A INTRODUCTION
In the early third century C.E., Hippolytus wrote the first known Christian commentary on Daniel. For him, Dan 9:24-27 originally pertained to the Antiochene crisis during the second century B.C.E., but the symbolic depth of these verses allowed later readers to expect a recapitulation of Antiochus IV in a future Antichrist.2 Antiochus IV was one instance of a recurring pattern of insolence and oppression throughout the Bible and redemptive history. Hippolytus thus anticipated and combined the Antiochene and Dispensational interpretations of Daniel’s seventy sevens.3 He, however, was not the first per-son to apply the seventy sevens to more than one context.
Jesus and the Gospel writers (Matt 24:15, Mark 13:14) had already mod-eled typological exegesis. Neither Jesus nor the Gospel writers thought that the verses in Daniel about the abomination of desolation (Dan 9:27, 11:31, 12:11) directly predicted the Roman razing of the Jerusalem temple. They knew that the writer of Daniel was talking about the Antiochene crisis. Nevertheless, they read Daniel typologically and saw in their day a repetition of the pattern of unbelief and worldliness that the writer of Daniel had applied to Hellenistic Jews during the reign of Antiochus IV.4 In other words, they expected a replay of the Antiochene crisis.5 Desolation of God’s temple would occur again at the hands of a Gentile army-this time, Rome. The Seleucids and Romans repre-sented historically independent but typologically related administrations of di-vine judgment. It is this typology that Jesus and the Gospel writers want the reader of Daniel and the Gospels to understand.6 Hippolytus evidently observed the typological hermeneutic of Jesus and the Gospel writers and then reasoned his way from Antiochus IV to a future Antichrist who would live long after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 C.E.
A question then arises about why Jesus and the Gospel writers read Daniel’s Antiochene prophecies typologically. Were they doing something new with Daniel or was there a precedent? This article will survey early Jewish exegesis of Dan 9:24-27 that may lie behind the typological reading of Daniel in Matthew and Mark. Because Hippolytus was acquainted with Second Temple literature, Jewish interpretation of the seventy sevens may also have informed his commentary on Daniel.7 The discussion will begin with the Greek translation of the book of Daniel and then consider those texts that cite or allude to the seventy sevens. Some attention will also be given to 1 Enoch and Jubilees because they share the interest of Dan 9 in the jubilee theme.
B THE SEPTUAGINT
The translation of Dan 9:24-27 in the Septuagint may be the earliest known version of the prophecy of the seventy sevens.8 Two different versions of the book of Daniel, known as the Old Greek and Theodotion, are available. Jobes and Silva point out that the Septuagint was a product of its time when Jews found themselves at the mercy of Ptolemies in Egypt and Seleucids in Syria.9 This situation could lead them to express their future (i.e., messianic) hope in guarded ways.10 The translation of Dan 9:26 seems to be a case in point. Both the Old Greek and Theodotion translate 
in Dan 9:26 with χρῖσμα (anointing) rather than χριστός (anointed one). The identity of the anointing is not obvious, but, whatever it is, it will not last.
Adler opines that “the translators clearly did not envisage here the removal of a messianic figure, but rather the cessation of a ritual function or office.”11 The word clearly seems to go beyond the evidence. Who else but a χριστός would perform a ritual function or occupy an anointed office? Still, the translation of Dan 9:24-27 seems delicately to maintain a messianic hope with-out raising too much fervor on the part of Jews living in foreign lands or too much suspicion on the part of the rulers under whose authority they live.12 So then, χρῖσμα could have been used deliberately instead of χριστός in order to tone down, but not necessarily deny, the messianism of 
. The Old Greek says that ἀποσταθήσεται χρῖσμα ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἒσται (the anointing will be removed and not be). Theodotion has ἐξολεθρευθήσεται χρῖσμα, ϰαὶ ϰρίμα οὐϰ ἒστιν ἐν αὐτῷ (the anointing will be destroyed and there is no judgment in it). These renditions may choose the word χρῖσμα in order to speak indirectly about a χριστός that suffers unjustly at the hands of others, whether Jews or Gentiles. Theodotion alone has a reference in Dan 9:25 to an anointed one who leads (χριστοῦ ἡγουμένου), but his willingness to use this expression suggests that he, in v. 26, was not trying to separate offices on the one hand from officers on the other.
The six objectives pertaining to the removal of sin and the establishment of righteousness bear witness to the hope not only of the author but also of the translator. The Old Greek renders the sixth objective as εὐϕρᾶναι ἅγιον ἁγιων (to gladden a holy of holies) instead of χρῖσαι ἅγιον ἁγιων (to anoint a holy of holies). The translator or an earlier copyist may have mistakenly transposed two Hebrew letters and read 
(to bring joy) instead of 
(to anoint).13 Still, εὐϕρᾶναι conveys the jubilant purpose of the seventy sevens. Perhaps the translator deliberately made a play on the Hebrew words in order to express his confidence that the desecration of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar and Antiochus IV would not be the last memory of God’s house. During the course of the seventy sevens, sorrow will turn to joy as the temple becomes a place that the righteous God of Israel (Dan 9:14) can inhabit again. Knowingly or not, the translator or copyist captured the jubilee theme of the seventy sevens.
Even so, vv. 26-27 in the Old Greek and Theodotion anticipate more defilement and destruction. Both versions add the word ἱερὸν (temple) before βδέλυγμα τῶν ἐρημώσεωυ (abomination of desolations) and thus make an explicit association of the desolations with the temple. If these Greek transla-tions were produced after the Antiochene crisis, which is true of Theodotion, then they may have read their Hebrew Vorlage in view of the continuing trou-ble for Jews after the Maccabean resolution of the Antiochene crisis. The end of that calamity may have marked the terminus ad quern of the seventy sevens and so yielded a sense of jubilee, but the translators knew that the six objectives of Dan 9:24 still awaited full realisation.
This observation may explain the additional seventy sevens in vv. 26 and 27 of the Old Greek version (7+70+62+1). While Adler, Grabbe, and Montgomery suggest that a translator or copyist read 
(seventy) instead of 
(weeks), Rösel proposes that the Old Greek’s translation reflects a theological reading after the Antiochene crisis.14 The additional seventy years push the realisation of the six objectives of Dan 9:24 into the more distant future. For the translator, the Antiochene crisis has become a “prelude” to or a type of the end of sin and the establishment of righteousness. Spangenberg similarly suggests that the Septuagint translator of Dan 9 lived after Antiochus IV and no longer felt threatened by him.15 For this reason, he altered the num-bers of the seventy sevens and muted the apocalyptic messianism of the origi-nal writer who lived during the Maccabean crisis. It is hard to say which group of scholars has the better explanation, but the history of interpretation after the Maccabees indicates that the Antiochene crisis was not always considered the sole referent of the prophecy. Whether intended or not, the additional seventy years in the Old Greek invited application of the seventy sevens to later events.
C TEXTS THAT CITE OR ALLUDE TO THE SEVENTY SEVENS
The Septuagint has the only known preservation of the full text of Dan 9:24-27. Other sources, however, cite or allude to a portion of the prophecy of the sev-enty sevens. This section will examine those instances.
1 The Books of 1 and 2 Maccabees
The books of 1 and 2 Maccabees record the events of the Antiochene crisis, the Maccabean resistance, and the Hasmonean restoration. According to 1 Macc 1:54, Antiochus IV built an abomination of desolation (ᾠϰοδόμησαν βδέλυγμα, ἐρημώσεως). He did this in response to a Jewish riot during his second cam-paign in Egypt. After rushing to Jerusalem, suppressing the riot, and massa-cring thousands of Jews (2 Macc 5:11-14, 23-26), Antiochus IV forbade the surviving Jews under penalty of death to practice their religion (Dan 9:27, 11:31). He ordered, instead, the erection of multiple altars for sacrificing pigs and other unclean animals, burning unlawful incense, destroying copies of the books of law, and killing circumcised babies and their families (1 Macc 1:43-61). This persecution of the Jews reached its climax with the abomination of desolation on the altar of the Jerusalem temple. According to Josephus, Antiochus IV built “an idol altar on God’s altar . . . and slew swine on it.”16 Antiochus IV dedicated the Jerusalem temple to Zeus (2 Macc 6:1-7) and broke down the walls that separated sacred space within the temple precinct from common space outside (1 Macc 4:38). As in the days of Ezekiel, debauchery filled the temple (2 Macc 6:4) and mocked the holiness of the God to whom it belonged.
Regarding the abomination of desolation, Collins says that 1 Maccabees 1:54 “stands as the earliest interpretation of the phrase in Daniel.”17 Given Daniel’s interest in Antiochus IV, 1 Maccabees’ reading of Dan 9:27, 11:31, and 12:11 with reference to the Antiochene crisis would seem to be not just the earliest interpretation of these verses but also an indication of the original intention of the author of Daniel. 1 Maccabees 1:54 understood Daniel’s abomination of desolation with reference to the Antiochene crisis. It would seem, then, that the writer of 1 Maccabees considered the Maccabean resolution of that crisis the climax of Daniel’s seventy sevens. How, though, does the Maccabean victory realise the six objectives of 9:24?
1a The First Objective
The setting of Daniel’s prayer and Gabriel’s prophecy is the end of the exile, but the exile did not eliminate sin. God’s people, whether back in the Promised Land or scattered among the nations, still struggled to trust God and obey his commands. The first objective of the seventy sevens affirms this reality. God’s people will continue to sin for seventy sevens. During the reign of Antiochus IV, Jason illegitimately bought the office of high priest and then corrupted it by, among other ways, slaughtering those who resisted his progressive policy (2 Macc 5:6). Menelaus then offered a larger price to Antiochus IV and murdered Onias III. Before that, Simon had falsely accused Onias III (2 Macc 4:1-2) in an effort to gain access to the temple treasury. In various ways, these men whom 1 Macc 1:11 calls ὑιοὶ παράνομοι (lawless members of the covenantal community) idolatrously wanted political power at the expense of obedience to God and spiritual care of God’s people. Consequently, the people who were supposed to be served by their leaders suffered neglect and wandered from the faith (1 Macc 1:52). Sin in the forms of false religion and uncharitable conduct characterized God’s people throughout the seventy sevens. Still, the first objective of the seventy sevens gives assurance that sin has a limit.
1b The Second Objective
If the first objective emphasises the limit of sin, the second similarly announces the end of sin. Sin, however, does not merely run its course after which there is no more sin. Someone has to stop it, or it will continue. In the Antiochene context, the sin of God’s people did not come to a complete end, but false worship ceased for a time. Mattathias and his sons (the Maccabees) took a stand that eventually led to the defeat of Antiochus IV (1 Macc 2:42-48) and the restoration of proper worship (1 Macc 4:36-58). The Maccabean victory may not have been the final defeat of evil, but it was one of Goldingay’s partial realisations in the long sweep of redemptive history.18 It removed the disgrace brought by the Gentiles (1 Macc 4:58), but of course, the Gentiles had the cooperation of Hellenised Jews. If “all the house of Jacob was clothed with shame” (1 Macc 1:28), Antiochus IV’s persecution was not solely responsible for the Jews’ humiliation. The Jews were not pure victims.19 They “had joined with the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil” (1 Macc 1:15), but God would not allow the self-destruction of his people. According to 2 Maccabees 5:17 and 6:12-16, Antiochus IV was actually God’s agent of discipline. The Jews were still God’s people-wayward as they might be-and God used the impiety of Antiochus IV to get the attention of some.20
1c Third Objective
If the third objective speaks of making atonement, 1 Macc 4:52-58 describes the resumption of sacrificial offerings at the temple refurbished by the Maccabees. Following the Law of Moses, the Maccabees and their supporters built a new altar out of uncut stones. This altar replaced the one defiled by Antiochus IV’s abomination of desolation. Judah Maccabee found faithful and legitimate priests to serve at the altar and in the temple. After dedicating the altar for eight days, the people sacrificed burnt offerings whose purpose was to expiate sin and propitiate God’s anger. 2 Maccabees 10:4 adds further evidence of true repentance. The people asked God to keep them from future sin and, if necessary, to use discipline for this purpose. The third objective of the seventy sevens gives assurance that God will provide atonement for sin, presumably through the sacrificial system. The reports of atoning sacrifice in Maccabees correspond to pentateuchal instruction. The Maccabees made use of the OT’s means of grace, and God continued to grant forgiveness and cleansing through the death of an unblemished substitute.
1d Fourth Objective
The writer of 1 Maccabees was alarmed by the loss of righteousness among God’s people in Judea. He noted in 1:11 how some Jews who transgressed the law convinced other Jews to make an agreement with Antiochus IV. This agreement led to the shedding of innocent blood and the defiling of the temple (1 Macc 1:37). Filled with zeal for the law of God (1 Macc 2:20-22), the Maccabees defeated the army of Antiochus IV and then restored the temple. When describing the renovation of the temple, the writer of 1 Maccabees made a point of saying that everything was done according to the law, i.e., righteously (4:42, 47, 53). On his deathbed, Mattathias had instructed his sons to be zealous for the law and to give their lives for the covenant of their fathers (1 Macc 2:50). The evident aim of the Maccabees was to establish righteousness again among God’s people in God’s land. The writer of 1 Maccabees reports that they did (cf. 2 Macc 2:22).
1e Fifth Objective
The writer of 1 Maccabees was also concerned about prophecy. In the context of the reconstruction of the temple altar, 1 Macc 4:46 refers to a coming prophet who will explain what to do with the defiled stones. Moreover, 1 Macc 14:41, while speaking favourably of Simon Maccabee’s priestly leadership, also expresses the expectation of a coming prophet who presumably would reveal what would happen after the interim rule of the Hasmoneans.21 Meanwhile, 1 Macc 9:27 suggests that a prophetic voice had not been heard for a while. Neither the identity of the last prophet nor the length of the prophetic silence is specified. Apparently, though, the writer of 1 Maccabees expected more revelation.22 As of the dedication of the renovated temple, a prophet had not yet appeared. First Maccabees may not say that Daniel’s seventy sevens ended with the resolution of the Antiochene crisis at the death of Antiochus IV or the dedication of the temple, but 1:54 calls Antiochus IV’s action at the temple altar an abomination of desolation. The writer of 1 Maccabees considered the Antiochene crisis the fulfilment-whether predictively or typologically-of Daniel’s prophecies about the disruption of the temple services. Even so, the discussion of the abomination of desolation and the report of the temple’s restoration come early in 1 Maccabees. In fact, the book ends with the high priesthood of Simon Maccabee about twenty years after the Maccabean war with Antiochus IV. Simon became high priest after the murder of his brother, Jonathan, who was high priest at the time (1 Macc 13:23). Later, Simon was murdered by his son-in-law (1 Macc 14:11-16). It is evident from 1 Macca-bees-not to mention other Second Temple literature-that not all prophecy or even the six objectives of Dan 9:24 reached complete realisation at the resolu-tion of the Antiochene crisis. The author of 1 Maccabees knew that the death of Antiochus IV and the victory of the Maccabees did not mark the full accomplishment of the six objectives of the seventy sevens.
1f Sixth Objective
According to 1 Macc 4:42, Judah Maccabee appointed priests who could purify the temple. Verse 56 then singles out the dedication of the altar. Though there is no explicit reference to anointing something or someone most holy, 1 Macc 4 indicates that God’s temple was re-consecrated for worship according to the law. Similar to the wall around the post-exilic temple, vv. 60-61 record the construction of a wall and the stationing of guards. The purpose of these was symbolically if not literally to preserve the sanctity of God’s house by keeping out those who did not wish to honor the God for whom the edifice was built. Sadly, neither the literal nor symbolic protection worked for long. The following decades brought more defilement and damage to God’s house. The seventy sevens’ structure of ten jubilee cycles anticipates the Jubilee of Jubilees for a historical outcome (i.e., the Maccabean victory), which in reality brought short-lived spiritual improvement. The recollection of God’s covenant with David (1 Macc 2:57) indicates that the writer of 1 Maccabees considered the Maccabean success a penultimate accomplishment.23
2 The Dead Sea Scrolls
The Qumran community and the Dead Sea scrolls originated in the middle of the second century B.C.E. during the aftermath of the Maccabean victory.24 The members of the community had withdrawn into the desert in order to practice their Torah faithfulness without interference from Hellenised Jews. They considered the high priest in Jerusalem-whether Jonathan Maccabee in particular or a series of high priests in general-a wicked priest who had abandoned true religion for political and cultural expediency.25 As seen throughout their community documents, the Qumran sectarians devoted much attention to sin and its defiling effects. They were aware of how Jews, and not just Gentiles, were responsible for the trouble during and after the seventy sevens. God’s own people needed to admit their contribution to that trouble, repent of their sins, and look to God for atonement. In this regard, the Qumran community shared the concerns of Daniel’s prayer of confession.
Daniel’s prayer pleaded for mercy (Dan 9:18), and similar dependence on God can be found, for example, in 1QS. The writer of 1QS obviously considered himself one of the sons of justice whom God had predestined to walk on the path of light (1QS 3.20), but he was not beyond an honest self-evaluation. By his own admission, he too often behaved like the sons of deceit that walk on the path of darkness (1QS 11.9-10a), but he found relief not in his own deeds but in God’s character (1QS 11.11b-15a). The writer seems to understand that he cannot atone for his sins. He is not a son of justice because of inherent righteousness or moral resoluteness. If not for God’s intervention, he would keep committing the sins of the sons of deceit (1QH 15.16-18, 18.16-21). As is the case in Daniel’s prayer, God’s activity must precede human performance (1QS 12:35-37).
The final poetic section of 1QS begins with a reference to “the constellation of the years up to their seven-year periods” (1QS 10.7-8). Whether or not the writer had Daniel’s seventy sevens in mind is not clear, but the Qumran community, judging from 11QMelchizedek that will be discussed below, evidently understood its moment in time in relation to the theology of jubilee. Given the stated dependence on God for atonement, the writer of 1QS 10 may have thought that the six objectives of Dan 9:24 were about to be realised in his day. He was certainly right, from Daniel’s point of view, to put his hope in God’s character and action, rather than his own.
A total of eight manuscripts with the text of Daniel were found in caves 1, 4, and 6 at Qumran. None of these manuscripts, however, preserves Dan 9:24-27.26 One manuscript from cave 4 has Daniel’s prayer of confession. Grabbe says, “Although Daniel 9 [i.e., the prophecy of the seventy sevens] is not explicitly discussed anywhere in the published scrolls, there are other pas-sages which suggest that it was quite important to the exegesis of the sect.”27 For example, 11QMelchizedek expresses hope for atonement at the end of ten jubilee periods with which the anointed one in Daniel seems to be associated, but the broken state of the text prevents better understanding.28 Verse 18 of 11QMelchizedek says that the messenger of Isa 52:7 is “the anointed of the spirit about whom Daniel spoke.” The anointed one of Dan 9:26 seems to be in view. Whereas the anointed one of Dan 9:25 is arguably Ezra, the anointed one of Dan 9:26, as suggested by 1 Macc 1:54, is Onias III.29 The writer of 11QMelchizedek, however, has combined this verse with the reference to the one whom Yahweh anoints in Isa 61:1-3. He evidently expects a recapitulation of messianic suffering in the near future. This suffering will somehow bring comfort to others who have been afflicted.
The Qumran sectarians also anticipated the restoration of David’s throne, which would play a role in the salvation of Israel from her enemies (e.g., 4QFlor). Bergsma links these twin hopes of atonement and kingship with Melchizedek.30 First, Melchizedek in Gen 14 and Ps 110 intercedes like a priest between God and humans and thereby represents the restoration of lost communion-the spiritual side of jubilee. Second, the biblical Melchizedek restores people to their property and so like a good king establishes justice among people-the economic side of jubilee. During the Second Temple period, God’s faithful people, including members of the Qumran community, already lived in the Promised Land, but they felt alienated from it not only because of the Antiochene crisis but also because of Jewish Hellenisation dur-ing and after that crisis. The interest of 11QMelchizedek in jubilee suggests that the Qumran community wanted full control of the Promised Land in order to establish widespread faithfulness to God’s covenant.31 So then, jubilee at Qumran had vertical and horizontal implications. Daniel’s seventy sevens were apparently read with both in view.
The Qumran community seemed to expect two anointed ones that would perform royal and priestly roles.32 Laato suggests that the Qumran community emphasised Davidic kingship in reaction to the presumptuous claims of the Hasmonean rulers. A future descendant of David would deliver Israel from her external foes and address instances of internal unfaithfulness to God’s law. Meanwhile, the priestly anointed one would oversee the sacrificial system that provided atonement for God’s people.33 Regarding this atonement, Garnet associates CD 14:18-19 with the six objectives of the seventy sevens.34 So then, the purpose of the (priestly) anointed one’s coming is to bring about the forgiveness of sin that is requested and promised in Dan 9. The Qumran commu-nity evidently awaited the provision of atonement that Daniel’s seventy sevens had announced. While these people believed that they could experience atonement in their day, they knew that atonement would come in the future and somehow be connected with an anointed one.
The Dead Sea scrolls indicate that some people, consciously or not, took the six objectives of Dan 9:24 seriously after the seventy sevens. They had concern for sin, atonement, righteousness, holiness, and fulfillment of prophecy. To state the obvious, they knew that the resolution of the Antiochene crisis had not eliminated all sin or brought full inheritance. Like Dan 9, the Qumran community expressed its hope for the future in terms of jubilee periods. Whether explicitly stated or not, these periods would usher in what amounted to the realisation of the six objectives of Dan 9:24.
3 Flavius Josephus
Similar to 1 Macc 1:54, Josephus understood Daniel’s abomination of desolation with reference to the desecrating action of Antiochus IV at the Jerusalem temple.35 Nevertheless, Josephus also perceived application for his day. He says, “In the very same manner Daniel also wrote concerning the Roman government, and that our country should be made desolate by them.”36 The reference to desolation would seem to have Dan 9:27 in view, but Josephus offers no explanation of Dan 9 to his Roman readers.
Modern readers of Josephus have to keep in mind that he wrote to two audiences-one Jewish and the other Roman-and that he wanted to convince both of his loyalty.37 He evidently tried to review Jewish history in such a way as not to upset his Roman patrons.38 Although Josephus could mention Roman conquest, he dared not say that biblical prophecy announced the eventual tri-umph of God’s kingdom over all others. Concerning the stone that smashes Nebuchadnezzar’s metallic statue in Dan 2, Josephus says:
Daniel did also declare the meaning of the stone to the king [Nebuchadnezzar]; but I do not think proper to relate it, since I have only undertaken to describe things past or things present, but not things that are future: yet if anyone be so desirous of knowing truth, as not to waive such points of curiosity, and cannot curb his inclination for understanding the uncertainties of futurity, and whether they will happen or not, let him be diligent in reading the book of Daniel, which he will find among the sacred writings.39
Readers cannot help but notice how carefully Josephus indicates that more could be said (for the sake of his Jewish readers) but avoids saying it (for the sake of his Roman readers and himself).40 He must have felt confident that his Roman readers would not consult the book of Daniel and discover the unfavorable revelation that an Israelite prophet received about the kingdoms of the world, including Rome.
What is evident, though, is Josephus’ typological understanding of the abomination of desolation. He thought that both Antiochus IV and the Romans had desecrated God’s temple. The original meaning of Daniel’s prophecies pertained to the former, but the passage of time allowed Josephus to recognise recapitulation in the latter. Van Kooten may say, “How exactly Josephus under-stood the qualifier ‘in the same manner’ remains unclear,” but typology seems to be a part of the explanation just as much as prediction.41
D TEXTS THAT SHARE DANIEL’S INTEREST IN JUBILEE
The books of 1 Enoch and Jubilees do not cite or allude to Daniel’s seventy sevens. Like Dan 9, they divide OT and Jewish history into periods. In so doing, they similarly express hope for jubilee.
1 The Book of 1 Enoch
Much of the book of 1 Enoch originated during the period of the seventy sevens and so offers a commentary on conditions during those years.42 If the first three objectives of Dan 9:24 pertain to sin, 1 Enoch also thunders against celestial and terrestrial evil.43 As seen in 1 En. 98:4, humans may not claim to be victims of the spiritual forces of darkness because they willfully make their own choices. Enoch then anticipates the elimination of sin, the establishment of righteousness, and the restoration of pure worship (1 En. 10:16-22). This worship, though, does not occur at a temple in Jerusalem. Because the whole world has been cleansed (1 En. 10:20), the most holy place expands to the farthest reaches of the earth that has changed into a garden (1 En. 10:18-19). Chapters 28-36 develop the theme of earth’s restoration by describing the transformation of desolate land into fertile orchards. This change happens as righteousness radiates outward from the Tree of Knowledge on God’s mountain in the center of the earth (1 En. 26:1). God now dwells with righteous humans in unimpeded communion. The equivalent of the six objectives of Dan 9:26 has come to fruition.
The Animal Apocalypse in 1 En. 85-90 reviews history from creation to the Antiochene crisis. Like Daniel, the Animal Apocalypse uses animals allegorically to represent empires. It further says that seventy shepherds and four kingdoms (Babylon, Persia, Ptolemies, and Seleucids) rule over the sheep, which are God’s people (1 En. 89:59-90:19).44 In the process, the Animal Apocalypse offers additional commentary on the events of the seventy sevens. The relevant verses are 1 En. 89:72-90:5, which metaphorically describe events between the end of the Babylonian exile and the rise of Antiochus IV. As seen in 1 En. 89:73 that speaks of defiled bread, Enoch had a less than favourable assessment of the worship that occurred at the second temple, called a tower. Moreover, God’s people failed to exercise spiritual discernment as the Second Temple leaders continued playing the ane game of power politics and so did not promote faithfulness to God’s word through Moses and the prophets. In other words, the exile had not changed anyone’s heart; consequently, God’s people relapsed into former patterns of belief and conduct.45 While the seventy sevens elapsed, the condition of God’s people worsened as they took advantage of each other and as Gentile rulers oppressed them (1 En. 90:2-4).
Enoch further says that fifty-eight shepherds ruled over God’s people during the Babylonian, Persian, and Ptolemaic eras (1 En. 90:1, 5). Another twelve shepherds during the Seleucid years (1 En. 90:17) brings the total to seventy.46 Such periodisation of history characterises apocalyptic literature and affirms God’s sovereignty.47 However the writers of 1 Enoch and Daniel may have influenced each other, their use of seventy attested to their belief that the sordid chain of events during Daniel’s seventy sevens had a limit and would even serve God’s ultimate plan for jubilee. According to 1 En. 90:22, the sev-enty shepherds were God’s instruments of discipline whether they knew it or not. With the passage of the seventieth shepherd, God gives all humans their just deserts at the final judgment (1 En. 90:20-27) and then reveals the new Jerusalem in the form of a house (1 En. 90:28-36). Before entering the house, all sheep (the Jews) and animals (the rest of humanity) become white (i.e., righteous) by means of a white bull (the Messiah).48 The Lord of the sheep then rejoices over all the animals that have been transformed (1 En. 90:37-38). The seventy sevens in Dan 9 and the seventy shepherds in 1 En. 90 may have been bleak times for God’s people, but they were part of a stretch of history that God had determined to judge the wicked and vindicate the righteous. He advanced his will for his glory and for the good of his people and world.
As seen in 1 En. 90:9-12, which depicts Judah Maccabee as a ram, God used the Maccabees to defend his people against the Seleucid army of Antiochus IV.49 Even so, the ram in these verses is not the same as the white bull in 90:37. Enoch does not consider Judah Maccabee the ultimate savior. The latter may have been used of God to bring temporary relief (cf. Dan 11:34), but 1 Enoch arguably expects someone greater than Judah Maccabee, even a descendant of David who would act as the good shepherd of Ezek 34.50 The book of Daniel may begin with a reference to the exile of a Davidic king, but it does not feature an explicit hope, like Jer 23:5 or Ezek 34:23, for the restora-tion of David’s throne. Instead, it announces that God’s kingdom will smash human kingdoms (Dan 2:22)-a belief shared by 1 Enoch.
Unlike Dan 9, the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 En. 93:1-10 and 91:11-17) does not discuss seventy weeks or sevens. Instead, it counts ten weeks that are followed by an eternity of weeks with unspoiled righteousness (1 En. 91:17). Like the Animal Apocalypse, the ten weeks review biblical history from the birth of Enoch to a final judgment of sin at the nadir of history, which is arguably the Antiochene crisis.51 Recognising that the ten weeks reach a “turning point” in the seventh week, Bergsma points out that the first seven weeks are a jubilee period that anticipates the eternity of weeks after the tenth week.52 Evil, however, does not disappear after the seventh week; hence, there is tension within the ten weeks between the already and the not yet. Bergsma refers to the eighth, ninth, and tenth weeks as ‘”mopping up’ operations in which righteousness vanquishes evil and the eschatological age arrives.” Nevertheless, the seventh week features the decisive moment in the history of redemption with the result that God’s victory is never in doubt during weeks 8-10. Similar, then, to Daniel’s seventy sevens, the Apocalypse of Weeks offers hope that God will eliminate sin and establish righteousness over a long stretch of time. God’s people during the seventy sevens needed this assurance. So also do people who live at other times.
2 The Book of Jubilees
The book of Jubilees purports to be revelation that God gave to Moses on Mount Sinai. In reality, the book is an example of what has been called the rewritten Bible.53 As rewritten scripture, Jubilees retells the early history of the world and of Israel in Gen 1-Exod 12 by omitting, condensing, and expanding the biblical material.54 The book is called Jubilees because it divides this stretch of history before the Exodus into forty-nine jubilee cycles. The fiftieth jubilee, which is indirectly mentioned in Jub. 50:2-3, has to do with the return of God’s people to the Promised Land.55 So then, Jubilees asserts that the purpose of God’s creative activity is his people’s inheritance of the Promised Land where they may live in righteous communion with him.56 The author adopted the jubilee structure because of the needs of his readers whose situation had something in common with the message of Gen 1-Exod 12.57 That situation had to do with a feeling of alienation from the Promised Land (cf. Jub. 49:18-22, 50:5).
In the narrative world of Gen 1-Exod 12, God’s people do not possess the Promised Land. In fact, they spend much of their time outside it. Even when Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob live in Canaan, they share it uneasily with Gentile neighbors. Abraham at the time of his death owned only Sarah’s burial plot that he had purchased from Ephron (Gen 23, Jub. 19). Not until after the Exodus do the descendants of Abraham take possession of Canaan and receive their patrimonies. Only then are they no longer alienated from the Promised Land. Neither are they supposed to share it with the Canaanites who, according to Jub. 10:27-34, had improperly resided in it.58 This opening portion of the OT would speak to Jews living during the Second Temple era. Whether they lived in Judea or away from it, they could feel alienated from their land because someone else (the Ptolemies, the Seleucids, or the Hasmoneans) controlled it and them. Jubilee represented a return to the land from which one had been es-tranged. Even so, living in the land did not necessarily constitute jubilee. God’s people also longed to be independent and faithful in their land. A Hellenised Jewish leader who disregarded God’s law was no better or preferable than a Seleucid ruler who persecuted those who kept the law.59 Both could be instruments of Satan (cf. Jub. 23:29, 50:5). Under either of them, the alienation persisted, and jubilee (i.e., the restoration of lost inheritance) remained an ideal.
Some scholars may date Jubilees to the period between the death of Antiochus IV and the rise of the Hasmonean kingdom.60 Even so, Jubilees could also address the second half of the second century.61 The Hasmoneans were every bit as worldly and corrupt as the Seleucids.62 “Many Jews,” suggests Grabbe, “evidently regarded their [i.e., the Hasmonean] claim on the high priestly office as usurpation.”63 During these years, the primary readers of Jubilees may have been living in Judea, but they presumably felt like strangers and aliens in their homeland.64 Apostasy and injustice ran rampant at the highest levels of government and discouraged the general populace from remaining faithful to God’s law (cf. Jub. 23:16-21). If the editorial frame in Jub. 1 and 50 and the eschatological section in Jub. 23:24-31 hold out the promise of jubilee (i.e., regaining inheritance), the main body indicates that keeping the law (halakah) is the proper way to live out that hope. In this way, Jubilees resembles the message of the prophets who also joined eschatology and ethics (i.e., perseverance in obedience to God’s law).65
Both Dan 9 and the book of Jubilees manifest a concern for keeping the law, but they also recognise that God’s people have lost their inheritance. In the narrative world of Jubilees, God’s people are in Egypt on the eve of the first Exodus. In Dan 9, Daniel is in Babylon on the eve of the second Exodus. If the writer of Jubilees believes that God must heal his servants (Jub. 23:30), Daniel puts his trust in Yahweh’s mercy and self-interest. In both books, the Jubilee of Jubilees will be marked by a return to the Promised Land, the establishment of righteousness, and the restoration of sincere worship. Not until then will the alienation end. Both books inform Jews in the second century that they must return in faith to the promises of God and in obedience to the commandments of God.66
E CONCLUSION
This article has considered anticipations or echoes of the seventy sevens in the literature of the Antiochene crisis and its aftermath. That literature preserves the faith and hope of God’s people for the Jubilee of Jubilees. Stated differently, God’s people still waited for their full inheritance in the Promised Land. They knew that the death of Antiochus IV had not eliminated all sin or established righteousness throughout the world. Some prophecy still awaited fulfillment, and the Most Holy Place in God’s house had not yet expanded to encompass and sanctify the Promised Land. In fact, God’s glory had yet to return to the temple and take up residence there. In these trying times, God’s people clung to their belief that God would keep his word to Daniel and all the prophets.
Second Temple literature demonstrates how early Judaism read the seventy sevens typologically. The Antiochene crisis and Maccabean deliverance were instances of humanity’s proclivity toward evil and God’s preservation of his redemptive plan that includes his people’s inheritance. As instances, the Antiochene crisis and Maccabean deliverance could represent and foreshadow other such moments in history. Josephus, for example, considered Rome’s destruction of the Jerusalem temple a recapitulation of Antiochus IV’s desecration of the temple. Moreover, the book of Daniel with its dual interest in Babylon and Greece associates Nebuchadnezzar and Antiochus IV as exemplars of pride and oppression. God’s Word, especially the apocalyptic sections, has typological depth that can address new but similar situations. The Antiochene crisis was not the end of redemptive history. The prophecy of the seventy sevens may have the Antiochene crisis as its primary focus, but redemptive history has seen other challenges to God’s plan. Because the same spirit of rebellion influences the human actors in each of these instances of hostility, what God says about evil and its solution on one occasion can paradigmatically apply to another.
Therefore, it may be proposed that Jesus, Matthew, Mark, and Hippolytus were not reading Daniel’s seventy sevens in an unprecedented way. Rather, they were following the typological example of the OT and early Judaism. The prophecy of the seventy sevens assures God’s people at any time that evildoers have limits and that God’s people will inherit the earth. God has been establishing and will establish his kingdom on earth.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abegg, Martin, Jr., Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the First Time into English. New York: Harper Collins, 1999. [ Links ]
Adler, William. “The Apocalyptic Survey of History Adapted by Christians: Daniel’s Prophecy of 70 Weeks.” Pages 201-238 in The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity. Edited by James C. VanderKam and William Adler. Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 3/4. Assen/Minneapolis: Van Gorcum/Fortress, 1996. [ Links ]
Archer, Gleason L., trans. Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1958. [ Links ]
Beckwith, Roger T. “The Significance of the Calendar for Interpreting Essene Chronology and Eschatology.” Revue de Qumran 10 (1980): 167-202. [ Links ]
Bergsma, John Sietze. The Jubilee from Leviticus to Qumran: A History of Interpretation. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 115. Leiden: Brill, 2007. [ Links ]
Bright, John. A History of Israel. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981. [ Links ]
Bruce, Frederick F. “Josephus and Daniel.” Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute 4 (1965): 148-162. [ Links ]
Carey, Greg. Ultimate Things: An Introduction to Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic Literature. St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2005. [ Links ]
Collins, Adela Yarbro. “Numerical Symbolism in Jewish and Early Christian Apocalyptic Literature.” Pages 1221-1287 in vol. 11.21.2 of Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Edited by Wolfgang Haase. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1984. [ Links ]
Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. 2nd ed. Biblical Resource Series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans / Livonia, Mich.: Dove Booksellers, 1998. [ Links ]
____. Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. [ Links ]
____. The Scepter and the Star: Messianism in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010. [ Links ]
Davenport, Gene L. The Eschatology of the Book of Jubilees. Studia post-biblica. Leiden: Brill, 1971. [ Links ]
Efron, Joshua. Studies on the Hasmonean Period. Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 39. Leiden: Brill, 1987. [ Links ]
Endres, John C. Biblical Interpretation in the Book of Jubilees. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 18. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1987. [ Links ]
____. “Eschatological Impulses in Jubilees.” Pages 323-337 in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. [ Links ]
Fabry, Heinz-Josef. “Messianism in the Septuagint.” Pages 193-205 in Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures. Edited by Wolfgang Kraus and R. Glenn Wooden. Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies 53. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006. [ Links ]
France, Richard T. The Gospel of Matthew. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007. [ Links ]
Garnet, Paul. Salvation and Atonement in the Qumran Scrolls. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2/3. Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1977. [ Links ]
Gilders, William K. “The Concept of Covenant in Jubilees.” Pages 178-192 in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. [ Links ]
Goldingay, John E. “The Book of Daniel: Three Issues.” Themelios 2 (1977): 45-49. [ Links ]
Goldstein, Jonathan. “How the Authors of 1 and 2 Maccabees Treated the ‘Messianic’ Promises.” Pages 69-96 in Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era. Edited by Jacob Neusner, William Scott Green and Ernest S. Frerichs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. [ Links ]
Grabbe, Lester L. “‘The End of the Desolations of Jerusalem’: From Jeremiah’s 70 Years to Daniel’s 70 Weeks of Years.” Pages 67-72 in Early Jewish and Christian Exegesis: Studies in Memory of William Hugh Brownlee. Edited by Craig A Evans and William F. Stinespring. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987. [ Links ]
____. Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian. 2 vols. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. [ Links ]
____. “The Seventy Weeks Prophecy (Daniel 9:24-27) in Early Jewish Interpretation.” Pages 595-611 in The Quest for Context and Meaning: Studies in Biblical Intertextuality in Honor of James A. Sanders. Edited by Craig A. Evans and Shemaryahu Talmon. Biblical Interpretation 28. Leiden: Brill, 1997. [ Links ]
Hagner, Donald A. Matthew 14-28. Word Biblical Commentar 33B. Dallas: Word, 1995. [ Links ]
Harrington, Daniel J. Invitation to the Apocrypha. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999. [ Links ]
Helyer, Larry R. Exploring Jewish Literature of the Second Temple Period: A Guide for New Testament Students. Downers Grove, 111.: InterVarsity, 2002. [ Links ]
Henze, Matthias. “Daniel and Jubilees.” Pages 52-66 in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. [ Links ]
Jeansonne, Sharon P. The Old Greek Translation of Daniel 7-12. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 19. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1988. [ Links ]
Jobes, Karen H. and Moisés Silva. Invitation to the Septuagint. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000. [ Links ]
Knibb, Michael A. “Temple and Cult in Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphical Writings from Before the Common Era.” Pages 401-416 in Temple and Worship in Biblical Israel. Edited John Day. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 422. New York: T & T Clark International, 2005. [ Links ]
Laato, Antii. A Star Is Rising: The Historical Development of the Old Testament Royal Ideology and the Rise of the Jewish Messianic Expectations. University of South Florida International Studies in Formative Christianity and Judaism 5. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997. [ Links ]
Montgomery, James A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1927. [ Links ]
Nickelsburg, George W. E. Chapters 1-35; 81-108. Volume 1 of 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001. [ Links ]
____. Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2005. [ Links ]
Olson, Daniel C. “Historical Chronology after the Exile According to 1 Enoch 89-90.” Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha 15 (2005): 63-74. [ Links ]
Patte, Daniel. Early Jewish Hermeneutic in Palestine. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 22. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975. [ Links ]
Ridderbos, Herman. Matthew. Translated by Ray Togtman. The Bible Sludenl’s Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987. [ Links ]
Rösel, Martin. “Theology after the Crisis: The Septuagint Version of Daniel 8-12.” Pages 207-219 in Text-Critical and Hermeneutical Studies in the Septuagint. Edited by Johann Cook and Hermann-Josef Stipp. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 157. Leiden: Brill, 2013. [ Links ]
Scott, James M. On Earth as in Heaven: The Restoration of Sacred Time and Sacred Space in the Book of Jubilees. Supplements to The Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods 91. Leiden: Brill, 2005. [ Links ]
Segal, Michael. The Book of Jubilees: Rewritten Bible, Redaction, Ideology and Theology. JSJSup 117. Leiden: Brill, 2007. [ Links ]
____. “The Composition of Jubilees.” Pages 22-35 in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. [ Links ]
Spangenberg, Isak J. J. “The Septuagint Translation of Daniel 9: Does It Reflect a Messianic Interpretation?” Pages 431-442 in The Septuagint and Messianism. Edited by Michael A. Knibb. Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium 145. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2006. [ Links ]
Talmon, Shemaryahu. “Waiting for the Messiah at Qumran: The Spiritual Universe of the Qumran Covenanters.” Pages 111-137 in Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era. Edited by Jacob Neusner, William Scott Green and Ernest S. Frerichs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. [ Links ]
Tiller, Patrick A. A Commentary on the Animal Apocalypse of 1 Enoch. Society of Biblical Literature Early Judaism and its Literature 4. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993. [ Links ]
Ulrich, Dean R. “From Judgment to Jubilee: A Redemptive-Historical Approach to Daniel’s Seventy Sevens.” Ph.D. Thesis, North-West University, 2014. [ Links ]
Van Kooten, George H. “The Desecration of ‘The Most Holy Temple of All the World’ in the ‘Holy Land’: Early Jewish and Early Christian Recollections of Antiochus’ ‘Abomination of Desolation.'” Pages 291-316 in The Land of Israel in Bible, History, and Theology: Studies in Honour of Ed Noort. Edited by Jacques van Ruiten and J. Cornells de Vos. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 124. Leiden: Brill, 2009. [ Links ]
VanderKam, James C. The Book of Jubilees. Guides to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. [ Links ]
____. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010. [ Links ]
____. Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 16. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1984. [ Links ]
____. From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2002. [ Links ]
____. “Identity and History of the Community.” Pages 487-533 of The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment. Volume 2. Edited by Peter W. Flint and James C. VanderKam. Leiden: Brill, 1999. [ Links ]
____. “The Origins and Purposes of the Book of Jubilees” Pages 3-24 in Studies in the Book of Jubilees. Edited by Matthias Albani, Jörg Frey and Armin Lange. Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum 65. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997. [ Links ]
____. “Studies in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17).” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 46 (1984): 511-523. [ Links ]
Vermes, Geza. “Josephus’ Treatment of the Book of Daniel.” Journal of Jewish Studies 42 (1991): 149-166. [ Links ]
Vos, Geerhardus. The Pauline Eschatology. Phillipsburg, N.J.: P. & R. Publishing, 1986. [ Links ]
Willis, Amy C. Merrill. Dissonance and the Drama of Divine Sovereignty in the Book of Daniel. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 520. New York: T & T Clark, 2010. [ Links ]
Wintermute, Orval S. “Jubilees (Second Century B.C.).” Pages 35-142 in vol. 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1985. [ Links ]
Wright, N. T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Christian Origins and the Question of God 2. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996. [ Links ]
Yamauchi, Edwin M. “Josephus and the Scriptures.” Fides et Historia 13 (1980): 42-63. [ Links ]
Zahn, Molly M. “Genre and Rewritten Scripture: A Reassessment.” Journal of Biblical Literature 131 (2012): 271-288. [ Links ]
Correspondence:
Dr. Dean R. Ulrich
Subject Group Theology
Faculty of Humanities
North-West University (Vaal Campus)
PO Box 1174
Vanderbijlpark, 1900
Email: deanrichardulrich@gmail.com
Article submitted: 2014/08/18
Accepted: 2014/09/22.
2 George H. van Kooten, “The Desecration of ‘The Most Holy Temple of all the World’ in the ‘Holy Land’: Early Jewish and Early Christian Recollections of Antio-chus’ ‘Abomination of Desolation,'” in The Land of Israel in Bible, History, and Theology: Studies in Honour of Ed Noort (ed. Jacques van Ruiten and J. Cornells de Vos; VTSup 124; Leiden: Brill, 2009), 298. Jerome read Dan 11:31 in the same dual or typological way. See Gleason L. Archer, trans., Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1958), 133; Van Kooten, “Desecration,” 299-300, 315-316.
3 The Antiochene view reads Dan 9:24-27 with reference to the reign of Antiochus IV and the priestly crisis in the second century B.C.E. The Dispensational view considers Jesus the cut off anointed one and Antichrist the ruler.
4 Cf. Richard T. France, The Gospel of Matthew (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 911-912; Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 14-28 (WBC 33B; Dallas: Word, 1995), 700; N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of Gocl (COQG 2; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996),351.
5 Cf. Geerhardus Vos, The Pauline Eschatology (Phillipsburg, N.J.: P. & R. Publish-ing, 1986), 95.
6 France, Matthew, 911 note 50; Herman Ridderbos, Matthew (trans. R. Togtman; BSC; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), 443.
7 Cf. Van Kooten, “Desecration,” 298-299.
8 Cf. Lester L. Grabbe, “The Seventy Weeks Prophecy (Daniel 9:24-27) in Early Jewish Interpretation,” in The Quest for Context and Meaning: Studies in Biblical Intertextuality in Honor of James A. Sanders (ed. Craig A. Evans and Shemaryahu Talmon; BibInt 28; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 596-597.
9 Karen H. Jobes and Moisés Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 89-90.
10 Heinz-Josef Fabry, “Messianism in the Septuagint,” in Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures (ed. Wolfgang Kraus and R. Glenn Wooden; SBLSCS 53; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006), 197.
11 William Adler, “The Apocalyptic Survey of History Adapted by Christians: Dan-iel’s Prophecy of 70 Weeks,” in The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christian-ity (ed. James C. VanderKam and William Adler; CRINT 3/4; Assen: Van Gorcum / Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 208.
12 Cf. Adler, “Apocalyptic Survey,” 207-208; Jobes and Silva, Invitation, 99.
13 See Grabbe, “Seventy Weeks,” 598-599; Sharon P. Jeansonne, The Old Greek Translation of Daniel 7-12 (CBQMS 19; Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1988), 24-25, 125-126.
14 Adler, “Apocalyptic Survey,” 207; Grabbe, “Seventy Weeks,” 599; James A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1927), 380; Martin Rosel, “Theology After the Crisis: The Septuagint Version of Daniel 8-12,” in Text-Critical and Hermeneutical Studies in the Septuagint (ed. Johann Cook and Hermann-Josef Stipp; VTSup 157; Leiden: Brill, 2013), 216.
15 Isak J. J. Spangenberg, “The Septuagint Translation of Daniel 9: Does It Reflect a Messianic Interpretation?” in The Septuagint and Messianism (ed. Michael A. Knibb; BETL 145; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2006), 434-435, 440.
16 Ant. 12.5.4 §253.
17 John J. Collins, Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 357.
18 John E. Goldingay, “The Book of Daniel: Three Issues,” Them 2 (1977): 47-48.
19 John Bright, A History of Israel (3rd ed.; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981), 419.
20 Daniel J. Harrington, Invitation to the Apocrypha (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 149; George W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah (2nd ed.; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2005), 107.
21 Antii Laato, A Star Is Rising: The Historical Development of the Old Testament Royal Ideology and the Rise of the Jewish Messianic Expectations (SFCJ 5; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 277.
22 Cf. Joshua Efron, Studies on the Hasmonean Period (SJLA 39; Leiden: Brill, 1987), 51.
23 Amy C. Merrill Willis, Dissonance and the Drama of Divine Sovereignty in the Book of Daniel (LHBOTS 520; New York: T & T Clark, 2010), 179.
24 James C. VanderKam, “Identity and History of the Community,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment (vol. 2; ed. Peter W. Flint and James C. VanderKam; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 487-533; James C. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 128-136.
25 Laato, Star Is Rising, 285.
26 Martin Abegg, Jr., Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich, The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the First Time into English (New York: Harper Collins, 1999), 482, 497-498.
27 Grabbe, “Seventy Weeks,” 602.
28 Roger T. Beckwith, “The Significance of the Calendar for Interpreting Essene Chronology and Eschatology,” RevQ 10 (1980): 171; John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature (2nd ed.; BRS; Grand Rapids: Dove Booksellers / Livonia, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1998), 155-156; Grabbe, “Seventy Weeks,” 603.
29 Dean R. Ulrich, “From Judgment to Jubilee: A Redemptive-Historical Approach to Daniel’s Seventy Sevens,” (Ph.D. thesis, North-West University, 2014), 198-206.
30 John Sietze Bergsma, The Jubilee from Leviticus to Qumran: A History of Interpretation (VTSup 115; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 283-284.
31 Cf. Adela Yarbro Collins, “Numerical Symbolism in Jewish and Early Christian Apocalyptic Literature,” in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt (vol. II.21.2; ed. Wolfgang Haase; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1984), 1221-1287.
32 1QS 9:9b-11; CD 12:23, 14:19, 19:10, and 20:1. See also Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 160-162; John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: Messianism in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 80-83, 108-109; Shemaryahu Talmon, “Waiting for the Messiah at Qumran: The Spiritual Universe of the Qumran Covenanters,” in Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (ed. Jacob Neusner, William Scott Green and Ernest S. Frerichs; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 122-126.
33 Laato, Star Is Rising, 279, 289, 294-304.
34 Paul Garnet, Salvation and Atonement in the Qumran Scrolls (WUNT 2/3; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1977), 97.
35 Ant. 10.11.7. §275; 12.7.6. §322.
36 Ant. 10.11.7 §276.
37 Cf. Ant. 16.6.8 §§174-178; Edwin M. Yamauchi, “Josephus and the Scriptures,” FH 13 (1980): 45.
38 Cf. Adler, “Apocalyptic Survey,” 213-214; Geza Vermes, “Josephus’ Treatment of the Book of Daniel,” JJS 42 (1991): 165.
39 Ant. 10.10.4 §210.
40 Cf. Adler, “Apocalyptic Survey,” 212-217; Frederick F. Bruce, “Josephus and Daniel,” ASTI 4 (1965): 159-160; Wright, Jesus, 500 note 83; Yamauchi, “Josephus,” 49.
41 Van Kooten, “Desecration,” 296.
42 George W. E. Nickelsburg, Chapters 1-35; 81-108 (vol. 1 of 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch; Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 7-8, 361, 427; Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 46, 86, 114.
43 Cf. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1, 46.
44 Cf. Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 69; Michael A. Knibb, “Temple and Cult in Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphical Writings from Before the Common Era,” in Temple and Worship in Biblical Israel (ed. John Day; LHBOTS 422; New York: T. & T. Clark International, 2005), 406; Daniel C. Olson, “Historical Chronology after the Exile According to 1 Enoch 89-90,” JSP 15 (2005): 65-66.
45 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1, 394-395.
46 Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 69.
47 Collins, 63-64; Lester L. Grabbe, “‘The End of the Desolations of Jerusalem’: From Jeremiah’s 70 Years to Daniel’s 70 Weeks of Years,” in Early Jewish and Christian Exegesis: Studies in Memory of William Hugh Brownlee (ed. Craig A. Evans and William F. Stinespring; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), 70-71; Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch I, 440.
48 See Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch I, 407; Patrick A. Tiller, A Commentary on the Animal Apocalypse of 1 Enoch (SBLEJL4; Atlanta: Scholar Press, 1993), 383.
49 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1, 396; Tiller, Commentary, 355-357.
50 Jonathan Goldstein, “How the Authors of 1 and 2 Maccabees Treated the ‘Messianic’ Promises,” in Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (ed. Jacob Neusner, William Scott Green and Ernest S. Frerichs; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 73, 91 note 22; Laato, Star Is Rising, 261-262.
51 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1, 441; James C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1984), 147-149; James C. VanderKam, “Studies in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17),” CBQ 46 (1984): 521-522.
52 Bergsma, Jubilee, 239-240.
53 Michael Segal, “The Composition of Jubilees,” in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees (ed. Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 25; James C. VanderKam, From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature (Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2002), 297; Molly M. Zahn, “Genre and Rewritten Scripture: A Reassessment,” JBL 131 (2012): 286.
54 Larry R. Helyer, Exploring Jewish Literature of the Second Temple Period: A Guide for New Testament Students (Downers Grove, 111.: InterVarsity, 2002), 121-124.
55 Cf. Bergsma, Jubilee, 235; Michael Segal, The Book o f Jubilees: Rewritten Bible, Redaction, Ideology and Theology (JSJSup 117; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 324. Fragment 12 of 4Q379 [4QPsalms of Joshuab] also likens the entrance into Canaan to a jubilee. See Bergsma, Jubilee, 252-253.
56 Cf. James M. Scott, On Earth as in Heaven: The Restoration of Sacred Time and Sacred Space in the Book of Jubilees (JSJSup 91; Leiden: Brill, 2005), 81-82; James C. VanderKam, “The Origins and Purposes of the Book of Jubilees,” in Studies in the Book of Jubilees (ed. Matthias Albani, Jörg Frey and Armin Lange; TSAJ 65; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997), 22; James C. VanderKam, The Book of Jubilees (GAP; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 131.
57 Cf. Daniel Patte, Early Jewish Hermeneutic in Palestine (SBLDS 22; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975), 160-161.
58 Cf. Bergsma, Jubilee, 235; Scott, On Earth, 177; VanderKam, Book of Jubilees, 96.
59 Cf. John C. Endres, Biblical Interpretation in the Book of Jubilees (CBQMS 18; Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1987), 236-238, 244; VanderKam, “Origins and Purposes,” 20-22; VanderKam, Book of Jubilees, 139-141.
60 E.g., Matthias Henze, “Daniel and Jubilees,” in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees (ed. Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 52; Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 73; Orval S. Wintemute, “Jubi-lees (Second Century B.C.),” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (vol. 2; ed. James H. Charlesworth; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983-1985), 44.
61 Helyer, Exploring, 120-121.
62 Cf. Gene L. Davenport, The Eschatology of the Book of Jubilees (StPB; Leiden: Brill, 1971), 45-46, 77.
63 Lester L. Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 1.273.
64 Greg Carey, Ultimate Things: An Introduction to Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic Literature (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2005), 75.
65 Cf. John C. Endres, “Eschatological Impulses in Jubilees,” in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees (ed. Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 336-337.
66 William K. Gilders, “The Concept of Covenant in Jubilees,” in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees (ed. Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 178-192.
Sharing is caringFacebookX / TwitterLinkedInWhatsAppTelegramRedditEmail10824 words · 177 views