translation of Daniel 9:26

Discussion must focus on the Hebrew text (including text criticism) and its ancient translations, not on archaeology, modern language translations, or theological controversies.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Saboi

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby Saboi » Tue May 07, 2019 1:30 pm

Jason Hare wrote: The Masoretes (and most after them) took יכרת as a niphal יִכָּרֵת "will be cut off" rather than as a qal יִכְרֹת "he will cut." Do you know of any other passages in which כרת appears without the explicit object ברית with the meaning "make a covenant." I understand it this way only when these two lexemes appear together.


In the example given in 1 Samuel 20:16, ברית does not appear, only ויכרת and the given Septuagint word is ἐξαρθῆναι, probably an homologue. ויכרת is in the Aorist tense and יכרת is future. don't need vowel pointers to distinguish them. The Jewish scribes translated the Septuagint without diacritics.

2 Chronicles 7.18 - כרתי לדויד אביך
Haggai 2.5 - את־הדבר אשר־כרתי

The Persian context of Daniel is always ignored and odd names.
- Daniel 9:1 - first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus

There was no Persian so-named אחשורוש/Ασουηρος in records, but is the same name in Esther 1:1, אחשורוש, the Septuagint suggests Artaxerxes, Josephus suggests Xerxes and this particular King is followed by Cyrus in Daniel 10:1 " third year of Cyrus king of Persia".

Josephus Antiquities of the Jews - 11.184
after the death of Xerxes, the kingdom came to be transferred to his son Cyrus, whom the Greeks called Artaxerxes

The King in Esther is Xerxes, called אחשורוש, the very name in Daniel 9:1 and he was succeeded by Cyrus, according to Josephus, is another name for Artaxerxes (ארתחששתא).
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... ight=cyrus

Josephus confirms Daniel by forwarding the chronology.

Darius I : 522-484 (38 years)
Xerxes I (Ahasuerus) :486–465 BCE (21 Years)
Artaxerxes I (Cyrus) : 464-424 BCE (40 years)

The Daniel in 9:1 is not called the King of Persia, but "King over the realm of the Chaldeans" probably meant he was a satrap and the historical 'Darius (son of Xerxes I)'.

Then also plausible that Cyrus in Isaiah 45:1 is Artaxerxes I, since Jews knew him as Cyrus. Its seems to me historians are meddling with Ancient Persian History, since no where does it state on Wiki that Artaxerxes was called Cyrus.

R.J. Furuli
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:51 am

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby R.J. Furuli » Wed May 08, 2019 4:37 am

Lee Mcgee wrote:

The Persian context of Daniel is always ignored and odd names.
- Daniel 9:1 - first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus

There was no Persian so-named אחשורוש/Ασουηρος in records, but is the same name in Esther 1:1, אחשורוש, the Septuagint suggests Artaxerxes, Josephus suggests Xerxes and this particular King is followed by Cyrus in Daniel 10:1 " third year of Cyrus king of Persia".

Josephus Antiquities of the Jews - 11.184
after the death of Xerxes, the kingdom came to be transferred to his son Cyrus, whom the Greeks called Artaxerxes

The King in Esther is Xerxes, called אחשורוש, the very name in Daniel 9:1 and he was succeeded by Cyrus, according to Josephus, is another name for Artaxerxes (ארתחששתא).
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... ight=cyrus

Josephus confirms Daniel by forwarding the chronology.

Darius I : 522-484 (38 years)
Xerxes I (Ahasuerus) :486–465 BCE (21 Years)
Artaxerxes I (Cyrus) : 464-424 BCE (40 years)

The Daniel in 9:1 is not called the King of Persia, but "King over the realm of the Chaldeans" probably meant he was a satrap and the historical 'Darius (son of Xerxes I)'.



Dear Lee,

All-propositions are dangerous claims, because no one knows everything of a particular category. It is not true that “The Persian context of Daniel is always ignored.” I have written the book, Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian, and Persian Chronology— Volume I Persian Chronology and the Length of the Babylonian Exile of the Jews, Second edition (2012, 413 p.). This book presents a study of all the known cuneiform tablets dated to the Persian kings until Artaxerxes II, it presents a study of all the more than 3,000 Persepolis tablets, and it presents detailed astronomical calculations of all the extant astronomical tablets until Artaxerxes II (there are tables with the positions of the seven “planets”—sun and moon included—with day, month, and year listed). In addition, a detailed study of Greek data and the data of Josefus is also presented. (I have taught Akkadian for more than a decade, and I am trained in reading astronomical tablets, which is a special discipline inside Akkadian).

The tables of the book have the following dates:

Cyrus: 539/38
Cambyses: 530/29
Bardiya: 521/20
Nebuchandezzar III 519/18
Nebuchadnezzar IV. 518/17
Darius I 516/15
Xeres I 496/95
Artaxerxes I 475/74
Darius II 423/22
Artaxerxes II 405/404

This chronology is very different from the traditional chronology. The problem with the traditional chronology is that historians and archaeologists rely on conclusion drawn by scholars one hundred or more years ago, and they have not tested these conclusions. I am not aware of any other work that has presented data from all the sources in my book.

Moreover, data are often manipulated. My chronology has for example five years between Cambyses and Darius I, while the traditional chronology claims that Bardiya, Nebuchadnezzar III, and Nebuchadnezzar IV ruled only a few months of the same year. Several dated tablets from the accession year and year 1 of Bardiya are found. Taken at face value, these would destroy the whole Persian chronology. So, it is said that “year 1” means “the accession year.” Such an argument for other kings have never been uttered. There is strong evidence that Artaxexes I reigned for 51 years, including one tablet dated in his year 50. This must be an error, according to present day scholars.

As for the king Darius the Mede, who received (passive, pael perfect) the kingdom (Daniel 9:1), I presents data regarding Ugbaru, the pihatu (governor), a word that can be synonym with sharru (king), that fit the description of Darius the Mede. Ugbaru reigned Babylon a short time in 539 BCE. See my book, When Was the Book of Daniel Written? A Philological, Linguistic, and Historical Approach (2017; pp. 174-177).


Best regards,

Rolf J. Furuli
Stavern
Norway

User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 351
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby SteveMiller » Fri May 10, 2019 12:56 am

Kenneth Greifer wrote:Rolf,
I have heard people say something that there is a indefinite period of time that is not mentioned in the prophecy after the 69 weeks or in the middle of the 70th week. I don't know if it is based on a religious belief or the Hebrew of Daniel 9. Some of them say that is based on the Hebrew, but I am not sure why. Is there any Hebrew grammar reason for that belief or is it a religious belief?


The gap between the 69th and 70th week is to match history and other prophecies in the OT and NT, so you may call that a religious reason. I would say that all prophecies should be interpreted in the light of other prophecies and history.
There is some linguistic justification for the gap here in Daniel 9:24 & 27:
In v24, the verb ‎ נֶחְתַּ֥ךְ (root חתך) is a hapax. In Rabbinic Hebrew it means to cut. Arabic hataka = tore apart.
God divided out 70 sevens of years upon Daniel's people, Israel.
These 70 sevens are cut out of time and are mainly concerning Israel.
Since they are cut out, they should not be required to be contiguous.
The gap between the 69th and 70th weeks is called the times of the Gentiles (Luke 21:24) in the NT.

This gap time is also mentioned in :

Hosea 3:4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.


The final 7 years are covered in detail in Revelation. They are split into 2 halves of 3.5 years each.

Another linguistic reason for the gap is ‎ וְהִגְבִּ֥יר at the start of v27.
This is a waw-consecutive, which according to rabbinic grammar, which I follow, says that this takes place AFTER the previous verse.
So this 70th week takes place AFTER the destruction of the temple and holy city in v26.
This time frame is also implied because we would expect that v27 takes place after v26 which takes place after v25, etc.
I do not know of any way to get from the word to bring back Jerusalem to the destruction of the temple in 70 AD in 490 years without a gap.
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)

kwrandolph
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby kwrandolph » Fri May 10, 2019 10:33 pm

SteveMiller wrote:
Kenneth Greifer wrote:Rolf,
I have heard people say something that there is a indefinite period of time that is not mentioned in the prophecy after the 69 weeks or in the middle of the 70th week. I don't know if it is based on a religious belief or the Hebrew of Daniel 9. Some of them say that is based on the Hebrew, but I am not sure why. Is there any Hebrew grammar reason for that belief or is it a religious belief?


The gap between the 69th and 70th week is to match history and other prophecies in the OT and NT, so you may call that a religious reason. I would say that all prophecies should be interpreted in the light of other prophecies and history.


When we read the total passage in context, there’s a gap between just before the 63rd to the 69th “weeks”. This gap can be accounted for in history. But this gap still keeps the 70 “weeks” united as one unit.

SteveMiller wrote:There is some linguistic justification for the gap here in Daniel 9:24 & 27:
In v24, the verb ‎ נֶחְתַּ֥ךְ (root חתך) is a hapax. In Rabbinic Hebrew it means to cut. Arabic hataka = tore apart.
God divided out 70 sevens of years upon Daniel's people, Israel.
These 70 sevens are cut out of time and are mainly concerning Israel.
Since they are cut out, they should not be required to be contiguous.


Why? That “cutting out” concerns only the 70th “week”? The rest you consider as a unit? That inconsistency suggests a problem.

SteveMiller wrote:The gap between the 69th and 70th weeks is called the times of the Gentiles (Luke 21:24) in the NT.


In verse 26, Messiah is cut off after 62 “weeks”, in other words, between 62 and 63 “weeks”. If the 62 “weeks” are taken as following the first seven “weeks”, that means that Messiah is cut of during the 70th “week”. But if the 62 “weeks” are concurrent with the 70 “weeks” total and the first seven “weeks”, then Messiah was cut off during the five years between 434 and 441 years after Nehemiah was commanded to rebuild Jerusalem. The exact year is not given.

SteveMiller wrote:This gap time is also mentioned in :

Hosea 3:4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.


The final 7 years are covered in detail in Revelation. They are split into 2 halves of 3.5 years each.

Another linguistic reason for the gap is ‎ וְהִגְבִּ֥יר at the start of v27.
This is a waw-consecutive, which according to rabbinic grammar, which I follow, says that this takes place AFTER the previous verse.


Rabbinic grammar, according to Waltke and O’Connor, dates back to late second temple period. Under the influences of no native speakers of Biblical Hebrew, first Persian (Farsi) and later Greek then Latin, spoken Hebrew was changed from Biblical grammar to largely Indo-European grammar. We can see the first movement towards that change in the book of Esther. Rabbinic grammar is the same as Tiberian Hebrew, which was very different from Biblical Hebrew.

In Biblical Hebrew, the use of the Qatal verb at the beginning of verse 27 indicates a change of emphasis, from the destruction of the city and temple, to the seven year period when the people mentioned in verse 26 impose their “treaty” upon many, half way through that seven year imposition of their “treaty” sacrifices are stopped.

SteveMiller wrote:So this 70th week takes place AFTER the destruction of the temple and holy city in v26.
This time frame is also implied because we would expect that v27 takes place after v26 which takes place after v25, etc.


If verse 26 is taken after verse 25, then we have the arithmetic of 7 + 62 + 62 + 1, no way do we get 70.

If we take the two 62s as being the same 62 but following the 7, then Messiah is cut off during the 70th “week”.

If we take the 70, the 7 and the 62 “weeks” as being concurrent, then it all fits together. The final 1 “week” is not counted as concurrent because it’s mentioned in connection with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

SteveMiller wrote:I do not know of any way to get from the word to bring back Jerusalem to the destruction of the temple in 70 AD in 490 years without a gap.


I don’t see how the gap fits in the text, neither linguistically nor historically. The only reason the gap is posited is because of the insistence that the 62 “weeks” follow the first seven “weeks”. But there’s no linguistic reason for the 62 to follow the 7. The prophesy fails to match history when the 62 is taken as following the first 7. But the prophesy matches both Biblical Hebrew grammar and history if the 62 “weeks” are taken an concurrent to the first 7 “weeks”.

Karl W. Randolph.

Kenneth Greifer
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 3:05 pm

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby Kenneth Greifer » Mon May 20, 2019 7:54 pm

Steve and Karl,

To be honest, I don't understand your explanations. I am sure they make sense, but I am just not getting it. Personally, I think the prophecy is about 70 real weeks in the future and not weeks of years. I think that the prophecy is vague and people are guessing about what each part of it means, and I am not going to argue about that stuff.
Kenneth Greifer

kwrandolph
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby kwrandolph » Tue May 21, 2019 10:10 am

Kenneth Greifer wrote:Steve and Karl,

… Personally, I think the prophecy is about 70 real weeks in the future and not weeks of years.…


Kenneth: I’ll add something that I learned after I wrote my message above—the word “seven” and “sevens” used in this passage are never used in Tanakh to refer to a week of days. If I were to write the above message again, I wouldn’t use the term “week” because of that non-use in Hebrew.

The closest we get to the same use is in Aramaic, Daniel 4:22, 29. The use of “seven” in those verses is, from the context, longer than a week of days.

Like you, I’m not here to argue, I just think you might find what I researched just recently would be of interest.

Karl W. Randolph.

Kenneth Greifer
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 3:05 pm

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby Kenneth Greifer » Tue May 21, 2019 10:50 am

Karl,

What about Daniel 10:3 and 13 which mention "three weeks (sevens) days". I was thinking that the word "days" could mean "daytimes" or maybe "a year" because the word "days" is sometimes used to mean "annually." I don't have quotes with me right now to list some. Daniel 10:13 mentions 21 days which is coincidentally three weeks of days.
Kenneth Greifer

kwrandolph
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby kwrandolph » Tue May 21, 2019 12:56 pm

Kenneth Greifer wrote:Karl,

What about Daniel 10:3 and 13 which mention "three weeks (sevens) days". I was thinking that the word "days" could mean "daytimes" or maybe "a year" because the word "days" is sometimes used to mean "annually." I don't have quotes with me right now to list some. Daniel 10:13 mentions 21 days which is coincidentally three weeks of days.


Good point.

All along I had been reading Daniel 10:3 as referring to 73 days, but you make a good case that what was meant is three sevens of days.

Here the word “day” is specifically added which is not the case elsewhere. Its addition here indicates that a unit of seven when used to refer to time doesn’t necessarily, or even expectedly, refer to the unit of time of seven days that we call a “week”.

Karl W. Randolph.

Kenneth Greifer
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 3:05 pm

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby Kenneth Greifer » Tue May 21, 2019 3:47 pm

Karl,

If you read it as "seventy three days", wouldn't it have sounded funny. Wouldn't it have been '"seventy and three days" or something like that.

Anyway, it is interesting that Daniel 10:2-3 might say "three sevens (weeks) of days", but it might not say "of days" grammatically. Also, why would it say "of days" for actual weeks, instead of just saying the usual word for "weeks" in Hebrew, if this word does not say "weeks", but "sevens"? I can understand using that word to mean "sevens (weeks) of years", if it said "of years" after it because there is no word for a week or seven of years, but there is a word for a seven or week of days and that word is the usual Hebrew word for "a week." There is no need for an usual word that means "week (seven) of days", in that case. I am not sure if I am explaining this clearly.
Kenneth Greifer

kwrandolph
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: translation of Daniel 9:26

Postby kwrandolph » Tue May 21, 2019 4:33 pm

Kenneth Greifer wrote:Karl,

If you read it as "seventy three days", wouldn't it have sounded funny. Wouldn't it have been '"seventy and three days" or something like that.


Not always. While I can’t put my finger on an example off the top of my head, I seem to remember other examples where the “and” is missing in numbers such as these.

Kenneth Greifer wrote: Anyway, it is interesting that Daniel 10:2-3 might say "three sevens (weeks) of days", but it might not say "of days" grammatically. Also, why would it say "of days" for actual weeks, instead of just saying the usual word for "weeks" in Hebrew, if this word does not say "weeks", but "sevens"? I can understand using that word to mean "sevens (weeks) of years", if it said "of years" after it because there is no word for a week or seven of years, but there is a word for a seven or week of days and that word is the usual Hebrew word for "a week." There is no need for an usual word that means "week (seven) of days", in that case. I am not sure if I am explaining this clearly.


I think I understand what you mean, and I disagree.

Elsewhere in Daniel, namely chapter 4, “seven” is used for a length of time that is definitely not a week of days, rather a long enough time that Nebuchadnezzar’s hair grew out and his fingernails grew long enough to be claws. The implication that this is long enough to be measured in months, if not years. Therefore “seven” ≠ “week”.

Nowhere in Tanakh do we find “seven” or “sevens” standing alone referring to “week(s)”, namely seven days. Taking how the words are used in Tanakh, we don’t get the use of “seven(s)” as referring to “week(s)” in Biblical Hebrew. Post-Biblical Hebrew, maybe, but not Biblical Hebrew.

That would explain Daniel’s addition of “days” after “sevens”.

Karl W. Randolph.


Return to “Hebrew Bible”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests