OK, so what's the deal with the Cyrus prophecy? (page 3)

jwfacts

One thing I found interesting about Daniel that indicates the prophecies were written after the event are the beasts. These are very specific about the earlier kingdoms. For instance Chapter 8 goes on to name which kingdoms the beasts represent, which I used to find remarkable. For instance, Dan 8:20,21 says the ram is Media Persia and the goat is Greece. However, Rome is not named, indicating that Daniel was finished during the time of Greece, but before Rome took power.

OBVES

If anyone has doubts on the importance of the date 537 BC I strongly recommend my recent posts on exJWchat forum with its subforum : Conspiracy Theory, End of Times Predictions,Jesus 2.0. Also visit a google.group : alt.apocalypse .

The date 537 BC was confirmed by my calculations.It is linked to Cyrus in some important way .

2492 BC + 1955 years = 537 BC . 2492 BC - Genesis 6.3 .

29 AD - 33 AD - 36 AD is a period linked to Jesus Christ and his first disciples.

2429 AD + " 7 times " as 2520 years ( + 2520 days ) = 29 AD - 36 AD.

29 AD - 33 AD - 36 AD + 1955 years = 1984 AD - 1988 AD - 1991 AD .

537 BC + " 7 times " as 2520 years ( + 2520 days ) = 1984 AD - 1988 AD - 1991 AD.

Priest73

If anyone has doubts on the importance of the date 537 BC I strongly recommend my recent posts on exJWchat forum with its subforum : Conspiracy Theory, End of Times Predictions,Jesus 2.0. Also visit a google.group : alt.apocalypse .

The date 537 BC was confirmed by my calculations.It is linked to Cyrus in some important way .

2492 BC + 1955 years = 537 BC . 2492 BC - Genesis 6.3 .

29 AD - 33 AD - 36 AD is a period linked to Jesus Christ and his first disciples.

2429 AD + " 7 times " as 2520 years ( + 2520 days ) = 29 AD - 36 AD.

29 AD - 33 AD - 36 AD + 1955 years = 1984 AD - 1988 AD - 1991 AD .

537 BC + " 7 times " as 2520 years ( + 2520 days ) = 1984 AD - 1988 AD - 1991 AD.

Will you marry me?

stillajwexelder

By the way - sorry to break the general theme of the thread, but I thought studying Isaiah 1 and 2 were the most stedious books I have ever studied. I even though BTGHF-GKR was better and that thick damn red sure as hell was tedious

JimmyPage

It was prophesied that Cyrus would have a daughter and she would rule the world.

Leolaia

jwfacts....The Syriac Peshitta of Daniel (possibly translated in the first century BC), in fact, has colophons in ch. 7 that identify the fourth kingdom with "Greece" and the little horn with "Antiochus". The third Sibylline Oracle (dating to the late second century BC) similarly draws on the description of the "fourth kingdom" in ch. 7 of Daniel to refer to the Seleucid kings. The Jewish apocalypse of 4 Ezra (dating to c. AD 100) identifies the "fourth kingdom" with Rome but notes that this was not the interpretation that was given to the prophet Daniel (12:11-26), suggesting that "Greece" is what is presumed in the book itself.

jwfacts

JimmyPage LOL very good

Leolaia - that is very interesting. It further reinforces that Daniel was finished after the break up of Greece.

Narkissos

(I seem to be able to reply on p. 2 now but still can't read the end of p. 1: sorry if the following repeats or ignores previous posts.)

I personally don't see any compelling reason for dating the 'Cyrus' passages before 539 or rather 538 BC. Deutero-Isaiah as a whole is a comparatively consistent work (as compared to 1--39 for instance) but it is certainly not exempt from additions (the last "Song of the Servant" being a likely example), and its publication is certainly post-exilic. While much of it depends on an exilic situation, the enthusiasm about Cyrus' policy makes better sense imo in the view of the 539/538 events than from mere hearsay and guesses about the potential next emperor. The content parallelism with the so-called Cyrus cylinder (where Marduk does exactly what Yhwh does in Deutero-Isaiah, i.e. lead Cyrus to the conquest of Babylon in order to restore the sanctuaries) also weighs on the side of the ex eventu hypothesis: both texts are better explained as a theological interpretation of current history; actually Deutero-Isaiah seems to be more aware of, or more attentive to, Persian culture: he doesn't make Cyrus a Yhwh worshiper (45:4f) and conspicuously relates (opposes) monotheism to dualism (v. 7). The prediction form (which applies also to the election and calling of Cyrus, 45:4) suits his theology very well (cf. 44:14 etc.).

Amha·aret

(I seem to be able to reply on p. 2 now but still can't read the end of p. 1: sorry if the following repeats or ignores previous posts.)

Same here Narkissos. I wonder why that is? I can't see what Surfrusty wrote and something I wrote doesn't seem to have been posted either. Odd!

inkling

I'm still confused as to WHY someone would write a fake prophecy after
the fact, and why anyone was fooled at the time...

[inkling]

OK, so what's the deal with the Cyrus prophecy?

Share this