JC/Lars is brilliant. Crazy but brilliant.
The Kingom of David never existed!
by 5go 65 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
-
Apognophos
JC/Lars is brilliant. Crazy but brilliant.
I agree, even if he's wrong, his posts make it clear that he's quite intelligent.
-
Witness My Fury
OK found it.
It's off topic I know but still....
Here's the full section from GTR p192-194 and relevant footnotes, it's not all needed but is here for context and a link at the bottom to the quoted inscription. Main points bolded by me:
History and time prophecies-a lesson
Most commentators agree that Daniel's prophecy of the "seventy weeks" (Daniel 9:24-27) refers to a period of 490 years. But various opinions have been held regarding the starting point of this period. Although it is stated at Daniel 9:25 that "from the going forth of [the] word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah [the] Leader, there will be seven weeks, also sixty-two weeks" (NW), different views are held regarding when and by whom this "word" was sent forth.2
If we "just stick to the Bible," it seems to point to the Persian king Cyrus. At Isaiah 44:28 Jehovah "saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure, even saying of Jerusalem, She shall be built; and of the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid" (ASV). And further, in chapter 45, verse 13: "I myself have roused up someone in righteousness [Cyrus], and all his ways I shall straighten out. He is the one that will build my city, and those of mine in exile he will let go, not for a price nor for bribery" (NW).
Thus it would seem clear that according to the Bible itself the "word to restore and rebuild Jerusalem" was issued by Cyrus. This application, however, limits the period from Cyrus' edict (Ezra 1:1-4) until Messiah to 483 years ("seven weeks, also sixty-two weeks"). If this period ended at the baptism of Christ, usually dated somewhere in the period 26-29 C.E., Cyrus' first year as king of Babylon would have to be dated in the period 458-455 B.C.E. instead of 538, the historically acknowledged date.
Contrary to all historical evidence, several Christian commentators in the past have chosen this application, and it is still adhered to by some expositors. The idea was popularized in the last century by Martin Anstey in his work The Romance of Bible Chronology, London 1913.3 Dr. E. W. Bullinger (1837-1913) accepted the same position, as may be seen in Appendix 91 (pp. 131-32) of his The Companion Bible.
The reasoning underlying this unhistorical position is clearly demonstrated by one of its adherents, George Storrs, a Bible student from the 19th century and editor of the periodical Bible Examiner. In an article dealing with the seventy weeks, he states:
In examining this point, we have nothing to do with profane chronology, or the chronology of the historians. The Bible must settle the question, and if profane chronology does not tally with it, we have a right to conclude such chronology is false, and not to be trusted.4
Storrs, like some other expositors before and after him, tried to cut off nearly 100 years from the Persian period, holding that a number of the Persian kings mentioned in "Ptolemy's canon" (the Royal Canon) and other historical sources never existed! George Storrs surely was an honest and sincere Christian Bible student, but his (and others') rejection of historical sources proved to be a grave mistake.5
That the Persian kings mentioned in the Royal Canon really did exist has been proved beyond all doubt by archeological discoveries in modern times.6 This is an instructive illustration of the necessity of considering the historical evidence in relation to biblical time prophecies. Although this special application of the seventy weeks seemed very biblical and very convincing, it has been refuted by historical facts and therefore cannot be correct.
The same is also true of the application of the seventy-year prophecy made by the Watch Tower Society. Although on the surface it may seem to be supported by some passages in the Bible, it should be abandoned because it is incompatible with historical facts established by a multitude of modern discoveries.
Is it possible, then, to find an application of the seventy years that accords with the historical evidence? It is, and a close examination of biblical texts dealing with the seventy years will demonstrate that there is no real conflict between the Bible and secular history in this matter. As will be shown below, it is the application made by the Watch Tower Society that conflicts, not only with secular history, but also with the Bible itself.
There are seven scriptural texts referring to a period of seventy years which the Watch Tower Society applies to one and the same period: Jeremiah 25:10-12; 29:10; Daniel 9:1-2; 2 Chronicles 36:20-23; Zechariah 1:7-12; 7:1-7, and Isaiah 23:15-18. These will now be examined one by one in chronological order.7
Relavent Footnotes:
5 The early Christian writer Tertullian (c. 160-c. 225 C.E.), in his Against the Jews, reckoned the 490 years from the first year of "Darius the Mede" (Dan. 9:1, 2) to the destruction of the second temple by the Romans in 70 C.E. This would date the first year of "Darius the Mede" to 421 B.C.E. instead of 538. Jewish rabbis in the Talmud (Seder Olam Rabbah) counted the 490 years from the destruction of the first temple by the Babylonians to the destruction of the second temple by the Romans, which would place the destruction of the first temple in 421 B.C.E. instead of 587. (R. T. Beckwith, "Daniel 9 and the Date of Messiah's Coming in Essene, Hellenistic, Pharisaic, Zealot and Early Christian Computation," in Revue de Qumran, Vol. 10:40, 1981, pp. 531-32, 539-40.) Although modern discoveries have made such applications wholly untenable, they still find adherents. See, for example, Rabbi Tovia Singer in Outreach Judaism. Study Guide to the "Let's Get Biblical!" Tape Series, Live! (Mousey, NY: Outreach Judaism, 1995), pp. 40-41.
6 During the years 1931-1940, reliefs, tombs, and inscriptions of the kings these expositors thought never existed were excavated in Persia. (Edwin M. Yamauchi, Persia and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990, pp. 368-70.) That the Roya1 Canon puts these kings in the right order is also demonstrated by the inscription discovered on the walls of a palace of Artaxerxes III (358-337 B.C.E.), which reads: "Says Artaxerxes the great king, king of kings, king of countries, king of this earth: I (am) the son of Artaxerxes (II) the king: Artaxerxes (was) the son of Darius (II) the king; Darius (was) the son of Artaxerxes (I) the king; Artaxerxes (was) the son of Xerxes the king; Xerxes (was) the son of Darius (I) the king; Darius was the son of Hystaspes by name." (E. F. Schmidt, Persepolis I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953, p. 224.) The absolute chronology of the later Persian kings thought not to have existed is today firmly established by numerous astronomical cuneiform texts extant from this period. In passing, the Watch Tower Society's application of the 490 years is basically as historically unsound as are those of the others mentioned in this section. The dating of the 20th year of Artaxerxes I to 455 B.C.E. instead of 445 is in direct conflict with a number of historical sources, including several astronomical texts. When, therefore, The Watchtower of July 15, 1994, p. 30, claims that, "Accurate secular history establishes 455 B.C.E. as that year," this is grossly misleading. (Cf. the similar misstatement in Awake!, June 22, 1995, p. 8.) No secular historian today would date the 20th year of Artaxerxes I to 455 B.C.E. (For a refutation of the idea, se the web essay referred to in footnote 14 on page 82 above.)
Here's a link to the quoted inscription: http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/A3Pa.html
Lars claims are nothing new.... but he'll still claim the inscriptions were later fakes...
-
mP
5go:
Solomon existed, except he wasnt Jewish he was Egyptian. YOu can find the prototype in Egypt. Hiram of Tyre, the number of gold this and that, names of a daughter and so on. The grand temple of Solomon is actually Karnak the worlds largest temple even today. The writer just stole the story of Amenhotep III( i think thats it) and rewrote it as Jerusalem.
There are many key points from egypt that have been copied almost verbatim to the story of Solomon.
-
Larsinger58
As archaeology unequivocally testifies, in the 10th century BC in the valleys of Palestine Canaanite culture continued uninterrupted. Thankfully most of the biblical carnage that is the motif of "David's Empire Building" is a fanatic's fantasy.
This is in response to a thread regarding the myth of David and Solomon. This simply boils down to CHRONOLOGY. Evidence of David's campaign shows up in archaeology as the "end of the Philistine pottery period" which Israel Finkelstein dates to "well into the 10th Century BC" meaning 900-950 BC. So there IS evidence of David's Campaign.
As far as Solomon, massive structures and evidence of full statehood are seen in Israel, particularly at Megiddo along with Gezer and Hazor, but dates by C14 advanced dating to being destroyed c. 871 BCE by Shishak.
Problem is, when the chronologists follow the popular timeline, the Assyrian eponym eclipse gets dated to 763 BCE rather than 709 BCE. The VAT4956 provides us a secular reference to look for an eclipse close to 57 years later than the 763 BCE eclipse to match the true, original timeline. That would be the 709 BCE eclipse. When that occurs, Shishak's invasion now dated to 925 BCE, gets dated to 871 BCE, year 9 of Solomon. Thus Solomon's rule moves down in time by 54 years and his rule occurs c. 910-870 BCE. Likewise David's rule moves down as well and must be dated 40 years earlier from 950-910 BCE. But note, 950 BCE is precisely when archaeology is ending the Philistine pottery period! Thus this is evidence of David's campaign against the Philistines. Further, all the monumental structures and evidence of a rich empire that we see at Megiddo now dated to the "early 9th century" (900-967 BCE) also confirms this is the work of Solomon when his rule is corrected to 910-870 BCE!
So if you have the wrong timeline, of course David and Solomon do not match what archaeology shows us. But it is not the fault of the Bible, but the fault of incompetent historians and biased archaeologists.
But what about the Bible's timeline? Well, the best way for dataing the Exodus is using 1947, the 70th jubilee. 70 jubilees is 3430 years which end in 1996 and begin in 1435 BCE. The Exodus occurs 49 years after the beginning of these 70 jubilees and thus in 1386 BCE. In that case, the 4th of Solomon would fall 480 years later in 906 BCE. His 40-year rule would be from 910-870 BCE. Shishak's invasion dated by C14 in 871 BCE would fall in his 39th year, which is consistent with the Bible's reference! No problem.
The only problem, which is not the job of archaeologists, is to correct the NB and Greco-Persian timelines. This is not their area of expertise but the area of expertise of chronologists. So right now the NB Period during the time of neb2 is 57 years too early, which is corrected by the VAT4956 and the SK400 astrotexts. No problem. But this means there is an 82-year discrepancy at the time Cyrus begins his rule, that is, 537 vs 455 BCE. The challenge now is to remove the 82 years from the Persian Period. No problem! The Persian Period is the least documented time in all history, in fact, is called "the darkest period in human history." The 82 years are easily removed, though, 30 years each from Darius I and Artaxerxes II, and 21 years from the rule of Xerxes who faked his death and claimed he was his own son, Artaxerxes. that removes 81 years right there! The final year is removed from the 8-year rule of Kambyses who had one co-rulership year with his father, Cyrus. That's it! So it's all done.
The Bible and archaeology and astronomy now are in agreement and prove the current popular timeline is fabricated and incorrect. But by using this incorrect timeline, which places Biblical events and characters 54-60 years too early, when that conflicts with the excellent dating evidence we now have from archaeology, the archaeologists take this opportunity to claim the Bible's history is a myth. But they are not in a position to do that if they considered all the timeline theories out there, which they should. Instead, they pick one that conflicts with archaeology and then claim the Bible is a myth. So they are dishonest and/or incompetent. Archaeologists need to stick to their profession and let the chronologists handle the rest.
-
Larsinger58
MRS JONES: JC/Lars is brilliant. Crazy but brilliant.
Oh, Mrs. Jones... how sweet of you!
You know, this makes me feel a little sad though. Because the Bible says once I'm fully "revealed" that many will come to try and get into the kigndom but will be rejected. But they will then try to use the "friendship card" to get in by saying... "
Luke 13:: 24 “Exert yourselves vigorously to get in through the narrow door, because many, I tell YOU, will seek to get in but will not be able, 25 when once the householder has got up and locked the door, and YOU start to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Sir, open to us.’ But in answer he will say to YOU, ‘I do not know where YOU are from.’ 26 Then YOU will start saying, ‘We ate and drank in front of you, and you taught in our broad ways.’ 27 But he will speak and say to YOU, ‘I do not know where YOU are from. Get away from me, all YOU workers of unrighteousness!’
So you see, when Christ returns and begins to teach, which he does in these XJW discussion groups, primarily, apparently lots of people will find him cute and nice and even "brilliant" even though they will still consider him "crazy." So he gets to know a few of them and become friends with them. Of course, they use the "friendship card" when they finally realize he must truly be the true christ, but that doesn't phase me. I still hae to reject them from the kingdom. So when they finally realize I'm the true christ, the door will have closed. Even so, this reminds me that many persons would be kindly toward me who get to know me over the years. So this is being fulfilled.
But when the majority of the people realize I'm the true Christ, then Armageddon happens. So it is bittersweet.
But, the fact that people would become fond of me but think I'm crazy where I teach is prpohesied!!! Another prophecy coming true!
-
transhuman68
The things that you're liable
To read in the bible
ain't necessarily so -
Satanus
Hollywood really started around 3000 yrs ago, only they didn't have cameras, yet, so they wrote the bible.
S
-
mP
Satanus: Thats true, everybody in the Bible is rich, just like Hollywood. You can be brain dead but you still drive a Ferrari, in the old days rich guys had lots of virgins, aka David, Solomon. The Bible is always telling us about their conquests, even a feeble David has a young bimbo to keep him warm.
There are no humble heros, everybody is a priest, not of a local town with 3 goats, they are priests in the temple or the king.
