Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Quick Note on the Chronology of Daniel 1:1

    Quick Note on the Chronology of Daniel 1:1

    For those who hold to the historicity of the story of Daniel and generally to an early dating, Daniel 1:1 is a critical text that presents some problems. As I proceed with my eschatology series, and starting going through the book of Daniel verse by verse, I’m trying to keep all the options in mind and explore interpretation based on the different views.

    As I talked about this last night (February 4, 2016; video embedded at end of post), I thought I was being confusing, and at one point said “Nebuchadnezaar” when I should have said “Pharaoh Neco.” I want to clarify the people and dates and how they apply to the text in question.

    First, here is a chart of the most critical dates. Note that you will find reference sources that differ on these dates by a year. It is beyond this post to discuss the different calendars and accession year vs non-accession year dating. The sequences involved are adequately handled by the dates I’m using.

    Click to view full size
    Click to view full size

    Biblical sources for this time period may be found in 2 Kings 23:29 – 25:30 and 2 Chronicles 35:20 – 36:23.

    Now for Daniel 1:1, my translation:

    In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim, King of Juday, Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon came to Jerusalem and put it under siege.

    Here is a list of the problems:

    1. Unless it is described in 2 Kings 24:1, which seems more likely to describe the events of 598/597 BCE, there is no siege and exile set for 605. It is nonetheless possible that there was one, as the Babylonians became dominant over the territory after winning the battle of Carchemish in 605. There might have been a small exile at that time. Even if 2 Kings 24:1 describes later events, Jehoiakim would have to first submit to Babylon before he could rebel. He was put in power by Pharaoh Neco.
    2. Nebuchadnezzar, as “King of Babylon” could not attack Jerusalem in 605, as he was not yet king of Babylon, but rather became king in that year.
    3. Even if there was a small set of exiles, or perhaps hostages, taken in 605, it doesn’t fulfill the description of the siege.

    The question here is how you evaluate the evidence. One critical element would be one’s determination on other grounds that the Book of Daniel is or is not historical. As an historian one would look for the most probable reconstruction of the evidence. Most scholars tend to support the later dating, even evangelicals, but you can find other arguments regarding dating via my Dating of Daniel Resources page.

    I’ll discuss dating and historicity further in my series, but for now I think this will clarify the issues discussed in the video.

  • Eschatology: Daniel Verse by Verse – I

    Tonight will be my first session on the book of Daniel. I’ll be starting with chapter 1 and going as far as I can. I expect the whole book to take some time, though the first several chapters should go more quickly than the later ones.

    Google+ Event Page

    YouTube:

    I’m going to skip over a good deal of introductory material (though not all of it!) in order to move forward. There are a couple of reasons for this. Most importantly, introductions are often wasted when introducing the topic. That may sound strange, but the reason is that if those reading the introduction aren’t fairly well acquainted with the text, they won’t follow the arguments. How can you know whether you think Daniel is a literary unity, rather than a collection of materials if you haven’t read it? Secondly, I want to use multiple perspectives in interpretation and let us work this out as we move forward.

    To make up for this seeming lack, I recorded an introductory video on the dating of the book, and also created a resource page. The video is embedded on the resource page.

  • The Old Testament: Serious Illness, Strong Medicine

    The Old Testament: Serious Illness, Strong Medicine

    9781893729902I ran across this while looking for something else. Dr. Alden Thompson was the author of the first book sold by Energion Publications, though it was published before I bought and renamed the company. We’ve now published a 5th edition, and this is overall our best selling book.

    In this presentation Alden using a number of Adventist specific references, but I think the message comes through. There are a variety of responses to the violence in the Old Testament. One of the keys to Alden’s approach is his insistence that it is all inspired, even the parts we don’t like very much, and he makes that claim in the video. Alden’s teaching at Walla Walla University was quite formative of my theology and I still enjoy working with him. We’ll be releasing a second edition of his book Inspiration: Hard Questions, Honest Answers later this year, as the publisher of the first edition allowed it to go out of print.

  • Thoughts from the Energion Tuesday Night Hangout: Stewardship and Worship

    Thoughts from the Energion Tuesday Night Hangout: Stewardship and Worship

    books tuesday 020216I enjoyed interviewing three different Energion authors last night. The first was Rev. Steve Kindle who talked about stewardship and the importance of starting from an understanding that everything belongs to God. Steve provided some practical steps that a church can use in caring for all of God’s creation. Steve’s book goes into this somewhat more: Stewardship: God’s Way of Recreating the World.

    At about 7:30 pm, a half hour into the program, Dr. Jon Dybdahl joined us. Jon is the author of a newly released book Hunger: Satisfying the Longing of Your Soul. When he experienced this longing as a young missionary he started to pursue the presence of God and co-taught a class in college in spirituality. Jon’s PhD is in Old Testament, but he has a passion for serious worship.

    For the last 15 minutes, he was joined by Dr. David Moffett-Moore. Dave is author of Pathways to Prayer, and has two doctorates, both a PhD and a DMin. It was interesting and challenging to hear two men with so much education of the mind nonetheless tell us that the intellectual paradigm of religion was not enough. Prayer is an essentially. Coming to know the reality of God’s presence and power is essential.

    When I asked Dr. Jon Dybdahl how one would start this in a church as a pastor or other church leader he said the best way was to see your own need and start practicing it yourself. People will sense when your activities in leadership are powered by prayer and time with God whether you’re telling them all about what you’re doing or not. He also suggested a change in terminology that struck me, suggesting we might use “lead worshipper” rather than “worship leader” to take away the separation of the one on the platform from the ones in the pew.

    The video is embedded below:

  • Stirring the Pot over on EDN

    EDN = Energion Discussion Network.

    Today’s post is by yours truly and titled In the Embrace of Change.

    As owner of Energion Publications, I’m putting a great deal of the company marketing efforts and dollars into building up that site, it’s sister site Nurturing Creativity, and our social media this year. We’re working hard to post high quality content there and we’re inviting discussion. Watch for the Giveaway emblem there, as every comment earns you a chance to win a free book.

  • The Relevance of Atonement Theories

    The Relevance of Atonement Theories

    Discussion Ahead traffic sign in woman's hand on a white background
    Discussion Ahead traffic sign in woman’s hand on a white background

    On the Energion Discussion Network we have two essays posted in answer to the question “Do atonement theories continue to speak to the human condition?” The “yes” answer, written by Dr. Allan Bevere appeared yesterday. The “no” answer appeared today, written by Rev. Steve Kindle. I find both of these articles well worth reading.

    In the past I have been accused of rejecting penal substitutionary atonement because of the fact that I don’t see it as central, or as the explanation of the atonement. In fact, I don’t see any theory of the atonement as a single explanation of the atonement. Our theories of the atonement are metaphors, used to carry across some of the meaning to us.

    As does Allan Bevere, I do find pretty much all theories of the atonement relevant in one way or another. Where I tend to be concerned is where a metaphor begins, in some people’s minds, to become the reality, i.e. that rather than believing in the cross of Christ we believe in our particular metaphor, the one that may best speak to us. I recall a professor from whom I took a class in exegesis of Romans from the Greek text. What was remarkable about the class was that his favorite theory, or metaphor, for the atonement as the moral influence theory. Now I have a bit of a liking for that metaphor myself, but it is not the metaphor Paul uses in Romans. There is some overlap. But this professor, because that was his very most favorite metaphor, taught nothing but, twisting Paul considerably in the process.

    I’d add one more caveat. Relevance is a word that points both ways. A metaphor, to be relevant must communicate to one who hears. If it doesn’t, it isn’t working as a metaphor. I think quite often we need to correct the presentation of some metaphors to make them function better. If they don’t carry something over, they aren’t relevant in that case, however great they might be otherwise.

  • Reading for Election Year

    Reading for Election Year

    politics booksThe day after the Iowa caucuses I’m left to wonder how I could have gotten so uninterested in politics. I have been fascinated by government as long as I can remember, and when I turned 18 and could vote I not only registered immediately, I also started working as a precinct worker for a presidential campaign. Now I can read a couple of articles on an election and my appetite is more than satisfied.

    What has really happened, I think, is that I have gotten more perspective on politics. I have lived through eight years of my friends to the left despising President George W. Bush, and then another eight years of my friends on the right despising President Barack Obama. In both cases it was very difficult to conduct a civil conversation on topics of policy. I have problems with both of these presidents, I might note, and almost all of the problems I have with them are the same for both, primarily an extension of executive power and an excessive willingness to resort to force.

    I have not decided politics is not important. I will definitely vote every time I’m eligible. I will always research the candidates thoroughly once it is time to make my choice.

    What I have decided is that politics is not as critical as I once thought. I have other priorities now.

    And with that, a link. Dave Black found a list of five books one should read during an election year, and proposed one of his own.

    I would add to that list The Politics of Witness by Allan R. Bevere, Ultimate Allegiance by Robert D. Cornwall, and Rendering unto Caesar by Chris Surber. Self interest is here no doubt evident. I publish them all!

  • Eschatology: Prophets, Symbols, and Time

    Eschatology: Prophets, Symbols, and Time

    Some Eschatology SourcesTonight I’ll be finishing my preparatory studies for eschatology as I look at a few more visions, especially from Zechariah, and then at a bit of chronology in preparation for studying the book of Daniel on a more verse by verse basis starting next week.

    Google+ Event Page

    YouTube:

  • The Importance of Little Things

    The Importance of Little Things

    Source: OpenClipart.org
    Source: OpenClipart.org (thenanobel)

    I’m working on a programming project for the IT side of my business today and I was reminded of the importance of little things.

    When I’m programming and something goes wrong, my tendency is to look for big things. For example, there was a problem in this program with handling time zone data. Time codes were coming out different processed through different systems. My first thought, which I followed, was to look for bad settings in the overall system, and then for subtle differences in the way different functions handled this data.

    But no, none of the above was correct. The actual error was a one character problem in the way I was formatting some text—the simplest element of the code involved. Because I was looking for the big things, none of which were causing the problem, I wasted considerable time. Once I saw the actual problem, a couple of keystrokes fixed it.

    Might this not apply to our lives at times? We’re looking for the big changes when we just need to change something small, but which will have a big result?

  • Tuesday Night Hangout on Air

    Salvation: Who and How? You can get more details by following the link.