REDVIT2000:
How anybody can use Josephus as basis for any of type of chronological scholarship is beyond me.
his writings and especially Antinquities is riddled with inconsistencies and errors. The man clearly didn't have a grasp on time and dates. Using Josephus to support anything biblical is especially bad since nothing of what he says actually agrees with the bible.
For example:
- Antiquities 1.3.4 says, "For indeed Seth was born when Adam was in his two hundred and thirtieth year,…" Genesis 5:3 says, " And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth: "
LARS:
Okay, Red, this is how this works. You are showing by this many references how unreliable Josephus can be. I know. My position is that you have to take each reference individually and compare them to the Bible. So what I would expect you to do is to compare Ant. 11.1.1 with what the Bible says:
Ant. 11.1.1. IN the first year of the reign of Cyrus (1) which was the seventieth from the day that our people were removed out of their own land into Babylon, God commiserated the captivity and calamity of these poor people, according as he had foretold to them by Jeremiah the prophet, before the destruction of the city, that after they had served Nebuchadnezzar and his posterity, and after they had undergone that servitude seventy years, he would restore them again to the land of their fathers, and they should build their temple, and enjoy their ancient prosperity.
Is this specific reference contradictory to the Bible, or another error or inconsistency? Here, Josephus is claming those who were removed off the land, that is, at the time of the last deportation in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar II, served for 70 years and were released after the 70 years in the 1st of Cyrus. Now does the Bible agree with that? Or not? Is this another false or contadicting statement among so many? Now 100% of Josephus' history isn't wrong. Maybe 30% is? So, does this all into those references that agree with the Bible or not?
You bring up all these other references to show unreliability of Josephus generally, but would that apply to the 70 years? That's the question.
PLUS, Josephus was redacted. I have two versions of Josephus with different details. For instance, most quote him as noting that Jerusalem fell in year 18 of Nebuchadnezzar, five years before the last deportation. But another version says year 19, which is consistent with the Bible. Josephus in Antiquities claims that Evil-Merodach ruled for 18 years. Buty in Against Apion, only 2 years. But there's the question of redaction. Did someone else change that? Or did Josephus himself state that, trying not to contradict the popular revised timeline.
Now let me tell you something. I've been researching for the last 20 years! I have researched in university libraries all over. I'm in a position to recover the original timeline. But I'm also aware of those who are involved with aggressively suppressing the original timeline. So it is not as if "nobody noticed" there was a conspiracy by the Persians to manipulate the timeline. It's a matter of selective ignorance. The reason why the correction of the timeline bogs down is because it will cause such a HUGE academic mess. Let me just share one aspect of this. Let's say in today's world, nobody really cares one way or the other. Fine. But as soon as you correct the Persian timeline, you will inadvertently correct the Classical Greek timeline. You will discover that Plato sold-out to the Persians along with Xenophon, following in the footsteps of Themistocles, whom they admired. That is, they went for the money! The Persians had plenty of it. So just like the focus shifts from the actual scandal to the COVER-UP, that's what will happen here. The year Jerusalem actually falls will fade into obscurity when the Classical Greek philosophers are shown to be opportunists. You can't remove 82 years of fake Persian history without removing 56 years of fake Greek history. So suddenly, all the Classical Greek curriculae from all the universities around the world will have to re-write all that history. So the main fall-out will not occur in the "Biblical Studies" departments of these universities, but in the Classical Greek history departments who will suddenly be faced with linking Plato and his students along with Xenophon with masterminding this part of history. Now the choice is to just suppress and postpone this, or be honest. Honesty has never been a critical talking point in the academic world, which is more concerned with propaganda than knowledge.
So it is not that no one noticed any of this, this is just something that's "too big to fail"! I mean, the academic world is about jobs and tenure and lies and propaganda. So why bother correcting the timeline? The academic world will cop-out or trade-off for whatever is expedient anyway. There was one point where the Pope had a choice to go along with the original chronology or with Ptolemy's canon which used revised astronomical texts; the Pope decided to go with Ptolemy's false timeline. The "cover-up", thus, as I noted, will be more newsy than any concern over when Jerusalem actually fell.
So really, the only people who really need the timeline corrected are the elect, so that the Bible's chronology and prophecies can amaze us! And we have that! We have corrected the timeline and we're happy! If the world needs to maintain the ancient status quo, then great. All this stuff about me being "crazy" and a "lunatic" and all that, is just an effort to have to shut the fk up! It's not about whether I have the truth or not. It's about not rocking the boat. I can deal with that. Plus, you know, I have what I need from secular sources to confirm the Bible. I'm happy. Am I now interested in forcing the dishonest academic world to come clean? Hmmmm, no really.
Anyway, thanks for your input on trying to discredit Josephus, but it's a moot point. In this case, you need to comment on the specific reference at Ant. 11.1.1. So why don't you? What do you think? It's a direct paraphrase!
You compare Ant. 11.1.1 with 2 Chronicles 36:
"20 Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; 21 to fulfill Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years."
Ant. 11.1.1. IN the first year of the reign of Cyrus (1) which was the seventieth from the day that our people were removed out of their own land into Babylon, God commiserated the captivity and calamity of these poor people, according as he had foretold to them by Jeremiah the prophet, before the destruction of the city, that after they had served Nebuchadnezzar and his posterity, and after they had undergone that servitude seventy years, he would restore them again to the land of their fathers, and they should build their temple, and enjoy their ancient prosperity.
Carl Jonsson doesn't deal with this. Ann O'Maly won't touch it. Jeffro ignores it. The WTS suppresses it. It's too HOT!
