[geocentrism] Re: 666
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 14:41:14 -0700 (PDT)
Never mind what scripture states....You depend/consult footnotes for crying
out loud.....??? that is the whole point the footnotes were written by folk who
do just like you and they dont know what they are talking about
either.......Wordy reply .........but it doesn?t make any logical sense
whatsoever in light of the arguments before us?..Tenacity is to be admired ,
willful and deliberate stubbornness for obvious ignorance is arrogant and
shameful??Do you actually believe anything you wrote? It is you who have
deluded yourself ...You acutely claim I addressed few of your arguments?????.
Please someone tell me which argument I failed to address adequatly expalin it
for me?.someone?.anyone?. I obviously don?t understand what Martin is trying to
tell us?...
Where is the scripture that actually supports your argument, (not how you
feel about it not how some commentary that doesn?t know anything about it
feels)? ..that states ch 11 is given in the day of Cyrus? ..I gave you verbatim
shows you that not only was it given in Darius the mead .....all you are doing
here is telling me how you quoting chapters attempting some kind of Exegetical
acrobatics and how it all makes you feel......."never mind the man behind the
curtain ( not that so much as a curtain even exist here) ..What are you talking
about ?.no matter how many words you use or quotes, nothing you have put
forward affects the validity of the arguments I demonstrated
Nowhere in any of your lengthily assertions based on pure "exegetical
acrobatics" do you demonstrate, (Plenty of assertions though) any thing you?ve
written to have nay bearing on or even mention any of your claims .... ??
Martian demonstrate quit or concede.. You would be far ahead if you bother to
read scripture get your head out of you commentaries and Concede?You are much
better then this??..I have proven my case whiteout so much as even one verse
from you that makes claims contrary to the ones I have demonstrated. The ones I
have soundly and decisively demonstrate that scripture excludes the model you
put forward?all you are putting forward is assertions and clumsy exegetical
acrobatics of utter nonsense. Which I "assert" is nonsense! The text is plain
but according to you ?..thank God we have you and your exegetical nonsense to
read and Interpret it for us regardless of what it actually states?just like
you did with the 3 days and nights?.. Does anyone else have or
can they point a logical objection to my proof? How you or many commentators
feel about something is not a valid substitute for demonstrating a logical
argument pro or con from scripture?.I call on Martin to concede
Martin Selbrede <mselbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 27, 2007, at 10:11 AM, Allen Daves wrote:
Martin,
I have soundly refuted all your arguments
I can only conclude that you are well-intentioned but self-deluded on this
claim (which is the most charitable option I can choose).
You have confronted few, if any, of my arguments (which are all based
directly on the Hebrew text and its actual words in situ). You have, more
accurately, unsoundly neglected and dismissed my arguments as if they weren't
worth interacting with. You don't refute them, you merely cite your own
meta-argument back at me without confronting the text. My argument is
granular and text-centric, but you've gone out of your way on several occasions
to deny any merit to assessing the case on the precise grammatical
constructions in the Hebrew, as if those are irrelevant. By doing so, you
torpedoed your own claim to being Biblical, because you didn't care what the
text said, and you actually said so (i.e., that you have the right to argue
based on a faulty English translation and the Hebrew can, in effect, be
dispensed with).Â
In my last post I didn't provide "reasons" why your five points were wrong, I
simply re-assessed them as wrong and didn't feel the need to repeat myself as
to the reasoning why they are wrong, which has been made by me (and neglected
by you) too many times to remember over the last few weeks. This thread and its
predecessor bear dismal testimony to your egregious handling of the texts of
scripture, all in the interest of your theory of chronology and an alleged
solution to the 666 cipher. Where your points are correct, they don't bear on
the question, and where they bear on the question, they're not correct.
When you, in your follow-on post, tell me that something is "imperative
regardless of what your commentary states or what you were taught," you set
yourself up as an unteachable cult of one: there can be no appeal from the
consensus of the last 20 centuries of Christian scholarship, from the brightest
minds of Christendom who spent lifetimes studying this material, because Allen
Daves has an imperative. But why should this surprise us, really, when this
imperative permits one to shut one's ears to the testimony of the Hebrew text,
since that pesky text gets in the way of the theory?
Your recommendation that I make good on burning my library and my Bibles
because you're right and all other Biblical scholarship is deluded is quite
interesting. Permit me to entertain doubt. Why? "He who is faithful in
little things will be faithful in big things." Your persistent error on Dan.
11:1 (despite more recent protests over relevance), which I thought we'd gotten
over but obviously not, is decisive on the point.
Let forum readers walk through the transition from Daniel 10 and 11 in the
following English translation, paying CLOSE ATTENTION to where the subject
break is made, where the parenthesis to define the periphrasis are placed,
consulting the FIRST FOOTNOTE for chapter 11 explaining the correct handling of
Dan. 11:1 and the antecedent reference for the "I" is that is speaking and its
chronological import and how one must deal with it to avoid "confusion" over
the chronology, and, of course, the CONTRAST between that brief backward look
and the subsequent phrase uttered by the Angel, "NOW I will tell you the truth"
(referring directly back to the statement in Daniel 10:1 that the "message that
was revealed to Daniel" was described as "This message was true...").
I appeal strictly to the following text and the construction of the Hebraic
exemplar underlying it, not to my feelings. I have no feelings over the correct
exposition of the text, apart from the fact that it is important to get it
right because God expects us to be "workmen approved, not ashamed." My feelings
don't dictate my statements, THIS TEXT OF SCRIPTURE dictates my statements, and
nothing more, but surely nothing less.Â
For those new to this debate, Allen claims that Daniel 11 and 12 were written
in the same year as Daniel 9. I corrected him on this, pointing out that the
chapter split at 11 is in the MIDDLE of an angel's speech which that angel
began to utter to Daniel earlier in Chapter 10, which specifies exactly when
the angel spoke (3rd year of King Cyrus, not 1st year of Darius). The angel
mere makes a short comment in passing, explaining a brief point of historic
interest, before commencing with the actual thing he was to tell Daniel, as
already pointed out in Daniel 10:1. As you read the Scripture, you'll see what
is actually happening as we cross the (badly positioned) chapter mark. This
translation keeps the correlated thoughts together, as it should. Read the text
closely near that transitional region and pay attention to the translator's
footnote of explanation, and you'll be on reasonable solid ground. I've not
been able to get Allen to step onto that firm ground yet,
however. But there's always the prospect of a breakthrough on this!Â
Martin
Daniel 10
An Angel Appears to Daniel
10:1 1Â In the third 2Â year of King Cyrus of Persia a message was revealed
to Daniel (who was also called Belteshazzar). This message was true and
concerned a great war. 3Â He understood the message and gained insight by the
vision.
10:2 In those days I, Daniel, was mourning for three whole weeks. 4Â 10:3 I
ate no choice food; no meat or wine came to my lips, 5Â nor did I anoint
myself with oil 6Â until the end of those three weeks.
10:4 On the twenty-fourth day of the first month 7Â I was beside the great
river, the Tigris. 8Â 10:5 I looked up 9Â and saw a 10Â man 11Â clothed in
linen; 12Â around his waist was a belt made of gold from Upaz. 13Â 10:6 His
body resembled yellow jasper, 14Â and his face had an appearance like
lightning. His eyes were like blazing torches; 15Â his arms and feet had the
gleam of polished bronze. His voice 16Â thundered forth like the sound of a
large crowd.
10:7 Only I, Daniel, saw the vision; the men who were with me did not see it.
17Â On the contrary, they were overcome with fright 18Â and ran away to hide.
10:8 I alone was left to see this great vision. My strength drained from 19Â
me, and my vigor disappeared; 20Â I was without energy. 21Â 10:9 I listened
to his voice, 22Â and as I did so 23Â I fell into a trance-like sleep with my
face to the ground. 10:10 Then 24Â a hand touched me and set me on my hands
and knees. 25Â 10:11 He said to me, â??Daniel, you are of great value. 26Â
Understand the words that I am about to 27Â speak to you. So stand up, 28Â
for I have now been sent to you.â?? When he said this 29Â to me, I stood up
shaking. 10:12 Then he said to me, â??Donâ??t be afraid, Daniel, for from the
very first day you applied your mind 30Â to understand and to humble yourself
before your God, your words were heard. I have come in response to your words.
10:13 However, the prince of the kingdom of
Persia was opposing me for twenty-one days. But 31Â Michael, one of the
leading princes, came to help me, because I was left there 32Â with the kings
of Persia. 10:14 Now I have come to help you understand what will happen to
your people in the latter days, for the vision pertains to future days.â??
10:15 While he was saying this to me, 33Â I was flat on 34Â the ground and
unable to speak. 10:16 Then 35Â one who appeared to be a human being 36Â was
touching my lips. I opened my mouth and started to speak, saying to the one who
was standing before me, â??Sir, 37Â due to the vision, anxiety has gripped me
and I have no strength. 10:17 How, sir, am I able to speak with you? 38Â My
strength is gone, 39Â and I am breathless.â?? 10:18 Then the one who appeared
to be a human being touched me again 40Â and strengthened me. 10:19 He said to
me, â??Donâ??t be afraid, you who are valued. 41Â Peace be to you! Be strong!
Be really strong!â?? When he spoke to me, I was strengthened. I said, â??Sir,
you may speak now, 42Â for you have given me strength.â?? 10:20 He said, â??Do
you know why I have come to you? 43Â Now I am about to return to engage in
battle with the prince of Persia. When I go, the prince of Greece is coming.
10:21 However, I will first tell you what is
written in a dependable book. 44Â (There is no one who strengthens me against
these princes, 45Â except Michael your 46Â prince.Â
11:1 And in the first year of Darius the Mede, I 1Â stood to strengthen him
and to provide protection for him.) 11:2 Now I will tell you the truth.
The Angel Gives a Message to Daniel
â??Three 2Â more kings will arise for Persia. Then a fourth 3Â king will be
unusually rich, 4Â more so than all who preceded him. When he has amassed
power through his riches, he will stir up everyone against 5Â the kingdom of
Greece. 11:3 Then a powerful king 6Â will arise, exercising great authority
and doing as he pleases. 11:4 Shortly after his rise to power, 7Â his kingdom
will be broken up and distributed toward the four winds of the sky 8Â â?? but
not to his posterity or with the authority he exercised, for his kingdom will
be uprooted and distributed to others besides these.
11:5 â??Then the king of the south 9Â and one of his subordinates 10Â will
grow strong. His subordinate 11Â will resist 12Â him and will rule a kingdom
greater than his. 13Â 11:6 After some years have passed, they 14Â will form
an alliance. Then the daughter 15Â of the king of the south will come to the
king of the north to make an agreement, but she will not retain her power, 16Â
nor will he continue 17Â in his strength. 18Â She, together with the one who
brought her, her child, 19Â and her benefactor will all be delivered over at
that time. 20Â
11:7 â??There will arise in his 21Â place one from her family line 22Â who
will come against their army and will enter the stronghold of the king of the
north and will move against them successfully. 23Â 11:8 He will also take
their gods into captivity to Egypt, along with their cast images and prized
utensils of silver and gold. Then he will withdraw for some years from 24Â the
king of the north. 11:9 Then the king of the north 25Â will advance against
the empire of the king of the south, but will withdraw to his own land. 11:10
His sons 26Â will wage war, mustering a large army which will advance like an
overflowing river and carrying the battle all the way to the enemyâ??s 27Â
fortress. 28Â
11:11 â??Then the king of the south 29Â will be enraged and will march out
to fight against the king of the north, who will also muster a large army, but
that army will be delivered into his hand. 11:12 When the army is taken away,
the king of the south will become arrogant. 30Â He will be responsible for the
death 31Â of thousands and thousands of people, 32Â but he will not continue
to prevail. 11:13 For the king of the north will again muster an army, one
larger than before. At the end of some years he will advance with a huge army
and enormous supplies.
11:14 â??In those times many will oppose 33Â the king of the south. 34Â
Those who are violent 35Â among your own people will rise up in confirmation
of 36Â the vision, but they will falter. 11:15 Then the king of the north will
advance and will build siege mounds and capture a well-fortified city. 37Â The
forces of the south will not prevail, not even his finest contingents. 38Â
They will have no strength to prevail. 11:16 The one advancing against him will
do as he pleases, and no one will be able to stand before him. He will prevail
in the beautiful land, and its annihilation will be within his power. 39Â
11:17 His intention 40Â will be to come with the strength of his entire
kingdom, and he will form alliances. 41Â He will give the king of the south
42Â a daughter 43Â in marriage in order to destroy the kingdom, but it will
not turn out to his advantage. 11:18 Then he will turn his attention 44Â to
the coastal regions and will capture many of them. But a
commander 45Â will bring his shameful conduct to a halt; in addition, 46Â he
will make him pay for his shameful conduct. 47Â 11:19 He will then turn his
attention to the fortresses of his own land, but he will stumble and fall, not
to be found again. 11:20 There will arise after him 48Â one 49Â who will send
out an exactor 50Â of tribute to enhance the splendor of the kingdom, but
after a few days he will be destroyed, 51Â though not in anger or battle.
11:21 â??Then there will arise in his place a despicable person 52Â to whom
the royal honor has not been rightfully conferred. He will come on the scene in
a time of prosperity and will seize the kingdom through deceit. 11:22 Armies
53Â will be suddenly 54Â swept away in defeat 55Â before him; both they and
a covenant leader 56Â will be destroyed. 57Â 11:23 After 58Â entering into
an alliance with him, he will behave treacherously; he will ascend to power
with only a small force. 59Â 11:24 In a time of prosperity for the most
productive areas of the province he will come and accomplish what neither his
fathers nor their fathers accomplished. He will distribute loot, spoils, and
property to his followers, and he will devise plans against fortified cities,
but not for long. 60Â 11:25 He will rouse his strength and enthusiasm 61Â
against the king of the south 62Â with a large army. The king of the south
will wage war with a large and very powerful army, but he
will not be able to prevail because of the plans devised against him. 11:26
Those who share the kingâ??s fine food will attempt to destroy him, and his
army will be swept away; 63Â many will be killed in battle. 11:27 These two
kings, their minds 64Â filled with evil intentions, will trade 65Â lies with
one another at the same table. But it will not succeed, for there is still an
end at the appointed time. 11:28 Then the king of the north 66Â will return to
his own land with much property. His mind will be set against the holy
covenant. He will take action, and then return to his own land. 11:29 At an
appointed time he will again invade the south, but this latter visit will not
turn out the way the former one did. 11:30 The ships of Kittim 67Â will come
against him, leaving him disheartened. 68Â He will turn back and direct his
indignation against the holy covenant. He will return and honor 69Â those who
forsake the holy covenant. 11:31 His forces 70Â will rise up
and profane the fortified sanctuary, 71Â stopping the daily sacrifice. In its
place they will set up 72Â the abomination that causes desolation. 11:32 Then
with smooth words he will defile 73Â those who have rejected 74Â the
covenant. But the people who are loyal to 75Â their God will act valiantly.
76Â Â (Etc.)
TRANSLATION NOTES FOR CHAPTER 10
1Â sn This chapter begins the final unit in the book of Daniel, consisting of
chapters 10-12. The traditional chapter divisions to some extent obscure the
relationship of these chapters.
2Â tc The LXX has â??first.â??
sn Cyrusâ?? third year would have been ca. 536 B.C. Daniel would have been
approximately eighty-four years old at this time.
3 tn The meaning of the Hebrew word צָ×?Ö¸×? (tsavaâ??) is uncertain in
this context. The word most often refers to an army or warfare. It may also
mean â??hard service,â?? and many commentators take that to be the sense here
(i.e., â??the service was greatâ??). The present translation assumes the
reference to be to the spiritual conflicts described, for example, in
10:16â??11:1.
4Â tn Heb â??three weeks of days.â?? The inclusion of â??daysâ?? here and in
v. 3 is perhaps intended to call attention to the fact that these weeks are
very different in nature from those of chap. 9, which are â??weeks of years.â??
5Â tn Heb â??mouth.â??
6Â sn Anointing oneself with oil (usually olive oil) was a common OT practice
due to the severity of the Middle Eastern sun (cf. Ps 121:6). It was also
associated with rejoicing (e.g., Prov 27:9) and was therefore usually not
practiced during a period of mourning.
7Â sn The first month would be the month of Nisan, during which Passover was
observed.
8 tn The Hebrew text has ×?Ö´×?ָּקֶ×? (hiddaqel). â??Tigrisâ?? appears
here in the LXX, since it is the Greek name for this river. Elsewhere in the OT
â??the great riverâ?? refers to the Euphrates (e.g., Gen 15:18; Josh 1:4),
leading some interpreters to think that a mistake is involved in using the
expression to refer to the Tigris. But it is doubtful that the expression had
such a fixed and limited usage. The Syriac, however, does render the word here
by â??Euphratesâ?? (Syr. perat) in keeping with biblical usage elsewhere.
9Â tn Heb â??I lifted up my eyes.â??
10Â tn Heb â??one.â?? The Hebrew numerical adjective is used here like an
English indefinite article.
11Â sn The identity of the messenger is not specifically disclosed.
Presumably he is an unnamed angel. Some interpreters identify him as Gabriel,
but there is no adequate reason for doing so.
12Â tn The Hebrew word ×?Ö¼Ö·×?Ö¼Ö´×?×? (baddim) is a plural of extension.
See GKC 396-97 §124.a, b, c and Joüon 2:500 §136.c.
13Â tn The location of this place and even the exact form of the Hebrew name
×?×?ּפָ×? (â??ufaz) are uncertain. Apparently it was a source for pure gold.
(See Jer 10:9.) The Hebrew word פָ×? (paz, â??refined goldâ?? or â??pure
goldâ??) is more common in the OT than ×?×?ּפָ×?, and some scholars emend
the text of Dan 10:5 to read this word. Cf. also â??Ophirâ?? (1 Kgs 9:28; Isa
13:12; Job 22:24; 28:16).
14 tn The Hebrew word translated â??yellow jasperâ?? is תַּרש×?Ö´×?ש×?
(tarshish); it appears to be a semiprecious stone, but its exact identity is
somewhat uncertain. It may be the yellow jasper, although this is conjectural.
Cf. NAB, NIV â??chrysoliteâ??; NASB, NRSV â??beryl.â??
15Â tn Heb â??torches of fire.â??
16Â tn Heb â??The sound of his wordsâ?? (cf. v. 9).
17Â tn Heb â??the vision.â??
18Â tn Heb â??great trembling fell on them.â??
19Â tn Heb â??did not remain in.â??
20Â tn Heb â??was changed upon me for ruin.â??
21Â tn Heb â??strength.â??
22Â tc Heb â??I heard the sound of his words.â?? These words are absent in
the LXX and the Syriac.
23Â tn Heb â??as I listened to the sound of his words.â??
24Â tn Heb â??Behold.â??
25Â tc Theodotion lacks â??and the palms of my hands.â??
tn Heb â??on my knees and the palms of my hands.â??
26Â tn Or â??a treasured personâ??; KJV â??a man greatly belovedâ??; NASB
â??man of high esteem.â??
27Â tn The Hebrew participle is often used, as here, to refer to the imminent
future.
28Â tn Heb â??stand upon your standing.â??
29Â tn Heb â??spoke this word.â??
30Â tn Heb â??gave your heart.â??
31Â tn Heb â??and behold.â??
32Â tc The Greek version of Theodotion reads â??I left him [i.e., Michael]
there,â?? and this is followed by a number of English translations (cf. NAB,
NRSV, NLT).
33Â tn Heb â??speaking to me according to these words.â??
34Â tn Heb â??I placed my face toward.â??
35Â tn Heb â??Behold.â??
36Â tc So most Hebrew MSS; one Hebrew MS along with the Dead Sea Scrolls and
LXX read â??something that looked like a manâ??s hand.â??
37Â tn Heb â??my lord,â?? here a title of polite address. Cf. v. 19.
38Â tn Heb â??How is the servant of this my lord able to speak with this my
lord?â??
39Â tn Heb â??does not stand.â??
40Â tn Heb â??He added and touched me.â?? The construction is a verbal
hendiadys.
41Â tn Heb â??treasured man.â??
42Â tn Heb â??my lord may speak.â??
43Â sn The question is rhetorical, intended to encourage reflection on
Danielâ??s part.
44Â tn Heb â??a book of truth.â?? Several English versions treat this as a
title of some sort (cf. NIV, NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT), although the NABâ??s
rendering â??the truthful bookâ?? regards â??truthâ?? as an attributive
adjective, as does the present translation.
45Â tn The word â??princesâ?? is supplied for clarity.
46Â tn The pronoun is plural in Hebrew, suggesting that Michael is the
angelic prince of Daniel and his people.
TRANSLATION NOTES FOR CHAPTER 11:
1Â sn The antecedent of the pronoun â??Iâ?? is the angel, not Daniel. The
traditional chapter division at this point, and the presence of a chronological
note in the verse similar to ones used elsewhere in the book to position
Danielâ??s activities in relation to imperial affairs, sometimes lead to
confusion on this matter.
2Â sn Perhaps these three more kings are Cambyses (ca. 530-522 B.C.),
Pseudo-Smerdis (ca. 522 B.C.), and Darius I Hystaspes (ca. 522-486 B.C.).
3Â sn This fourth king is Xerxes I (ca. 486-465 B.C.). The following
reference to one of his chiefs apparently has in view Seleucus Nicator.
4Â tn Heb â??rich with great riches.â??
5 tn The text is difficult. The Hebrew has here ×?ֶת (â??et), the marker
of a definite direct object. As it stands, this would suggest the meaning that
â??he will arouse everyone, that is, the kingdom of Greece.â?? The context,
however, seems to suggest the idea that this Persian king will arouse in
hostility against Greece the constituent elements of his own empire. This
requires supplying the word â??against,â?? which is not actually present in the
Hebrew text.
6Â sn The powerful king mentioned here is Alexander the Great (ca. 336-323
B.C.).
7Â tn Heb â??and when he stands.â??
8 tn Or â??the heavens.â?? The Hebrew term ש×?Ö¸×?Ö·×?Ö´×? (shamayim) may
be translated â??heavensâ?? or â??skyâ?? depending on the context.
9Â sn The king of the south is Ptolemy I Soter (ca. 323-285 B.C.). The
following reference to one of his subordinates apparently has in view Seleucus
I Nicator (ca. 311-280 B.C.). Throughout the remainder of chap. 11 the
expressions â??king of the southâ?? and â??king of the northâ?? repeatedly
occur. It is clear, however, that these terms are being used generically to
describe the Ptolemaic king (i.e., â??of the southâ??) or the Seleucid king
(i.e., â??of the northâ??) who happens to be in power at any particular time.
The specific identity of these kings can be established more or less
successfully by a comparison of this chapter with the available extra-biblical
records that discuss the history of the intertestamental period. In the
following notes the generally accepted identifications are briefly mentioned.
10Â tn Heb â??princes.â??
11Â tn Heb â??and heâ??; the referent (the subordinate prince mentioned in
the previous clause) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
12Â tn Heb â??be strong against.â??
13Â tn Heb â??greater than his kingdom.â??
14Â sn Here they refers to Ptolemy II Philadelphus (ca. 285-246 B.C.) and
Antiochus II Theos (ca. 262-246 B.C.).
15Â sn The daughter refers to Berenice, who was given in marriage to
Antiochus II Theos.
16Â tn Heb â??the strength of the arm.â??
17Â tn Heb â??stand.â?? So also in vv. 7, 8, 11, 13.
18Â tn Heb â??and his arm.â?? Some understand this to refer to the
descendants of the king of the north.
19 tc The present translation reads ×?Ö·×?Ö°×?Ö¼Ö¸×? (yaldah, â??her
childâ??) rather than the MT ×?Ö¹×?Ö°×?Ö¸×?Ö¼ (yolÿdah, â??the one who begot
herâ??). Cf. Theodotion, the Syriac, and the Vulgate.
20Â sn Antiochus II eventually divorced Berenice and remarried his former
wife Laodice, who then poisoned her husband, had Berenice put to death, and
installed her own son, Seleucus II Callinicus (ca. 246-227 B.C.), as the
Seleucid king.
21Â sn The reference is to the king of Egypt.
22Â tn Heb â??the stock of her roots.â??
sn The reference to one from her family line is probably to Bereniceâ??s
brother, Ptolemy III Euergetes (ca. 246-221 B.C.).
23Â tn Heb â??will deal with them and prevail.â??
24Â tn The Hebrew preposition ×?Ö´×? (min) is used here with the verb
×¢Ö¸×?Ö·×? (â??amad, â??to standâ??). It probably has a sense of separation
(â??stand away fromâ??), although it may also be understood in an adversative
sense (â??stand againstâ??).
25Â tn Heb â??heâ??; the referent (the king of the north) has been specified
in the translation for clarity.
26Â sn The sons of Seleucus II Callinicus were Seleucus III Ceraunus (ca.
227-223 B.C.) and Antiochus III the Great (ca. 223-187 B.C.).
27Â tn Heb â??hisâ??; the referent (the enemy of the king of the north) has
been specified in the translation for clarity.
28Â tn Heb â??and he will certainly come and overflow and cross over and
return and be aroused unto a fortress.â?? The translation has attempted to
simplify the syntax of this difficult sequence.
29Â sn This king of the south refers to Ptolemy IV Philopator (ca. 221-204
B.C.).
30Â tn Heb â??his heart will be lifted up.â?? The referent (the king of the
south) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
31Â tn Heb â??cause to fall.â??
32Â tn Heb â??of myriads.â??
33Â tn Heb â??stand against.â??
34Â sn This was Ptolemy V Epiphanes (ca. 203-181 B.C.).
35Â tn Heb â??sons of violence.â?? â??Son(s) is sometimes used idiomatically
in Hebrew to indicate that someone is characterized by a certain quality. So
the expression â??sons of violenceâ?? means that these individuals will be
characterized by violent deeds.
36Â tn Heb â??to cause to stand.â??
37Â sn This well-fortified city is apparently Sidon. Its capture from the
Ptolemies by Antiochus the Great was a strategic victory for the Seleucid
kingdom.
38 tn Or â??choice troopsâ?? (BDB 104 s.v. ×?Ö´×?Ö°×?ָר), or â??elite
troopsâ?? (HALOT 542 s.v. ×?Ö´×?Ö°×?ָר).
39Â tn Heb â??hand.â??
40Â tn Heb â??and he will set his face.â?? Cf. vv. 18, 19.
41 tc The present translation reads ×?Öµ×?ש×?ָרִ×?×? (mesharim,
â??alliancesâ??) for the MT ×?Ö´×?ש×?ָרִ×?×? (viysharim, â??uprightnessâ??).
42Â tn Heb â??himâ??; the referent (the king of the south) has been specified
in the translation for clarity.
43Â tn Heb â??the daughter of the women.â??
sn The daughter refers to Cleopatra, the daughter of Antiochus, who was given
in marriage to Ptolemy V.
44Â tn Heb â??his face.â?? See v. 19 as well.
45Â sn The commander is probably the Roman commander, Lucius Cornelius Scipio.
46 tn The Hebrew here is difficult in that the negative ×?Ö¼Ö´×?ְתִּ×?
(biltiy, â??notâ??) is used in an unusual way. The sense is not entirely clear.
47Â tn Heb â??his shameful conduct he will return to him.â??
48Â tn Heb â??on his place.â??
49Â sn The one who will send out an exactor of tribute was Seleucus IV
Philopator (ca. 187-176 B.C.).
50Â sn Perhaps this exactor of tribute was Heliodorus (cf. 2 Maccabees 3).
51Â tn Heb â??brokenâ?? or â??shattered.â??
52Â sn This despicable person to whom the royal honor has not been rightfully
conferred is Antiochus IV Epiphanes (ca. 175-164 B.C.).
53Â tn Heb â??arms.â??
54 tc The present translation reads ×?ִש×?Ö¼Ö¸×?Ö¹×£ (hishatof), Niphal
infinitive absolute of ש×?Ö¸×?Ö·×£ (shataf, â??to overflowâ??), for the MT
×?ַש×?Ö¼Ö¶×?ֶף (hashetef, â??floodâ??).
55Â tn The words â??in defeatâ?? are added in the translation for
clarification.
56Â tn Heb â??a prince of the covenant.â??
57Â tn Heb â??brokenâ?? or â??shattered.â??
58Â tn The preposition ×?Ö´×? (min) is probably temporal here (so BDB 583
s.v. 7.c; cf. KJV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV), although it could also be understood
here as indicating means (so J. Goldingay, Daniel [WBC], 279, n. 23a; cf. TEV,
NLT).
59Â tn Heb â??nation.â??
60Â tn Heb â??and unto a time.â??
61Â tn Heb â??heart.â??
62Â sn This king of the south was Ptolemy Philometer (ca. 181-145 B.C.).
63 tc The present translation reads ×?ִש×?Ö¸×?Öµ×£ (yishatef, passive)
rather than the MT ×?ִש×?Ö°×?×?Ö¹×£ (yishtof, active).
64Â tn Heb â??heart.â?? So also in v. 28.
65Â tn Heb â??speak.â??
66Â tn Heb â??heâ??; the referent (the king of the north) has been specified
in the translation for clarity.
67Â sn The name Kittim has various designations in extra-biblical literature.
It can refer to a location on the island of Cyprus, or more generally to the
island itself, or it can be an inclusive term to refer to parts of the
Mediterranean world that lay west of the Middle East (e.g., Rome). For ships of
Kittim the Greek OT (LXX) has â??Romans,â?? an interpretation followed by a few
English versions (e.g., TEV). A number of times in the Dead Sea Scrolls the
word is used in reference to the Romans. Other English versions are more
generic: â??[ships] of the western coastlandsâ?? (NIV, NLT); â??from the
westâ?? (NCV, CEV).
68Â sn This is apparently a reference to the Roman forces, led by Gaius
Popilius Laenas, which confronted Antiochus when he came to Egypt and demanded
that he withdraw or face the wrath of Rome. Antiochus wisely withdrew from
Egypt, albeit in a state of bitter frustration.
69Â tn Heb â??show regard for.â??
70Â tn Heb â??arms.â??
71Â tn Heb â??the sanctuary, the fortress.â??
72Â tn Heb â??will give.â??
73Â tn Or â??corrupt.â??
74Â tn Heb â??acted wickedly toward.â??
75Â tn Heb â??know.â?? The term â??knowâ?? sometimes means â??to
recognize.â?? In relational contexts it can have the connotation â??recognize
the authority of, be loyal to,â?? as it does here.
76Â sn This is an allusion to the Maccabean revolt, which struggled to bring
about Jewish independence in the second century B.C.
Translation is from the New English Translation (NET) Bible. I own and use
the Printed Beta Edition of the NET, but you can find an updated version online
at www.netbible.com -- Martin Selbrede
Other related posts:
