№ 65. Book of Daniel







The Matrix Connection


The runtime for both the original Matrix and Matrix Reloaded movies is 2 hours and 16 minutes. This is something you will want to remember while reading this page. There are only two movies that I can say with authority were made by the progeny of Jove.

The Matrix and Tomorrowland.


The name of the ship in the original Matrix movie is the Nebuchadnezzar.


Mark 3:11 is the metaphysics of the Matrix.


Mark 3:11
And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God.


The intent here is clearly to identify the main character of this movie as the reincarnation of Christ Jesus. But beware. The original Matrix movie was released on March 31, 1999. In it, while riding in an elevator a comment is made by one of the characters that it looks like every floor is wired with explosives. There was no reason for this comment. In the movie, the building does not explode. Then they get out on floor 101, which is, of course, very prominently displayed. I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to get from this observation to The Illuminati Signature on the World Trade Center.  This is not unlike 2001: A Space Odyssey in which Stanley Kubrick films a flag mysteriously waving is a completely closed and empty room. The messages are subtle, but they are very real.






abomination of desolation

Tag Phrases

Christ Jesus’ use of “abomination of desolation” is what I call a “tag phrase.” When I am searching for an electronic copy of a document online, I select an unusual combination of words from the text of the document (the tag phrase) and then enter this into Google using parentheses. It is a flawless way of finding things online.

Here are the closing words of that book (Daniel 12:8-13 in the AKJV):


And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days. [bold-red emphasis added]


Christ Jesus knows the Book of Daniel is apocalyptic. He knows his followers in the end time would be trying to decipher the meaning of Daniel. He is using the tag phrase “abomination of desolation” to point to this specific series of numbers at the end of the book.


Countless books, magazine articles, and websites have written about this subject, but they all create a convoluted reality in which we are asked to jump through hoops to believe the encoded year in which to expect the “Day of the Lord.” It took me one evening to see through all this nonsense. One evening. I knew as in all things, the truth is always simple. Likewise, the math in the Book of Daniel is very simple.

Here is an interesting quote from A Testimony of Jesus Christ – Volume 2: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation

This somewhat validates my theory that Christ Jesus was using “abomination of desolation” as a tag phrase to point to the end of the Book of Daniel.





The Math is Simple

The math surrounding the Book of Daniel can get really bizarre.

I knew existing date interpretations were too complicated. What I saw from the moment I looked at the Book of Daniel was that it began with a very pronounced date and ended with two numbers that looked very much like years, not days.

Adding the years at the end of the book to the date at the beginning of the book is the first thing I did. That day is etched into my memory because I had already discerned the true end date of the Maya Long Count calendar (December 21, 2018). The two ancient artifacts were in perfect agreement.


So let’s just add these two numbers referenced at the close of Daniel (1290 + 1335). Their sum is 2625. Suppose those are just years? Could it be that simple?


The first sentence in the Book of Daniel:


Daniel 1:1
In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.


And the last paragraph:


And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.


I cannot help but to see in this structure of the message in the Book of Daniel a faint echo of Revelation 21:6


Revelation 21:6
And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.


The progeny of Jove have been in control of the Fifth World sense at least 600 B.C. Knowing them, I cannot help but to suspect that they are immortalizing the anniversary of some year that is very important to them. But what I know for sure is that the Book of Daniel is providing us with what computer programmers call a “checksum” with which to verify the end date of the Maya Long Count calendar.


607 BC + 2,625 years = 2018 AD


Just another coincidence? More confirmation bias? Not if you’re me. Not if you’re the one figuring out all of this. I feel sorry for the reader. Instead of seeing it for yourself, you must now hear it from another. That alone introduces doubts that do not haunt me. You really must pull this out of the realm of the abstract and make it real. For me, it has been real since that day I first discovered it. 




So what does all this mean? The answer to that question is also very simple. The author of the Book of Daniel knew the correct end date of the Maya Long Count calendar. The Maya Long Count calendar is the intellectual masterpiece of all time. The people who designed it were spoken of the world over.


The Maya Long Count calendar significantly predates the writing of both the Book of Daniel (which scholars generally agree was sometime in the second century BC) and the New Testament. This is critical to your understanding of the Bible.


After Venus and Mars assumed their current orbits centuries before these books were written, the new solar system configuration was studied all over the world. This is what led to the discovery of when the Earth would be subject to the next axial tilt and the subsequent development of the Maya Long Count calendar to mark the year. That calendar is very, very old, most probably dating back to around 600 to 700 BC. Christ Jesus obviously learned about all of this either while in Egypt or while traveling around the world during the missing 18 years of his life.








Why 1290 and 1335?

But why divide the number of years into 1290 and 1335, besides the obvious answer to obfuscate their intended use? This question haunted me for years.


Daniel says “Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.”


1335 x Phi(𝛟) = 2160


This is yet another anti-cipher intended for anyone who figured out that you were supposed to add 607 BC + 2,625 years = 2018 AD. The people who designed this encoding knew how hard it would be for us to believe it. It points to the Maya Long Count calendar which ends not on December 21, 2012, but 2160 orbits of Jupiter from the start of the ancient Yuga calendar off India. I lose patience with those whose minds are so obstinate that everything is a coincidence. Everything is one thing. And that one thing is the coming axial tilt. We are living in the end times.


So now I finally know why 2,625 was divided into 1335 and 1290. Thanks to an anonymous contributor. This is the first time anyone has ever helped me. He uses the “Nordic pseudonym” Alder Av Grunn. Thank you, Mr. Grunn. Please note that 1290 is nothing more than the difference of subtracting 1,335 from 2,635. You should not try to find meaning in it.

I tell you of a truth, the progeny of Jove have a sense of humor. I see evidence of it everywhere. Take for example Daniel 2:16. Here it is important to realize that the progeny of Jove not only wrote both the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelation, but they also numbered the chapters and verse in the Bible.

Daniel 2:16
Then Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would give him time, and that he would shew the king the interpretation.

The interpretation not of King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, but of the message encoded in the Book of Daniel is time, the end times to be exact.





When was the Book of Daniel canonized?




“The same things are reported in the records and in the memoirs of Nehemiah, and also that he founded a library and collected the books about the kings and prophets, and the writings of David, and letters of kings about votive offerings. In the same way Judas [Maccabeus] also collected all the books that had been lost on account of the war which had come upon us, and they are in our possession.”  2 Maccabees 2:13-14

“Nothing specific is said about what Judas collected other than that they were books lost in the war with the Seleucids.”

Nehemiah’s library is too early. Translation from Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature, James C. Vanderkam, 2002, “Revealed Literature in the Second Temple Period” p. 6-7







The 1st-century Roman portrait bust said to be of Josephus (credit Wikipedia)

The 22 Books of Josephus

Before I say anything else, you need to understand I think Josephus was an integral part of the Roman bastardization of Christianity, and as soon as I hear his name I become suspicious. I think he is a tool of the Roman elite (i.e. the progeny of Jove in his time). And I am very suspicious of what you are about to read.

…we have the names of our High priests from father to son set down in our records, for the interval of two thousand years. And if any of these have been transgressors of these rules, they are prohibited to present themselves at the altar, or to be partakers of any other of our purifications. And this is justly, or rather necessarily done: because every one is not permitted of his own accord to be a writer; nor is there any disagreement in what is written. They being only prophets that have written the original and eldest accounts of things, as they learned them of God himself, by inspiration: and others have written what hath happened in their own times, and that in a very distinct manner also. For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from, and contradicting one another: [as the Greeks have:] but only twenty two books: which contain the records of all the past times: which are justly believed to be divine. And of them five belong to Moses: which contain his laws, and the traditions of the origin of mankind, till his death. This interval of time was little short of three thousand years. But as to the time from the death of Moses, till the reign of Artaxerxes, King of Persia, who reigned after Xerxes, the Prophets, who were after Moses, wrote down what was done in their times, in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God; and precepts for the conduct of human life. ’Tis true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly; but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers; because there hath not been an exact succession of Prophets since that time.

Rather than citing this translation by William Whiston, I have copied his title page. The quote is from his translation of Flavius Josephus’s Against Apion. The bold-red emphasis is added. The complete translation of Against Apion in a most pleasant format is available on a University of Chicago website as part of The Genuine Works of Flavius Josephus the Jewish Historian.

Title page for William Whiston’s 1737 translation of the Works of Flavius Josephus

The translator William Whiston is himself somewhat famous. The following footnote references his “Essay on the Old Testament.”

Which were these XXII sacred Books of the Old Testament, see the Supplement to the Essay on the Old Testament, pag. 25-29, viz. those we call Canonical, all excepting the Canticles. But still with this farther exception, that the book of Apocryphal Esdras be taken into that number, instead of our Canonical Ezra: which seems to be no more than a later epitome of the other. Which two books of Canticles, and Ezra, it no way appears that our Josephus ever saw.

I should very much like to read what he says about these twenty-two books, but as of this writing I have exhaustingly searched both the Internet (including archive.org) and the Library of Congress and cannot find a copy. I’ve asked the Library of Congress for help locating a copy and if I can find one will update this text. An important footnote William Whiston added to the title page of his translation reads in part:

As to the time, and place when and where these two books were written; the learned have not hitherto been able to determine them, any farther than that they were written some time after his Antiquities, or some time after A.D. 93. Which indeed is too obvious at their entrance to be overlooked by even a careless peruser. They being directly intended against those that would not believe what he had advanced in those books concerning the great antiquity of the Jewish nation. As to the place, they all imagine that these two books were written, where the former were; I mean at Rome. And I confess that I myself believed both those determinations, till I came to finish my notes upon these books: when I met with plain indications that they were written not at Rome, but in Judea, and this after the 3d of Trajan, or A.D. 100. See the VIth Dissertation, § 3.

So William Whiston is convinced Flavius Josephus is writing about these twenty-two books (what is presumably the original Hebrew canon) sometime after 100 AD at or very near the time of his death. An equally respectable translator and scholar was Henry St. John Thackeray who translated Josephus; with an English translation by H. St. J. Thackeray, in eight volumes by Josephus, Flavius for The Digital Loeb Classical Library (Harvard University Press), 1926. The following two pages are copied from an original edition available on archive.org. They are from the Introduction to Volume 1, “THE LIFE   AGAINST APION” (which are titles of “The Minor Works” written by Flavius Josephus at the end of his life), pages vii and viii.


Henry St. John Thackeray gives essentially the same date for the publication of Against Apion, which is around the year 100 AD, but in any case after the publication of the 20-volume Antiquities of the Jews in 93 or 94 AD.


Okay, so if we can prove that these 22 books are the same as the Mikra (or Hebrew canon) of today (the Protestant Old Testament), then we can say that the Book of Daniel was written sometime after 168 BC and included in the Mikra no latter than 100 AD.

Late first-century c.e. sources such as Josephus and 4 Ezra offer proof that the number of books was fixed (their numbers for the sacred books―22 [= the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet; Josephus] and 24 [= the numbers of letters in the Greek alphabet; 4 Ezra]―actually refer to the same books differently counted). Josephus also comes close to specifying precisely which books were involved. By the time he wrote the canon was closed. —Vanderkam, p. 11 [bold-red emphasis added]



Who wrote the Scriptures? …Samuel wrote the book which bears his name and the Book of Judges and Ruth…Jeremiah wrote the book which bears his name, the Book of Kings, and Lamentations…The Men of the Great Assembly wrote (Mnemonic KNDG) Ezekiel, the Twelve Minor Prophets, Daniel and the Scroll of Esther. —Translation of M. Simon in The Babylonian Talmud, Part 4, vol. 2 (ed. 1 Epstein; London: The Soncino Press, 1935). Quote and citation from Vanderkam, p.9



The first strong indication that Flavius Josephus is involved in planting the Book of Revelation in the Hebrew scriptures is the following implied warning to anyone who might consider adding to, subtracting from, or altering the Jewish scriptures.

And how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation, is evident by what we do. For during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold, as either to add any thing to them; to take any thing from them; or to make any change in them. But it is become natural to all Jews, immediately, and from their very birth, to esteem these books to contain divine doctrines; and to persist in them: and, if occasion be, willingly to die for them. For ’tis no new thing for our captives, many of them in number, and frequently in time, to be seen to endure wracks, and deaths of all kinds, upon the theatres; that they may not be obliged to say one word against our laws, and the records that contain them.  —Against Apion, Flavius Josephus, from Vanderkam translation, p. 8

In other words, Do not question the Book of Daniel!

Revelation 22:18-19 echoes these words of Flavius Josephus.

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.


Ezra-Nehamiah split

The Book of Ezra is a book of the Hebrew Bible; which formerly included the Book of Nehemiah in a single book, commonly distinguished in scholarship as Ezra–Nehemiah. The two became separated with the first printed rabbinic bibles of the early 16th century, following late medieval Latin Christian tradition.[1]

Jewish tradition has long attributed authorship of this historical book to the scribe and scholar Ezra, who led the second group of Jews returning from Babylon to Jerusalem (Ezra 7:11–26). Ezra 8 includes a first-person reference, implying the author’s participation in the events. He plays a major role in the second half of the book, as well as in the book of Nehemiah, its sequel. In the Hebrew Bible, the two books were considered one work, though some internal evidence suggests they were written separately and joined together in the Hebrew canon (and separated again in English translations).

The Book of Nehemiah has been, since the 16th century, a separate book of the Hebrew Bible. Before that date, it had been included in the Book of Ezra; but in Latin Christian bibles from the 13th century onwards, the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah become separated; a separation that became canonised with the first printed bibles in Hebrew and Latin.


Hebrew Canon

The Nevi’im are divided into two groups. The Former Prophets (Hebrew: נביאים ראשונים‬ Nevi’im Rishonim) consists of the narrative books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings; while the Latter Prophets (Hebrew: נביאים אחרונים‬ Nevi’im Aharonim) include the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and The Twelve minor prophets.





Unless you believe in prophesy (I do not, especially not with the level of detail found in Daniel, and have recently dedicated an entire page to the subject), the inclusion of the “line in the sand” story of Antiochus IV Epiphanes being met by Gaius Popillius Laenas in Egypt and the aftermath of that meeting dates the writing of the Daniel to no earlier than 168 BC. As I write this, I have yet to study the Jewish canon, but I can tell you this much for certain, as a matter of logical consistency the inclusion of the Book of Daniel had to be sometime after 168 BC.



Jewish Canon

Modern scholarship suggests that the most recently written are the books of Jonah, Lamentations, and Daniel, all of which may have been composed as late as the second century BCE.

There is no scholarly consensus as to when the Hebrew Bible canon was fixed: some scholars argue that it was fixed by the Hasmonean dynasty (140–40 BCE),[5] while others argue it was not fixed until the second century CE or even later.  —Wikipedia, Development of the Hebrew Bible canon

Now this is interesting because we may safely assume that much like Constantine the Great took control of Christianity in order to plant the Book of Revelation in the New Testament, the progeny of Jove must have taken control of Judaism long enough to plant the Book of Daniel. The question is, When did this happen? Obviously, it must have been after 168 BC, but was this the work of the Greeks or Romans?
If you look at the [5] footnote in the above Wikipedia quote after “some scholars argue that it was fixed by the Hasmonean dynasty (140–40 BCE), it reads, “Philip R. Davies in The Canon Debate, page 50: ‘With many other scholars, I conclude that the fixing of a canonical list was almost certainly the achievement of the Hasmonean dynasty.'” Well, he cannot be right. The difference between 168 and 140 is 28 years which is not enough time for this forged book to gain acceptance in the Jewish community. Moreover, the “Hasmonean dynasty” is practically synonymous with the Maccabees

The Maccabees (/ˈmækəˌbiːz/), also spelled Machabees (Hebrew: מכבים‬ or מקבים‬, Maqabim; Latin: Machabaei or Maccabaei; Greek: Μακκαβαῖοι, Makkabaioi), were a group of Jewish rebel warriors who took control of Judea, which at the time was part of the Seleucid Empire. They founded the Hasmonean dynasty, which ruled from 167 BCE to 37 BCE, being a fully independent kingdom from about 110 to 63 BCE. They reasserted the Jewish religion, partly by forced conversion, expanded the boundaries of Judea by conquest and reduced the influence of Hellenism and Hellenistic Judaism.  —Wikipedia, Maccabees

It is highly unlikely that a forged book could have been canonized at this time. In fact, the thought that the Book of Daniel, which was written sometime after 168 BC could have survived the scrutiny of orthodox Jews at this particular time in history and been canonized by the Hasmonean dynasty was for me initially preposterous.  Then I came across this passage in Wikipedia.

The Hasmonean bureaucracy was filled with men with Greek names, and the dynasty eventually became very Hellenized, to the annoyance of many of its more traditionally-minded Jewish subjects. Frequent dynastic quarrels also contributed to the view among Jews of later generations that the latter Hasmoneans were degenerate. One member of this school was Josephus, whose accounts are in many cases our sole source of information about the Hasmoneans.  —Wikipedia, Hasmonean dynasty

(I included the last sentence in this quote for a very specific reason I will return to momentarily.) So let’s say it was remotely possible. The problem then is that Antiochus IV Epiphanes would not be acting on his own, any more than he would have defied Popilius and marched on Alexandria. The progeny of Jove have long ago morphed into the Roman elite. And planting the Book of Daniel in the Hebrew Bible is not something they would have entrusted to this madman.

After more than 100 years of Jewish independence under this Hasmonean dynasty, Roman rule is established when Pompey conquers Jerusalem in 63 BC. This is followed by Herod the Great’s Siege of Jerusalem in 37 BC.

Tired…general logic is to look for first break with history (or last accurate “prophecy”) which may be the latest date before which it could be canonized

Most readers of the Holy Bible have a good feel for what it was like in Jerusalem at this time because of the familiar stories of King Herod negotiating with the Jewish Rabis



The fact that jews were divided into different groups throughout the second-temple period must be remembered. How far any canonical decision would have been effective would have depended on the extent of authority possessed by those who made the decision. Their authority may not have covered all Jews, whether in the land of Israel or in the diaspora.  —From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature, James C. Vanderkam, 2002, “Revealed Literature in the Second Temple Period“p. 3

  • Samaritans: The Samaritan Bible includes only the Torah. 
  • Hellenists
  • Sadducees
  • Pharisees
  • Essenes
  • Hebraists


70 CE, when Jewish civilization was faced with an existential threat.









The “Council of Jamnia” is a Myth

According to the Wikipedia Council of Jamnia page, Heinrich Graetz proposed this theory in 1871.


Westminster Theological Journal 38.4 (Spr. 1976) 319-348.


The Myth of the Council of Jamnia and the Origin of the Bible from the Catholic Productions channel

The real value of the “council of Jamnia” myth is in the suggestion that the Writings canon was not closed at the time. James C. Vanderkam says as much in Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature, “Revealed Literature in the Second Temple Period:”

…J.P. Lewis, S.Z. Leiman, and R. Beckwith have pulverized the thesis that a “council” of Jamnia/Yavneh closed the third and final division of the canon. The details of the arguments regarding Jamnia need not detain us; suffice it to say that our few sources for the academy at Yavneh and its deliberations indicate that of the Writings the status of Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes alone was discussed. In addition, the discussions appear not to have centered about whether to admit these books to the canon; the issue was whether they should remain in the canon. This scholarly group, the extent of whose authority is unknown, in all likelihood did not close the canon. —Vanderkam, p. 11-12 [bold-red emphasis added]

Thus if we can date the supposed council at Jamnia, we have a date at which we can say that the books included in the Writings (which inclused Daniel) are still open for debate. Here are a collections of quotes that suggest a date

Based on these, and a few similar references, Heinrich Graetz concluded in 1871 that there had been a Council of Jamnia (or Yavne in Hebrew) which had decided the Jewish canon sometime in the late 1st century (c. 70–90).  —Wikipedia, Council of Jamnia. [bold-red emphasis added. The citation for this sentence is a German work to which I do not have access.]






The Threefold Division of Jewish Scripture

Recommended Reading: From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature, James C. Vanderkam, 2002, “Revealed Literature in the Second Temple Period


Luke 24:44
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.


It was either called “the Other Books,” or “the Remaining Books,” or “the Writings,” even “the Holy Writings.” It became common to identify this Third Division by the name of the book which introduced it — the Book of Psalms. There was nothing odd in using this procedure from the Jewish point of view because they customarily named the Book of Genesis by the first Hebrew word that introduced it. This was also true of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and even the Book of Lamentations. There can be little doubt that Christ was referring to the whole of the Third Division (all eleven books) when He made His reference to the Psalms.

Vanderkam also agrees that “psalms could refer to the third division of the Hebrew Bible.” Regarding Luke 24:44, he specifically says,

Here again a tripartite division is enunciated, with the third being called “psalms”. This could refer to the book of that name or possibly it is a cover term for a section of the scriptures that is not further defined. The intention of the saying seems to be inclusive: the entire scriptures testify to Jesus and are fulfilled in him. [both quotes from page 7, bold-red emphasis added]


(1) “The Law, the Prophets, and Others of like kind.” (2) “The Law, the Prophets and the Other Books.” (3) “The Law itself, and the Prophets, and the Remaining Books.” Ecclesiasticus, Prologue 1:1


the unanimous opinion of early Jewish scholars expressed conviction that the Old Testament scriptures had been selected and placed in an official order by Ezra the priest (with the help of Nehemiah) in the 5th century B.C.E.


From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature, James C. Vanderkam, 2002, Revealed Literature in the Second Temple Period, p.


For rabbinic assessment up to the 17th century of our era we can quote Humphrey Prideaux:

“He [Ezra] collected together all the books of which the holy scriptures did then consist, and disposed them in their proper order, and settled the canon of scripture for his time. These books he divided into three parts: first, the Law; secondly, the Prophets; and thirdly, the Ketubim or Hagiographa, i.e. the Holy Writings; which division our Saviour himself takes notice of in Luke 24:44.” —Connection of the Old and New Testaments, Humphrey Prideaux, vol. I. (London: 1858), pp.318–319


Vanderkam on the threefold divisions in Prologue to Ecclesiasticus…

From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature, James C. Vanderkam, 2002, “Revealed Literature in the Second Temple Period,” p. 5



Ketuvim, (Hebrew), English Writings, Greek Hagiographa, the third division of the Hebrew Bible, or Old Testament. Divided into four sections, the Ketuvim include: poetical books (Psalms, Proverbs, and Job), the Megillot, or Scrolls (Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations of Jeremiah, Ecclesiastes, and Esther), prophecy (Daniel), and history (Ezra, Nehemiah, and I and II Chronicles).




The Writings in the Protestant Old Testament are organized differently than the Ketuvim because it is based on the Septuagint in which the

The Hebrew canon has three divisions: the Torah (Law), the Neviʾim (Prophets), and the Ketuvim (Writings). The Septuagint has four: law, history, poetry, and prophets, with the books of the Apocrypha inserted where appropriate. This division has continued in the Western church in most modern Bible translations, except that in Protestant versions the Apocrypha are either omitted or grouped separately.







The most complete copy the Book of Daniel is the Qumrān scroll designated 4QDana, of which this is a sample. It doesn’t get any older than this.

The Oldest Extant Copies of the Book of Daniel

The Septuagint is of no use in studying the origins of the book of Daniel, but it seemed prudent to at least discuss why this is so in that the Septuagint is the oldest extant copy of the Bible. I removed the discussion to a subsection. I think it should be read for the sake of completeness.




















Calligraphy in a Latin Bible of AD 1407 on display in Malmesbury Abbey, Wiltshire, England (credit Wikipedia)

The Septuagint

Before the Qumrān scrolls were found, the oldest extant copy of the Book of Daniel was the Septuagint.

The Septuagint (from the Latin: septuāgintā literally “seventy”, often abbreviated as LXX and sometimes called the Greek Old Testament) is the earliest extant Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures from the original Hebrew.  —Wikipedia, Septuagint

The three oldest surviving copies of the Septuagint are known as the Great uncial codices. They are the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Alexandrinus. Codex is just another name for very old handwritten books as opposed to the scrolls they replaced. In this context, a codex is best thought of as a larger collection of writings such as the Old Testament or the entire Bible, whereas the term manuscript is usually reserved for handwritten copies of individual books within these larger collections, such as the Book of Daniel. The distinction is primarily between handwritten copies versus printed books, with a codex or manuscript implying antiquity. The term uncial refers to a particular style of handwriting that uses only capital letters. I usually think of it as old German writing. In fact, I have a very old German Bible written in the uncial script.

It is not known when the Greek Septuagint was translated from the original Hebrew text which is now lost to history. If that date were known, it would be more relevant to this discussion than the date of surviving copies.


Another legend holds that the translators were sent to Alexandria by Eleazar, the chief priest at Jerusalem, at the request of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 BCE), though its source, the Letter of Aristeas, is unreliable. Despite the tradition that it was perfectly translated, there are large differences in style and usage between the Septuagint’s translation of the Torah and its translations of the later books in the Old Testament. —Encyclopedia Britannica, Septuagint



Our discussion of the Septuagint ends abruptly with the fact that all three of these codices were written after the time of Constantine the Great, which is to say, after the Roman bastardization of Christianity during which time the Book of Revelation was planted in the New Testament, which makes them entirely unreliable for the purpose of understanding how the very same progeny of Jove planted the Book of Daniel in the Writings of what became the Old Testament for Christians. In fact, there is some speculation that one or more of these codices may be surviving copies of the  which Emperor Constantine used to cement the place of Revelation in the Christian canon.







The Only New Testament Reference to Daniel

There are only two references to Daniel in the New Testament. One is in Matthew and the other in Mark. In Matthew 24:15-18, Christ Jesus references the Book of Daniel when he says:

When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. [emphasis added]

And in Mark 13:14-16, the same saying was recorded as follows:

But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judæa flee to the mountains: and let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house: and let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment.

Here is an Interesting new translation from http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm, which claims to be non-denominational:

So when you see the disgusting destroyer that was spoken of through the Prophet Daniel standing in the Holy Place (let the reader pay attention to this), those [who are living] in Judea should flee to the mountains! The man who is standing on his roof shouldn’t go down to remove things from his house, and the man who is standing in his field shouldn’t [go back home] to get his clothes.

There are many “signs” of the end times in Matthew 24, but none is more important than this one. Why? Because it is the last one given before Christ Jesus says to “flee into the mountains.” His use of “flee” and the deliberately exaggerated urgency of the last two sentences could not be any clearer. This is the last sign before the end. It is therefore profoundly important to understand the real meaning of the phrase “abomination of desolation.”  I can assure you, it does not mean what you think.




Vaticinium ex eventu in the Book of Daniel

If the book is a plant by the progeny of Jove, the author most assuredly would have known the Egypt would be under Roman control for the foreseeable future. The stuff he got wrong does not date the writing. This is a mistaken belief no one else will understand.


As we see in Daniel 7:2–11:39, especially Daniel 11, the Book of Daniel utilizes vaticinium ex eventu, by its seeming foreknowledge of events from Alexander’s conquest up to the persecution of Antiochus IV in the summer of 164 BCE. However, Daniel knows neither about the re-dedication of the Temple (1 Maccabees 4:52–54) nor about Antiochus’ death, both of which happened late in November and December of 164 BCE. Therefore, Daniel 11:40–12:3 is no longer vaticina ex eventu but genuine predictive prophecy. Modern scholarship considers the stories of the first half legendary in origin, and the visions of the second the product of anonymous authors in the Maccabean period (2nd century BCE). Its inclusion in Ketuvim (Writings) rather than Nevi’im(Prophets) was likely because it appeared after the canon for those books had closed, and the dominant view among Jews and scholars is that Daniel is not in any case a prophetic book but an apocalypse. However, in the Christian canon Daniel is listed under the Major Prophets.  —Wikipedia, Vaticinium ex eventu



References to Jeremiah



From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature, James C. Vanderkam, 2002, “Revealed Literature in the Second Temple Period,” p. 5




Significant Parallels between the Books of Daniel and Revelation

The main parallels I see between these two books are the historical sloppiness of the Book of Daniel and the inconsistent character of Christ Jesus as presented in the Book of Revelation in comparison to the rest to the New Testament. I believe both the historical sloppiness and the inconsistent character of Christ Jesus are faint echoes of the contempt the progeny of Jove feel for religion. They are planting these books in Jewish and Christian canons and cannot be bothered to exercise even this minimalist level of care. This very same contempt for humanity can be seen in the sloppiness of the faked moon landings and false flag attack of September 11, 2001 (9/11).








Correcting Some Historical Discrepancies




Nebuchadnezzar is Antiochus Epimames (Antiochus the Madman)

Antiochus IV Epiphanes



…the name Nebuchadnezzar contains a disguised reference to Antiochus to those acquainted with Hebrew numbering. The Babylonian king of 605 – 562 BCE was in fact called nabu-kuddurri-usur which should be transliterated into Hebrew script as NeuchadRezzar (as it is in eg. Jeremiah 46:2, 39:11). The change of that one letter gives this name the same numerical value in Hebrew (which had no separate numbers and so used letters to represent numbers) as the name Antiochus Epiphanes. This is too coincidental to be accidental and too contrived to be miraculous.  —Westminster College, The Dating of the Book of Daniel, no date, unattributed, accessed February 17, 2019

Jeremiah 39:11
Now Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon gave charge concerning Jeremiah to Nebuzar-adan the captain of the guard, saying,

Jeremiah 46:2
against Egypt, against the army of Pharaoh-necho king of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates in Carchemish, which Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon smote in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah.






The Divine Comedy


The divine comedy is that all of the insanity that grips modern Christians, the rapture, tribulation, pre-tribulation, premillennialism, mid-tribulational premillennialism, prewrath, partial pre-tribulation pre-millennialism, post-tribulation rapture, postmillennialism, amillennialism, millennial kingdom, etc., etc., etc., is fueled by the belief that the symbolic language used in these esoteric works is the God speaking to mankind.





This page is deceptively simple. So is truth. Were I to stack all the books, magazine articles, and websites written about this subject, they would reach the moon. I have written less than 1,500 words. It is my belief that the Book of Daniel encodes an exact year that is in perfect agreement with the Maya Long Count calendar. There was a time when this meant everything to me. I see it now as just one of many “end times markers.” They are not exact. They are just the ancients screaming at us to stay alert because we are living in the end times.




I mean no disrespect, but the warnings of the ancients are what I call “end times markers.” They are not exact. And now we must accept at least the possibility that they have been partially or fully negated by either altering of the year in which Christ Jesus was born or altering history itself by making changes to the Anno Domini timeline. I have yet to begin even seriously researching this possibility, but I am collecting references at the top of the № 34. The Problem with Time page.


arge blocks of time have







The third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah

Here is the first sentence in the Book of Daniel.

In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.

There are two parts to this sentence Exactly what year this opening sentence of the Book of Daniel represents is more contentious than I originally thought. Secular historians favor 587 BC, including the Siege of Jerusalem (587 BC) article in Wikipedia, or to a lessor extent 586 BC. Christians favor 607 BC and to a lessor extent 606 BC. My take on something like this is that one must always be suspect of the secular historians misdirecting thought away from anything that might point to the actual year of the event. That may sound paranoid, but from where I am standing the extend to which the Progeny of Pythagoras is willing to go to misdirect and distract us at this point in time includes the possibility of nuclear war.





Pythagoras predates Christianity

It is important to realize that the secret societies, in particular the Pythagoreans, were alive and well long, long before the man we refer to as Christ Jesus was born. Then as now, knowledge of the coming destruction of the world was highly guarded information.

If you do not understand that Christ Jesus was constrained in what he could say about the end time then you do not understand his reality. Christ Jesus at one time says his words will always be with us and at the same time is careful not to be too specific in what he says about the end time. He knew that if he went too far in warning the people that in the intervening two thousand years the secret societies would only make greater efforts to destroy or mutilate his teachings. This is why the average person has no idea that he is a man of science. Matthew 24 is some of the most subtle communication in the whole of the Bible. Even given his careful choice of words, “and the winters will be severe” was stripped from Luke 21:11 in all but Lamsa’s translation of the Aramaic. I would go as far as to say that Christ Jesus gave his life so that he might draw our attention to the Book of Daniel and thereby know when to expect the end.






Research Notes

On this page, I do not use the terms Biblia Hebraica, (pretentiously Latin), Hebrew Bible (offensively Christian), of Tanakh to refer to the canonized Jewish texts. I do not like the acronym TaNaKh because it is clear to me that the Masoretic Text was adulterated in the worst possible way. This is discussed in the The Biblical Deluge (650 years off) section of the № 34. The Problem with Time page and in the The Genealogy in Genesis section of the № 37. 3100 BC, Genesis of the Fifth World page. The intensity or ferocity of resentment I feel toward the Rabbinic Judaism for this change in the sacred texts is unnatural and closely related to the discussion in the How Close are We to the End? section of the № 23. End Times page. Instead I consistently referred to as the Mikra, or “Readings.”


Tanakh is an acronym of the first Hebrew letter of each of the Masoretic Text’s three traditional subdivisions: Torah (“Teaching”, also known as the Five Books of Moses), Nevi’im (“Prophets”) and Ketuvim (“Writings”)—hence TaNaKh. The books of the Tanakh were passed on by each generation and, according to rabbinic tradition, were accompanied by an oral tradition, called the Oral Torah. The three-part division reflected in the acronym “Tanakh” is well attested in the literature of the Rabbinic period.

During that period, however, “Tanakh” was not used. Instead, the proper title was Mikra (or Miqra, מקרא, meaning “reading” or “that which is read”) because the biblical texts were read publicly. Mikra continues to be used in Hebrew to this day, alongside Tanakh, to refer to the Hebrew scriptures. In modern spoken Hebrew, they are interchangeable.  —Wikipedia, Hebrew Bible

Mikra, I believe, is the historically correct term for referring to the Jewish canon.



First Principle: We know better what was done with Revelation. Assume similarities and work backwards; not all at once…history added later…why multiple language…why do Catholics have more text?