to the land. Again no mention of rebuilding Jerusalem.
You are right, Karl. Thank you very much. Jeremiah does not mention the rebuilding of Jerusalem.
So the word to return and rebuild Jerusalem cannot be Jeremiah's prophesy.
kwrandolph wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 2:19 pm
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am I dismiss any future event to be seen as this דבר.
As I said before, it turns these words to Daniel into vain words.
As I said before, you make an excellent point that Daniel was to understand this prophecy.
(I added what you said to my notes in BibleWorks.)
Cyrus' proclamation came shortly after this, and it was a monumental miracle.
Daniel would understand this as the beginning of the 70 weeks.
Really? Seeing as the Jeremiah prophesies cited above lack any mention of rebuilding Jerusalem, how would he see Cyrus’ proclamation as a start of the 70 sevens prophesy? Especially, according to Ezra, Cyrus’ proclamation extended only to the rebuilding of the temple which included some support structures?
I do not follow you here, Karl.
Cyrus' proclamation included the building of Jerusalem.
The execution of that part of his proclamation was slow, but Daniel 9:25 says "from the going forth of the word", not from the execution of it.
When Gabriel tells Daniel that there will be a word coming to return and to restore Jerusalem, Daniel would recognize Cyrus' miraculous decree as that word.
kwrandolph wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 2:19 pm
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm
ducky wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:30 am And also, Daniel seeks to find When will Jerusalem will be built, right?
So what is the answer that you propose?
You propose that Gabriel came and started telling him things that would start to happen when Jerusalem will be built.
But WHEN it will be built?
Daniel does not ask, When will Jerusalem be built? He already knows that from Jeremiah's prophecy.
Where in Jeremiah’s prophesy?
Daniel says in 9:2 that he understood from Jeremiah's prophesy the time is now to return to Jerusalem.
kwrandolph wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 2:19 pm
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm Daniel prays for God to act to fulfill His promise. In other prayers prophets ask How long? When?
I don't see that question anywhere in Dan 9. The requests in Daniel's prayer are vv16-19:
for God to turn away His anger from Jerusalem, to cause His face to shine upon His desolate sanctuary, to forgive, and to do what You had promised.
The answer through Gabriel tells Daniel that there will be a word to restore Jerusalem. It will be unmistakable.
And you will know that what you have prayed has been answered.
Daniel wants to see Jerusalem rebuilt, but he’s not promised that it will happen in his lifetime. Rather he’s told to know and understand from the command to rebuild the city itself to the destruction of the nation is 490 years (70 sevens). From recorded history, Cyrus did not command the rebuilding of the city.
I think it is very strong that Daniel was to understand what the word to return and to rebuild Jerusalem would be.
That word would be in his lifetime.
According to the Isaiah, Cyrus did command the rebuilding of the city. That trumps any recorded history for you and me.
kwrandolph wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 2:19 pm
SteveMiller wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:57 pm Jesus' ministry was less than 7 years. So His ministry started in the 69th week and ended at the end of the 69th week.
The text doesn’t say that. Rather it says that after the 62 sevens, in other words, during the 63rd seven, that Messiah would be killed (cut off). Or if you say 7 + 62 = 69, then after the 69th seven, during the 70th seven is when Messiah would be cut off. אחר when preceding an event refers to afterwards, following.
I don't think that is always true for a case like this. אחר an event would mean "after that event", yes. But אחר a time unit could include in the last part of that time unit. In the NT, Jesus said he would rise after 3 days, and also rise on the 3rd day. So "after 3 days" can mean "on the 3rd day" at least in Greek and English.
When, for example, Gen 7:10 says "after 7 days", it doesn't necessarily mean on the 8th day, but may mean on the 7th day.
But, it doesn't matter. I don't have a problem with the Messiah being cut off right after the end of the 69th week. And that may be the case. With the Biblical year starting Nisan 1, Jesus was cut off 15 days after the start of a new year.
kwrandolph wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 2:19 pm I haven’t given an interpretation of the passage, other than noting that the last verse and a half fit the description of the Roman suppression of the Jewish revolt. I see nothing in the passage that indicates that the 490 years are anything other than one unit not to be split. I see nothing in the passage that connects it with Cyrus or Daniel. I see nothing in the passage that the two time periods in verse 25 must be consecutive. Those are my conclusions based on linguistic analysis.
This passage is all about 70 weeks. And then inside the prophesy we have 7 and 62 and 1 weeks, which added together = 70.
The default position should be that the 3 numbers of weeks given do not overlap, but add up to the 70 weeks.
If you are going to make any of these 3 divisions concurrent or overlap, the burden of proof is on you to say why the alternative is impossible.
You could say the same to me about putting a gap between the 69th and 70th week.

Thanks Karl. As always, I learn a lot from you.
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
Post Reply