[b-hebrew] To Yigal: Re: Daniel 11:22

Yigal Levin leviny1 at mail.biu.ac.il
Wed Aug 30 19:06:11 EDT 2006


How did I get into the subject line here? Sujata, the quote you're 
addressing is Shoshanna, not me.

Yigal Levin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "sujata" <shevaroys at yahoo.com>
To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] To Yigal: Re: Daniel 11:22


> "3. I do have justification for opposing people putting Christian
> doctrine into Tanach, where it doesn't exist - it is OUR Bible, and
> our Bible does not teach Christianity. I would never tell a
> Christian what their New Testament means, I would never inject Jewish
> doctrine into it."
>
>  On a similar vein, I could ask  you  to refrain from  injecting Rabbinic 
> doctrine into OUR scripture  since the  Tanach is part  and parcel of OUR 
> (Christian) scripture which includes both the Old and New Testaments.  But 
> I understand that this list is not the place  for such discussions.
>
>
>  Best,
>  Sujata
>
>  Shoshanna Walker <rosewalk at concentric.net> wrote:
>  Dear Yigal:
>
> 1. I don't assume anything, I am drawing on others far wiser than me
>
> 2. Please cite to me Jewish interpretations that "DO understand
> these verses as referring to the Messiah."
>
> 3. I do have justification for opposing people putting Christian
> doctrine into Tanach, where it doesn't exist - it is OUR Bible, and
> our Bible does not teach Christianity. I would never tell a
> Christian what their New Testament means, I would never inject Jewish
> doctrine into it.
>
> 4. "Come on" - to where? I didn't make that up, I cited the Stone
> Tanach, tell THEM they are wrong.
>
> 5. The answer to your last question is that Judaism does NOT
> consider Daniel to be a prophet, even though his writings include
> visions of the future, which we believe to be true, he was not
> considered one of the 55 prophets, BECAUSE
>
> a. Daniel never spoke directly to God. According to the Torah,
> prophets speak to God, not to intermediaries like angels. Daniel saw
> angels and never spoke to God. This is the primary reason Daniel is
> not considered a prophet.
>
> b. His mission was not that of a prophet. In Judaism a prophet speaks
> to his or her generation, not to future generations. The Prophets in
> the Jewish Tanach (e.g., Isaiah, Ezekiel) spoke primarily to their
> generation, but their message was also pertinent to the future.
> Daniel's visions of the future were never intended to be proclaimed
> to the people; they were designed to be written down for future
> generations. Thus, they are Writings, not Prophecies, and are
> classified accordingly.
>
> The Men of the Great Assembly (Sanhedrin) who codified the Jewish
> Bible (Tanach) argued about including Daniel in the Bible and placed
> him in Writings, not Prophets. They are our authority, not the
> Christian canon, which obviously has a different understanding than
> we do.
>
> Shoshanna
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Shoshanna,
>
> Daniel is obviously not a "Christian" book, since it was written many 
> years
> before there was such a thing as Christianity. That's not the issue. Both
> you and John B. Senterfitt seem to assume that the book contains 
> prophecies
> about the future. John quoted a common Christian understanding of Daniel 
> as
> foretelling the coming (and return) of Jesus. You quote a Jewish
> understanding of it foretelling events in later Jewish history - and there
> are Jewish interpretations that DO understand these verses as referring to
> the Messiah. Both interpretations are equally legitimate in their own
> religious contexts. What you forget and John may not know, is that this 
> list
> is neither a Jewish list or a Christian one - you have no justification 
> for
> opposing "foreign doctrine into OUR (meaning Jewish) scripture", just as
> John has no justification for assuming that the Christian interpretation 
> is
> the only one that is legitimate.
>
> Besides, "Rome will be able to conquer the countries surrounding the Land 
> of
> Israel without fear of Hashmonean Intervention" - come on!
>
> And now a serious question: if "the rabbis" (of the "great assembly")
> considered Daniel to be prophetic, why was it not included in the Nevi'im
> (as it is in the Christian canon - that is, together with the "prophetic
> books")?
>
> Yigal
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shoshanna Walker"
> To:
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 3:07 AM
> Subject: [b-hebrew] Daniel 11:22
>
>
>> NONE of these verses refer to any "anti-christ" - which is a foreign
>> concept after all, if this were a Christian book, the rabbis would
>> not have included it in our Tanach.
>>
>>
>> Verse 22 refers to the covenant that the Jews made with the Romans -
>> ie; they will also be crushed by them - this does not refer to
>> Mashiach.
>>
>> Verse 21 refers to the Roman Empire, not to an "anti- christ"
>> ("contemptible one" = Roman empire)
>>
>> Verse 20: The Hashmonean Dynasty will succeed Antiochus in
>> Jerusalem, but it will eventually fall as a result of a battle of
>> succession between the two brothers, Aristobulos and Hyrcanus.
>>
>> Verse 23: By signing a "holy covenant" of friendship (see verses 28,
>> 30) with the Hashmoneans, Rome will be able to conquer the countries
>> surrounding the Land of Israel without fear of Hashmonean
>> Intervention.
>>
>>
>> PLEASE don't put foreign doctrine into our scripture, where it does not
>> exist.
>>
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> Shoshanna
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Seeing as how I am quite new to this endeavor I would appreciate it
>> if I am not acting according to b-hebrew protocol, that you let me
>> know.
>>
>> And so, assuming I am ok, I will go ahead and ask my question.
>>
>> Is there any conceivable way that Daniel 11:22 and the last statement
>> "also prince of covenant" could be in reference to Messiah?
>>
>> I know the verses before and after are obviously referring to the
>> antichrist but could it be that verse 22 is a nugget so easily
>> overlooked?
>> John B. Senterfitt
>> _______________________________________________
>> b-hebrew mailing list
>> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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