Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Dirk Frulla <fiveacorns AT yahoo.com>]

Thanks for responding!
 

The question regarding Daniel 9:2 is closely related to the questions I had 
from Jeremiah because Daniel makes SPECIFIC reference that he got his 
information from Jeremiah. To me, it seems very important to take that into 
consideration when trying to figure out what exactly Daniel meant when he 
wrote chapter 9, verse 2.
 
Which is the main reason why I was also stated the two initial quesitions 
regarding the grammar of Jeremiah 25:11 and Jeremiah 29:10. I don't know 
Hebrew, which is why I am posting to this list.

Here is what I mean in summary:
ALL of the Bibles that I have ever seen - ALL of them render Jeremiah 25:11 
(the very first reference to the 70 years prophecy in the Bible) as a two 
part thought. That is, some of them render it as a compound sentence joined 
with ", and"; however, most render it with a semicolon or a period. It 
doesn't matter how you do it, they all mean that there are two separate 
thoughts expressed. I've gotten ahold of one Hebraist, and he said that there 
are clearly two thoughts there even in Hebrew - which makes sense because 
every Bible renders it as two separate thoughts. This means grammatically the 
seventy years attaches to the "servitude" not the "desolations". 
Most Bibles render Jeremiah 29:10 (except maybe 2 or 3) as "for Babylon". 
Some of them even render it as possessive - "Babylon's seventy years"
So when I read Jeremiah 25:11 and Jeremiah 29:10, grammatically speaking, 
Jeremiah NEVER equates the 70 years with Jerusalem's desolations. The 
emphasis is always on Babylon. In Jeremiah 25 it is seventy years of 
"servitude" for "these nations" (plural). In Jeremiah 29:10 it is seventy 
years "for Babylon" - putting emphasis on Babylon's supremacy. Honestly, 
Daniel may not have even had Jeremiah 25. He was exiled as part of the first 
wave (Daniel 1:1), as you had noted. So he may have only had Jeremiah 29 - 
which was a letter to the exiles. But even if we assume he read what was 
later to became Jeremiah 25, then IT STILL points to servitude for "these 
nations" and seventy years "for Babylon". Nothing that I have read 
specifically attaches the desolations of Jerusalem with the 70 years, IN 
JEREMIAH.
 
Now when I read the NIV translating Daniel as saying the 70 years = 
desolations of Jerusalem, I am confused because he specifically references 
Jeremiah.
 
Let's come at it another way. This is another dimension to it that is 
confusing to me. When Daniel wrote chapter 9, the Jews were still in 
Jerusalem. They had not been released yet - that's the whole reason for his 
prayer in chapter 9. Daniel has just witnessed the end of the Babylonian 
empire in chapter 5. If you go back to Jeremiah chapter 25, read verse 12, 
and then go back to Jeremiah 29 and read the verses after verse 10, there was 
an order that was to be followed - a clear sequence of events.
 
FIRST the 70 years would end 
THEN Babylon would be called to account 
THEN the Jews would return to God - with repentence, fasting, etc. 
THEN the Jews would return to their land
At the time Daniel wrote the prayer recored in chapter 9, the Jews were on 
step #3 - remember Babylon was called to account in ch. 5. It is interesting 
that Daniel set out to do exactly what came next on the list of event - 
repent and pray to God. The Jews were on step #3, NOT step 4. That would come 
a few years later when they got back to their land. Until then, it would 
remain desolated. But look, step #1 was the 70 years ending. So the 70 years 
ended at least 2-3 years before the desolations did. How can they be the same 
period?
 
See what I mean? 
 
That is why I am having such a hard time with the NIV. Now if you look at an 
interlinear for Daniel 9:2, you'll notice the word rendered "fulfill", 
"complete", "accomplish" is strong number H4390. I've looked it up in a 
Hebrew dictionary and it definitely means "bring to and end" - "accomplish" - 
"fulfill". I may not know Hebrew, but words are words because they have 
meaning. And unless Jeremiah was using some sort of idiom, then the NIV left 
out any sense of the word rendered "fulfill".
 
When the word is included, it brings the readers attention to the end of the 
desolations corresponding to the end of the 70 years. Now THAT matches the 
order set forth in Jeremiah. 

Just a side note. The seventy years could be a round. However, it is not 
necessary. If you take Jeremiah at face value - as 70 years of servitude for 
"these nations" to the "king of Babylon", then you can start with the full 
conquering of the Babylonian empire in 609 BC.... 609-539 = 70 years exactly. 
 
 
Thanks!



----- Original Message ----
From: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>
To: "b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org >> "b-hebrew-lists.ibiblio.org"" 
<b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 5:15:27 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] repost of full question

Dirk,

The NIV of Daniel 9:2 seems fine. It justs states things in more normal 
English than the KJV. The text is talking about the number of years that 
Jerusalem's devastation would last. Yes, the city was attacked in 587. 
But it was also attacked by Nebuchadnezzar in 605, when Daniel and 
others went into exile. The dating is in a rounded number. How desolated 
does it have to be to be desolated? Jehoiakim reigned from 609-598, and 
Jehoiachin from 598-597:

2Kings 24:1 In his days King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came up; 
Jehoiakim became his servant for three years; then he turned and 
rebelled against him.
2Kings 24:2 The LORD sent against him bands of the Chaldeans, bands of 
the Arameans, bands of the Moabites, and bands of the Ammonites; he sent 
them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the LORD that 
he spoke by his servants the prophets.
2Kings 24:3 Surely this came upon Judah at the command of the LORD, to 
remove them out of his sight, for the sins of Manasseh, for all that he 
had committed,
2Kings 24:4 and also for the innocent blood that he had shed; for he 
filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and the LORD was not willing to 
pardon.
2Kings 24:5 Now the rest of the deeds of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, 
are they not written in the Book of the Annals of the Kings of Judah?
2Kings 24:6 So Jehoiakim slept with his ancestors; then his son 
Jehoiachin succeeded him.
2Kings 24:7 The king of Egypt did not come again out of his land, for 
the king of Babylon had taken over all that belonged to the king of 
Egypt from the Wadi of Egypt to the River Euphrates.
2Kings 24:8 ¶ Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign; 
he reigned three months in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Nehushta 
daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
2Kings 24:9 He did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, just as his 
father had done.
2Kings 24:10 ¶ At that time the servants of King Nebuchadnezzar of 
Babylon came up to Jerusalem, and the city was besieged.
2Kings 24:11 King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came to the city, while his 
servants were besieging it;
2Kings 24:12 King Jehoiachin of Judah gave himself up to the king of 
Babylon, himself, his mother, his servants, his officers, and his palace 
officials. The king of Babylon took him prisoner in the eighth year of 
his reign.
2Kings 24:13 ¶ He carried off all the treasures of the house of the 
LORD, and the treasures of the king’s house; he cut in pieces all the 
vessels of gold in the temple of the LORD, which King Solomon of Israel 
had made, all this as the LORD had foretold.
2Kings 24:14 He carried away all Jerusalem, all the officials, all the 
warriors, ten thousand captives, all the artisans and the smiths; no one 
remained, except the poorest people of the land.
2Kings 24:15 He carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon; the king’s mother, 
the king’s wives, his officials, and the elite of the land, he took into 
captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon.
2Kings 24:16 The king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon all the men 
of valor, seven thousand, the artisans and the smiths, one thousand, all 
of them strong and fit for war.
2Kings 24:17 The king of Babylon made Mattaniah, Jehoiachin’s uncle, 
king in his place, and changed his name to Zedekiah.


Dan. 1:1 In the third year of the reign of King Jehoiakim of Judah, King 
Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it.
Dan. 1:2 The Lord let King Jehoiakim of Judah fall into his power, as 
well as some of the vessels of the house of God. These he brought to the 
land of Shinar, and placed the vessels in the treasury of his gods.
Dan. 1:3 Then the king commanded his palace master Ashpenaz to bring 
some of the Israelites of the royal family and of the nobility,
Dan. 1:4 young men without physical defect and handsome, versed in every 
branch of wisdom, endowed with knowledge and insight, and competent to 
serve in the king’s palace; they were to be taught the literature and 
language of the Chaldeans.

So Nebuchadnezzar was ruling over and desolating Israel years before 587 
B.C.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard

> I am going to repost my question regarding Daniel 9:2. I did not have too 
> much time previously to give you details. I appologize for this. 
>  
> My questions center around the NIV's translation of Daniel 9:2, how it 
> relates to Jeremiah 25 & 29, and whether the NIV paraphrased the scripture 
> - possibly leaving out some meaning. Let me cite some scriptures from 
> Jeremiah first (since Daniel 9:2 references Jeremiah). To be clear, there 
> are several questions in this post - all of which are grammatical Hebrew 
> questions. Any help would be appreciated.
>  
> To start, Jeremiah 25:11 reads:
>  
> This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these nations will 
> serve the king of Babylon seventy years. (NIV)
>  
> Most Bibles actually render this scripture with a semicolon or period 
> dividing the two halves of this compound sentence. It seems that when you 
> read this scripture, grammatically speaking, the "seventy years" modifier 
> attaches itself to "serve". So it is NOT attaching the "desolation" with 
> the seventy years, but rather the servitude of "these nations". It is 
> stating
>  
> 1) "This whole country" will be desolate
> 2) "These nations" will serve the king of Babylon 70 years ("these nations" 
> is a reference back to verse 9)
>  
> So my first question is this: Is this consistent with the grammar in 
> Hebrew? There seems to be two subjects and two predicates here, and the 70 
> years is attached to the servitude. However, could it be read differently 
> in Hebrew? 
>  
> Next, if we move into Jeremiah 29:10, it states:
>  
> This is what the LORD says: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, 
> I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you back to 
> this place. (NIV)
>  
> Notice that is says "for Babylon". There are a few Bibles (including the 
> KJV) that render it "at Babylon". There is a clear difference in meaning. 
> If a translator were to render it "at Babylon", then it is clearly meaning 
> the seventy years would transpire at the location of Babylon. If a 
> tranlator were to render it "for Babylon", then it has a totally different 
> meaning, one that is compatible to the "servitude" for "many nations" in 
> Jeremiah 25:11.
>  
> So my second question is this: What should it be? "for Babylon" or "at 
> Babylon"?
>  
> Now, we bring it into Daniel 9:2. Daniel references Jeremiah, and then 
> states (as it is translated in the NIV):
>  
> in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood from the Scriptures, 
> according to the word of the LORD given to Jeremiah the prophet, that the 
> desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years.
>  
> Notice that the NIV literally equates the 70 years with the desolation. 
> However, I found that the majority of Bibles out there render it slightly 
> different - and the difference changes the meaning a bit. For example, here 
> it is from NASB:
>  
> in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, observed in the books the number 
> of the years which was revealed as the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the 
> prophet for the completion of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy 
> years. (NASB)
>  
> Notice that in the scripture above, it says, "for the completion of the 
> desolations of Jerusalem". This statement focuses on the END of the 
> desolation, not the desolation as a whole. This difference matters when we 
> consider that Daniel also references Jeremiah - because Jeremiah seemed to 
> indicate that it was "servitude" (not desolation) of "these nations" 
> (plural). If you read it as focusing on the end of the desolations, it 
> agrees with Jeremiah this way ... basically saying that the end of the 70 
> years would bring, as a consequence, the end of the desolation.
>  
> So my third question is this: Is there something missing from the original 
> Hebrew when the NIV translates Daniel 9:2 - and why do most others 
> translate it as "fulfull", "accomplish", or "complete" - bringing focus to 
> the end of the desolation and not the desolation as a whole?
>  
>  
> Here is the main reason for analyzing these scriptures this way: There is a 
> massive amount of historical evidence pointing to 587 as the destruction of 
> Jerusalem. Just about every history book ever written recognizes this. This 
> evidence consists of agreement of several kings lists, business documents 
> recovered from the Neo-Babylonian era (that establish the kings and lengths 
> of reigns), astronomical diaries, and syncronization with other cultures 
> (like Egypt). They all point to 587 as Jerusalem's fall.
>  
> If we take the NIV as it stands, equating the desolation of Jerusalem with 
> the 70 years, then the Jews got back around 538/537, after Cyrus released 
> them. That would put the beginning of the desolation (or the destruction of 
> Jerusalem) at 607/606. About 20 years off.
>  
> However, if we take Jeremiah as saying the 70 years applies to servitude of 
> "these nations", as the grammar seems to indicate, and if Jer. 29:10 says 
> "for Babylon", then there is no issue - it agrees with history. But that 
> means the NIV has either translated this incorrectly, or has simply 
> paraphrased it without carrying over the entire meaning.
>  
> Thanks!
>
>
>      
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and 
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> _______________________________________________
> 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


      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>From fiveacorns AT yahoo.com  Fri Apr 18 11:10:14 2008
Return-Path: <fiveacorns AT yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 62FE14C01F; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:10:14 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from web38905.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web38905.mail.mud.yahoo.com
        [209.191.125.111])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 599CD4C01A
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:10:10 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: (qmail 71537 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Apr 2008 15:10:09 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: 
X7m70JEVM1lMq5fXIlUlizZWDUW3oI0pEWHT6FbnJlrBHZhKQNUhqEf7GZTWoU.xqhiezd0zIVD7O3AJ3uM5VbQ6YROewyffMztXoZ30clRrwANBh9kmsDFbRg--
Received: from [72.10.198.252] by web38905.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP;
        Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:10:09 PDT
X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/902.40 YahooMailWebService/0.7.185
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dirk Frulla <fiveacorns AT yahoo.com>
To: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>,
        b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <778708.70576.qm AT web38905.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] repost of full question
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:10:14 -0000

Sorry! Typo in my last email. The last email said this at the end:

Just a side note. The seventy years could be a round. However, it is not 
necessary. If you take Jeremiah at face value - as 70 years of servitude for 
"these nations" to the "king of Babylon", then you can start with the full 
conquering of the Babylonian empire in 609 BC.... 609-539 = 70 years exactly. 
 


I meant it to read:

Just a side note. The seventy years could be a round. However, it is not 
necessary. If you take Jeremiah at face value - as 70 years of servitude for 
"these nations" to the "king of Babylon", then you can start with the full 
conquering of the ***ASSYRIAN*** empire in 609 BC.... 609-539 = 70 years 
exactly.  



Thanks!

----- Original Message ----
From: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>
To: "b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org >> "b-hebrew-lists.ibiblio.org"" 
<b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 5:15:27 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] repost of full question

Dirk,

The NIV of Daniel 9:2 seems fine. It justs states things in more normal 
English than the KJV. The text is talking about the number of years that 
Jerusalem's devastation would last. Yes, the city was attacked in 587. 
But it was also attacked by Nebuchadnezzar in 605, when Daniel and 
others went into exile. The dating is in a rounded number. How desolated 
does it have to be to be desolated? Jehoiakim reigned from 609-598, and 
Jehoiachin from 598-597:

2Kings 24:1 In his days King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came up; 
Jehoiakim became his servant for three years; then he turned and 
rebelled against him.
2Kings 24:2 The LORD sent against him bands of the Chaldeans, bands of 
the Arameans, bands of the Moabites, and bands of the Ammonites; he sent 
them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the LORD that 
he spoke by his servants the prophets.
2Kings 24:3 Surely this came upon Judah at the command of the LORD, to 
remove them out of his sight, for the sins of Manasseh, for all that he 
had committed,
2Kings 24:4 and also for the innocent blood that he had shed; for he 
filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and the LORD was not willing to 
pardon.
2Kings 24:5 Now the rest of the deeds of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, 
are they not written in the Book of the Annals of the Kings of Judah?
2Kings 24:6 So Jehoiakim slept with his ancestors; then his son 
Jehoiachin succeeded him.
2Kings 24:7 The king of Egypt did not come again out of his land, for 
the king of Babylon had taken over all that belonged to the king of 
Egypt from the Wadi of Egypt to the River Euphrates.
2Kings 24:8 ¶ Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign; 
he reigned three months in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Nehushta 
daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
2Kings 24:9 He did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, just as his 
father had done.
2Kings 24:10 ¶ At that time the servants of King Nebuchadnezzar of 
Babylon came up to Jerusalem, and the city was besieged.
2Kings 24:11 King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came to the city, while his 
servants were besieging it;
2Kings 24:12 King Jehoiachin of Judah gave himself up to the king of 
Babylon, himself, his mother, his servants, his officers, and his palace 
officials. The king of Babylon took him prisoner in the eighth year of 
his reign.
2Kings 24:13 ¶ He carried off all the treasures of the house of the 
LORD, and the treasures of the king’s house; he cut in pieces all the 
vessels of gold in the temple of the LORD, which King Solomon of Israel 
had made, all this as the LORD had foretold.
2Kings 24:14 He carried away all Jerusalem, all the officials, all the 
warriors, ten thousand captives, all the artisans and the smiths; no one 
remained, except the poorest people of the land.
2Kings 24:15 He carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon; the king’s mother, 
the king’s wives, his officials, and the elite of the land, he took into 
captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon.
2Kings 24:16 The king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon all the men 
of valor, seven thousand, the artisans and the smiths, one thousand, all 
of them strong and fit for war.
2Kings 24:17 The king of Babylon made Mattaniah, Jehoiachin’s uncle, 
king in his place, and changed his name to Zedekiah.


Dan. 1:1 In the third year of the reign of King Jehoiakim of Judah, King 
Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it.
Dan. 1:2 The Lord let King Jehoiakim of Judah fall into his power, as 
well as some of the vessels of the house of God. These he brought to the 
land of Shinar, and placed the vessels in the treasury of his gods.
Dan. 1:3 Then the king commanded his palace master Ashpenaz to bring 
some of the Israelites of the royal family and of the nobility,
Dan. 1:4 young men without physical defect and handsome, versed in every 
branch of wisdom, endowed with knowledge and insight, and competent to 
serve in the king’s palace; they were to be taught the literature and 
language of the Chaldeans.

So Nebuchadnezzar was ruling over and desolating Israel years before 587 
B.C.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard

> I am going to repost my question regarding Daniel 9:2. I did not have too 
> much time previously to give you details. I appologize for this. 
>  
> My questions center around the NIV's translation of Daniel 9:2, how it 
> relates to Jeremiah 25 & 29, and whether the NIV paraphrased the scripture 
> - possibly leaving out some meaning. Let me cite some scriptures from 
> Jeremiah first (since Daniel 9:2 references Jeremiah). To be clear, there 
> are several questions in this post - all of which are grammatical Hebrew 
> questions. Any help would be appreciated.
>  
> To start, Jeremiah 25:11 reads:
>  
> This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these nations will 
> serve the king of Babylon seventy years. (NIV)
>  
> Most Bibles actually render this scripture with a semicolon or period 
> dividing the two halves of this compound sentence. It seems that when you 
> read this scripture, grammatically speaking, the "seventy years" modifier 
> attaches itself to "serve". So it is NOT attaching the "desolation" with 
> the seventy years, but rather the servitude of "these nations". It is 
> stating
>  
> 1) "This whole country" will be desolate
> 2) "These nations" will serve the king of Babylon 70 years ("these nations" 
> is a reference back to verse 9)
>  
> So my first question is this: Is this consistent with the grammar in 
> Hebrew? There seems to be two subjects and two predicates here, and the 70 
> years is attached to the servitude. However, could it be read differently 
> in Hebrew? 
>  
> Next, if we move into Jeremiah 29:10, it states:
>  
> This is what the LORD says: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, 
> I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you back to 
> this place. (NIV)
>  
> Notice that is says "for Babylon". There are a few Bibles (including the 
> KJV) that render it "at Babylon". There is a clear difference in meaning. 
> If a translator were to render it "at Babylon", then it is clearly meaning 
> the seventy years would transpire at the location of Babylon. If a 
> tranlator were to render it "for Babylon", then it has a totally different 
> meaning, one that is compatible to the "servitude" for "many nations" in 
> Jeremiah 25:11.
>  
> So my second question is this: What should it be? "for Babylon" or "at 
> Babylon"?
>  
> Now, we bring it into Daniel 9:2. Daniel references Jeremiah, and then 
> states (as it is translated in the NIV):
>  
> in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood from the Scriptures, 
> according to the word of the LORD given to Jeremiah the prophet, that the 
> desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years.
>  
> Notice that the NIV literally equates the 70 years with the desolation. 
> However, I found that the majority of Bibles out there render it slightly 
> different - and the difference changes the meaning a bit. For example, here 
> it is from NASB:
>  
> in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, observed in the books the number 
> of the years which was revealed as the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the 
> prophet for the completion of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy 
> years. (NASB)
>  
> Notice that in the scripture above, it says, "for the completion of the 
> desolations of Jerusalem". This statement focuses on the END of the 
> desolation, not the desolation as a whole. This difference matters when we 
> consider that Daniel also references Jeremiah - because Jeremiah seemed to 
> indicate that it was "servitude" (not desolation) of "these nations" 
> (plural). If you read it as focusing on the end of the desolations, it 
> agrees with Jeremiah this way ... basically saying that the end of the 70 
> years would bring, as a consequence, the end of the desolation.
>  
> So my third question is this: Is there something missing from the original 
> Hebrew when the NIV translates Daniel 9:2 - and why do most others 
> translate it as "fulfull", "accomplish", or "complete" - bringing focus to 
> the end of the desolation and not the desolation as a whole?
>  
>  
> Here is the main reason for analyzing these scriptures this way: There is a 
> massive amount of historical evidence pointing to 587 as the destruction of 
> Jerusalem. Just about every history book ever written recognizes this. This 
> evidence consists of agreement of several kings lists, business documents 
> recovered from the Neo-Babylonian era (that establish the kings and lengths 
> of reigns), astronomical diaries, and syncronization with other cultures 
> (like Egypt). They all point to 587 as Jerusalem's fall.
>  
> If we take the NIV as it stands, equating the desolation of Jerusalem with 
> the 70 years, then the Jews got back around 538/537, after Cyrus released 
> them. That would put the beginning of the desolation (or the destruction of 
> Jerusalem) at 607/606. About 20 years off.
>  
> However, if we take Jeremiah as saying the 70 years applies to servitude of 
> "these nations", as the grammar seems to indicate, and if Jer. 29:10 says 
> "for Babylon", then there is no issue - it agrees with history. But that 
> means the NIV has either translated this incorrectly, or has simply 
> paraphrased it without carrying over the entire meaning.
>  
> Thanks!
>
>
>      
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and 
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> _______________________________________________
> 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


      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>From kwonbbl AT gmail.com  Fri Apr 18 14:44:58 2008
Return-Path: <kwonbbl AT gmail.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id CC6654C01E; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:44:58 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled
        version=3.2.3
Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com 
[64.233.184.230])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C92C4C017
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:44:58 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 68so485866wri.15
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:44:58 -0700 
(PDT)
Received: by 10.114.159.17 with SMTP id h17mr92522wae.227.1208544296539;
        Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.115.110.4 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5f1984b20804181144ja75db51u6026bc8647a9a49d AT mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:44:56 -0400
From: "Oun Kwon" <kwonbbl AT gmail.com>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
In-Reply-To: <434976.93131.qm AT web38903.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <434976.93131.qm AT web38903.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] repost of full question
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:44:59 -0000

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Dirk Frulla <fiveacorns AT yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks for responding!
>
>
> The question regarding Daniel 9:2 is closely related to the questions I had 
> from Jeremiah because Daniel makes SPECIFIC reference that he got his 
> information from Jeremiah. To me, it seems very important to take that into 
> consideration when trying to figure out what exactly Daniel meant when he 
> wrote chapter 9, verse 2.
>
> Which is the main reason why I was also stated the two initial quesitions 
> regarding the grammar of Jeremiah 25:11 and Jeremiah 29:10. I don't know 
> Hebrew, which is why I am posting to this list.
>
> Here is what I mean in summary:
> ALL of the Bibles that I have ever seen - ALL of them render Jeremiah 25:11 
> (the very first reference to the 70 years prophecy in the Bible) as a two 
> part thought. That is, some of them render it as a compound sentence joined 
> with ", and"; however, most render it with a semicolon or a period. It 
> doesn't matter how you do it, they all mean that there are two separate 
> thoughts expressed. I've gotten ahold of one Hebraist, and he said that 
> there are clearly two thoughts there even in Hebrew - which makes sense 
> because every Bible renders it as two separate thoughts. This means 
> grammatically the seventy years attaches to the "servitude" not the 
> "desolations".
> Most Bibles render Jeremiah 29:10 (except maybe 2 or 3) as "for Babylon". 
> Some of them even render it as possessive - "Babylon's seventy years"
> So when I read Jeremiah 25:11 and Jeremiah 29:10, grammatically speaking, 
> Jeremiah NEVER equates the 70 years with Jerusalem's desolations. The 
> emphasis is always on Babylon. In Jeremiah 25 it is seventy years of 
> "servitude" for "these nations" (plural). In Jeremiah 29:10 it is seventy 
> years "for Babylon" - putting emphasis on Babylon's supremacy. Honestly, 
> Daniel may not have even had Jeremiah 25. He was exiled as part of the 
> first wave (Daniel 1:1), as you had noted. So he may have only had Jeremiah 
> 29 - which was a letter to the exiles. But even if we assume he read what 
> was later to became Jeremiah 25, then IT STILL points to servitude for 
> "these nations" and seventy years "for Babylon". Nothing that I have read 
> specifically attaches the desolations of Jerusalem with the 70 years, IN 
> JEREMIAH.
>
> Now when I read the NIV translating Daniel as saying the 70 years = 
> desolations of Jerusalem, I am confused because he specifically references 
> Jeremiah.
>
> Let's come at it another way. This is another dimension to it that is 
> confusing to me. When Daniel wrote chapter 9, the Jews were still in 
> Jerusalem. They had not been released yet - that's the whole reason for his 
> prayer in chapter 9. Daniel has just witnessed the end of the Babylonian 
> empire in chapter 5. If you go back to Jeremiah chapter 25, read verse 12, 
> and then go back to Jeremiah 29 and read the verses after verse 10, there 
> was an order that was to be followed - a clear sequence of events.
>
> FIRST the 70 years would end
> THEN Babylon would be called to account
> THEN the Jews would return to God - with repentence, fasting, etc.
> THEN the Jews would return to their land
> At the time Daniel wrote the prayer recored in chapter 9, the Jews were on 
> step #3 - remember Babylon was called to account in ch. 5. It is 
> interesting that Daniel set out to do exactly what came next on the list of 
> event - repent and pray to God. The Jews were on step #3, NOT step 4. That 
> would come a few years later when they got back to their land. Until then, 
> it would remain desolated. But look, step #1 was the 70 years ending. So 
> the 70 years ended at least 2-3 years before the desolations did. How can 
> they be the same period?
>
> See what I mean?
>
> That is why I am having such a hard time with the NIV. Now if you look at 
> an interlinear for Daniel 9:2, you'll notice the word rendered "fulfill", 
> "complete", "accomplish" is strong number H4390. I've looked it up in a 
> Hebrew dictionary and it definitely means "bring to and end" - "accomplish" 
> - "fulfill". I may not know Hebrew, but words are words because they have 
> meaning. And unless Jeremiah was using some sort of idiom, then the NIV 
> left out any sense of the word rendered "fulfill".
>
> When the word is included, it brings the readers attention to the end of 
> the desolations corresponding to the end of the 70 years. Now THAT matches 
> the order set forth in Jeremiah.
>
> Just a side note. The seventy years could be a round. However, it is not 
> necessary. If you take Jeremiah at face value - as 70 years of servitude 
> for "these nations" to the "king of Babylon", then you can start with the 
> full conquering of the Babylonian empire in 609 BC.... 609-539 = 70 years 
> exactly.
>
> Thanks!
>
>

>From simple minded understanding of the Bible text,

why don't we take 'desolation of Jerusalem' synonymous/figurative for
'servitude of Israelites'? (Not just physical desolation of the city
after a war.)

Oun Kwon.