This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

BSF study for tonight: God blesses those who exemplify faith in him.

#11JonWood007Posted 11/20/2012 9:44:28 AM
^^For some things, yes, but there were some incidents (for example, Antiocus IV persecuting followers of the covenant) that don't fit this model well, so it was back to the drawing board. Post exilic writings begin getting interesting as you see a shift from reward/punishment for following/not following to seeking alternate explanations, since people were trying to follow God and bad things were still happening.

This is why we began to see stories like Job in this era, which seem to suggest a "crap happens" stance toward the problem of evil, and stuff like Daniel, which set the ground for future apocalyptic literature. Because even if people follow the covenant, they are still "punished" for doing so, so they made up apocalyptic visions about how they'll be avenged and all. This trend goes into the new testament, and I'd argue stuff like revelation is in a similar genre as daniel...God's followers will in the end get rewarded, everyone else will get punished.

The whole thing is, much of this literature is aimed at the time in which the writers are writing it. The dream of the statue Nebuchadnezzar saw, for example, was saying that God will establish his kingdom by destroying the greeks. Revelation was all about rome, etc. I see no reason to believe any of this will happen.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 5850 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#12Dathrowed1Posted 11/20/2012 11:02:03 AM
Actually, the Nebuchadnezzar's statue dream wasn't about God's kingdom destroying the Greeks. The Ionians were represented by the copper part (coming after the silver part which represented the Medes and Persians). God's Kingdom hits the iron and clay feet. This is actually consistent with other prophecies in Daniel. Babylon, then Medo-Persia, then Greeks, then Rome (and vassal kingdoms)
---
sig
#13JonWood007Posted 11/20/2012 12:06:52 PM
Wrong. Common misconception. Medes and Persia were seen separately. So the iron/clay was greece.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 5850 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#14Dathrowed1Posted 11/20/2012 1:18:05 PM
JonWood007 posted...
Wrong. Common misconception. Medes and Persia were seen separately. So the iron/clay was greece.


They were never seen separately, they are always joined together in the bible.
---
sig
#15JonWood007Posted 11/20/2012 1:54:07 PM(edited)
^^Which books? The Bible is not a single work, but an anthology of works. What one book says about it is not what the entire bible says. Most scholars (at least those who look at the context in which it was written) will agree that the gold was babylon, silver was persia, bronze was medes, and the iron/clay was greece. Daniel was written during greek persecution, and the authors were expecting deliverance from the greeks. Throwing Rome into it is a Christian reinterpretation. See that Yale Course I posted.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 5850 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#16Dathrowed1Posted 11/20/2012 1:58:26 PM
JonWood007 posted...
^^Which books? The Bible is not a single work, but an anthology of works. What one book says about it is not what the entire bible says. Most scholars will agree that the gold was babylon, silver was persia, bronze was medes, and the iron/clay was greece. Daniel was written during greek persecution, and the authors were expecting deliverance from the greeks. Throwing Rome into it is a Christian reinterpretation. See that Yale Course I posted.


Daniel, Isaiah, and Esther. Daniel 2:39,38 say it is succession of kingdoms. What history books have you been reading where the Persians preceded the Medes?
---
sig
#17JonWood007Posted 11/20/2012 2:18:47 PM
Mightve gotten persia and medes backwards, but I know they're seen separately. In that context, makes more sense it's medes then persia.

Also, Isaiah and Esther were written in a completely different era as Daniel.

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/gic/chapter-5.pdf

I dont agree fully with the theological perspective of this link (he starts going into jesus and all...daniel had nothing to do with jesus), but it makes a strong historical case for medes and persia being separate. Medes was a weak kingdom, like the verse you posted shows, and then persia ran the (known) world. I did get them mixed up earlier, but it doesn't take away from my main point. Keep in mind, Daniel was written by Jews around 160 BC when they were being persecuted. Look at the historical context of the book. It was not a prophecy involving Jesus or Rome...this is a christian context superimposed...it's not the author's original intention.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 5850 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#18Dathrowed1Posted 11/20/2012 2:48:56 PM
JonWood007 posted...
Mightve gotten persia and medes backwards, but I know they're seen separately. In that context, makes more sense it's medes then persia.

Also, Isaiah and Esther were written in a completely different era as Daniel.

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/gic/chapter-5.pdf

I dont agree fully with the theological perspective of this link (he starts going into jesus and all...daniel had nothing to do with jesus), but it makes a strong historical case for medes and persia being separate. Medes was a weak kingdom, like the verse you posted shows, and then persia ran the (known) world. I did get them mixed up earlier, but it doesn't take away from my main point. Keep in mind, Daniel was written by Jews around 160 BC when they were being persecuted. Look at the historical context of the book. It was not a prophecy involving Jesus or Rome...this is a christian context superimposed...it's not the author's original intention.


The bible says that Babylon would be given to the Medes and the Persians (Daniel tells Belshazzar, that his kingdom would be given to them both). Not the Medes would defeat Babylon, and the Persians would defeat them (not even how it happened, it was a joint effort). Esther and Isaiah still refer to elements that would be recognized as "Medes and Persians" and not them being separate. Chapter 2 also draws parallels with 7 and 8. They point to the copper part being Greece. Daniel 9 is about messianic prophecy, even secular sources point to the Jews looking for the Messiah around the time Jesus was baptized.
---
sig
#19JonWood007Posted 11/20/2012 2:59:05 PM
Again, I dont care what Isaiah and Esther say. They were different books written in different time periods.

It was not looking at the Jews. Please educate yourself, listen to the yale course's lecture on Daniel. It was babylon, Medes, Persia, Greece. It was written in greek times. They thought the messiah or overthrow of the greeks by God was imminent. They were under intense persecution at the time. They werent looking 150 years into the future at a roman empire that did not rise yet. It's silly to think a group that is experiencing such persecution and deliverance would be talking hundreds of years from then.

http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/rlst-145/lecture-23

Some of my info was also taken from a course I took at my local college IRL, which basically had the same interpretation.

Once again, you can't look at "the Bible" as a single book. IT'S NOT. And Daniel is pretty well separated from the rest.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 5850 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#20Polish_Crusader(Topic Creator)Posted 11/20/2012 3:11:56 PM
You are wrong jonwood. Just outright wrong.

The bible is an accumulative document. Every book supports the general story of the rest, but does not stand on its own as above the rest. Isaiah and old testament books clearly point toward the coming messiah coming from bethlehem and riding on a donkey, both of which jesus did. The rest of the new testament was basically about daily life and growing in faith leading up to the end revelation of the warning of the end of the world. Genesis covers beginning of the human race. Revelation covers the end of it (atleast the physical realm. spiritually we live forever whether in heaven or hell).

How is the bible not one book?