Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Ian Hutchesson" <mc2499 AT mclink.it>]

>Ian, I don't find it unusual that a Jewish writer such as Daniel was
>writing about resurrection from the dead and everlasting life after death.

Read in the historical context of the dramatic period of the Hellenistic
crisis it was clearly not unusual. Both 1 Enoch and 2 Maccabees wrote on the
subject. However literature written later (1 Maccabees, Psalms of Solomon)
show no interest at all in the notion of resurrection. Times changed.

>This same topic was broached in Hebrew literature both before and
>after Daniel. It looks to me that it was a part of the Jewish mindset.

List the places where this topic was "broached" in Hebrew literature and
when the texts were written and then we might be able to comment.

>Ezekiel was a contemporary of Daniel who also wrote from Babylon,
>and as such my mention of his comments on the resurrection from the dead
>was a calculated choice on my part.

Are you saying that either Daniel or Ezekiel were written in the sixth
century?

Daniel with its lack of knowledge of sixth century history or of sixth
century Aramaic doesn't make much sense at all in the sixth century.

All the harangues against Tyre in Ezekiel were anachronistic from the start
of the Assyrian repressions in the late eighth century down to the more
gentile overlordship of the Persians when Tyrian trade regained its footings
around the Levant. Tyre was fundamentally out of action with Assyrians
taking control of trade in the Levant, yet was of great interest to
Ezekiel's writer, suggesting a writing of that text at least well into the
Persian period when Tyre again stretched its trading tentacles across
Palestine.

--------------

The point of your use of Ezekiel is that it allegedly refers to
resurrection. This of course is not sustained from the text, which is using
metaphor (explained in 37:11) to explain about the coming salvation of
Israel which is in a state comparable to dried bones. The text says God
"will bring you home into the land of Israel."

>I could just as well have brought up
>Jonah whose 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of a whale
>were referenced by another Jew who claimed he was going to be resurrected,

(This is conjecture not derived from the text.)

>or perhaps I could have mentioned King Saul who apparently believed
>in life after death since he had the prophet Samuel called up from the
dead,

(Again not supportable from the text. You should read the text, not what
other people conjecture about it.)

>or even that other Jew with a vision, John, who wrote of seeing
>resurrections of great numbers of people and life after death
>in a manner that coincides with Daniel's vision.

Is this other than empty rhetoric, Christine? Try this: can you show any
references in Hebrew literature from after the Hellenistic crisis to the
start of the Christian literary era which touch on resurrection?

>As I recall a major point of debate between the Pharisees and the Sadducees
>was just this topic, resurrection from the dead and everlasting life.

(Who were these Sadducees and when was this debate?)

I can't see that we are going to get anywhere in this exchange, Christine.
There are three relatively well-dated texts to the Hellenistic crisis which
deal with resurrection. There was a clear context for the nurturing of such
an idea with the dire circumstances of an apparently unwinnable war against
immense odds, circumstances needing the miraculous. It is analogous to the
desperate situation of the American Indians who put on the ghost shirts. The
Dead Sea Scrolls which were mainly written after this period shows little
interest in resurrection. I think therefore the notion of resurrection in
Daniel is another indicator of its historical context.


Ian


>Oddly enough, on the "ancient history"
>site you referenced there is a great deal written on resurrection from the
>dead. (From a literal point of view.)