The Gentile Times Reconsidered Chronology Christ

Sham Scholarship 461
would have noted that le does not function in that way except when directly
connected with a term expressing some time element, as in Williams’ examples,
e.g. 2 Chronicles 11:17, leshanim shalosh (‘for three years’).
Thus, the prepositional phrase lechorebhôt Yerûshalâyim, ‘for desolations of
Jerusalem’ functions as an adverbial indicating the purpose intended, namely to
fix the absolute end of the desolations of Jerusalem, i.e., when the 70 years ‘for
Babylon’ were to end. As for RF’s little comparison with a ‘simpler clause’, it is
really of no value at all, and that goes for his paraphrase, too. The framed
statement in bold-faced type is rather irrelevant: true, there is no need to take
the word chorebhôt (fem. plur., construct) to signify several desolations of
Jerusalem, but neither is it logical to apply it to ‘the many ruins of the city’,
because in Hebrew the so-called plural form may also signify fulness, intensity,
magnitude, extension and similar concepts, according to the context, and here it
is most likely used to show that the full and complete desolation of Jerusalem
would end exactly at the time designated by Jehovah himself, as made known
through his prophet Jeremiah. (Cf. Johs. Pedersen, Hebræisk Grammatik,
Copenhagen 1926, pages 197, 198, § 115) However, we ought to note that RF
correctly connects the complete desolation of Jerusalem with the final conquest
by the Chaldeans (in 587 BC, not 607), but he errs again when he stubbornly
sticks to a ‘period of 70 years’ for the Jewish exile, even though he is not able to
present any real evidence, simply because there is none. Let us just see how
NASB renders Daniel 9:2:
in the first year of his reign I, Daniel, observed in the books the number of
the years which was revealed as the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the
peophet for the completion of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy
years. – Cf. also RV, ASV, RSV, AAT, Moffatt, Amplified, Rotherham.
Please note the fine wording ‘for the completion of the desolations of Jerusalem,
namely seventy years’: here the emphasis is placed where it belongs, namely on
the latter part of the period of desolations, when it is to be completed. Here many
others have failed in exactly the same way as RF, taking the period of seventy
years to signify the total number of years of the exile; a clear example of this
grammatical error in a modern translation may be seen in The Good News Bible:
In the first year of his reign, I was studying the sacred books and thinking
about the seventy years that Jerusalem would be in ruins, according to what
the LORD had told the prophet Jeremiah. – Cf. also NEB, NAB, and
NASB.
Interestingly, the GN-Bible renders some of the parts excellently, such as ‘I was
studying the sacred books’, because no doubt that was what Daniel was doing;
naturally, this high official of the Babylonian government had copies of the
sacred books for his own private use, including the prophecy of Jeremiah, thus
being able to make sure of these things, for which he had waited a lifetime! But
modern scholars who do not really believe in the inspiration and the complete
integriity of the Bible unfortunately distort parts of it, as may be seen in the
translations here referred to.