Masoretic Text vs. Greek Septuagint

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

To take one point at at time, please consider the following:

1. The durations are not "weeks". If this were the case, then the AUTHOR would have used the concise Feminine text. Instead the inconcise Masculine text was used. So where we do know the 70 ≠ 490, it takes additional evaluation to determine the actual duration.

BibleScribe

I am not declaring them to be "weeks" as periods of 7 days and most others do not. But they are periods of seven(s).
Again; Jesus affirmed to the woman at the well that her understanding of the time for the Messiah was correct and that He to whom she was speaking was indeed the annointed one.
Jesus himself confirms that he 70 [7's] are understood as periods of 7 years or 'weeks' of years through this declaration to the woman at that time. He would not have misled her.
Jesus himself affirms that a definite time length was intended by the 70 X 7 by his affirmation of being the Annointed ONE or Messiah of Daniel 9 to this woman.

Again; some comments from the previous link.
God's determinate council had a 70-week plan for his people and city to bring Messiah and salvation.
1. We know this prophecy of 70 weeks is a prophecy of 490 years, 70 weeks of years (70x7).
a. Such a principle was introduced 1000 years earlier to Moses (Numbers 14:33-35).
b. We encountered this principle of a year for a day already in chapter seven (7:25).
c. We assumed it there and rejected it in chapter eight by context, the timeframe of the
prophecies: chapter seven covers the last 2000 years and chapter eight only the Greeks.
d. We are blessed to know this fulfillment, and we know that it took precisely these years.
e. The coordination with the expiring 70 years of Jeremiah 25 implies 70 weeks of years.
f. The issue of a year for a day is not debated; but the issue of gaps is certainly debated.

Where some might be stumped as to a solution, Daniel 9:2 says the interpretation is found in the "books" of the Bible. Thus one could consider using the Prophetic Psalms as the 19th Book, Chapter for year, such that Book 19, Chapter 48 = 1948, -- the international recognition of Israel. And so the TRUE interpretation for the seventy ~weeks~ is validated by this book.

I think this is called soothsaying. Attempting to foretell the future [or justify a present event] throuigh some conglomeration of data.

Daniel 9:2 does not say that the interpretation of the 70 weeks is found in the "books" of the bible.
Daniel is saying that towards the end of the babylonian captivity which had been prophecied to last 70 yrs by Jeremiah the prophet [and recorded in his books or writings] that he Daniel came to understand that they were in the ending years of that time.

1In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;

2In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem

Jeremiah 25:11 And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years.

12And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, and that nation, saith the LORD, for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans, and will make it perpetual desolations.

This has nothing to do with his understanding of the 70 X 7's from the 'books' of the bible as the 70(7's) had not even been declared to him yet. This part in vs 1,2 is referring to the 70 yrs of babylonian captivity.

Daniel understood that they were coming to the end of those years and yet they had not made the confession prescribed in Deut 30:1-4; click link that would enact the call to the return to the land from the curse of the law of Moses. As Daniel declares in vs 13.

yet made we not our prayer before the LORD our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth.

If there is any consideration whatsoever to be gleaned from your focus on the gender of the noun, perhaps it is to emphasize that the time period was a group of 7 yrs, not actual concise 'weeks' of 7 days.

Again, the prophecies in Daniel are from the end of the babylonian captivity to the 'latter end' of the mosaic covenant and the fulfillment of the NC which would be accomplished by the New Prophet of Deut 18. Daniel is not talking about the 'end of the world' but the end of the mosaic covenant AGE which had been previously prophesied by Moses and God in the very giving of the covenant. Daniel is given additional details about that time period when they were needed (as they were needed) and Jesus and the apostles added further final detail and commentary to that first century audience.

Newton was not infallible. He was a good/great Mathmatician. I've also read that he was coached by the Jews.

Please affirm your misunderstanding of vs 2.

Please react and respond to the previous points that the "time of the end" is not the 'end of time' but rather the time of the end of the mosaic covenant. And in this light; please answer Mr Goodies question.. Where is the end of the world or human history prophecied in the OT.??

[BibleScribe]

I am not declaring them to be "weeks" as periods of 7 days and most others do not. But they are periods of seven(s). ...

The Hebrew text shibiym/shabuwa as described below is literally "sevens"/"seven" but is interpreted as "weeks"/"week". But in either case your assertion is incorrect. The distinction is the concise Feminine text versus the inconcise Masculine text, per Young, as affirmed by Keil & Kliefoth.


As such, please use the correct definitions for the respective words.


... I will provide that the Masoretic text "weeks"/"week" as shibiym/shabuwa, (plural/singular respectively), which according to Edward Young is NOT written in the usual concise Feminine text, but in the unusual inconcise Masculine text.

Thus although most interpretations present a value of ~ seventy sevens = 490 years, -- the inconcise Masculine text actually presents: NOT 490 years. (Please note that the concept is analogous to ~slang~ where someone is described a "hot" or something is described as "cool". These terms reflect a concept which is independent of a thermal gradient.

Where some might be stumped as to a solution, Daniel 9:2 says the interpretation is found in the "books" of the Bible. Thus one could consider using the Prophetic Psalms as the 19th Book, Chapter for year, such that Book 19, Chapter 48 = 1948, -- the international recognition of Israel. And so the TRUE interpretation for the seventy ~weeks~ is validated by this book.



BibleScribe

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

As such, please use the correct definitions for the respective words.
... I will provide that the Masoretic text "weeks"/"week" as shibiym/shabuwa, (plural/singular respectively), which according to Edward Young is NOT written in the usual concise Feminine text, but in the unusual inconcise Masculine text.

Thus although most interpretations present a value of ~ seventy sevens = 490 years, -- the inconcise Masculine text actually presents: NOT 490 years. (Please note that the concept is analogous to ~slang~ where someone is described a "hot" or something is described as "cool". These terms reflect a concept which is independent of a thermal gradient.

Where some might be stumped as to a solution, Daniel 9:2 says the interpretation is found in the "books" of the Bible. Thus one could consider using the Prophetic Psalms as the 19th Book, Chapter for year, such that Book 19, Chapter 48 = 1948, -- the international recognition of Israel. And so the TRUE interpretation for the seventy ~weeks~ is validated by this book.

BibleScribe

The Daniel 9:2 understanding of Jeremiahs 70 years is addressed in the previous post. No need to repeat it.

I reject your contrived -slang - inferrence. This is a hypothesis and needs several supporting references to even be considered. Your trying to say that there is no time reference inferred by the 70's 7 in order to support your contrived mis-understanding of Dan 9:2.

But that is the very intention of the time reference. It was to give Daniels people added information about the time of the coming of the new prophet who Moses spoke about in Deut 18 [the seed of Eve] to accomplish the items mentioned in vs 24; and of the latter end of the mosaic covenant which Moses also prophesied. The mosaic covenant was displaced by the fulfilling of the everlasting covenant, called "NEW" by Jeremiah in it's contrast with the national covenant delivered by Moses.

I haven't seen this much twisting of scripture since twospirits tried to twist the book of Revelation to indicate that the U.S. was the fulfilling of the beast.

I've run out of interest and time to continue to interact with these points. You havn't answered or attempted to interact with the responses. This is not good etiquette to foster open forum discussion and learning from one another. Perhaps someone else will take up the discussion. Dan 9:2 has nothing to do with deciphering from the 'books'. The book's werent' even divided into chapters until the 13th century and the prophecy of the 70's 7 wasn't given till after the prayer in chapter 9. Daniel couldn't have been referring to that prophecy in vs 2. Thanks for the thoughts though.

[BibleScribe]

The Daniel 9:2 understanding of Jeremiahs 70 years is addressed in the previous post. No need to repeat it.

I reject your contrived -slang - inferrence. This is a hypothesis and needs several supporting references to even be considered.

Once again, Edward Young made the observation as validated by Keil & Kliefoth.

If you had an interlinear you could either validate or invalidate the premise, -- which I've done to my satisfaction, which agrees with Young, Keil, & Kliefoth.

Of course Scripture says that many perish for lack of knowledge. But to each his own


BibleScribe

[BibleScribe]

Hi EndtimesDeut32/70AD,

I apologize for neglecting to provide the reference for the Edward Young observation, cited as follows:


'...as Young points out, the word ‘sevens’ is in the masculine plural instead of the usual feminine plural. No clear explanation is given except that Young feels ‘it was for the deliberate purpose of calling attention to the fact that the word 'sevens' is employed in an unusual sense.’'

'...Young finally concludes after some discussion that Keil and Kliefoth are correct when they hold that the word ‘sevens’ does not necessarily mean year-weeks, but an intentionally indefinite designation of a period of time measured by the number seven, which chronological duration must be determined on other grounds.'

John Walvoord, Daniel, The Key to Prophetic Revelation, Moody Press, Chicago, 1971, p. 217-218



Hope this helps,
BibleScribe

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

Once again, Edward Young made the observation as validated by Keil & Kliefoth.

If you had an interlinear you could either validate or invalidate the premise, -- which I've done to my satisfaction, which agrees with Young, Keil, & Kliefoth.

Of course Scripture says that many perish for lack of knowledge. But to each his own


BibleScribe

The Daniel 9:2 understanding of Jeremiahs 70 years is addressed in the previous post. No need to repeat it.

I reject your contrived -slang - inferrence. This is a hypothesis and needs several supporting references to even be considered.

The hypothesis that needs support is that when a masculine plural is used instead of a normal feminie plural is employed that it neccessarily adds a vagueness or invokes a 'slang' inuendo to the text. Please support this from other instances where it is used in the OT.

'...as Young points out, the word ‘sevens’ is in the masculine plural instead of the usual feminine plural. No clear explanation is given except that Young feels ‘it was for the deliberate purpose of calling attention to the fact that the word 'sevens' is employed in an unusual sense.’'

'...Young finally concludes after some discussion that Keil and Kliefoth are correct when they hold that the word ‘sevens’ does not necessarily mean year-weeks, but an intentionally indefinite designation of a period of time measured by the number seven, which chronological duration must be determined on other grounds.'


John Walvoord, Daniel, The Key to Prophetic Revelation, Moody Press, Chicago, 1971, p. 217-218

I can possibly agree with the underlined statement of the first paragraph above but I disagree with the second paragraph and with Walvoord.

I disagree with Youngs evaluation and agreement with Keil and Klienfoth. I'm sure there are statements from 1000 other 'scholars' which would contradict this and even be variant from one another.

The support for the disagreement is found in the other posts where you attempt to twist Dan 9:2 to fit your scheme.

Again note that Dan 9:2 is not referring to the the 70 7's but to the 70 yrs of Jeremiahs prophecy.
The books were not divided into chapters until the 13th century; thus Daniel could not have understood Ps 48 at that time.

Again, Someone else will have to join in to interact.
This is a little to twisted and unsupported for me.

Thanks.

[BibleScribe]

I'm sure there are statements from 1000 other 'scholars' which would contradict this and even be variant from one another.

Regarding the Masculine text of shibiym/shabuwa:

... and I'm sure that you can cite at least ONE of the THOUSAND which you reference. -- Please note that I provided the reference you requested, and am confident you will reply in kind.


BibleScribe

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

Regarding the Masculine text of shibiym/shabuwa:

... and I'm sure that you can cite at least ONE of the THOUSAND which you reference. -- Please note that I provided the reference you requested, and am confident you will reply in kind.


BibleScribe

The plural is employed until vs 27 where the one week [the 70th] is mentioned. Thus the plural seems similar to our putting an 's' on the end of a word. 70 week(s); 7 week(s) 62 week(s) 1 week(no s)

The 'indefinite' aspect to the words indicates to me that it's intending that the porphecy is not declared an actual week of 7 days, but is allowed to be a week of 7 years. This is the understanding and interpretation of the KJV translators and many others.

It is not proven that the indefinite aspect demands a indefinite time period or is 'slang' for something else. No-one else mentions this though the second link implies that the weeks are not 'weeks' of 7 days but perhaps 'generations' from Enoch.

Here are two other discussions I found which have some of these points but which may come up with differing opinions than yours. The second link allows for and follows thorugh with the concept of a week being a generation. They too end with Christ.

http://philologos.org/bpr/files/word...es/dan-2-2.htm

http://www.sheshbazzardaq.com/ezra4-chronology.html

Here are some other comments concerning Edward Young; and quoting these comments does not mean I agree with or support them but that they portray a different concept than what you hold to.

Collin Sandler
"The word used for "weeks" is actually TWO words in the original text: shibah and shabuwa."

In his book "Daniel, Key to Prophetic Revelation," John Walvoord cites Edward Young's "The Prophecy Of Daniel", which noted that Daniel used: "the masculine plural instead of the usual feminine plural. No clear explanation is given except that Young feels 'it was for the deliberate purpose of calling attention to the fact that the word sevens is employed in an unusual sense.'" This word is found only FIVE times in the O.T., all in the 9th chapter of Daniel, twice in verse 24, twice in verse 25, and once in verse 26. Interestingly, Daniel's verse 27 uses "shabuwa" (Strong's 7620)."

However, if you examine a J.P. Green interlinear, you should find FIVE instances of the Hebrew word "shibiym" ("Strong's" 7657), and TWO instance of "shabuwa". According to "Strong's", "shibiym" is described as a "multiple [plurl] of 7651", which is the word "sheba" in feminine gender and "shibah" in masculine gender. "

If I understand the contexts correctly, it appears that the first sixty-nine "shibah" are one chronology, and the seventieth "shabuwa" is a different chronology. It seems fairly obvious that the seventieth "shabuwa" is a seven-year period, and that the sixty-nine "shibah" are NOT. Nearly all commentators interpret all seventy periods of time as "shabuwa", which totals to 490 years. Literal scripture does NOT support that interpretation."

His understanding of the contexts may be erroneous due to his futurists pre-suppositions.

Here is another link of some value.
http://www.bibleinsight.com/shabuwa.html

And there are likely 1000's who support the interpretation as found in the KJV or similar wordings while being aware of the peculiar alterations to the words. They understand those alterations to allow for a week of yrs and not a week of days.

It seems that you have a fixation on this perspective by Young. and yet refuse to interact with the other questions, information and comments posed to you and which alter your perspective.

You refuse to interact with the statements about Dan 9:2 that Daniel is not declaring to understand the 70's 7 prophecy by the books and numbers, but is declaring to understand {and come to awareness} that they were coming to the end of the time alloted for the babylonian captivity that had been declared by Jeremiah in his writings {books} to be 70yrs long {numbers}; and that they had still not made their confession prescribed in Deut 30:1-4 to initiate the return to the land from that captivity.

And again, as Edward Goodie asked: where is the end of the world prophecied in the OT??

AS shown with the connection between Dan 10:14 and Deut 31:29 and shown from the evidence of Daniels prayer being the confession needed to initiate the return from the baylonian captivity that MOses prophecied in Duet 30:1-4, the context of the time of the end(s) to which Daniel is given further information visions and prophecies about is NOT the end of time or the end of the world or any such thing, but it the time of the end of law Moses, (and also the end of the law of individual sin/seperation from God {abba}) which occured in the first century through the coming of the seed of Eve.

As noted before and ignored; Christ affirmed to the woman at the well that He was the Messiah to whom the prophesies of Daniel related. AND he affirmed this 3 1/2 yrs before the cross; and before 3 1/2 yrs before being 'cut off' in the midst of the 70th week. Thus, Chirst interpreted and declared that the 69th week had ended and the 70th week begun at his baptism... HIS being the Annointed one. Thus Jesus refutes Walvood and other futurists et al.


Vs 24 of Dan 9 declares that 70 weeks were given..... to 'finish' the transgression....of man against God
Jesus' last words on the cross were "It is finished". And the finishing of the 70th week continued through the indwelling of his apostles who were victorious over being called liars.

And again

The hypothesis that needs support is that when a masculine plural is used instead of a normal feminie plural that it neccessarily adds a vagueness or invokes a 'slang' inuendo to the text. Please support this from other instances where a masculine plural instead of a normal feminie plural is used in the OT.

As noted before,
Someone else will have to join in to interact.
Thanks for the interaction though.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi EndtimesDeut32/70AD,

I apologize for neglecting to provide the reference for the Edward Young observation, cited as follows:


'...as Young points out, the word ‘sevens’ is in the masculine plural instead of the usual feminine plural. No clear explanation is given except that Young feels ‘it was for the deliberate purpose of calling attention to the fact that the word 'sevens' is employed in an unusual sense.’'

'...Young finally concludes after some discussion that Keil and Kliefoth are correct when they hold that the word ‘sevens’ does not necessarily mean year-weeks, but an intentionally indefinite designation of a period of time measured by the number seven, which chronological duration must be determined on other grounds.'

John Walvoord, Daniel, The Key to Prophetic Revelation, Moody Press, Chicago, 1971, p. 217-218



Hope this helps,
BibleScribe

Yes, that quote helps a lot. Note the words I highlighted red. The implication you are seeking does not necessarily follow from the text you are quoting.

You seem to be trying to force some particular interpretation by insisting that it "cannot" be interpreted as referring to seven year periods. Unfortunately, you have failed to provide any evidence supporting such a strong conclusion.

Is there any reason the text cannot mean 70 periods of seven years, for a total of 490 years?

[BibleScribe]

Hey RAM, (Richard),

Is there any reason the text cannot mean 70 periods of seven years, for a total of 490 years?

There is, as provided by Montgomery, Newton, Young, etc. Byt if there were a fulfillment, it might clarify the correct interpretation. So as it currently stands, Mauro comes the closest, but is still incorrect.


Maybe we could evaluate an end-times fulfillment?!?

With Best Regards,
BibleScribe