A STUDY of J?1� ($[!(/) in DANIEL 8:14
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A STUDY OF j?1� ($[!(/) IN DANIEL 8:14, ITS RELATION TO THE "CLEANSE" SEMANTIC FIELD, AND ITS IMPORTANCE FOR SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM'S CONCEPT OF INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT A Thesis Submitted for the degreeof Doctor of Philosophy, the School of Classics, History and Religion; Faculty of Arts; University of New England. March2007 by Eric Murray Livingston Cooranbong, NSW Declaration I ce1iify that the substance of this thesis has not already been submitted for any other degree or qualification. I certify that any help m prepanng this thesis, and all sources used, have been acknowledged in this thesis. 11 Abstract While the Hebrew word root p1~ has a broad semantic range, examination of usage in this work shows that it relates mostly to justice and judgment, often describing the just manner of judicial proceedings. A number of these usages depict contexts that Seventh-day Adventism terms 'investigative judgments'; that is, the preliminary judicial phase in which evidence is examined. The relevant usages of verbal p1:!! span narrative, legal, historical, poetic (particularly the individual laments), prophetic and wisdom genres. It frequently relates directly to the general biblical 'good-vs-evil' metannarative. The complex wisdom of Job is very illuminating as here verbal p1~ is utilised a disproportionately high number of times, and in connection with themes developed in Daniel, particularly the notions of test, conflict among professing God-followers, judicial investigation, theodicy, and anthropodicy. Further, there is a manifest connection with the "cleanse" semantic realm in the book of Job, in parallelism and linguistic interchange or substitution. This p1:!!-"cleanse" linguistic interrelation, also seen in other places in the Hebrew scriptures, is important for the cultic context of Dan 8. It suggests a strong connection between the righting of the sanctuary in Dan 8 (p1:!!) and the righting or cleansing of the sanctuary in the Day of Atonement service of Lev 16 (1;-m and 1~:i pi.). The visual imagery of Dan 8, such as the sanctuary and the ram and goat, combined with the intertextual cultic-judicial usage of p1:!! and metaphorical meaning of cultic words like 1;-i~, ;-i:ir, and 1~:i, further gives reason to connect the two passages. Therefore it is legitimate to make the interpretive movement :from the apocalyptic Dan 8:14 to the cultic and typological Lev 16, with the common referent 111 of an investigative judgment. To deny a linguistic (and thematic) connection is often due to the restrictive semantic methodology of determinacy. A modified indeterminacy both engages prior usage of p1l, particularly in contexts reflecting Danielic themes, and utilises the present Dan 8 sanctuary context as the final determinant of meaning. Consequently, the translation " ... then shall the sanctuary be cleansed (p1lJ)" (Dan 8:14), reflected in the Septuagint, Theodotion, Syriac, Coptic, and Vulgate, is an appropriate rendering as it engages the metaphorical "cleanse" nuance significantly associated with pil, as seen in Dan 11/12, and particularly germane to the sanctuary and related themes of Dan 8. lV Acknowledgments It gives me pleasure to express appreciation for the input of others into this undertaking. Foremost has been my major supervisor, Professor Majella Franzmann. Prof. Franzmann has helped with expertise academically, and has gone beyond the normal supervisory role to show great patience and care in meeting personal needs of her student. Earlier, while at the University of New England, Dr Jean Harkins gave guidance and stimulus in linguistic matters. So, also, has my wife Carol with general theological thoughts. Carol has also done much proof reading. Martin Probstle kindly shared the results of his recently completed, very thorough and insightful text oriented study on Dan 8:9-14. Other fellow researchers and friends, and our sons Paul and Daniel, have given encouragement and computer assistance. In a vertical direction, it is mind-stretching and reassuring to know that Deity outlines in Scripture an equitable investigative phase to judgment, both to facilitate scrutiny of the Sovereign's handling of evil and to furnish opportunity for people to have 'their day in court'. V General and Technical Preface This preface makes a statement regarding the delimitations of the work, then moves to terminology and presuppositions, followed by a note about the text and translations used. Finally, a list of abbreviations is given. While all 523 usages of j71:!! in the Hebrew(-Aramaic) scriptures are tabulated and analysed, the linguistic inquiry in this work is always focused upon the usage of j71:!! in the base text of Dan 8:14, and also how the word relates to the "cleanse" semantic domain as seen in Lev 16. Accordingly, the themes and genre of Dan 8 and parallel chapters, and any j71:!!-cleanse associations, are the background focus in the analysis of j71:!!. The word root will not be examined to give a complete view of what it conveys from a more general perspective. Also, the "cleanse" semantic realm ( as i~rn, ~::ir) will not be explored beyond what elucidates the present inquiry into Daniel's portrayal of "then shall the sanctuary be cleansed" (8: 14, AV). Some (e.g., Kersten 2004c, 2-3) have felt that the focus should be on j;,1:!!-1!:l:J "atone" as much as p1:!!-"cleanse" because of the greater frequency of 1:,::, (pi. l 6x) in Lev 16 compared to -,~~ "cleanse" (2x pi., 1x qal). While 1:,::, does statistically dominate Lev 16, the roots -,~~ "cleanse" and -,:,::, are complementary or supplementary. For example, -,~~ piel "cleanse" and w,p piel "sanctify" action complements -,:,::, piel "atone" action in Lev 16: 15-20, and both -,:,::, piel and 1~~ piel effects -,~~ qal in verse 30. Also, Num 8:5-22 (cleansing/dedication of Levites) has -,~~ (pi. 4x: vv. 6,7,15,21; hitp.lx: v.7), 1:,::, (pi. 3x: vv. 12,19[re Israel],21), and i-mn (hitp. Ix: v.21) working together. Finally, Ezek 43:18-27 (dedication of the altar) has i:mn (pi. "de-sin" "purify" "cleanse" 4x: vv. 20,22[bis],23), 1:,::, (pi. 2x: vv.20,26), and -,~~ (pi. Ix: v.26), and all summarised in terms of 1:,::, piel and -,~~ piel in verse 26. The settings do differ, but the services are complementary dedication/cleansing rituals Vl (cf. Rodriguez 1979, 109-112,137). The most frequent root used through these three passages is first 1~:i (Lev 16), then 1;-m (Num 8), and finally ~Dn (Ezek 43). The numerics vary, but all lexemes and contexts interrelate closely, by both direct correspondence and also by 'connected differentiation' within correspondence. 1~:i piel is a broad term relating to different synonyms, including 1;-JD "cleanse" (as above). Kiuchi (1987, 99) states: " ... the concept of kipper includes the notion of 'purification"' expressed through the piels of i;iD, 1.znp, and ~Dn. Levine (1989, 23) states: "kipper, means 'to wipe off, burnish, cleanse.' In cultic terms this means that expiation is conceived of as cleansing, as wiping away .... " Milgrom (1991, 1033,1079-84) concurs: "kipper literally means 'purge'." The 1~:i-privative min combination, 17j, .. 1~J, gives the idea of "purging ... from" or cleansing (e.g., Lev 16:16; Gane 2005, 331). The present work will follow the focus of the debate and target the "cleanse" connection primarily through i;iD and ;i:ir, noting synonyms including 1~:i piel. Since the vigorous debate in the last few decades has been primarily within the Seventh-day Adventist community, Adventist terminology and perspective will be identified and largely utilised as a frame of reference. This particularly relates to 1 questions of methodology , and the authorship and dating of the book of Daniel. Internal data of the canonical books that indicate time, place and authorship is highly regarded by Seventh-day Adventists. 1 It is granted that each discipline of the various theological activities, as textual criticism, exegesis, systematic theology, etc., has its own method to meet its specific objective. However, on a higher level, for these "theological disciplines to interact harmoniously with one another, they must share the same understanding of the hermeneutical (i.e., interpretational) and material (i.e., source of theology) principles of their particular methods." This requires, and this work seeks, "an overarching interdisciplinary methodology through which all disciplines communicate, complement, and correct one another" (Canale 2004, 11). The author goes on to suggest that Seventh-day Adventism must retain a sola Scriptura macro-hermeneutical principle in its biblical and theological interpretation (e.g., ibid., 43). In this present work, such is discussed under "Methodology", and a further consensus sought on a level below so/a Scriptura, focusing in the pivotal area of exegesis, through a largely common historico-grammatical-literary method. Vll Therefore two positions will be adopted that are generally current in the Seventh-day Adventist community and in the broader evangelical Christian world. One is the dating of the book of Daniel as a sixth-century BCE work (Archer 1974, 470-81; Hasel 1986a, 84-164; Ferch 1986, 5-21; McCready Price 1955, 14-19; cf. Kitchen 1965, 79; Montgomery 1979, 58; in Eissfeldt 1965, 519: "Here we find scholarship moving back towards the tradition of Synagogue and Church, in that the book of Daniel, or at any rate its basic material, is ascribed to the exilic period"). The other is that Daniel was written by the prophet of that name (Ferch 1986, 22-50). Arguments from dating and authorship could be rigorously employed to bolster linguistic affirmations either way. On the other hand, some would contend that whether Daniel is a sixth- or second-century BCE work, or whether it is a product of the prophet Daniel or some later guild of maskilim, if the present study is fundamentally a synchronic analysis, then it will largely work above these differences.