Who was the first Christian writer to apply Isaiah 9:6 to Jesus?
I mean as a direct quotation, not as an allusion.
Doug
Doug Mason
JoinedPosts by Doug Mason
-
8
Who first applied Isaiah 9:6 to Jesus?
by Doug Mason inwho was the first christian writer to apply isaiah 9:6 to jesus?.
i mean as a direct quotation, not as an allusion.. doug.
-
-
-
248
H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"
by AnnOMaly ina long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.
volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.
you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.
-
-
Doug Mason
Billy,
You will be pleased to know that the process you describe is being presented at:
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-witness/TPHQURFQA6VOL3BP1
Doug
-
6
Cyrus's Decree versus Ezra and the Chronicler
by Doug Mason inthe following is part of the decree on the cyrus cylinder, now in the british museum:.
i am cyrus, king of the universe, the great king, the powerful king, king of babylon, king of sumer and akkad, king of the four quarters of the world, son of cambyses, the great king, king of the city of anshan, grandson of cyrus, the great king, ki[ng of the ci]ty of anshan, descendant of teispes, the great king, king of the city of anshan, the perpetual seed of kingship, whose reign bel (marduk) and nabu love, and with whose kingship, to their joy, they concern themselves.. .
when i went as harbinger of peace i[nt]o babylon i founded my sovereign residence within the palace amid celebration and rejoicing.
-
-
Doug Mason
Prodigal Son,
What does it do to your understanding of History Writing by the Hebrews?
Remember, the only things we know about them comes from the elite, the people who could write. We only read their side of the story.
Have you read "Who Wrote the Bible?" by Richard Elliott Friedman?
While that book deals with the OT, the situation with the NT is equally fascinating.
Doug
-
6
Cyrus's Decree versus Ezra and the Chronicler
by Doug Mason inthe following is part of the decree on the cyrus cylinder, now in the british museum:.
i am cyrus, king of the universe, the great king, the powerful king, king of babylon, king of sumer and akkad, king of the four quarters of the world, son of cambyses, the great king, king of the city of anshan, grandson of cyrus, the great king, ki[ng of the ci]ty of anshan, descendant of teispes, the great king, king of the city of anshan, the perpetual seed of kingship, whose reign bel (marduk) and nabu love, and with whose kingship, to their joy, they concern themselves.. .
when i went as harbinger of peace i[nt]o babylon i founded my sovereign residence within the palace amid celebration and rejoicing.
-
-
Doug Mason
Black sheep,
It is most likely that Ezra was responsible for stitching together the various written traditions into the first four books, Genesis to Numbers. (Deuteronomy was written at the time of the Babylonian Captivity as part of their history.)
I sent you a pm.
Doug
-
6
Cyrus's Decree versus Ezra and the Chronicler
by Doug Mason inthe following is part of the decree on the cyrus cylinder, now in the british museum:.
i am cyrus, king of the universe, the great king, the powerful king, king of babylon, king of sumer and akkad, king of the four quarters of the world, son of cambyses, the great king, king of the city of anshan, grandson of cyrus, the great king, ki[ng of the ci]ty of anshan, descendant of teispes, the great king, king of the city of anshan, the perpetual seed of kingship, whose reign bel (marduk) and nabu love, and with whose kingship, to their joy, they concern themselves.. .
when i went as harbinger of peace i[nt]o babylon i founded my sovereign residence within the palace amid celebration and rejoicing.
-
-
Doug Mason
The following is part of the decree on the Cyrus’ Cylinder, now in the British Museum:
“I am Cyrus, king of the universe, the great king, the powerful king, king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of the four quarters of the world, son of Cambyses, the great king, king of the city of Anshan, grandson of Cyrus, the great king, ki[ng of the ci]ty of Anshan, descendant of Teispes, the great king, king of the city of Anshan, the perpetual seed of kingship, whose reign BEL (Marduk) and NABU love, and with whose kingship, to their joy, they concern themselves.
“When I went as harbinger of peace i[nt]o Babylon I founded my sovereign residence within the palace amid celebration and rejoicing. MARDUK, THE GREAT LORD, bestowed on me as my destiny the great magnanimity of one who loves Babylon, and I EVERY DAY SOUGHT HIM OUT IN AWE.
“My vast troops were marching peaceably in Babylon, and the whole of [Sumer] and Akkad had nothing to fear. I sought the safety of the city of Babylon and all its sanctuaries. As for the population of Babylon […, w]ho as if without div[ine intention] had endured a yoke not decreed for them, I soothed their weariness; I freed them from their bonds(?).
“MARDUK, the great lord, rejoiced at [my good] deeds, and HE pronounced a sweet blessing over me, Cyrus, the king who fears HIM, and over Cambyses, the son [my] issue, [and over] my all my troops, that we might live happily in his presence, in well-being. At HIS exalted command, all kings who sit on thrones, from every quarter, from the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea, those who inhabit [remote distric]ts (and) the kings of the land of Amurru who live in tents, all of them, brought their weighty tribute into Shuanna, and kissed my feet.
“From [Shuanna] I sent back to their places to the city of ASHUR and SUSA, AKKAD, the land of ESHNUNNA, the city of ZAMBAN, the city of METURNU, DER, as far as the border of the land of GUTI - the sanctuaries across the river Tigris - WHOSE SHRINES HAD EARLIER BECOME DILAPIDATED, THE GODS WHO LIVED THEREIN, AND MADE PERMANENT SANCTUARIES FOR THEM. I collected together all of their people and returned them to their settlements, and THE GODS OF THE LAND OF SUMER AND AKKAD which Nabonidus – TO THE FURY OF THE LORD OF THE GODS – had brought into Shuanna, at the command of MARDUK, THE GREAT LORD, I returned them unharmed to their cells, in the sanctuaries that make them happy. MAY ALL THE GODS THAT I RETURNED TO THEIR SANCTUARIES, EVERY DAY BEFORE BEL AND NABU, ASK FOR A LONG LIFE FOR ME, AND MENTION MY GOOD DEEDS, AND SAY TO MARDUK, MY LORD, this: “Cyrus, the king who fears YOU, and Cambyses his son, may their … […......................................................…….]. The population of Babylon call blessings on my kingship, and I have enabled all the lands to live in peace.” (http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/article_index/c/cyrus_cylinder_-_translation.aspx. Translation by Irving Finkel, Assistant Keeper, Department of the Middle East, The British Museum) [HIGHLIGHTING ADDED] The words at the opening to the book of Ezra are nothing like the Decree of the Cyrus Cylinder. The Hebrews’ record added the reference to Jeremiah, while Cyrus is named “king of Persia”, rather than the title Cyrus gave to himself, “king of the universe ... king of the four quarters of the earth”.
This is how the Hebrews amended Cyrus’s words:
“In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the LORD spoken by Jeremiah, the LORD moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm and to put it in writing:
“This is what Cyrus king of Persia says: ‘‘The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah. Anyone of his people among you—may his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem in Judah and build the temple of the LORD, the God of Israel, the God who is in Jerusalem. And the people of any place where survivors may now be living are to provide him with silver and gold, with goods and livestock, and with freewill offerings for the temple of God in Jerusalem.’ ”(Ezra 1:1-4)
Why is there such a great difference? Because the writing of history is always interpretive; and in the case of Ezra and of the Chronicler, their history writing was interpreted through their theology.
Did Ezra and the Chronicler invent these words? If not, where did they get them?
For the mature student, a highly probable solution is provided in the file available at:
http://rapidshare.com/files/426680075/Fried_on_dedication_of_temple.pdfDoug
-
11
Is God so small?
by Doug Mason inif a grieving muslim prays to her god, does he refuse to listen?
does god refuse to provide comfort because she did not say yahweh?.
if a person who believes in god calls him/her "allah", does god turn his back like a petulant child?.
-
-
Doug Mason
If a grieving Muslim prays to her God, does he refuse to listen? Does God refuse to provide comfort because she did not say Yahweh?
If a person who believes in God calls him/her "Allah", does God turn his back like a petulant child?
How small is God?
Doug
-
5
CTR was prepared to accept either 1914 or 1915 for the end of troubles
by Doug Mason inctr was aware of difficulties with his dates.
but while he was not prepared to move his babylonian dates of 536 and 606, he was quite prepared to move the 1914 terminus by a full year to 1915. with its fixation at maintaining 1914, the gb shifted ctrs babylonian dates back by one year, to 537 and 607 respectively.. .
but russell was not so concerned with the accuracy of 1914 and was quite prepared to move the terminus to 1915. he wrote the following in 1912, where he expected the end of the troubles on the gentiles to take place by either october 1914 or october 1915. it also shows that ctr was fully aware of that there was no zero year, which is the wts's excuse for shifting in 1942, the fall of babylon from 538 bce to 539 bce:.
-
-
Doug Mason
Ding,
If only JWs were aware that nothing CTR expected came to pass.
He might have marked 1914 or 1915, but he expected that this would be the ending of the 40 years of trouble, which would be followed by an unprecedented outbreak of peace under the Zionists. His 1874 date for the Parousia (obtained from Barbour) was critical, since 1914 marked the end of the 40-year period from the Parousia in 1874.
It was not until 1930 that Rutherford moved the Parousia to 1914.
Doug
-
5
CTR was prepared to accept either 1914 or 1915 for the end of troubles
by Doug Mason inctr was aware of difficulties with his dates.
but while he was not prepared to move his babylonian dates of 536 and 606, he was quite prepared to move the 1914 terminus by a full year to 1915. with its fixation at maintaining 1914, the gb shifted ctrs babylonian dates back by one year, to 537 and 607 respectively.. .
but russell was not so concerned with the accuracy of 1914 and was quite prepared to move the terminus to 1915. he wrote the following in 1912, where he expected the end of the troubles on the gentiles to take place by either october 1914 or october 1915. it also shows that ctr was fully aware of that there was no zero year, which is the wts's excuse for shifting in 1942, the fall of babylon from 538 bce to 539 bce:.
-
-
Doug Mason
believingxjw,
I have never been a JW, and since the mid 1960s I have worked to help JWs break the mental stranglehold that the GB holds over them.
It is my intention to help a JW make up their own mind, free of coercion.
My web site is: http://www.jwstudies.com/
If there is anything you wish to question me personally, you will find my email address at my web site. In all of the decades I have devoted to this work, I have never divulged confidences or passed on names, without permission.
Doug
-
5
CTR was prepared to accept either 1914 or 1915 for the end of troubles
by Doug Mason inctr was aware of difficulties with his dates.
but while he was not prepared to move his babylonian dates of 536 and 606, he was quite prepared to move the 1914 terminus by a full year to 1915. with its fixation at maintaining 1914, the gb shifted ctrs babylonian dates back by one year, to 537 and 607 respectively.. .
but russell was not so concerned with the accuracy of 1914 and was quite prepared to move the terminus to 1915. he wrote the following in 1912, where he expected the end of the troubles on the gentiles to take place by either october 1914 or october 1915. it also shows that ctr was fully aware of that there was no zero year, which is the wts's excuse for shifting in 1942, the fall of babylon from 538 bce to 539 bce:.
-
-
Doug Mason
CTR was aware of difficulties with his dates. But while he was not prepared to move his Babylonian dates of 536 and 606, he was quite prepared to move the 1914 terminus by a full year to 1915. With its fixation at maintaining 1914, the GB shifted CTR’s Babylonian dates back by one year, to 537 and 607 respectively.
But Russell was not so concerned with the accuracy of 1914 and was quite prepared to move the terminus to 1915. He wrote the following in 1912, where he expected the END of the troubles on the Gentiles to take place by either October 1914 or October 1915. It also shows that CTR was fully aware of that there was no zero year, which is the WTS's excuse for shifting in 1942, the Fall of Babylon from 538 BCE to 539 BCE:
Here are CTR's words:
Coming now to a very critical examination of the date 536 B.C., there is an open question: Shall we call it 536 full years to A.D., or 535 full years? The difference in time between October 1st and January 1st would be the fourth of a year; hence our query is respecting 536-1/4 or 535-1/4 years B.C.
What is the proper method of calculation, is in dispute. If we count the first year B.C. as 0, then the date 536-1/4 B.C. is the proper one for the end of the seventy years of captivity. But if we begin to reckon it by counting the first year before the Christian era as B.C. 1, then evidently the desolation ended 535-1/4 years B.C.
As to the methods of counting, Encyclopaedia Britannica says, “Astronomers denote the year which preceded the first of our era as 0 and the year previous to that as B.C. 1--the previous year B.C. 2, and so on.”
Whichever of these ways we undertake to calculate the matter the difference between the results is one year. The seventy years of Jewish captivity ended October, 536 B.C., and if there were 536-1/4 years B.C., then to complete the 2,520 years’ cycle of the Times of the Gentiles would require 1913-3/4 years of A.D., or to October, 1914. But if the other way of reckoning were used, then there were but 535-1/4 years of the period B.C., and the remainder of the 2,520 years would reach to A.D., 1914-3/4 years, otherwise October, 1915.
Since this question is agitating the minds of a considerable number of the friends, we have presented it here in some detail. We remind the readers, however, that nothing in the Scriptures says definitely that the trouble upon the Gentiles will be accomplished before the close of the Times of the Gentiles, whether that be October, 1914, or October, 1915. (Watchtower, December 1, 1912, page 377, "The Ending of the Gentile Times").
-
untitled
by Doug Mason inctr was aware of difficulties with his dates.
but while he was not prepared to move his babylonian dates of 536 and 606, he was quite prepared to move the 1914 terminus by a full year to 1915. with its fixation at maintaining 1914, the gb shifted ctrs babylonian dates back by one year, to 537 and 607 respectively.. .
but russell was not so concerned with the accuracy of 1914 and was quite prepared to move the terminus to 1915. he wrote the following in 1912, where he expected the end of the troubles on the gentiles to take place by either october 1914 or october 1915. it also shows that ctr was fully aware of that there was no zero year, which is the wts's excuse for shifting in 1942, the fall of babylon from 538 bce to 539 bce:.
-
Doug Mason
CTR was aware of difficulties with his dates. But while he was not prepared to move his Babylonian dates of 536 and 606, he was quite prepared to move the 1914 terminus by a full year to 1915. With its fixation at maintaining 1914, the GB shifted CTR’s Babylonian dates back by one year, to 537 and 607 respectively.
But Russell was not so concerned with the accuracy of 1914 and was quite prepared to move the terminus to 1915. He wrote the following in 1912, where he expected the END of the troubles on the Gentiles to take place by either October 1914 or October 1915. It also shows that CTR was fully aware of that there was no zero year, which is the WTS's excuse for shifting in 1942, the Fall of Babylon from 538 BCE to 539 BCE:
Here are CTR's words:
Coming now to a very critical examination of the date 536 B.C., there is an open question: Shall we call it 536 full years to A.D., or 535 full years? The difference in time between October 1st and January 1st would be the fourth of a year; hence our query is respecting 536-1/4 or 535-1/4 years B.C.
What is the proper method of calculation, is in dispute. If we count the first year B.C. as 0, then the date 536-1/4 B.C. is the proper one for the end of the seventy years of captivity. But if we begin to reckon it by counting the first year before the Christian era as B.C. 1, then evidently the desolation ended 535-1/4 years B.C.
As to the methods of counting, Encyclopaedia Britannica says, “Astronomers denote the year which preceded the first of our era as 0 and the year previous to that as B.C. 1--the previous year B.C. 2, and so on.”
Whichever of these ways we undertake to calculate the matter the difference between the results is one year. The seventy years of Jewish captivity ended October, 536 B.C., and if there were 536-1/4 years B.C., then to complete the 2,520 years’ cycle of the Times of the Gentiles would require 1913-3/4 years of A.D., or to October, 1914. But if the other way of reckoning were used, then there were but 535-1/4 years of the period B.C., and the remainder of the 2,520 years would reach to A.D., 1914-3/4 years, otherwise October, 1915.
Since this question is agitating the minds of a considerable number of the friends, we have presented it here in some detail. We remind the readers, however, that nothing in the Scriptures says definitely that the trouble upon the Gentiles will be accomplished before the close of the Times of the Gentiles, whether that be October, 1914, or October, 1915. (Watchtower, December 1, 1912, page 377, "The Ending of the Gentile Times").