Biblical Languages Tools

Some of my favorite Language assist tools from around the web:

Shalom שָׁלוֹם: Live Long and Prosper!

Darrell Wolfe

Storyteller | Writer | Thinker | Consultant | Freelancer | Bible Nerd *Written withs some editing and research assistance from ChatGPT-4o

Read more →

White evangelicals have rejected Jesus and chosen their false Messiah (Donald Trump)... woe to the church in the hose of USA!

Judgment against the church is coming... 

Woe to the church in the house of USA, woe to the house of white evangelicals, you are in danger of your candle being removed.

You have rejected The Way of Yeshua, you have chosen Ahab, prepare accordingly.

And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel as the house of Ahab had done, for the daughter of Ahab was his wife. And he did evil in the sight of Yahweh (2 Ch 21:6)

You have wearied Yahweh with your words, but you ask, “With what have we wearied him?” You have done so when you say, “Everyone who does evil is good in the sight of Yahweh, and in them he delights,” or “Where is the God of justice?” (Mal 2:17)

W. Hall Harris III et al., eds., The Lexham English Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012).

Shalom שָׁלוֹם: Live Long and Prosper!

Darrell Wolfe

Storyteller | Writer | Thinker | Consultant | Freelancer | Bible Nerd *Written withs some editing and research assistance from ChatGPT-4o

Read more →

AUTOBIOGRAPHY/UNDERSTANDING OF CALLING, Life of the mind and the gift of hardship

Sharing on my website too... 

 

 

AUTOBIOGRAPHY/UNDERSTANDING OF CALLING

 

Life of the mind and the gift of hardship

 

by

 

Darrell Wolfe

 

 

 

 

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the course SF509: Formation for Theological Studies

 

Professor Kristin Huffman

 

 

Sunday, November 3, 2024

 

INTRODUCTION

            The following is a reflection of my journey, my unique contexts, and my strengths and gifts – all of which play a role in my story and my sense of calling.

REFLECTION OF JOURNEY

As my personal timeline was laid out before me, a realization dawned that was both subtle and profound. My formative years were hard, painful, and confusing. My young adult years were harder, more painful, and more confusing. I am intimately aware of the many painful moments and how they shaped me; I use those stories often when working with others through their painful moments. I am reminded of a ubiquitous social media meme, “Trauma didn’t make me stronger, it gave me dark humor and unhealthy coping mechanisms”.[1] I eventually healed from many of those and I’m still unlearning others; however, the trauma gave me a sense of realism and non-fake-ness that others appreciate. Several folks have commented on how they don’t have to put on mask when working with me (like watching their language) – which is all too common in US-American Churchianity.

Yet, I was surprised by how many non-painful or not-as-painful moments dotted my personal timeline in those early years. Even in those sad and hard years, I can look backward and see Yahweh guiding and providing –through access to mentors, successful businesspeople, and quirky or unusual men and women of God. At one point, I was given direct access to the executive leadership at a major bank, and recently he’s given me an inside view of an elected official’s inner workings. I was given access to leaders (both great and awful leaders) inside and outside of the Church. Throughout the journey, Yahweh has shown me his nature, mind, heart, and ways of operation, bringing me closer to him and to his human imagers. On many occasions in many jobs with many leaders, I’ve sat in a one-on-one meeting with my manager that was intended to be about my job performance but ended up taking a pastoral or counselor role for that manager as they went through hard things. HaRuach HaKodesh (The Holy Spirit) moved on these leaders such that they often spontaneously shared their pain – often surprising themselves to be doing so. I’ve come to recognize it when Ruach is leading in these moments.

All these preparation seasons were followed by a season of profound personal death (both literal for my late-wife, Flavia, and metaphorical for me). In many ways, my darkest nights of the soul (ages 36-40) became the furnace in which I was burned to ashes and reborn.[2] Like the mythological Phoenix, or Yeshua himself, I rose from the ashes with a new lease on life. Suddenly, while some new hard and painful moments still dotted the remaining timeline, most of them took on a different tenor; the nature of the hard moments was different somehow. The timeline also exploded with positives, or at least neutrals after 2019.

Greene-McCreight notes, “I think that people who are engaged in psychotherapy, if they work hard with the right therapist, cannot help but come out the other end of depression changed.”[3] This was my experience. I count myself extremely lucky to have worked with two world-class counselors since 2016; both of whom helped me become a “fully integrated” human imager. While I remain connected to my second counselor for regular check-ins – like getting my emotional oil changed, it was the end of 2019 that my breakthrough hit in the oddest way.

After years of dealing with some really big things in the counselor’s office, I had this one nagging memory that didn’t feel like a ‘big deal’. Jana (the counselor) said, “It’s usually the things that don’t seem like a big deal that we should be working on.” So, we set out to do Lifespan Integration Therapy techniques on this memory. In what is otherwise an innocuous memory of a fifth grader who skipped school, I had internalized that I should run far and fast from hard things. We thanked 10-year Darrell for protecting me but assured him that I’m an adult now and I can take it from here. While it felt healing to have that moment, it did not feel “profound”. The moment passed without fanfare, or fireworks, or sudden blasts of “Aha!”. Yet, I woke up a week later realizing that over 20-years of depression was gone. It was simply – Gone! When I’m tempted to run away from hard things today, I can look at that moment, turn back to the hard thing, and stand.

Now I’ve followed Yahweh into seminary – a place I swore since childhood I would never be. Today, he is teaching me how to lead-well within my context. For most of my life, I took seriously the warning, “not many should become teachers” (James 3:1).[4] I knew I was emotionally weak and vulnerable, prone to mood swings, and unable to sustain momentum. I would volunteer for a season, feel a pressure of some kind that I could never quite explain, then to the bewilderment of those around me I would jump ship. I “needed milk because I couldn’t handle meat” (Hebrews 5:12), and that was true for many years.

The dark nights of my soul forged me into someone who can handle tough things. Getting my Autism and ADHD (AuDHD) diagnosis helped me understand things like sensory overload, which allowed me to carve out space in my life and schedule to work with my uniqueness. These have resulted in my capacity to lead, teach, and guide in new ways. Getting my bachelor’s in general Christian studies allowed me to learn a healthier relationship with Yahweh and the Bible. I found shalom (שָׁלוֹם) in my relationship with Yahweh, and with my wrestling with some Bible questions.

In many ways, this current season is marked by “you ought to be teachers by this time” (Hebrews 5:12), and so I am tentatively taking steps into that space. Due to experiences from my own past and formative years, I avoided any roles that felt like a church leader. These days, I am beginning to accept that role as he provides me opportunities to step into it. Most of my work today is through one-on-one work with others like me – those who have questions. We shall see what the future holds. As I walk into this next season, I am also aware of how my contexts have shaped who I am and what I bring into those one-on-one fireside chats.

PERSONAL CONTEXT(S)

I was raised a white middle-class male by two white educated parents. My dad was a Doctor of Ministry, one uncle was a PhD in Psychology, another uncle was a high school dropout but built a million-dollar painting business. My mom was a union nurse who went back to get more education and became a nursing educator for the CalState University system.

All of this led me to expect many things from life, which is why I was frustrated when I spent six years in city college and couldn’t seem to find a major or finish a degree (1998-2004). I was even more frustrated when I became homeless with a wife and 9-month-old (2006). I grew bitter as my life continued into poverty for most of my adult years. Only in my forties did I finally “break even” financially. Why could my family seem to succeed but I couldn’t?

Then I learned that I have the “inattentive” presentation of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) which is a cognitive processing disorder, and that my constant struggle to handle social pressure (which blocked me from many promotions) was related to level 1 Autism spectrum disorder. It was as though this AuDHD diagnosis snapped everything into focus and all my ‘failure-to-launch’ suddenly made sense.

Meanwhile, counseling related to grief and codependency and family addiction trauma gave me new tools to “handle hard stuff”. It gave me grace for myself (accepting that today is enough, and I don’t have to accomplish everything I once thought I should), and it gave me the capacity to sit with others in their hard stuff (as my dopamine reserves allow). I also bring my widower journey with me, and my recovery from a mental health crisis.

I bring all of this with me into my studies, my perspectives, my worldviews, and my interactions with people. There are positives and drawbacks to each of those for my calling. Part of becoming an “integrated human”, as my counselor once calls, is to accept that all those things are true and own them. So, if these hard things are part of my context, what strengths do I bring to the table?

STRENGTHSFINDER INSIGHTS

I first took CliftonStrengths in 2014 at the beginning of a long process of personal and religious Deconstruction. Several pivotal, traumatic, life-altering events have taken place between 2014 and 2024. The cumulative effects of these are a profound shift in my personality. No small part of that shift was due to “de-masking” after the AuDHD diagnosis; seeking my authentic self behind neurodivergent masks originally created to live in a neurotypical world.

So, I decided to take this opportunity to re-take the CliftonStrengths. While my results shifted slightly between 2014 and 2024 in some important ways, my patterns remain centered around the life of the mind. My happy place is at my desk or with my books, pouring over ideas, learning new information, and drawing out the contexts through a process of intellection and ideation to connect new dots between seemingly disparate ideas. The intellectual strengths pair with each other as dynamic duos, pulling more out of their combination.

Meanwhile, my life of the mind is balanced through paradoxical pairs. Context allows me to see all the “what ifs” and Strategic allows me to push forward without getting stuck in analysis. A need to achieve and cross off to-do lists – and – my need to make deep connections and relate to the minds of others, both pull me out of my own mind and connect me with the world around me. It is not enough to hold these ideas and connected-dots to myself, I must share them with others.

This leads me to the spiritual gift Yeshua uses in me to bring gifts to his people, “teaching”. διδασκαλία (didaskalia; teaching, instruction) - The act of teaching or instructing, focused on imparting knowledge or doctrine to others (Romans 12, Ephesians 4). It is when I’ve had hours, days, weeks, or sometimes years to dissect a topic or passage, break it down to its core elements, and fit it back together by connecting all the relevant dots that I begin helping others see those dots.

CONCLUSION

            The hardships, grief, trauma, and subsequent counseling left me with the capacity to be brutally vulnerable with others – a policy I call “No Hiding”. Getting my AuDHD diagnosis gave me the capacity to recognize my strengths and limitations, carving out space for the unique challenges I face as a neurodivergent navigating a neurotypical world. My strength-sets allow me to revel in the playground of the mind, which blend well with my autistic need to preserve energy and limit my exposure to sensory overload. For example, working from home two days a week has allowed me to stay engaged in my job without being overwhelmed by social interactions and harsh lights of the office environment. My Relator strength allows me to share my internal world with those who can meet me on that playground. My teaching gift allows me to share the insights from that life of the mind with a broader audience. For now, I am at Fuller learning both the academic skills to go deeper into that life of the mind while learning more about how my contexts play a role in that endeavor. Where we go from here is yet to be determined; it is enough for this season to “do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with my God” (Micah 6:8).

---

[1] Darrell Wolfe, “Author’s Note:,” n.d., n.The meme is common, original citation unknown.

[2] Saint John of the Cross, The Dark Night of the Soul (La Noche Oscura Del Alma), trans. David Lewis (London: Thomas Baker, 1577).

[3] Kathryn Greene-McCreight, Darkness Is My Only Companion: A Christian Response to Mental Illness, Second edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2015), 114, https://fuller.on.worldcat.org/oclc/904227520.

[4] The Lexham English Bible (LEB), Fourth Edition, Logo Bible Software., Harris, W. H., III, Ritzema, E., Brannan, R., Mangum, D., Dunham, J., Reimer, J. A., & Wierenga, M. (Eds.) (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2010), n. All Bible quotes from LEB, http://www.lexhampress.com.

Shalom שָׁלוֹם: Live Long and Prosper!

Darrell Wolfe

Storyteller | Writer | Thinker | Consultant | Freelancer | Bible Nerd *Written withs some editing and research assistance from ChatGPT-4o

Read more →

Daniel 9: An exegetical look at the 70th week

Daniel 9: An exegetical look at the 70th week

The 70th week of Daniel 9 is a hot topic in eschatology. In this exegetical exercise, we will avoid speculation into systems. Instead, we seek to understand what the author of Daniel intended to communicate to his/her original audience.

Exegetical Review

Daniel chapter 9 opens with an explanation that Daniel was reviewing Jeremiah's prophecy to determine when the exile to Babylon would end:

“In the first year of Darius, the son of Ahasuerus, from the offspring of the Medes, who became king over the kingdom of the Chaldeans— in the first year of his kingship I, Daniel, observed in the scrolls the number of the years that it was that were to be fulfilled according to the word of Yahweh to Jeremiah the prophet for the devastation of Jerusalem—seventy years.” (Daniel 9:1–2, LEB)

“For thus says Yahweh, ‘As soon as the time has passed, seventy years for Babylon, I will attend to you, and I will fulfill my good word to you, to bring you back to this place.” (Jeremiah 29:10, LEB)

Thus, the author demonstrates that Daniel knew it would be 70-years from the day Babylon conquered Jerusalem until the day exile would end. This leads Daniel into prayer and pleads for mercy on behalf of the people. He calls back to the rescue out of exile from Egypt as a template for a new return from exile. It is in this state that he received a visit from a member of Yahweh's divine council with instructions.

The text of Daniel's 70th Week

““Seventy weeks is decreed for your people and for your holy city, to put an end to the transgression and to seal up sin and to make atonement for guilt and to bring in everlasting righteousness and to seal vision and prophet and to anoint the most holy place. And you must know and you must understand that from the time of the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem until an anointed one—a leader—will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be restored and will be built with streets and a moat, but in a time of oppression. 

“And after the sixty and two weeks an anointed one shall be cut off, and he shall have nothing, and the people of the coming leader will destroy the city and the sanctuary, and its end will be with the flood and on to the end there shall be war; these desolations are determined. 

And he will make a strong covenant with the many for one week, but in half of the week he will let cease sacrifice and offering and in its place a desolating abomination comes even until the determined complete destruction is poured out on the desolator.”” (Daniel 9:24–27, LEB)

The Basic Math

Daniel 9:24-27 presents the prophecy of the 70 weeks:

• Daniel 9:24: The purpose of the 70 weeks (or sevens).
• Daniel 9:25: From the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one (Messiah), there will be seven sevens and sixty-two sevens (a total of 69).
• Daniel 9:26: After the 62 weeks (meaning after the seven plus sixty-two weeks = 69), the anointed one will be "cut off," and a people of a ruler will destroy the city and the sanctuary.
• Daniel 9:27: The final (70th) week is described, where a covenant is made and then broken in the middle of the week.

In terms of the basic exegetical math: 7+62=69 weeks; 69 weeks + 1 week = 70 weeks.

From the time the word is sent to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed one comes is 69 weeks. At the end of the 69th week, the anointed one is cut off, and the "people of the coming leader" will destroy the city and sanctuary.

He (the leader of the people who destroyed the city and sanctuary, will strike a covenant for one week (the 70th week). 

Worldview Observations

In the biblical authors' worldview, sabbatical cycles of seven years are also wrapped into a sabbath of cycles. Seven cycles of seven (70 years) was a Jubilee. The IVP Bible Background Commentary notes that the author of Danial is likely referring to a prophetic "word" not an official royal decree.

9:25. word to restore and rebuild. The NIV translates this as “decree,” but in its note indicates that it is a “word”—and this usually refers to a prophetic oracle, not a royal decree. In fact the same combination of verb and noun (“word going out”) has just been used in verse 23. This identification of the “word” is even more likely in light of the fact that Daniel is reflecting on the writing of Jeremiah, who proclaimed the prophetic oracle concerning return and restoration in his letter to the exiles (see comment on 9:2). Notice especially Jeremiah 29:10. The “going forth” of this word would then be dated to sometime between 597 and 594.  (1)

While any interpretation is a guess into the author's meaning for a document of this age, it is a reasonable and text driven. This hypothetical but reasonable conclusion would put the target of these dates around 70 years after Jeremiah's prophecy 527-524 BCE.

The first deportation of Judahites into Babylon was approximately 597 BCE, followed by the destruction of the temple in 586 BCE. Somewhere around 597-594 BCE Jeremiah is issued a "word" about a 70-year period before they would be allowed to return. 

Around 538 BCE (approximately 50 years), the first Judahites began returning to Jerusalem under King Cyrus the Great who conquered Babylon. Eventually, a Second Temple (ei Second Temple Judaism) was rebuilt around 538-516 BCE.

Fee and Stuart note that the book of Daniel may have been composed as early as 520 BCE, but that some date the book to as late as 165 BCE. (2) 

This dating largely depends upon how you read the numbers in Daniel 9 either as references to earlier or later events. Either way, it is likely that the events are aimed by the author of Daniel at events contemporary or historical to that author's time.

This aligns well with an understanding that the 70-years of Jeremiah and Daniel are aimed at the late 500s BCE.

Alternative dates

If, however, we believe the author was using the figurative or symbolic numbers, one could argue for understanding 70 sets of 7, which would be 490 years. 

In this reading, the date would likely still begin with Jeremiahs word (597-594 BCE) which would put the final events well within the 2nd century BCE and the Maccabean Revolt (167-160 BCE). 

Steinsaltz notes the odd Hebrew expressions and heavy use of Aramaic, which would lend itself to an authorship well into the 2nd century BCE (3).

The IVP commentary mentioned earlier goes on to note: 

9:26. anointed one cut off. The most common identification of the cut off anointed one is Onias III, the high priest murdered by Antiochus Epiphanes in 171 (referred to in 11:22). Many find this an irresistible option because it initiated a seven-year period of persecution in Jerusalem that included the desecration of the temple in 167.

In this reading, the author is likely writing contemporary to the other second temple literature such the books of the Maccabees. It is therefore plausible that the author is aiming at these events.

While conjecture beyond this into highly debatable and theoretical systems of eschatology are often unhelpful, it is worth noting that medieval scholar and rabbi Rashi notes that he thought the monarch was Titus, who destroyed the Temple of Jerusalem in 70 AD/CE. So, he took an even more symbolic view of the dates (4). Welton made similar arguments dating the end of the period at 70 AD/CE (5). 

In terms of understanding the authors' intentions, it appears that the aim is to understand the events leading up to an anointed one and then a period of 7 dedicated to an evil leader from the people to come. 

The gap between 69th and 70th week is simply a transition between the anointed one (an anointed king) who is cut off and a week of terror under a tyrannical ruler.

I find the dating of the book based on elements in the text to be most likely in the 2nd century BCE, which places the author's intended target around 167 BCE. This seems the most compelling representation of the data.

References:

(1) Victor Harold Matthews, Mark W. Chavalas, and John H. Walton, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), Da 9:24–27.

(2) Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K. Stuart, How to Read the Bible Book by Book: A Guided Tour (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002), 204–205; 209.

(3) Steinsaltz, Adin. Introductions to Tanakh: The Steinsaltz Tanakh. Jerusalem, 2015. Section: Daniel, Book Introduction

(4) Rashi and Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi). Rashi on Daniel. Troyes, France, 1075. Rashi on Daniel 9:26

(5) Welton, Jonathan. Raptureless. 3rd Edition Printing. Place of publication not identified: Bookbaby, 2015. http://public.ebookcentral.proquest.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=4188734.

Commentaries

The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament

9:24. seventy sevens. A period of seven years was the sabbatical year cycle (see especially Lev 26:34–35 and the reference to it in 2 Chron 36:21). Seven sabbatical year cycles constituted a Jubilee cycle, at the end of which slaves were set free and land was returned to its proper owner (Lev 25). Seventy sabbatical cycles equal ten Jubilee cycles. The first Jubilee cycle is distinguished here (seven sevens in v. 25), and the last sabbatical cycle is distinguished (the seventieth week). It is clear, then, that these numbers are laden with theological significance that give them a schematic appearance. In Mesopotamia the numbers seven and seventy represent a full measure of time. Schematic usage of the term “weeks” can be seen in Jewish literature in the book of 1 Enoch (in the Apocalypse of Weeks), and the period of seventy weeks is also found at Qumran. The schematic use of time has been referred to as “chronography,” which is to be differentiated from “chronology.”

9:24. seal up vision and prophecy. See comment on 12:4. Sealing concerns authentication. The authentication of Jeremiah’s prophecy and Daniel’s vision will only be accomplished when the designated period of time passes.

9:24. anoint the most holy. The consecration ceremony that involves anointing and purification of the Holy of Holies in Exodus 29 (especially vv. 36–37) is sufficient background for understanding this statement. The desecration of the holy place requires its purification. Assyrian temple inscriptions also refer to the anointing of a temple that is to be repaired and restored by a future prince.

9:25. word to restore and rebuild. The NIV translates this as “decree,” but in its note indicates that it is a “word”—and this usually refers to a prophetic oracle, not a royal decree. In fact the same combination of verb and noun (“word going out”) has just been used in verse 23. This identification of the “word” is even more likely in light of the fact that Daniel is reflecting on the writing of Jeremiah, who proclaimed the prophetic oracle concerning return and restoration in his letter to the exiles (see comment on 9:2). Notice especially Jeremiah 29:10. The “going forth” of this word would then be dated to sometime between 597 and 594.

9:25–26. anointed one. It is important to note that the noun here is indefinite, thus a messiah (an anointed one, as in the NIV note), rather than the Messiah. The prophetic literature had not yet adopted this term as a technical term for the ideal, future Davidic king (besides this chapter, the term is used only in the prophets in Is 45:1, referring to Cyrus, and Hab 3:13, in a generic way). Priests and kings were both anointed to their tasks in Israel. Some have maintained that the two references to anointed individuals require two different anointed individuals: one after the first cycle of forty-nine years (plausibly Cyrus, since he has already been given anointed status in the prophets, though leaders of the return such as Zerubbabel or Joshua would not be impossible); the second to be cut off before the last week. This view is favored by the Hebrew punctuation that suggests a period should be placed between the two numbers (as reflected in the RSV) rather than after the sixty-two sevens. It was forty-nine years between the fall of Jerusalem (586) and the decree of Cyrus (538).

9:25. streets and a trench. “Streets” refers to the city squares and plazas that are the major features of city planning. This is where the public functions of the city take place, from government to merchant activities. “Trench” can only refer to the dry moat that was a common element of a city’s defenses. The combination indicates that Jerusalem will again be a place of security and prosperity, providing all of the civic functions of a smoothly operating urban center.

9:26. anointed one cut off. The most common identification of the cut off anointed one is Onias III, the high priest murdered by Antiochus Epiphanes in 171 (referred to in 11:22). Many find this an irresistible option because it initiated a seven-year period of persecution in Jerusalem that included the desecration of the temple in 167.

9:27. abomination of desolation. The consistent use of the noun translated “desolation” (shmm, see also 8:13) is quite intentional. The Syrian Baal Shamem (“Lord of Heaven”) was the deity whose worship was instituted in the temple on the altar of sacrifice by the Syrian citizens who were brought into Jerusalem by Antiochus and his military commander, Apollonius. Antiochus worshiped this deity as Olympian Zeus. This desecration perpetrated by Antiochus served as a prototype for all future desecrations. Even in the sixth century, however, this concept had precedent. In a work called The Verse Account of Nabonidus the priests of Marduk list the offenses of Nabonidus that purportedly led Marduk to dethrone him in favor of the Persian king Cyrus. Among the accusations are that he built an abomination, a work of unholiness (a statue of the god Nanna placed in the temple of Marduk), and ordered an end to the most important rituals.

Victor Harold Matthews, Mark W. Chavalas, and John H. Walton, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), Da 9:24–27.

How to Read the Bible Book by Book: A Guided Tour

Date of composition: unknown; presumably toward the end of the sixth century B.C. (ca. 520), although many have suggested it dates from the early second century B.C. (ca. 165)

Part 2 is a series of apocalyptic visions about the rise and fall of succeeding empires, in each case involving a coming tyrannical ruler (7:8, 24–25; 8:23–25; 11:36–45)—most often understood to be Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) of the Seleucid rulers of Palestine (175–164 B.C.), who because of his desolation of Jerusalem and sacrilege of the temple was to become the first in a series of antichrist figures in Jewish and Christian literature. But in each case the final focus is on God’s judgment of the enemy and the glorious future kingdom awaiting his people.

Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K. Stuart, How to Read the Bible Book by Book: A Guided Tour (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002), 204–205.

9:1–27 The Interpretation of Jeremiah’s Prophecy

Daniel’s prayer (vv. 4–19) is the theological centerpiece of the book, reflecting Israel’s deserved exile for covenant unfaithfulness, but expressing hope in Yahweh’s forgiveness and mercy (the only place in Daniel where the name Yahweh appears). This is enclosed by the need for a new application of Jeremiah’s seventy years (vv. 1–3, in light of the devastation to be caused by the little horn). The answer (vv. 20–27) is a typical apocalyptic use of numbers, where the original number is multiplied by seven (= at the end of the devastation by the little horn), which, again typically, is portrayed against the backdrop of the final end.

Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K. Stuart, How to Read the Bible Book by Book: A Guided Tour (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002), 209.

The Steinsaltz Tanakh - English

"The book of Daniel is unique among the books of the Bible in several respects. First, parts of it are written in Aramaic, rather than Hebrew. Although there are sections of the book of Ezra that are also in Aramaic, these are only documents or official records cited in their original language, whereas in the case of Daniel it is the actual text of the narrative itself. Furthermore, the portions of the book that are in Hebrew contain many obscure expressions."

Steinsaltz, Adin. Introductions to Tanakh: The Steinsaltz Tanakh. Jerusalem, 2015. Section: Daniel, Book Introduction

Rashi on Daniel 9:26

and the people of the coming monarch will destroy [The monarch who will come] upon them. That is Titus and his armies.

And he will strengthen a covenant for the princes for one week לָרַבִּים, for the princes, like “and all the officers of (רַבֵּי) the king,” in the Book of Jeremiah (39:13).

Rashi and Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi). Rashi on Daniel. Troyes, France, 1075. Rashi on Daniel 9:26

Shalom שָׁלוֹם: Live Long and Prosper!

Darrell Wolfe

Storyteller | Writer | Thinker | Consultant | Freelancer | Bible Nerd *Written withs some editing and research assistance from ChatGPT-4o

Read more →

John-Revelation as a diptych (δίπτυχον)? An exploratory conversation with ChatGPT.

I've been listening to a series on John-Revelation by Dr Gregory Hall at Rethinking Scripture podcast. Hall mentions a work by Warren A. Gage: John's Gospel: A Neglected Key to Revelation? | Logos Bible Software

That got me thinking about the late great Dr Michael Heiser's series on Revelations use of the Tanakh (OT). 

And those two together got me thinking about how one of Michael Heiser's key contributions besides his specific work on the Divine Council Worldview was to teach us just how much we imposed modern contexts and later traditions on the biblical authors, and miss most of what the biblical authors are actually saying.

I think that Gregory Hall and his seminary professor (see that linked podcast above) may be correct, that we've been misunderstanding John-Revelation. 

Both The Gospel of John and Revelation have been treated as seperate niche special interests, but mostly dismissed topics. 

In New Testament studies, Paul and/or The Synoptics get all the attention. Luke-Acts has gotten a ton of attention as a diptyche. Pauline studies has exploded from the traditional view (Luther, Augustine) to the New Perspective on Paul (NPP) (EP Sanders, NT Wright), and now even Paul within Judaism "The Extreme Perspective on Paul" (Mark Nanos, Mark Kinzer, David Rudolph, Joel Willits, Joel Green, Richard Bauchman). 

Meanwhile, within secular biblical studies at least, John and Revelation are usually dismissed as later and as probably even written by separate authors, and not for the serious table. 

Outside of weird eschatology circles (#LeftBehind), Revelation is rarely taken as a serious book with serious implications for the present church.

All of the thoughts mentioned above got me into a multipronged long thread discussion with ChatGPT-4o attempting to tease out the possibilities of reading John-Revelation not as separate works by possibly separate authors, but rather, as a single work in two parts, known as a "diptych" (δίπτυχον), which Luke-Acts is widely recognized to be. 

This diptyche view of John-Revelation isn't just a minority view, it's so rare it may be considered a fringe view, if that. I've only even heard it proposed by this podcaster who had it proposed to him by his seminary professor. 

But Michael Heiser's work on the Divine Council Worldview implications of Tanakh studies was relatively unknown outside academic circles until he connected various scholars together in one work.

Could this be the same? Could there be a handful of voices each crying in the wilderness about this diptyche view, but nobody has connected all those voices and shouted it loud enough for the world to take notice? Who knows. Just wondering out loud.

The following is not an academic article by me, rather, the following is ChatGPT's own summary of our much longer thread conversation about this possibility. I believe I will write on this more but for today I wanted to post this summary as a snapshot in time so I can come back to it and ruminate.

***Below is a ChatGPT-4o Summary of my inquiry with the AI***

John and Revelation as a Diptych: A Hypothetical Reading

The concept of reading the Gospel of John and the Book of Revelation as a literary and theological diptych opens up intriguing possibilities for understanding these works as two complementary parts of a unified whole. While these texts are traditionally viewed as distinct—one a narrative about the life of Jesus, the other an apocalyptic vision of the end times—there are compelling reasons to consider them as working in tandem. By exploring their shared themes, literary structures, and historical contexts, we can propose a new reading that situates both works within the broader trajectory of early Christian reflection on Jesus and his ongoing significance in the world.

I. Historical Context and Dating

The dating of the Book of Revelation and the Gospel of John has been a subject of scholarly debate, but most scholars place their composition in the late first century AD, somewhere between AD 90 and 110. The Patristic references to both books help us narrow down these dates. Justin Martyr (AD 135-160) refers to the Logos theology central to John's Gospel, and Irenaeus (ca. AD 180) explicitly references both the Gospel of John and Revelation, attributing both to the Apostle John (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.30.3).

If we consider these references in light of the fact that Revelation and John were widely recognized by the mid-second century, we can infer that these works were completed and had already begun circulating no later than AD 110. This allows us to propose that the diptych could have been completed in the period AD 90-110, after the fall of Jerusalem (AD 70) and during the reigns of emperors Domitian and Trajan, when Christian communities were experiencing significant persecution.

II. Structural Parallels

One of the key reasons for viewing John and Revelation as a diptych is the remarkable structural parallels between the two works. Both texts are characterized by the use of symbolic numbers, especially the number seven, and dualistic frameworks that present cosmic conflicts between good and evil, light and darkness.

1. The Number Seven:

John's Gospel is structured around seven signs (miracles) and seven "I Am" statements (e.g., "I am the bread of life" [John 6:35], "I am the resurrection and the life" [John 11:25]). These serve to reveal Jesus' divine identity and mission.

Similarly, Revelation is organized around cycles of seven seals (Rev 6), seven trumpets (Rev 8-9), and seven bowls of wrath (Rev 16), which unfold God’s judgment and the eventual renewal of creation. These cycles emphasize completeness and divine sovereignty, themes also present in John’s Gospel.

2. Prologue and Epilogue:

Both works contain highly stylized prologues and epilogues:

John 1:1-18 opens with the famous prologue about the Logos, identifying Jesus as the Word made flesh. This introduction is theological and cosmic in scope, setting the stage for the narrative that follows.

Revelation 1:1-8 introduces the apocalyptic vision with a focus on Christ as the faithful witness and the Alpha and Omega, emphasizing his role in creation and judgment.

Both works also conclude with reflections on Christ’s ongoing presence and the ultimate fulfillment of God’s purposes (John 20:30-31; Rev 22:12-21).

III. Theological Continuity

From a theological standpoint, John and Revelation present Jesus as the central figure in God’s plan of salvation and judgment, though they do so in different ways.

1. Jesus as Creator and Consummator:

In John’s Gospel, Jesus is portrayed as the pre-existent Word, present at creation (John 1:1-3). The narrative focuses on Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, which provide the basis for the new creation. In Revelation, Jesus is seen as the one who brings the final consummation of history, ushering in a new heaven and a new earth (Rev 21:1). Thus, the two works can be seen as bookends: John begins with creation, while Revelation ends with new creation.

2. The Lamb of God:

In John, Jesus is introduced as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). This theme is expanded in Revelation, where Jesus is repeatedly described as the slain Lamb who is victorious and worthy to open the scroll of God’s judgment (Rev 5:6-10). The motif of the Lamb, central to both texts, highlights the continuity between Jesus’ sacrificial role and his role as cosmic judge and redeemer.

IV. Revelation as Allegory of Post-70 AD History

One of the most intriguing aspects of this diptych reading is the possibility that Revelation is not primarily concerned with eschatology but is instead an allegory for post-70 AD history, using the Second Temple Jewish genre of apocalypse to tell the story of the early Christian community in the aftermath of the destruction of Jerusalem.

1. Jerusalem as Babylon:

The identification of Babylon with Rome is a common interpretation, but it is also plausible that John uses Babylon as a symbol for Jerusalem, which had become, in the eyes of early Christians, a place of rejection and judgment after the crucifixion of Jesus and the destruction of the temple. The fall of Babylon in Revelation 17-18 could be read as an allegorical account of Jerusalem’s destruction by the Romans in AD 70.

2. Rome and Christian Persecution:

Revelation’s depiction of Rome as the Beast and its persecution of Christians reflects the realities of early Christian life under Roman rule. This apocalyptic imagery can be read as describing the trials of the post-70 AD church, particularly during the reigns of Domitian and Trajan, who persecuted Christians for refusing to worship the emperor (Rev 13:4-7).

V. Stories of John’s Death and Legacy

Understanding John’s death also informs our reading of this diptych. According to Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 3.23), John lived to a ripe old age and died a natural death in Ephesus during the reign of Trajan (ca. AD 98-117). This tradition supports the view that John authored both the Gospel and Revelation during his later years. Other legends, such as his attempted martyrdom in boiling oil, reflect the trials faced by early Christian leaders but ultimately serve to emphasize John’s role as the enduring witness to Jesus' life and message.

Conclusion

By reading John and Revelation as a diptych, we can see these two works as two sides of the same theological and literary coin. John introduces Jesus as the divine Logos who brings light into the world, while Revelation presents Jesus as the victorious Lamb who brings judgment and renewal to creation. The structural parallels, shared themes, and historical context support this reading, suggesting that both works reflect the struggles and hopes of the early Christian community in the late first century, particularly in the aftermath of Jerusalem’s destruction and during the persecutions under Rome. This reading deepens our understanding of the Johannine corpus and offers new ways of interpreting these texts in relation to each other.

Read more →