Latin Vulgate (Jerome):
secundum voluntatem suam et dirigetur dolus in manu eius et cor suum magnificabit et in copia rerum omnium occidet plurimos et contra principem principum consurget et sine manu conteretur
"According to his will, and craft shall be successful in his hand: and his heart shall be puffed up, and in the abundance of all things he shall kill many: and he shall rise up against the prince of princes, and shall be broken without hand"
See https://vulgate.org/ot/daniel_8.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate_manuscripts
ReplyDeleteSorry, not early enough.
The Vulgate is fair game for OT/NT criticism. It may have been translated in the 5th century CE, but that does not mean the VG doesn't reflect older readings. Secondly, I'm not simply relying on the VG, just using it as another witness. Moreover, the image I posted does more than rely on the VG for support. So does Matthew Walsh in his book about angels and the DSS. I'm interested in what Tov would say about Dan. 8 as well.
ReplyDeleteAll I am interested in is the documentary evidence, the rest is pesher.
ReplyDeleteFor me, when it comes to Hebrew Bible/OT criticism, I consider how the MT reads and accept it unless there's good reason to reject it. We have lots of Hebrew MSS to compare one with the other.
ReplyDeleteNo you don't, and it's never about the number of manuscripts. This is an old and tired argument. I'm not going their.
ReplyDeleteOkay, we can move on, but I think you misinterpreted what I wrote or else I was too laconic in what I said. Please allow me to explain.
ReplyDeleteI do accept the MT unless there's good reason to reject it. Please give me an example where I fail to do what I said.
Did I say it was about the number of MSS? No, because I don't believe that. I was talking about comparing MSS, not about going with the Majority reading. Those are two different issues.
It is a fact that we have plenty of Hebrew MSS that we can compare one with another. However, I never said that's the end of the story.
Lastly, this is really about rejcting some lectio because LXX handles it differently or DSS doesn't help with the lectio. Yet I've seen no good reason to reject Dan. 8:25 and its reading of sar along with sar in the superlative. But to each his/her own.
On a somewhat lighter note, I could be grading papers, getting ready for the Super Bowl, taking a walk or listening to smooth jazz. No need to get worked up about hermeneutical differences.
ReplyDeleteHow many times is the DSS closer to the LXX than MT? Much more than many admit. But Daniel is a problem all its own when you compare the DSS witnesses with each other. It was clearly a text in development.
ReplyDeleteThe Peshitta seems to know how to differentiate terms that are correct to the period in general, why?
Quite frankly, I don't privilege the DSS witnesses although I think they should be included in the calculus of TC, and I've seen times where LXX and DSS were likely correct but MT was wrong. As for Daniel, there are two sides of the issue like other things. Hasel and others like him think Daniel as we have it, is highly reliable and that it has survived the den of critics determined to challenge the book.
ReplyDeleteI'm not going out on a limb where the Peshitta is concerned. There have been scholars who compared the it with the MT. Those articles might be worth consulting.
See https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&context=dissertations
ReplyDeleteGive a positive assessment of the Peshitta and suggests it was based on a text similar to the MT.
http://dssenglishbible.com/daniel%202.htm
ReplyDeleteNote the footnote of LXX.
The debate continues-
https://www.youtube.com/live/wd2H67E31Fo?feature=share
Compare 1 Samuel 1:24 in MT, DSS, and LXX. Maybe you've already done it before.
ReplyDeleteDaniel a forgery? Some ppl will question anything, and Satan will make sure that folks don't accept God's Word. On the other hand, many scholars accept the book and make arguments for its veracity. As Bertrand Russell said, we can be skeptical about whether the world began five minutes ago or not. Someone who wants to think that way will never be convinced otherwise. It's easy to be a skeptic until you meet with one inconsistency with universal skepticism. I don't let skeptics determine what I believe about the Bible because I want to avoid the tricks of the Devil. On the other hand, we can't be gullible either.
Ezekiel28:3NASB"3Behold, you are wiser than Daniel;
DeleteThere is no secret that is a match for you!"
Ezekiel ch.14:20NIV"as surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, even if Noah, Daniel and Job were in it, they could save neither son nor daughter. They would save only themselves by their righteousness."
Matthew ch 24:15 NIV"So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ a spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— "
Daniel9:27NIV"He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ h In the middle of the ‘seven’ i he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple j he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him. "
It is a matter historical of historical record that the Hebrew Christian heeded this prophetic warning base on Daniel's inspired writing and were thus spared from sharing in the faith of the city.
Ps. I must say Elon Musk's edit button idea just keeps looking better and better.
Deletehttps://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/daniel-the-basic-issues/
ReplyDeletehttps://biblearchaeology.org/research/divided-kingdom/3193-new-light-on-the-book-of-daniel-from-the-dead-sea-scrolls
See also Peter Gentry's article, The Text of the Old Testament.
Thus any alleged post exilic forger would have to be a better historian than the leading historians of the day. Who for instance were unaware of Belshazzar's status as coregent .
DeleteOr of the cultural differences that would allow for the imagery of women(other than dancing girls or prostitutes) being present at the kind of revelry mentoned at Daniel ch.5
Servant,
ReplyDeleteSee https://biblehub.com/hebrew/daniyel_1840.htm
It is a matter historical of historical record that the Hebrew Christian heeded this prophetic warning base on Daniel's inspired writing and were thus spared from sharing in the faith of the city.
ReplyDeleteAbout that, Please site the historical record?
"Eusebius, the “father of church history,” also tells us that Christians were warned by an oracle to flee the city some time before war’s outbreak. In fact, they evacuated to Pella and other cities north of Jerusalem, and so escaped the Roman siege and conquest."
Deletehttps://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/not-one-stone-left-upon-another
Daniel ch.1 v.6 NIV"Among those who were chosen were some from Judah: Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah. "
ReplyDeleteThis Daniel is of the tribe of Judah not levi.
Additionally the Levite Daniel would not have been a contemporary of the prophet Ezekiel.
Servant, I'm with you on the edit button
ReplyDeleteWhich Daniel exactly. Abraham and Noah, contemporaries?
ReplyDeleteThe Levite Daniel was the post exilic Daniel Ezra ch.8 v.2 NKJ"of the descendants of Phinehas, Gershom;
ReplyDeletef the descendants of Ithamar, Daniel;"
Leviticus ch.10 v.6 NIV"Then Moses said to Aaron and his sons Eleazar and ITHAMAR...“"
The Daniel who would have been a contemporary of the prophet Ezekiel was of the tribe of Judah Daniel ch .1 v.6 NKJ"Now from among those of the sons of Judah were Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah."
No Abraham and and Noah would not have been contemporaries. Abraham would have been born approximately two years or so after Noah's Passing according to the scriptures.
No mention of Daniel on that page.
ReplyDeleteDan 11:31 LXX - And seeds shall spring up out of him, and they shall profane the sanctuary of strength, and they shall remove the perpetual sacrifice, and make the abomination desolate. And the transgressors shall bring about a covenant by deceitful ways: but a people knowing their God shall prevail, and do valiantly.
Fleeing?