[b-hebrew] Daniel 9:24-27
Rolf Furuli
furuli at online.no
Sat Dec 20 07:10:08 EST 2008
Dear George,
I applaud disagreement, particularly substantial
disagreement. This is the way science should
work, but it is not the way it actually works. A
scholar at the university of Oslo made a study of
which MA students were allowed to continue with
a Ph.D project. He found that in almost all cases
those who were allowed to become Ph.D students
worked on projects that agreed with the opinions
of the University professors. Projects of MA
students with theories and approaches which
challenged the traditional views were rejected.
In all scientific disciplines there are paradigms
and axioms that never are challenged. Thomas
Kuhn, whose field is the history of science, has
written a lot on scientific progress and paradigm
change. His conclusion regarding scientific
progress is that through time different
discoveries contradict the paradigm everyone
believes in, and each discovery is explained away
ad hoc. Then suddenly the old paradigm is
rejected and a new one takes its place. According
to Kuhn, the mechanism of paradigm change is not
that more and more evidence against the paradigm
accumulates, and at last it is proven to be
wrong. To the contrary, the mechanism can be
compared to a religious revival, and is more
based on emotions and belief in authority than on
rational thought. We therefore need go to the
sources themselves and not just repeat what the
authorities say. I know that you go to the bottom
of things, so I look forward to read your article.
I would like to give one example showing the
problems with following authorities instead of
studying the sources. (I give another example in
a post to Jason) The example is Daniel 11:20. It
is almost universally believed that the verse
refers to Antiochus IV who sent Heliodorus to
despoil the temple in Jerusalem (2 Maccabees 3).
Because Bible translators accept this reference,
their translations are colored by it. This is
seen in their rendering of NG$ as "tax collector"
(or a similar expression), but there is no
*lexical* reason for this rendering. Below I
quote a paragraph from the book on the dating of
Daniel that I work on.
Several Bible translators render noges
as
"tax-collector", It is true that the perfect form
of the word in 2 Ki 23:35 is used in the sense
"demand (tax)". But we should note that what is
demanded, namely gold and silver, is explicitly
mentioned in the text. The corresponding verb
means "to be hard pressed". (1 Sam 13:6;
participle: "slavedriver"; Ex 3:7; "to oppress";
Is 3:5; "oppressor" Is 14:4; (participle)
"governor" Is 60:17. Thus, the word generally
refers "to the taskmaster who urges the people to
severe labor, afflicts and oppresses them as
cattle." (Keil-Delitzsch 444). Because these
characteristics could be connected with a
governor or ruler, the word could be applied to
such a person, even if he did not force anyone to
do something. Thus, the participle noges
could
refer to any high official of a king regardless
of what his duty was. From the point of view of
lexical semantics, the popular rendering "tax
collector" is wrong. There is no part of the word
that is connected with tax, and this rendering is
probably chosen, because the translators see the
fulfillment in Heliodorus, who could be viewed as
a tax collector.
The Syriac Peshitta uses s
oltan "power, ruler,
prince", and the LXX has "a man striking (the
honor of the king)," thus taking noges
in the
sense "to strike". The only thing we can know on
the basis of the use of the word noges
, is that
the king mentioned sent one of his officers. We
may also infer that since this sending is
mentioned, there must have been something special
with this situation.
The basic meaning ma'abir "move through; pass
over," and the hiphil participle can have the
meaning "allow/cause to pass over".
Literally the words heder and malkut mean
kingdom/kingship and glorious/splendid
respectively. The word malkut is basically an
abstract word referring to kingship or kingly
power, but because a person having kingly power
uses to rule in a particular country, the word
can refer to the country itself as well. Two
renderings are possible, 1) "who will cause an
official (or, exactor, or, governor) to pass
through the glorious kingdom." and 2) who will
cause an officer/exactor to pass through with
royal glory.
NRSV renders the clause different from other
translations.: "Then shall arise in his place one
who shall send an official for the glory of the
kingdom."
When a person reads a Bible translation and finds
the word "tax collector " and is told about
Heliodorus, there is no doubt about the reference
of the verse in the mind of this person. But if
the original text is studied, the reference to
Heliodorus in this verse is not at all clear.
An analysis of the original text in other verses
in Daniel and a careful scrutiny of what we know
with certainty and what we do not know regarding
Antiochus IV may lead to an understanding of
Daniel that is different from the traditional one.
Best regards,
Rolf Furuli Ph.D
University of Oslo
>Hi Jason!
>
>I'd disagree with Rolf, and say that most Daniel
>scholars would be of the opinion that Antiochus
>IV is certainly the focus of the visionary
>sections of the book. There is ample support for
>this view. However, I'd be interested in reading
>Rolf's view when it is published. I'm not going
>to dismiss his view out of hand (viz. that
>Antiochus IV is not the focus), but I daresay he
>faces an uphill battle.
>
>I've got an article on the 'seventy weeks' which
>I'm hoping to put the finishing touches on in
>the next few weeks. It will be published online
>by JHS very soon. In short, it argues that there
>are some unwarranted assumptions in the way we
>view and calculate the 'seventy weeks', and
>offers a new configuration of the 'seventy
>weeks' which works with the narrative cues of
>the book itself and lands smack bang at the time
>of Antiochus IV.
>
>
>Regards,
>GEORGE ATHAS
>Moore Theological College (Sydney)
>Ph: 9577 9774. Mob: 0449 758 100
>www.moore.edu.au
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>b-hebrew mailing list
>b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
More information about the b-hebrew
mailing list