[b-hebrew] anti-prophet

Karl Randolph kwrandolph at email.com
Thu Dec 30 16:29:17 EST 2004


To be consistant, you’d have to claim that the Tanakh was finished after 73 AD, after the defeat of the Jewish revolt. For example, Daniel 9:24-27 mentions a 490 year period that started at the command to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. That did not happen under Cyrus the Great, which was merely a command to rebuild the temple, rather it started under Nehemiah. The dates I have seen from different sources for Nehemiah’s rebuilding range from ca 390 to 440 BC, so taking an average of 415 BC gives 490 years ending at 75 AD, only two years off from the traditional date of 73 AD for the end of the Jewish revolt, which was put down after seven years by a general who later became emporer, i.e. “the leader who is to come”. About midway through the seven year revolt, the temple sacrifices were stopped, again fitting the prophecy. Therefore, if the prophecy was really written after the events portrayed, then Daniel would have been finished only well after Jesus lived. (Notice, I’m not doing funny things with the years to make them fit some imagined timeline with a separate seven year period that we are still waiting for.) (From the same prophecy, if Jesus was the Messiah who was cut off, his death was about 27 ± a year or two.)

Again, Genesis 49:10 was not fulfilled until about AD 5. Jews were often a vassal nation, but internally continued to be ruled by Jewish law until it was abrogated by the Romans, so was Genesis written in the early years AD? Even Antiochus Epimanes controlled only a few main cities, not the countryside which continued to follow Jewish law, which caused him to lose the main cities as well.

Or is it only through some highly improbable coincidences that these prophecies seem to fit, but that they were meant for some other events?

Now to pull this thread back onto subject, are there linguistic and grammatical reasons apart from philosophy to read these passages differently than as I have interpreted them?

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim West" <jwest at highland.net>
> At 01:06 PM 12/30/2004, you wrote:
> > Any "anti-prophet" movement would have had to have been post
> > about 400 BC when the last of the Tanakh was written. There is
> > nothing in Tanakh that in anti-prophet per se, rather plenty that
> > is anti-false-prophet.
> The tanak was hardly finished before around 150 BCE.
> I have since been directed to David Marcus' book and look forward
> to reading it.  There is also a review on the RBL website- just
> search for David Marcus.
> best
> Jim
> ++++++++++++++++++++
> Jim West, ThD
> http://web.infoave.net/~jwest Biblical Studies Resources
> http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com Biblical Theology Weblog

Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list