The Difficulty Of Fulfilling The Predictions Relevant To Jesus' Death

I've written posts over the years about some of the problems with claiming that Jesus' life lined up with Daniel's Seventy Weeks prophecy by normal means, without anything supernatural involved. For example, the passage involves the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, which was done by the Romans, not by Jesus and the early Christians. You can read my previous posts for more about such issues, like here. What I want to focus on in this post is expanding on a point that I think I've only addressed more briefly in the past.

Notice that if Jesus was merely human and wanted to get himself crucified by the Romans to fulfill both Daniel 9:26 and Psalm 22, for example, he would only have partial control of the situation. You can provoke people to kill you by natural means. There wouldn't have to be anything supernatural involved. But you wouldn't have control over how other people would respond to the provocation, and there would be multiple contexts simultaneously in which you'd lack relevant control. You might get a response of mockery or pity, for example, rather than the relevant type of anger. You might get anger, but not enough of it to lead to your execution. Or you might get killed the wrong way. Too soon. Too late. In too humiliating a manner. The gospels illustrate that point. They refer to multiple occasions in which people attempted to do something like throw Jesus over a cliff or stone him. You don't even have to go to a Christian source, like the gospels. Look at what Josephus tells us about how one of Jesus' own siblings was put to death. Jesus could have met the same kind of death as his brother, James, and at the wrong time.

Jesus' fulfilling Psalm 22, Isaiah 50, and Daniel 9, for example, required the Romans, not fellow Christians, to do a series of things the right way. We need to keep in mind that this isn't just a matter of whether Jesus could by natural means try to get people to kill him. The situation is much more complicated than that. If he was merely human, he only had partial control over his fulfillment of the relevant prophecies. The degree to which the fulfillment depended on non-Christian sources was large and evidentially highly significant.

The Evidence For Daniel's Prophecies

Jonathan McLatchie recently wrote an article about the dating of the book of Daniel. The article makes a lot of good points and is well worth reading. He's written a lot of other good material as well, which you can find here. He also has a YouTube channel.

Steve Hays wrote a lot about Daniel and the dating of the book. There's a section in the post here that links several examples. You can find more by searching our archives. The page just linked also cites posts we've written on other issues related to prophecy more broadly, and those have some relevance to Daniel. See here, including the comments section of the thread, for other online resources on when Daniel was written. For example, Glenn Miller has written a lot about the manuscript evidence and pre-Maccabean use of Daniel.

I've done some work on the evidence for prophecies of Daniel fulfilled after the Maccabean era, meaning that the fulfillments offer evidence for Christianity even if we accept a Maccabean date for Daniel or a portion of it. You can find some examples here. The post here discusses problems with arguing that Jesus fulfilled Daniel's Seventy Weeks prophecy by natural rather than supernatural means. When a fourth kingdom arises after Greece, in the form of the Roman empire, Jesus announces the coming of a kingdom of God during the days of that empire, that kingdom becomes popular to the point of being accepted by billions of Gentiles, Jesus identifies himself as the Son of Man of Daniel 7, he dies during the sixty-ninth sabbatical cycle after the decree to rebuild Jerusalem in Nehemiah 2, that death is perceived early on as making a final atonement for sin, and the Romans go on to destroy both the city of Jerusalem and the temple, you can't explain that series of events that line up so well with Daniel's prophecies by dating the book or a portion of it to the second century B.C.

Daniel The Prophet

I think Steve Hays wrote more about Daniel than any of the other prophets. You can find a collection of links to a lot of Steve's material on Daniel here. The page also links many of his other posts on issues related to prophecy. The collection is far from exhaustive, though. You can search our archives for more.

"The Egyptian or Chaldaean prophets, and the other writers, should have been able accurately to tell, if at least they spoke by a divine and pure spirit, and spoke truth in all that was uttered by them; and they should have announced not only things past or present, but also those that were to come upon the world. And therefore it is proved that all others have been in error; and that we Christians alone have possessed the truth, in as much as we are taught by the Holy Spirit, who spoke in the holy prophets, and foretold all things. And, for the rest, would that in a kindly spirit you would investigate divine things - I mean the things that are spoken by the prophets - in order that, by comparing what is said by us with the utterances of the others, you may be able to discover the truth." (Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus, 2:33-34)

"Let [Porphyry] explain the meaning of that rock which was hewn from the mountain without hands, and which grew to be a great mountain and filled the earth, and which smashed to pieces the fourfold image. And let him say who that Son of man is who is going to come with clouds and stand before the Ancient of Days and have bestowed upon him a kingdom which shall never come to an end, and who is going to be served by all nations, tribes, and language-groups. Porphyry ignores these things which are so very clear and maintains that the prophecy refers to the Jews, although we are well aware that they are to this very day in a state of bondage." (Jerome, Commentary On Daniel, Chapter Eleven, vv. 44-45)

Jesus' Fulfillment Of The Seventy Weeks Prophecy

One of the themes I've been emphasizing about prophecy fulfillment is that a fulfillment can be evidential for Christianity even if the fulfillment is thought to be of a secondary or typological nature. For example, though I've argued that the Servant Songs in Isaiah are about the Messiah in their original context, Jesus' alignment with the passages is evidentially significant in support of Christianity even if the passages are about the nation of Israel, a Jewish remnant, or some other entity instead. See the article just linked for a further discussion of that example.

The same is true of Daniel's Seventy Weeks prophecy. See the article on that prophecy here by Robert Newman. I consider his interpretation of the passage the best one I've seen. I take it as the original meaning of the passage. But even if I'm wrong, it still seems evidentially significant that Jesus' life lines up so well with the passage in the manner discussed by Newman. Even if you think the passage in its original context refers to some entity other than the Messiah, that Jesus fulfilled it in some significantly different way than how Newman proposes, or whatever, it's still significant that Jesus was crucified during the sixty-ninth sabbatical cycle after the 445 B.C. decree to rebuild Jerusalem. And there are other ways in which Jesus' life lines up well with the passage. See the second-to-last paragraph of the post here for further discussion.

The more Jesus' life lines up so well with passages like the Servant Songs and the Seventy Weeks prophecy, the more difficult it is to deny that something supernatural has occurred. It's noteworthy that you don't even have to grant a Christian understanding of the original meaning of these passages to reach the conclusion that there's been a supernatural fulfillment of the passages.

Expository gaps

I'd like to revisit an issue I often discuss, with some additional considerations:

1. The secular interpretation of Dan 11 is that most of Dan 11 is "prophecy" after the fact, but then the author goes out on a limb and makes an actual prediction about the fate of Antiochus, only he gets it wrong. By contrast, conservatives postulate a chronological gap. They say it's not about Antiochus but the future Antichrist. That can look suspiciously like special pleading. An ad hoc, face-saving postulate to salvage the prophecy.

2. And, of course, there are false prophets and "psychics" who make failed predictions. So that's a legitimate issue.

If we have extrabiblical evidence that some people have genuine premonitions, then that establishes the principle. So we approach the text of Daniel knowing that's both possible and sometimes actual. And it only takes a few verified examples to establish that a phenomenon is real. The prophecies of John Knox might be a good candidate. Likewise, Craig Keener includes some uncannily accurate predictions in his book on miracles. There are other examples. 

3. If the author of Daniel got it wrong, why didn't he just edit the prediction to make it retrospectively correct? Did he die before the demise of Antiochus? Or if it circulated before the demise of Antiochus, why was it even preserved by posterity when Jews on the scene, who'd be in the best position to know, could tell that the prediction was a bust? 

4. In Scripture, the default mode of prophetic inspiration is visionary revelation. And the book of Daniel is no exception. It contains revelatory deems and visions. However, it also contains futuristic exposition. Take the angel who tells Daniel what will happen. One question this raises is whether Daniel's experience alternates between visions in which he foresees the future and auditions in which an angel tells him what will happen. In principle, he could see what the angel is describing. In a sense, the angelic exposition is for the benefit of the reader rather than Daniel.

I don't think it's coincidental that the shorter material takes the form of visual descriptions while the longer material takes the form of verbal exposition. When there's too much ground to cover, the reader is given a verbal summary rather than a vision description. But this doesn't imply that Daniel had a different experience. Rather, it seems more likely that he consistently has visions, but some of the visions are distilled into verbal summaries to save space.  

5. Let's take a comparison: movies consist of consecutive scenes. In terms of the plot, there are chronological gaps between the scenes. The interval between one scene and another may be a matter of minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, or years. 

The movie viewer isn't shown the gaps. He watches a seamless series of scenes. It's not like there's a scene, then it goes black or blank, then there's another scene. 

But the viewer is expected to understand that while, in terms of the viewing process, there's no time lapse from one scene to the next, changing scenes usually implies a time lapse, in terms of the plot–even though the viewer isn't shown the passage of time in-between scenes. 

And that's not just a fictional convention. The same convention exists for documentaries and biopics. Chronological gaps in historical narration are routine and necessary. 

6. That's overlooked in Dan 11. Even before we get to the question of Dan 11:36-45, or 11:40-45, the series of events leading up to that oracle contains many unspecified chronological gaps. It sketches the rise and fall of empires and the succession of kings: Neo-Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Ptolemies, Seleucids, and Rome. But it doesn't provide a minute-by-minute, day-by-day, week-by-week, month-by-monthly, or even year-by-year account. It skips over many intervening stretches of time, choosing to focus on key figures and events. 

7. This may also have a bearing on oracles that say a future event is "soon", "near", "at hand". In a vision, the seer views each event following right on the heels of the prior event. Within the continuity of the vision, a particular scene may be sooner or later in relation to the series of images. Just like, in a movie, one scene may be close to another scene, in the sense that there are no chronological gaps in the flow of the imagery. The scenes were shot at different times, sometimes out of order, but edited into a continuous succession of scenes. 

Yet in terms of how the scenes track the plot, there is a lapse of time between one scene and another, even though that's not shown. By the same token, the way visionary revelation corresponds to reality needs to make allowance for the difference between the flow of images in the vision and how that lines up with the future.  

Prophetic blanks

Conservatives have often argued that the critical position rests on a dogmatic, rationalistic denial of the possibility of predictive prophecy. For the critical scholar, however the issue is one or probability. That Daniel’s predictions have particular relevance to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes is not in dispute…There is no apparent reason, however, why a prophet of the sixth century should focus minute attention on the events in the second century. J. Collins, Daniel (Fortress Press 1993), 26.

That sounds plausible, but it's superficial. Bible prophecy is selective. Focussed on the big events. The Babylonian Exile was a big event for Jews. Suppose that's when Daniel was written. What's the next big event on the prophetic calendar? The Antiochean crisis is a good candidate. 

That would tempt many Jews to commit apostasy. So it would be very encouraging for 2C BC Jews to realize that a 6C prophet foresaw their ordeal, and predicted that God would deliver them.

And what's the next big event on the prophetic calendar? What's the big event between the Antiochean crisis and the advent of Christ? There's nothing of comparable importance in-between. So it's not unreasonable think Dan 11 has a blank, an unstated interval, between Antiochus and the next big event.

That's how prophetic timetables in Scripture work. They skip over minor events and focus on the high points or low points. 

Is the Archangel Michael the Son of Man?

Some commentators think the Son of Man in Dan 7 is the Archangel Michael. Here are some problems with that identification: 

i) Dan 7 depicts the Son of Man as the cloud-rider. That has its background in Baal, who was the cloud-rider. That was appropriated by OT writers, who reapply it to Yahweh. Yahweh is the true cloud-rider. In OT usage, that's a divine prerogative. 

Therefore, it can't apply to an angel like Michael. For the Son of Man to be the cloud-rider is a divine insignia. 

ii) There's the question of what Daniel saw. What did the Son of Man look like? Supposed he looked like Jesus at the Transfiguration or the Christophany in Rev 1. That might have an angelomorphic appearance in the sense of a radiant being. But that doesn't mean the Son of Man is an angel. Just that, like angels, he looks, in that setting, like a celestial being.

iii) Also, the context of Dan 7 is not about an angel appearing before Yahweh. Rather, it's an enthronement scene. The ancient of days represents the old king, while the son of man represents the crown prince who's now entering into the kingship as the royal successor or coregent.

iv) Angels might be in the pictorial background of Dan 7 as courtiers in God's throne room. That, however, doesn't make the Son of Man an angel, for the relationship between the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man is a royal father/royal son dynamic.

For another perspective:

https://frame-poythress.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/PoythressVern1976HolyOnes.pdf

Defending Daniel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z4c4DxTHhE

The king of the north

At the same time, Whitcomb raises some legitimate arguments that call into question whether the prophecies in Daniel culminate solely in the second century BCE. If the King of the North was only the Seleucid Empire, Whitcomb asks, why does he take such a circuitous route to get to Israel, attacking countries on the way? If his base were in Syria, all he would have to do is go straight south to Israel. [Cf. John C. Whitcomb. Daniel. Moody Publishers, 1985, 2018, pp174-176.]

http://jamesbradfordpate.blogspot.com/2018/10/book-write-up-daniel-by-john-c-whitcomb.html

George H. Harton, "An Interpretation of Daniel 11:36-45," Grace Theological Journal 4/2 (Fall 1983): 213-214. https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/gtj/04-2_205.pdf

Daniel and the Sibylline oracles

Unbelievers discount the oracles of Daniel as prophecy after the fact. Let's test that by using a standard of comparison. The Sibylline oracles were originally pagan oracles. These were taken quite seriously by Romans. Subsequently, Jewish writers and later Christian writers imitated the pagan exemplars to fabricate prophecy after the fact that "predicted" Roman history and the life of Christ. If the oracles of Daniel are prophecy after the fact, why do they lack the heavy-handed clues we find in the Sibylline oracles? I'm going to quote some excerpts, along with the editorial identifications: 

Fireproof

20 And he ordered some of the mighty men of his army to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and to cast them into the burning fiery furnace. 21 Then these men were bound in their cloaks, their tunics,[e] their hats, and their other garments, and they were thrown into the burning fiery furnace. 22 Because the king's order was urgent and the furnace overheated, the flame of the fire killed those men who took up Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. 23 And these three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, fell bound into the burning fiery furnace.

24 Then King Nebuchadnezzar was astonished and rose up in haste. He declared to his counselors, “Did we not cast three men bound into the fire?” They answered and said to the king, “True, O king.” 25 He answered and said, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.”

26 Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the door of the burning fiery furnace; he declared, “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, servants of the Most High God, come out, and come here!” Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego came out from the fire. 27 And the satraps, the prefects, the governors, and the king's counselors gathered together and saw that the fire had not had any power over the bodies of those men. The hair of their heads was not singed, their cloaks were not harmed, and no smell of fire had come upon them (Dan 3:20-27).

There are readers who find this unbelievable or hard to believe. In that regard, the description of Polycarp as fireproof presents a striking parallel to Daniel's friends in the furnace:

Polycarp 15:2

The fire, making the appearance of a vault, like the sail of a vessel filled by the wind, made a wall round about the body of the martyr; and it was there in the midst, not like flesh burning, but like [a loaf in the oven or like] gold and silver refined in a furnace. For we perceived such a fragrant smell, as if it were the wafted odor of frankincense or some other precious spice.

Polycarp 16:1

So at length the lawless men, seeing that his body could not be consumed by the fire, ordered an executioner to go up to him and stab him with a dagger. And when he had done this, there came forth [a dove and] a quantity of blood, so that it extinguished the fire; and all the multitude marvelled that there should be so great a difference between the unbelievers and the elect.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/martyrdompolycarp-lightfoot.html

The martyrdom of Polycarp is presented as an eyewitness account. To my knowledge, it's generally considered to be authentic. 

The account includes a premonition (5:2), and audible divine voice (9:1). Although an unbeliever will dismiss that as legendary embellishment, it helps to explain Polycarp's indomitable courage in the face to death by torture. 

Easter Prophecy Fulfillment

I wanted to put together a collection of links to some of our posts on the fulfillment of prophecies related to the Easter season. Since the fulfillment of these prophecies postdates our earliest Old Testament manuscripts, there's no need to argue for the traditional dating of the Old Testament books. But for those who are interested in that topic, you can find some of our posts on the subject linked here.

Here's something I wrote about Jesus' fulfillment of the first three Servant Songs in Isaiah. I also wrote a post on Facebook about Jesus' fulfillment of the fourth Servant Song, the Suffering Servant prophecy.

The opening of the Suffering Servant passage and some other passages in Isaiah and elsewhere refer to the impact the Servant and Israel would have on the Gentile world. Here's a post I wrote on the subject. And here's a post on how such passages give us modern evidence for the deity of Christ. I also discussed how we can use such prophecy fulfillments to argue from the common ground we have with skeptics.

Near the end of this post on the book of Daniel, there's some material on Jesus' fulfillment of the Seventy Weeks prophecy and some other predictions in Daniel.

Here's something about Psalm 22.

And here's something Steve Hays wrote about Psalm 16:10.

Exposition of Daniel

https://www.monergism.com/exposition-daniel-mp3-series

Genesis through Joshua, and Daniel

http://theologicalsushi.blogspot.com/2017/01/my-sermons-on-genesis-through-joshua.html

http://theologicalsushi.blogspot.com/2017/01/lectures-on-daniel.html

Daniel Remains A Major Problem For Skeptics

In late 2014, Carol Newsom, an Old Testament scholar at Emory University and president of the Society of Biblical Literature in 2011, published a commentary on the book of Daniel (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2014). She takes the position that's now the majority view on the dating of Daniel, placing the composition of the closing chapters of the book in the middle of the second century B.C. John Collins, one of the foremost Daniel scholars of our day, calls Newsom's work "the first major commentary on Daniel of the twenty-first century" (front flap).

I've read the introduction and some other portions of the commentary, but I haven't read the large majority of it. So, these are my tentative first impressions. But I found it striking that "the first major commentary on Daniel of the twenty-first century", written by such a prominent Old Testament scholar, published just recently and with all of the resources of a scholarly majority behind it, has to concede so much to a traditional dating of Daniel.