Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Daniel 11:29, a third campaign implied?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard AT ont.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Daniel 11:29, a third campaign implied?
  • Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:19:18 -0600

Anthony Becker wrote:
Greetings everyone,

I just joined the list and already have a question. I merely dabble in
Hebrew so please be patient with me. I am looking at Daniel 11:29. There it
says, "WL) THYH KR)SNH WK)XRNH." The RSV/ESV translates as "but it shall not
be this time as it was before." The JPS translates as "but the second time
will not be like the first." Translations such as these see a contrast being
made between two items: the first / former and the last / later. These two
items are no doubt understood to be the 2 campaigns of Antiochus IV against
Egypt given Daniel 11:25-28, 11:29-35. Thus, in effect the meaning of these
translations is "but this campaign will not be successful like the first one
was." My questions is, is it possible that the text should be read as
implying a middle campaign, and translated as "but it shall not be as the
first or as the last"? The reason I ask is that Daniel 11 continues later on
and envisions another campaign against Egypt (among others) which is to be
successful (Daniel 11:40-43). Thus we would have Daniel 11:25-28
(successful, first), 11:29-35 (unsuccessful), 11:40-43 (successful, last).
The statement at 11:29 would then say in effect, "unlike the first and last
campaigns, this one will not be successful." I just want to know if the text
supports such an understanding or if I am overreaching and reading things
into the text.

HH: I don't have the time to study this in depth, but your idea is old, going back to the KJV:

Dan. 11:29 At the time appointed he shall return, and come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter.

HH: The fact that the modern translations (NIV, NRSV, NET) do not agree with the KJV is reason to suspect that the KJV's interpretation is not correct, though it is possible grammatically.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page