Is Jesus an angel?

[sooda]

Correct again. Nevertheless, the books of todayś canon , except for a few books, were in circulation. This is confirmed by letters from early church fathers.

The junk books did not come into being before 200 AD, most are after that. This is one of the reasons why they were excluded from the canon.

Of course, the Gospels were in circulation verbally before 100 AD.

The Jews had the Torah and other OT books in the proper order long, long, before the time we are speaking of.

I don't recall the date of the Septuagint but it was quite early.

Septuagint
[ˈsepto͞oəˌjint]
NOUN

1. a Greek version of the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament), including the Apocrypha, made for Greek-speaking Jews in Egypt in the 3rd and 2nd centuries bc and adopted by the early Christian Churches.

 

[Spartan]

For example the Revelation (95 AD.) and the book Daniel (167 BC.) are much younger.

The only people who date Daniel that late are those who deny that prophecy exists. Daniel was so accurate about the future that liberal theologians (who deny the supernatural) and their students late-date Daniel to make it appear he is reciting history instead of prophesying the future. In fact, the anti-supernaturalists don't even believe Daniel wrote the book named after him.

Alexander the Great and Daniel

JOSEPHUS [Antiquities, 11.8.5] mentions that Alexander the Great had designed to punish the Jews for their fidelity to Darius, but that Jaddua (332 B.C.), the high priest, met him at the head of a procession and averted his wrath by showing him Daniel's prophecy that a Grecian monarch should overthrow Persia. Certain it is, Alexander favored the Jews, and JOSEPHUS' statement gives an explanation of the fact; at least it shows that the Jews in JOSEPHUS' days believed that Daniel was extant in Alexander's days, long before the Maccabees, and long before 167 BC.

What you have to believe if Daniel didn't write the Book of Daniel

The (critics of Daniel) cannot believe in miracles and predictive prophecy which involve nothing but a simple faith in a wise and mighty and merciful God intervening in behalf of his people for his own glory and their salvation; BUT THEY CAN BELIEVE that a lot of obstreperous and cantankerous Jews who through all their history from Jacob and Esau down to the present time have disagreed and quarreled about almost everything, or nothing, could have accepted, unanimously and without a murmur, in an age when they were enlightened by the brilliant light of Platos philosophy, and Aristotles logic, and the criticism of the schools of Alexandria, a forged and fictitious document, untrue to the well remembered facts of their own experience and to the easily ascertained facts concerning their own past history and the history of the Babylonians, Medes, Persians, and Greeks of whom the author (of the book of Daniel) writes. R.D. Wilson, Studies in the Book of Daniel, pages 268, 269

The Sanhedrin of the second century B.C. was composed of men of the type of John Hyrcanus; men famed for their piety and learning; men who were heirs of all the proud traditions of the Jewish faith, and themselves the sons of successors of the heroes of the noble Maccabean revolt. And yet we are asked to believe (by the critics of Daniel) that these men, with their extremely strict views of inspiration and their intense reverence for their sacred writings, used their authority to smuggle into the Jewish Canon a book which, ex hypothesi, was a forgery, a literary fraud, and a religious novel of recent date. R. Anderson, Daniel in the Critics Den, pages 104-105

 

[calm]

The only people who date Daniel that late are those who deny that prophecy exists. Daniel was so accurate about the future that liberal theologians (who deny the supernatural) and their students late-date Daniel to make it appear he is reciting history instead of prophesying the future. In fact, the anti-supernaturalists don't even believe Daniel wrote the book named after him.

Alexander the Great and Daniel

JOSEPHUS [Antiquities, 11.8.5] mentions that Alexander the Great had designed to punish the Jews for their fidelity to Darius, but that Jaddua (332 B.C.), the high priest, met him at the head of a procession and averted his wrath by showing him Daniel's prophecy that a Grecian monarch should overthrow Persia. Certain it is, Alexander favored the Jews, and JOSEPHUS' statement gives an explanation of the fact; at least it shows that the Jews in JOSEPHUS' days believed that Daniel was extant in Alexander's days, long before the Maccabees, and long before 167 BC.

What you have to believe if Daniel didn't write the Book of Daniel

The (critics of Daniel) cannot believe in miracles and predictive prophecy which involve nothing but a simple faith in a wise and mighty and merciful God intervening in behalf of his people for his own glory and their salvation; BUT THEY CAN BELIEVE that a lot of obstreperous and cantankerous Jews who through all their history from Jacob and Esau down to the present time have disagreed and quarreled about almost everything, or nothing, could have accepted, unanimously and without a murmur, in an age when they were enlightened by the brilliant light of Platos philosophy, and Aristotles logic, and the criticism of the schools of Alexandria, a forged and fictitious document, untrue to the well remembered facts of their own experience and to the easily ascertained facts concerning their own past history and the history of the Babylonians, Medes, Persians, and Greeks of whom the author (of the book of Daniel) writes. R.D. Wilson, Studies in the Book of Daniel, pages 268, 269

The Sanhedrin of the second century B.C. was composed of men of the type of John Hyrcanus; men famed for their piety and learning; men who were heirs of all the proud traditions of the Jewish faith, and themselves the sons of successors of the heroes of the noble Maccabean revolt. And yet we are asked to believe (by the critics of Daniel) that these men, with their extremely strict views of inspiration and their intense reverence for their sacred writings, used their authority to smuggle into the Jewish Canon a book which, ex hypothesi, was a forgery, a literary fraud, and a religious novel of recent date. R. Anderson, Daniel in the Critics Den, pages 104-105

I believe that the Book of Daniel is God's Word. But that doesn't change the fact that Daniel is much younger than the book of Enoch.

 

[sooda]

The only people who date Daniel that late are those who deny that prophecy exists. Daniel was so accurate about the future that liberal theologians (who deny the supernatural) and their students late-date Daniel to make it appear he is reciting history instead of prophesying the future. In fact, the anti-supernaturalists don't even believe Daniel wrote the book named after him.

Alexander the Great and Daniel

JOSEPHUS [Antiquities, 11.8.5] mentions that Alexander the Great had designed to punish the Jews for their fidelity to Darius, but that Jaddua (332 B.C.), the high priest, met him at the head of a procession and averted his wrath by showing him Daniel's prophecy that a Grecian monarch should overthrow Persia. Certain it is, Alexander favored the Jews, and JOSEPHUS' statement gives an explanation of the fact; at least it shows that the Jews in JOSEPHUS' days believed that Daniel was extant in Alexander's days, long before the Maccabees, and long before 167 BC.

What you have to believe if Daniel didn't write the Book of Daniel

The (critics of Daniel) cannot believe in miracles and predictive prophecy which involve nothing but a simple faith in a wise and mighty and merciful God intervening in behalf of his people for his own glory and their salvation; BUT THEY CAN BELIEVE that a lot of obstreperous and cantankerous Jews who through all their history from Jacob and Esau down to the present time have disagreed and quarreled about almost everything, or nothing, could have accepted, unanimously and without a murmur, in an age when they were enlightened by the brilliant light of Platos philosophy, and Aristotles logic, and the criticism of the schools of Alexandria, a forged and fictitious document, untrue to the well remembered facts of their own experience and to the easily ascertained facts concerning their own past history and the history of the Babylonians, Medes, Persians, and Greeks of whom the author (of the book of Daniel) writes. R.D. Wilson, Studies in the Book of Daniel, pages 268, 269

The Sanhedrin of the second century B.C. was composed of men of the type of John Hyrcanus; men famed for their piety and learning; men who were heirs of all the proud traditions of the Jewish faith, and themselves the sons of successors of the heroes of the noble Maccabean revolt. And yet we are asked to believe (by the critics of Daniel) that these men, with their extremely strict views of inspiration and their intense reverence for their sacred writings, used their authority to smuggle into the Jewish Canon a book which, ex hypothesi, was a forgery, a literary fraud, and a religious novel of recent date. R. Anderson, Daniel in the Critics Den, pages 104-105

Daniel is based on Dan'el a Syrian (Canaanite) poem written about 1500 BC. Daniel was never in Babylon. Daniel was written to encourage the Jews during the turmoil of the Maccabean Revolt and the indignities of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

 

[sooda]

I believe that the Book of Daniel is God's Word. But that doesn't change the fact that Daniel is much younger than the book of Enoch.

"Daniel is one of the few OT books that can be given a fairly firm date. In the form in which we have it (perhaps without the additions of 12:11, 12), the book must have been given its final form some time in the years 167-164 B.C.

Daniel

Daniel is NOT considered a prophet in Judaism.

 

[Spartan]

Daniel is based on Dan'el a Syrian (Canaanite) poem written about 1500 BC. Daniel was never in Babylon. Daniel was written to encourage the Jews during the turmoil of the Maccabean Revolt and the indignities of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

Nuts. Daniel is even mentioned in the book of Ezekiel as being in Babylon.

https://www.quora.com/Who-is-this-Daniel-mentioned-in-Ezekiel-14-14

 

[Spartan]

I believe that the Book of Daniel is God's Word. But that doesn't change the fact that Daniel is much younger than the book of Enoch.

Agreed. However, i respectfully ask that you revise your 167 BC date of the writing of Daniel. It was more likely written in the sixth century BC. The Book of Daniel gives clear internal dates such as "the third year of the reign of king Jehoiakim," (1:1), that is, 606 BCE; "the second year of the reign of king Nebuchadnezzar, " (2:1), that is, 603 BCE, etc.

 

[sooda]

Nuts. Daniel is even mentioned in the book of Ezekiel as being in Babylon.

https://www.quora.com/Who-is-this-Daniel-mentioned-in-Ezekiel-14-14

There are problems with Ezekiel too.

Ezekiel

 

[susanblange]

This is wrong. There was no Lilith either.

According to Jewish lore, Lilith was Adam's first wife. She was also his mother and God. The name Susan is The BRANCH, (Je)SUSAN and it means "lily". Zechariah 6:12. The lily is a recurring theme in the SOS and the Temple was ordained with lilies. Eve was Adam's second wife and his daughter. Eve means "life" and the Messiah is the second and one seed of Eve. Genesis 3:15. Jesus is the second and one seed of Adam the serpent. Lilith gets a bad rap as well as Eve and the sin of the world is laid on her shoulders. Isaiah 53:6.

 

[PruePhillip]

There was NO Daniel. It was written by a committee in 167 BC about the Abomination of Desolation and Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

No, no. What you must say is, "One theory states there here was NO Daniel. It was written by a
committee in 167 BC about the Abomination of Desolation and Antiochus IV Epiphanes."

And there are other theories.
My theory is that you take the work at face value and that Daniel really DID foresee events beyond
his day, all the way up to the Messiah - some five hundred years into the future.

 

[sooda]

No, no. What you must say is, "One theory states there here was NO Daniel. It was written by a
committee in 167 BC about the Abomination of Desolation and Antiochus IV Epiphanes."

And there are other theories.
My theory is that you take the work at face value and that Daniel really DID foresee events beyond
his day, all the way up to the Messiah - some five hundred years into the future.

Do you also believe in Hal Lindsey?

 

[PruePhillip]

There are problems with Ezekiel too.

Ezekiel

What I find fascinating in Ezekiel is his description of an event which clearly hasn't happened
yet, but is highly plausible in our generation.
A second return of the Jews to Israel, coming out of all the nations and living back in Israel,
in "cities without walls" and chillingly "all of them." Given the meteoric rise in antisemitism in
even Western countries today - that is a distinct possibility.
Ezekiel describes the nations (or as they were back then) which shall come against Israel,
including the famous Magog - "to the uttermost north of Israel." And ally of Israel, called the
"islands" or "coast lands", the only nation simply not named, that will "send fire upon Magog
from the north." How can you fire upon the uttermost northern country from the north? We
know how today.
This is all in Ezekiel 38 or 39 if I recall. Reads like a nuclear war to me.

 

[PruePhillip]

Do you also believe in Hal Lindsey?

Who's that?

 

[sooda]

Who's that?

He's a prophet.

 

[sooda]

What I find fascinating in Ezekiel is his description of an event which clearly hasn't happened
yet, but is highly plausible in our generation.
A second return of the Jews to Israel, coming out of all the nations and living back in Israel,
in "cities without walls" and chillingly "all of them." Given the meteoric rise in antisemitism in
even Western countries today - that is a distinct possibility.
Ezekiel describes the nations (or as they were back then) which shall come against Israel,
including the famous Magog - "to the uttermost north of Israel." And ally of Israel, called the
"islands" or "coast lands", the only nation simply not named, that will "send fire upon Magog
from the north." How can you fire upon the uttermost northern country from the north? We
know how today.
This is all in Ezekiel 38 or 39 if I recall. Reads like a nuclear war to me.

Gog and Magog already invaded 628 BC.

 

[PruePhillip]

Gog and Magog already invaded 628 BC.

Really? You should say "One theory states that Gog and Magog already invaded in 628 BC"
A good theory must fit the facts. Numerous facts don't support this 628 business, ie the Jews
had not not returned to their nation a second time, or even, a first time.
The Jews didn't have an ally in the "coast lands" or "islands" at that time.
The ferocity of the attack didn't square with the technology back then.
The enemies against Israel don't match the enemies back then - if I recall these include what
was then Ethiopia, Libya, Persia and of course, Magog. Only Libya and Iran make sense.

Without going back and reading the detailed account I cannot remember much more.

 

[PruePhillip]

He's a prophet.

I don't read prophets outside of the bible.
Some might be plausible but all the modern ones I have read
sound ridiculously earth-centric and wildly inaccurate.

 

[sooda]

Really? You should say "One theory states that Gog and Magog already invaded in 628 BC"
A good theory must fit the facts. Numerous facts don't support this 628 business, ie the Jews
had not not returned to their nation a second time, or even, a first time.
The Jews didn't have an ally in the "coast lands" or "islands" at that time.
The ferocity of the attack didn't square with the technology back then.
The enemies against Israel don't match the enemies back then - if I recall these include what
was then Ethiopia, Libya, Persia and of course, Magog. Only Libya and Iran make sense.

Without going back and reading the detailed account I cannot remember much more.

Are you speaking of Elephantine Island? The Jews had a garrison there.

Gog and Magog were Scythians.

Palestine during the Scythian Invasion and the Period of ...
Palestine during the Scythian Invasion and the Period of Josiah, 639–608 BC
Map of A map of the regions of Palestine after the Scythian invasion (628 BC) and the reign of Josiah (639–608 BC) showing principal cities, mountains, rivers, the route of the Scythians, and the dominions of Assyria, Phoenicians, Ammonites, Philistines, Judah, Moabites, and Edomites.

There's a good map at the link. They were fierce warriors that came in like locusts on horsebac with bows and arrows.

 

[PruePhillip]

Are you speaking of Elephantine Island? The Jews had a garrison there.

Gog and Magog were Scythians.

Palestine during the Scythian Invasion and the Period of ...
Palestine during the Scythian Invasion and the Period of Josiah, 639–608 BC
Map of A map of the regions of Palestine after the Scythian invasion (628 BC) and the reign of Josiah (639–608 BC) showing principal cities, mountains, rivers, the route of the Scythians, and the dominions of Assyria, Phoenicians, Ammonites, Philistines, Judah, Moabites, and Edomites.

There's a good map at the link. They were fierce warriors that came in like locusts on horsebac with bows and arrows.

My issue with these theories is their unstated intention - to "explain away" the unexplainable.
Thus Daniel had to have been written after the Greeks, because, after all, how could he
have possibly foreseen Alexander the Great and breakup of his kingdom into four empires.
So a later date is given, after Alexander.
Problem solved.
Or maybe not.
Daniel goes on to talk about the Messiah coming before the destruction of the temple.
This can't be post-dated to the first or second centuries so THE PROBLEM IS IGNORED.
Fact is - we have the book of Daniel centuries prior to Jesus. And there was no additions to
the Old Testament after the Babylonian return as the book was "sealed" - that's why Maccabees
is considered apocrypha.

I take exception to this bogus academia. Some things in the universe are far stranger than
we can imagine.

 

[sooda]

My issue with these theories is their unstated intention - to "explain away" the unexplainable.
Thus Daniel had to have been written after the Greeks, because, after all, how could he
have possibly foreseen Alexander the Great and breakup of his kingdom into four empires.
So a later date is given, after Alexander.
Problem solved.
Or maybe not.
Daniel goes on to talk about the Messiah coming before the destruction of the temple.
This can't be post-dated to the first or second centuries so THE PROBLEM IS IGNORED.

I take exception to this bogus academia. Some things in the universe are far stranger than
we can imagine.

Many foreign legions fought with Titus and his Roman troops because they were part of the Roman empire. Look at a 1st century map.