1. The Intertestamental Period: From Babylon To The Birth Of Christ
Overview

2. Intertestamental Period
Week
Date
Topic 1
05 Mar 14
Overview 2
12 Mar 14
Babylonian Period ( BC) 3
19 Mar 14
Persian Period ( BC) 4
26 Mar 14
Greek Period ( BC) 5
02 Apr 14
Ptolemaic ( BC) 6
09 Apr 14
Syrian ( BC) 7
16 Apr 14
Maccabean Part 1 ( BC) 8
23 Apr 14
Maccabean Part 2 ( BC) 9
30 Apr 14
Independence ( BC) 10
07 May 14
Rome Intervenes (63 – 37 BC) 11
14 May 14
Herod (37 BC – 4 BC) 12
21 May 14
The IT Period and Christianity (4 BC – 70 AD) 13
28 May 14
Review
Week 1 - Overview Week 2 - Babylonian Period ( BC) Week 3 - Persian Period ( BC) Week 4 - Greek Period ( BC)              Alexander Week 5 - Ptolemaic ( BC)               Ptolemy and Egypt 320 – 198
Week 6 - Syrian ( )              Seleucid and Syria Week 7 - Maccabean Period Part 2 ( )               Mattathias
Judas the Maccabee              Jonathan Week 8 - Independence ( )
Simon              John Hyrcannaus 134 – 105
   Aristobulus              Alexander Jannaus              Alexander Salome              Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II Week 10 – Rome Intervenes (63 – 37 BC)
Week 11 – Herod (37-4 BC) Week 12 – Intertestamental period and Christianity (4 BC – 70 AD) Week 13 - Review 2

3. Today’s Objectives Review the lesson plan Review references
Review overall study objectives
Learn why understanding the Intertestamental (IT) Period is critical to understanding New Testament (NT) text
Learn about the extent of the Old Testament (OT) Canon
Study highlights 3

4. Overall Course Objectives
Better understanding of the connection between the Old Testament (OT) and the New Testament (NT)
Learn about the political, social, economic, cultural, and religious issues during the IT period and its’ influence upon Israel, Judaism, and Christianity
Learn about various nations that ruled over Judea
Learn about religious/political parties existing within Judaism

5. Reference Material KJV (w/ Apocrypha) Josephus – The Complete Works
1st and 2nd Maccabbees
Josephus – The Complete Works
Herodotus – The History
Intertestamental History – Mark Moore
Ancient Rome – Simon Baker
Harding University – BNEW 112 Course Notes – Dr. Thompson

6. Content and Extent of the Old Testament Canon
The word “canon” is from a Greek word that means a “rule” or “standard”
Revealed truth
Luke 24:44 – teachings of Christ
Luke 11:50-51 – more teachings of Christ
Law of Moses, Prophets, and Psalms
Even Judas Maccabaeus knew
1546 Council of Trent
The Apostle Paul wrote, regarding the Old Testament, “Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come” (1 Cor. 10:11). The use of the Old Testament Scriptures by the church of Christ has been the subject of some debate from the early church fathers up to the present day. The debate is primarily concerned with the question of what writings are truly in the canon of the Old Testament Scriptures. The word “canon” is from a Greek word that means a “rule” or “standard”; in the second century Christian church it came to be understood as “revealed truth.”1 Yet for some Christians the “revealed truth” represented more than for others. Augustine is a fine example of this, as he “. . . regarded the church to be the custodian of Scripture and thus may easily have concluded that on matters of the extent of the canon the church had the authority to decide. . . Augustine seemed to consider church reception to be sufficient warrant for canonical authority; this he gave as the reason for accepting the Maccabean books as canonical.”2 Initially, it was not as if the canon itself was debated as much as it was looked at differently. Some held that the canon was extensive enough to encompass all the books read in the church for edification, which would include the Apocrypha and sometimes the Pseudipigrapha (anonymous apocalyptic writings). Others held that the canon was simply that of the Jewish Bible, representing also the Protestant Bibles of today.3 It was not until the age of the Reformation that the debate began to rage. In 1546 when the Council of Trent made a formal statement that all not accepting the selected Apocryphal writings should be damned, the Protestants retorted with an equally resolute voice.
The question of canonicity is completely valid. If there are disputes about what is Scripture, the validity of faith itself is greatly at stake. For as Beckwith puts it so well, “. . . with no canon there is no Bible.”4 This paper will briefly discuss the major issues of the Old Testament canon attempting to show the contents and extent of the canon.
The Concept of the Old Testament Canon
How ironic it is that evangelicals today base their beliefs solely on Scripture, and yet their canon was recognized by tradition. The way that canon was regarded in history past plays an integral role in the recognition of the canon. The tradition and authority of the people of God throughout history have attested that there was a group of writings, divinely inspired, which were recognizable as such. The internal evidence within the Old Testament itself affirms that it is Scripture. Deuteronomy 31:24-26 says, “And it came about, when Moses finished writing the words of this law in a book until they were complete, that Moses commanded the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, ‘Take this book of the law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may remain there as a witness against you.’” Deuteronomy itself, “. . .also reaffirms in Israel the idea of a ‘canon,’ a collection of written materials by which the life of the nation would be administered.”5
The inter-testament saints held that there was a known corpus of Scripture, for in their writings they would often refer to it with the authoritative phrase, “as it is written,” or “according to Scripture,” or “it is written.” In fact, references to almost all of the books of the Old Testament are considered to be Scripture by the writers of the inter-testament and the New Testament period. Beckwith says of this period that
. . . with the exception of the three short books of Ruth, Song of Songs and Esther, the canonicity of every book of the Hebrew Bible is attested, most of them several times over. . . it is very striking that, over a period ranging from the second century BC (at latest) to the first century AD, so many writers, of so many classes (Semitic, Hellenistic, Pharisaic, Essene, Christian), show such agreement about the canon. . .6
In addition, there are at least 28 documented separate titles for the Old Testament canon proving that the individual books had become a collection sufficient enough to warrant various titles to the group (i.e. canon) as a whole.7
Church history took very heavily into consideration what Jesus and the New Testament writers thought about the Old Testament in determining canonicity. The number of references to the Old Testament by New Testament writers is abundant, and it attests to the fact that there was an established canon at the time of their writing.
Probably the fullest evidence (in secular writings) on the concept of there being a canon is in the work of Josephus. In Against Apion 1.7f., or 1.37–43, Josephus gives his understanding that, not only was there a canon, but he also lists what he believes that canon is. This list is identical to the Jewish and Christian canon with one exception, that of omitting either the Song of Songs or Ecclesiastes.8 Josephus mentions that there were copies of Scripture in the Temple itself, and before its destruction in AD 70 it contained a collection of books. This collection was considered by the Jewish community to be canon, for “the main test of the canonical reception of a book must have been whether or not it was one of those laid up in the Temple.”9
This evidence reveals not what the books of the canon are, but the fact that the concept of a canon did indeed already exist before the beginning of the Christian era.
The Construct of the Old Testament Canon
Not only does the literature testify to the concept of there being a canon, but also to the construction of that canon as being in three parts: the Law, the Prophets and the Hagiographa. This is a method of arranging the various books evidenced from many sources outside the canon itself. The earliest evidence is from the prologue to the book Ecclesiasticus which specifically mentions three times the three parts of the canon. The author says, “. . . many great things have been communicated to us through the Law and the prophets, and the others who followed after. . . my grandfather Jeshua, after devoting himself for a long time to the reading of the Law and the prophets and the other books of our forefathers. . .”. Here the author, writing about 180 BC, clearly delineates the construction as being in three recognized parts, and these parts, having titles and sections, show that by the writer’s time the canon was considered closed.
Jesus Himself, the most authoritative witness for the Christian, states in Luke 24:44 the three sections of the Old Testament as “the Law of Moses and the Prophets and Psalms . . .” “Psalms” undoubtedly means the whole Hagiographa, for Christ often referred to Daniel, which was a part of that third section, as well as the book of Psalms itself, after which the section was named. Philo and the tenth century Arabian writer al-Masudi both refer to the Hagiographa as the “Psalms.”10
Since the Jews traditionally placed the book of Chronicles in the Hagiographa, another statement of Jesus alludes to the three sections of the completed canon. He said in Luke 11:50-51 (also in Matthew 23:35), “. . .in order that the blood of all the prophets, shed since the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the house {of God;} yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation.” The Zechariah referred to is certainly the one in 2 Chronicles 24:21, and this is significant because His statement is, in a sense, referring to the first part of the three sections (Genesis) and to the last (Chronicles), implying the inclusion of the second section as well. Christ’s point also is in His mentioning the prophets, for “. . . prophecy, as the Jews knew well, had virtually ended with the composition of the latest book of Holy Scripture. . .,” which was the book of 2 Chronicles, written about 400 BC.
Judas Maccabaeus and his associates, in 164 BC, compiled a list of the Prophets and Hagiographa at least 250 years prior to the generally assumed date of the closing of the canon (AD 90, at the Synod of Jamnia). The historical book of 2 Maccabees 2:14f describes it this way: “And in like manner Judas (Maccabaeus) also gathered together for us all those writings that had been scattered by reason of the war that befell, and they are still with us. If therefore ye have need thereof, send some to fetch them unto you.” Beckwith says,
Judas knew that the prophetic gift had ceased a long time before (1 Macc. 9:27; cp. Also 4.46; 14;41), so what is more likely than that, in gathering together the scattered scriptures, he and his companions the Hasidim classified the now complete collection in the way which from that time became traditional. . .The manner in which Judas Maccabaeus did his work was presumably by compiling a list, not by combining books in large scrolls. . . If Judas gave such structure to the canon, he must have had a definite collection of writings to work on.11
The Old Testament books, as grouped in the canon, also had an established order. The relevancy that there was an established order--even though that order was different for different people--implies that the books in that order, however arranged, were recognized as canonical and that the canon was closed at the time of its ordering.
The number of the books is also a relevant issue, and the evidence shows that the number of the canonical books was always assumed to be 22 or 24. The books themselves were the same in both renderings; they would simply be grouped differently. “In earlier days they combined Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah and thus made twenty-two books equivalent to the twenty-two letters in the Hebrew alphabet.”12 It is “. . . difficult to conceive of those books being counted, and the number being generally accepted and well known, if the canon remained open and the identity of its books uncertain. . . agreement about their number implies agreement about their identity.”13
The Contents of the Old Testament Canon
The Canonical Books
It would be logical that upon completion of an Old Testament book the book was canonical. Theoretically, this must be true, but actually, a book of Scripture was considered to be such by virtue of the authority of the human author. So while the Pentateuch was completed with the death of Moses, and the Prophets and the Hagiographa with their authors, the recognition of their canonicity may have been centuries after their actual completion. Consequently, as recognitions differ, there was some dispute about mainly five books of the Old Testament, sometimes called the “antilegomena” or the “books spoken against.” These were: Ezekiel, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, and Esther. The secular motifs in these books were the leading cause of concern to some scholars as well as was the apparent contradictions with other canonical books which were not disputed. The disputes themselves imply that the books in question were considered canonical, because contradictions in un-inspired texts would have been assumed, and therefore, non-existent. It is usually assumed that the presence of the dispute proves that the canon was still open and up for grabs and that it was not settled until the Council of Jamnia in AD 90. The motivation behind such an assertion is the desire to canonize some Apocryphal and books of the Pseudepigrapha as well. Beckwith makes a good argument14 that Ezekiel was not debated, it being part of the already closed Prophets, and not the Hagiographa, which was the subject of debate at Jamnia. In particular only the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes were debated, or according to the Rabbi Akiba, only Ecclesiastes. Green quotes Rabbi Akiba from the Talmud regarding the Jewish opinion of the inspiration of the Song of Solomon. “‘Silence and Peace! No one is Israel has ever doubted that the Song of Solomon defiles the hands [i.e. is Scripture]. For no day in the history of the world is worth the day when the Song of Solomon was given to Israel. For all the Hagiographa are holy, but the Song of Solomon is a holy of holies. If there has been any dispute, it referred only to Ecclesiastes. . . So they disputed and they decided.”15 And what did they decide? “‘The wise men desired to withdraw (ganaz) the Book of Ecclesiastes because its language was often self-contradictory and contradicted the utterances of David. Why did they not withdraw it? Because the beginning and the end of it consist of words of the law.’ Sabbath 30b.”16 The book of 2 Esdras shows that Ezra republished the 24 books of the inspired law. “How could such an assertion be made if five of the 24 books were known to have been added to the canon about AD 90, only ten years or so earlier?”17 In the end the Hagiographa triumphed. For two factors helped, says Pfeiffer: “The first was mere survival. In ancient times, when books had to be copied laboriously by hand on papyrus or parchment, no literary work could survive for a few centuries unless it had attained considerable circulation. . . We may wonder, for instance, why Esther should have survived among the Jews, while Judith perished, since the appeal of both was mainly patriotic.”18
The Non-Canonical Books
The non-canonical books which were excluded from the canon had a foot in the canonical door mainly by virtue of the disputed books’ arguments. The thought was, “If we can dispute about these five canonical books, can we not also dispute about these other books as being canonical too?” For the most part, the books in question from the Pseudepigrapha (anonymous authors) and Apocrypha could not be included in the canon, for one reason, because their date is much later than the previously attested date of the closing of the canon recognized by Judas Maccabaeus in 164 BC. The confusion comes in that many of the books in question are impeccable historical sources, and are true in what they say, but truth does not necessarily equate with canonicity. The books such as 1 Maccabees, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, and Ecclesiasticus, just to name a few, contain great value in and of themselves. But value is not enough to warrant canonicity. Even within the book of such value as Ecclesiasticus are personal biases that Holy Scripture would not commend. The author, Jesus the son of Sira, reveals a great deal of his personal character as he “not only expresses his views quite frankly on a variety of subjects, making no secret, for instance, of his intense dislike for the fair ‘weaker’ sex (9:8; 23: ).”19
Augustine believed that some of the Apocrypha was inspired.
Nevertheless, in the heat of the argument, Augustine limits his Old Testament to the Jewish canon when he writes in his tract on ‘Faith of Things not Seen’ appealing to the Scriptures as follows: ‘Unless haply unbelieving men judge those things to have been written by Christians, in order that those things which they already believed might have greater weight of authority if they should be thought to have been promised before they came. If they suspect this let them examine carefully the codices of our enemies the Jews. There let them read those things of which we have made mention.’20
“Philo, the Egyptian Jew of the first century AD, evidently accepted the twenty-two Hebrew books, for he quotes from many of them and from them only, as authoritative.”21 Jerome as well as Rufinus
. . . were crystal clear on the matter [of not considering them canonical] but their reaction to the pressure exerted on them indicates that many leaders thought the additional books ought to be recognized as inspired. . . Jerome yielded to the popular request in furnishing a translation to the church at large but never permitted his scholarly convictions to yield to the point of recognizing these books as canonical.22
The Essene canon contained some of the Pseudepigrapha which they claimed to be divine. Most of these writings were midrash on canonized books and logically therefore would not be Scripture. For if the Pseudepigrapha contained a copy of a canonical book as well as commentary on it, why would it not negate the original canonical book, because the Pseudepigrapha with its inspired commentary would be much more valuable? In addition, “If they were conscious of being inspired, why did they not have the confidence to use their own names?”23 Even the quote in Jude 14 of 1 Enoch 1:9 does not require that 1 Enoch is Scripture. To quote what is true in Scripture is different than saying that what is quoted is Scripture. Even Paul quoted a pagan poet in Acts 17:28, yet he certainly did not regard it as Scripture but as simply true. The Pharisees, the Sadducees and the Essenes also all recognized a closed canon and generally saw that prophecy had ceased before the Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha were even written. None of the Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha were in the canon of the Jews and it was to this canon that Jesus Himself and the Apostles appealed.
Implications and Conclusions
The implications of such a study are two-fold. For those who have held that the writings other than the Jewish and Protestant Old Testament are inspired, there needs to be serious reconsideration. Jesus Himself implied that the last prophet was Zechariah in the book of Chronicles. The previous section alone is sufficient to warrant solemn attention. The value of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha is not the question but only whether they were even candidates for canonicity. There is no shame in a change of position, only in resolute rejection of the historical and logical data.
For those who have held to the Jewish and Protestant Old Testament there is the implication of comfort, assurance, as well as a deepening devotion to what God has not only seen fit to reveal to us, but that which He has seen fit to uphold and confirm to us through many different agencies.
1 Bauer, Walter, William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Fredrick W. Danker (BAGD), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, Chicago: Univ. Of Chicago, 1979, “kanwn,” 403
2 Schultz, Samuel J. “Augustine and the Old Testament Canon,” Bibliotheca Sacra , Vol. 112 # July, 1955, 230, 232
3 Beckwith, Roger. The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985, 2
4 Beckwith, 5
5 Dillard, Raymond B. and Tremper Longman III. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 103
6 Beckwith, 71, 76
7 Beckwith,
8 Beckwith, 80
9 Beckwith, 86
10 Beckwith,
11 Beckwith, 152, 165
12 Harris, R. Laird. “Canon of the Old Testament,” Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Regency, 1976, 189
13 Beckwith, 262
14 Beckwith,
15 Green, William H., General Introduction to the Old Testament: The Canon, London: Murray, 1899, 139
16 Green, 138
17 Beckwith, 275
18 Pfeiffer, Robert H. Introduction to the Old Testament. New York: Harper & Row, 1948, 62
19 Pfeiffer, Robert H. History of New Testament Times with an Introduction to the Apocrypha. New York: Harper & Row, 1949, 366
20 Schultz, 228
21 Harris, 189
22 Schultz, 231
23 Beckwith, 359
Author: Wayne Stiles

7. Book of Daniel and the Intertestamental Period
God’s providence in history (1:1-6:28)
Nebuchadnezzar’s demise (5:1-31)
God’s purpose in history (7:1-12:13)
Daniels dream of the four bests (Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome in 7:1-28)
Prophecy of the Intertestamental Period
Details of nations and leaders
Describes the end times of the Jewish people and rise of the Christian age

8. New Testament Connection
The destruction of the temple foretold (Matt 24:1-3)
The sign when things would soon occur (Matt 24:4-28)
The tribulation and events immediately after (Matt 24:29-35)
The need to be prepared and productive (Matt 24:36-51)
Fullfillment of Daniel 12

9. Daniel 11:31 “His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation.” Matthew 24:15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand—” Matthew 24:34 “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”

10. Old Covenant
Church Age
Eternity
Symbolic 1000 years

11. Amillennialism – The view that the kingdom of God is in existence now and is realized in the church and in salvation with no literal, earthly millennium in store for the future. In amillennialism, the thousand-year reign is considered a metaphor and spiritual symbol. (Within the churches of Christ, amillennialism [or some variation thereof] is now the predominant view.)

12. The date is 74 AD. The location is , Masada (Hebrew for fortress), which is situated atop an isolated rock cliff at the western end of the Judean Desert, overlooking the Dead Sea. It is a place of strength and beauty. The Romans had destroyed Jerusalem and the temple around 70 AD. About 1000 Jews defend the citadel against a Roman Army numbering
On the east the rock falls in a sheer drop of about 1400 feet to the Dead Sea (the lowest point on earth, some 1200 feet below sea level) and in the west it stands about 300 feet above the surrounding terrain. The natural approaches to the cliff top are very difficult.
The only written source about Masada is Josephus Flavius’ The Jewish War. Born Joseph ben Matityahu of a priestly family, he was a young leader at the outbreak of the Great Jewish Rebellion against Rome (66 AD) when he was appointed governor of Galilee. He managed to survive the suicide pact of the last defenders of Jodfat and surrendered to Vespasian (who shortly thereafter was proclaimed emperor) – events he described in detail. Calling himself Josephus Flavius, he became a Roman citizen and a successful historian. Moral judgment aside, his accounts have been proved largely accurate. (War of the Jews
According to Josephus Flavius, Herod the Great built the fortress of Masada between 37 and 31 BC. Herod, an Idumean, had been made King of Judea by his Roman overlords and was hated by his Jewish subjects. Herod, the master builder, “furnished this fortress as a refuge for himself.” It included a casemate wall around the plateau, storehouses, large cisterns ingeniously filled with rainwater, barracks, palaces and an armory.
Some 75 years after Herod’s death, at the beginning of the Revolt of the Jews against the Romans in 66 BC, a group of Jewish rebels overcame the Roman garrison of Masada. After the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple (70 BC) they were joined by Zealots and their families who had fled from Jerusalem. With Masada as their base, they raided and harassed the Romans for two years. Then, in 73 AD, the Roman governor Flavius Silva marched against Masada with the Tenth Legion, auxiliary units and thousands of Jewish prisoners-of-war. The Romans established camps at the base of Masada, laid siege to it and built a circumvallation wall. They then constructed a rampart of thousands of tons of stones and beaten earth against the western approaches of the fortress and, in the spring of the year 74 AD, moved a battering ram up the ramp and breached the wall of the fortress.
Josephus Flavius dramatically recounts the story told him by two surviving women. The defenders – almost one thousand men, women and children – led by Eleazar ben Ya’ir, decided to burn the fortress and end their own lives, rather than be taken alive. “And so met (the Romans) with the multitude of the slain, but could take no pleasure in the fact, though it were done to their enemies. Nor could they do other than wonder at the courage of their resolution, and at the immovable contempt of death which so great a number of them had shown, when they went through with such an action as that was.”
The Zealots cast lots to choose 10 men to kill the remainder. They then chose among themselves the one man who would kill the survivors. That last Jew then killed himself.
The heroic story of Masada and its dramatic end attracted many explorers to the Judean desert in attempts to locate the remains of the fortress. The site was identified in 1842, but intensive excavations took place only in , with the help of hundreds of enthusiastic volunteers from Israel and from many foreign countries, eager to participate in this exciting archeological venture. To them and to Israelis, Masada symbolizes the determination of the Jewish people to be free in its own land.
THE HERODIAN FORTRESS
The rhomboid, flat plateau of Masada measures 1800 x 1200 feet. The casemate wall (two parallel walls with partitions dividing the space between them into rooms), is 4200 feet long and 12 feet wide. It was built along the edge of the plateau, above the steep cliffs, and it had many towers. Three narrow, winding paths led from below to fortified gates. The water supply was guaranteed by a network of large, rock-hewn cisterns on the northwestern side of the hill. They filled during the winter with rainwater flowing in streams from the mountain on this side. Cisterns on the summit supplied the immediate needs of the residents of Masada and could be relied upon in time of siege.
To maintain interior coolness in the hot and dry climate of Masada, the many buildings of various sizes and functions had thick walls constructed of layers of hard dolomite stone, covered with plaster. The higher northern side of Masada was densely built up with structures serving as the administrative center of the fortress and included storehouses, a large bathhouse and comfortable living quarters for officials and their families.

13. Begin with the end...70 A.D.
How did the 1000 Jews under Eleazar ben Ya’ir make their last stand at Masada, almost 600 years after being sent into exile in Babylon? The events of AD destroyed what was left of the nation of Israel; yet, it provided the backdrop for the birth of Christianity. At the same Rome destroyed the last vestiges of Judaism, the Gospel is being written. Out of the ashes of Jerusalem, a Savior is born. The early church was born during this time and over the next 300 years would be defined, culminating in Roman Emperor Theodosius declaring Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire.
Great Commission – Matthew 28:19-20
Day of Pentecost – Acts 2:1
“Now the number of those that were carried captive during this whole war was collected to be ninety-seven thousand; as was the number of those that perished during the whole siege: one million and one hundred thousand” Josephus, Wars of the Jews, VI 9.3, 75 A.D.

14. Rulers of Judea Babylonian Persian Greek Ptolemaic Syrian Maccabean
Independence
Rome

15. Babylonian 612 BC – Babylon captures the Assyrian capital of Nineveh
605 BC – Nebuchadnezzar reigns over the Babylonian empire and begins Jewish deportation to Babylon
604 BC – Nebuchadnezzar’s dream – Daniel 2
Inferior kingdom will replace Babylon
A third kingdom will rise, of bronze
A fourth kingdom will rise, of iron
Prophets are Habakkuk, Ezekiel, Daniel
539 BC - Persia, under Cyrus, captures Babylon
Read about the Assyrians in 701 BC: 2 Kings 18: The field commander said to them, "Tell Hezekiah:
" 'This is what the great king, the king of Assyria, says: On what are you basing this confidence of yours? 20 You say you have strategy and military strength—but you speak only empty words. On whom are you depending, that you rebel against me? 21 Look now, you are depending on Egypt, that splintered reed of a staff, which pierces a man's hand and wounds him if he leans on it! Such is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who depend on him. 22 And if you say to me, "We are depending on the LORD our God"-isn't he the one whose high places and altars Hezekiah removed, saying to Judah and Jerusalem, "You must worship before this altar in Jerusalem"?
2 Kings 19: That night the angel of the LORD went out and put to death a hundred and eighty-five thousand men in the Assyrian camp. When the people got up the next morning—there were all the dead bodies! 36 So Sennacherib king of Assyria broke camp and withdrew. He returned to Nineveh and stayed there
Read Daniel Chapter 2 – Nebuchadnezzar's’ dream, not all, just
Mention Daniel Chapter 7 – Four beasts, interpreted to mean Babylon, Persia, Greece, and rome

17. Persian
BC – Cyrus decrees return of the Jews from captivity (Ezra 1:1-4)
536 BC – 70 year captivity ends (Ezra 1:5-11), temple construction begins
516 BC – 2nd temple completed in Jerusalem
Haggai, Zechariah, Ezra, Nehemiah, Malachi, Esther
480 BC - Greek victories over Persia (Dan 11:2)
331 BC – Alexander gains complete control of the Persian empire

19. Greek 331-324 BC – Extension of Greek territory Extends into Asia
323 BC – Alexander dies
316 BC – Ptolemaic and Seleucid dynasties (Dan 11:4)
300 BC – Greek empire divided between four Generals (Dan 8:5-8, 11:3-4)
Cassander
Lysimachus
Sleucus
Ptolemy
Daniel 11
vs. 2. Three more kings in Persia, then a 4th.
l . Cambyses
2. Snerdis
3. Darius the Great
4. Xerxes (Ahasuerus of the book of Esther)
vs. 3—4, Alexander the Great of Greece, his death, the dividing of the kingdom between his 4 gen. Of these, two were especially significant as far as the Jews were concerned: the Ptolemies who ruled Egypt, and the Selucids who ruled in Syria.
NOTE: In 7:6 Greece was symbolized by a leapord with 4 wings & 4 heads. In 8:21-22, Alexander the Great was symbolized by a single horn. When it was broken off, 4 little horns came up in its place. Here in 11:3-4, when Alexander’s reign is broken up, it is divided I to the 4 winds.
vs. 5—9. Ptolemy I of Egypt was strong but Seleucus I of Syria was even stronger. The Ptolemies wanted an alliance with the Seleucids in hopes of eventually annexing Syria into Egypt. Ptolemy I gave his daughter Bernice in marriage to Antiochus I, son of Seleucus with the agreement that Antiochus divorce his wife Laodice & exclude her children from succession to the throne. This took place about 248 B.C., almost 300 years after Daniel’s vision. About 2 years later the king of Egypt died and the king of Syria divorced Bernice and went back to his former wife. He executed Bernice, her children, & those who had helped her. Following that, he himself was murdered by his wife, Laodice. Then Berenice’s brother, Ptolemy III invaded Syria to avenge his sister’s death and carried many captives and spoils of war into Egypt. This occurred about 245 B.C.
vs. 10—13. The Sons of Seleucus II invaded E with a great army led by Antiochus II and these prophecies were fulfilled in detail about 203 B.C.

22. Ptolemaic and Seleucid
280 BC (prophecy in Dan 11)
Seleucids
Babylonia
Asia Minor
Northern Syria
Ptolemaic
Southern Syria
Egypt
260 BC – Rome controls all of Italy
250 BC – Greek translation of OT begins

23. Maccabean/Independence
198 BC – Ptolemies lose control of Palestine to the Seleucids
175 BC - Antiochus IV Epiphanies seizes the Seleucid throne
Antiochus IV punishes Jerusalem for their rebellion
BC - Maccabean revolt
164 BC – Temple retaken and cleansed
150 BC – Rome destroys Carthage
142 BC – Judea gains political independence
130 BC – Dead Sea Scrolls
66 BC – Rome occupies Jerusalem

24. Roman 63-40 BC – High Priest is under Roman Control
44 BC – Caesar assassinated
37-4 BC – Herod the Great is king over Judea (Roman control)
19 BC – Construction of Herod’s temple
4 BC – Birth of Christ and death of Herod
6 AD – Judea becomes a Roman province
28 AD – Pontius Pilate appointed procurator of Judea
30 AD – Christ is crucified, birth of the church
66-73 AD – Jewish revolt against Rome, destruction of Jerusalem, end of Judaism

26. The IT period and Christianity
Roots of many Judean political and religious movements impacting Christian thought
Many of Jesus’ teachings can find origin in the IT period
Intricately linked to Jewish religion and society of the IT period
Impact of Hellenism on first century Christians
Earliest interpretations of OT literature began in the IT period
Answers questions not readily available in OT literature

27. Today’s Objectives Reviewed the lesson plan Reviewed references
Reviewed overall study objectives
Learned why understanding the Intertestamental (IT) Period is critical to understanding New Testament (NT) text
Learned about the extent of the Old Testament (OT) Canon
Provided study highlights
Next week – Babylonian Empire 27