Posts by Larsinger58

29

Seven times

by Jeffro in

the book of daniel was almost certainly written in the 2nd century bce, probably based on some historical accounts mixed with jewish folklore.

with that in mind, and given that there isn't any evidence that nebuchadnezzar went insane for seven 'times', is there any other period from which the reference to "seven times" at daniel 4:13-17 may be derived?.

i continued beholding in the visions of my head upon my bed, and, look!

Larsinger58

Comment on expandable chronology.

Someone above claims that the 70 years of desolation is assigned to 490 years. This does not work for the basic concepts of expandable chronology. The expandable chronology converts a year to 360 days and then using the "day of a year" formula (Ezk. 4:6), converts those days to years. This is consistent throughout. Therefore the 70-year desolation can never be converted to 490 years by this basic conversion. Let's look at a couple of examples:

A) The "7 times" prpohecy is a period of 7 years. At 360 days per year, you end up with 2520 days. Thus in this case, you have two fulfillments, one fulfilment called the "minor" fulfillment, where 2520 days are a literal 7 years, and a "major fulfillment" where the 2520 days become 2520 years, which the WTS applies to the 607 BCE date for the fall of Jerusalem and end up with 1914.

B) Another example is the "70 weeks" prophecy. A week is 7 days, so 70 weeks would be 490 days. So the "minor fulfillment" would be a period of 490 literal days, and the "major fulfillment" would use the "day for a year" formula to look for a fulfillment for 490 years. This prophecy has to do with the rebuilding of Jerusalem and also the 1st coming of the messiah. A literal 490 days is about a year and 4 months. Certainly no messiah appeared in such a short time period after Jerusalem began to be rebuilt. When 490 days becomes 490 years, though and we date the beginning of the 70th week with the appearance of the messiah at his baptism in 29 CE, then this prophecy begins in 455 BCE, as the witnesses claim. This prophecy begins with the "going forth of the word to rebuild Jerusalem." For those using the revised timeline like JWs, 455 BC has been manipulated ot occur in the 20th of Artaxerxes where we find Nehemiah engaged in rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem, which took a total of 52 days. But others who use historical records to remove 82 fake years from the Persian Period, date the 1st of Cyrus to 455 BCE. This is supported by the famous predictable eclipse by Thales occurring in year 2 of Nabonidus in February of 478 BCE. We get this chronology by using the first 20-year rule of Cyrus before he became king of Babylon and began his new rule over the combined empire of the Medes and Persians and began to start that new rule as year one. He became king over the Persians for 20 years beginning the 6th year of Nabonidus, thus in 475 BCE. (455+20=475 BCE) Add 5 years back to the 1st of Nabonidus and you get his first year in 480 BCE. (475+5=480 BCE). The eclipse match occurred in February of 478 BCE, which falls in the 2nd year of Nabonidus. After this, Nabonidus left the throne under the charge of his son, Belshazzar. The revised timeline which found an eclipse near Ionia in 585 BCE, though, is not a precise match and is not a predictable eclipse. Even so, 490 days is simply converted to 490 years.

So when someone claims that the 70 years of desolation can be converted to 490 years, it has nothing to do with the "day for a year" conversion. 70 years, a literal 70 years, when converted to days at 360 days per year is a period of 25,200 days, which then converts to 25,200 years! So it just doesn't work. I suppose one can convert 70 years to 490 years by a simple formula of multiplying by 7, but that's outside the rather direct concept of a "day for a year" conversion.

Now, someone noted that the time of desolation was only 50 years and not 70 years, quoting Josephus in Against Apion 1:21. What some don't realize is that in the same work Josephus states the period of desolation was seventy years, a reference he made in Antiquities 11:1. So the 50-year reference is considered cryptic and certainly does not reflect a revision of his previous statement about the 70 years. That is, no one has an epiphany within his own work sometime between paragraphs 1:18 and 1:21. Why he makes both references is up to interpretation, but you must remember Josephus is playing both sides of the fence here. He has created a history that can be "politically correct" on the surface while otherwise reflecting the true Biblical timeline. So you have to read between the lines. Here are those two, critical "seventy year" references by Josephus in both Antiquities and Against Apion:

Antiquities x.9.7 "7. And when they were there, God signified to the prophet that the king of Babylon was about making an expedition against the Egyptians, and commanded him to foretell to the people that Egypt should be taken, and the king of Babylon should slay some of them and, should take others captive, and bring them to Babylon; which things came to pass accordingly; for on the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, he made an expedition against Celesyria; and when he had possessed himself of it, he made war against the Ammonites and Moabites; and when he had brought all these nations under subjection, he fell upon Egypt, in order to overthrow it; and he slew the king that then reigned (16) and set up another; and he took those Jews that were there captives, and led them away to Babylon. And such was the end of the nation of the Hebrews, as it hath been delivered down to us, it having twice gone beyond Euphrates; for the people of the ten tribes were carried out of Samaria by the Assyrians, in the days of king Hoshea; after which the people of the two tribes that remained after Jerusalem was taken [were carried away] by Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon and Chaldea. Now as to Shalmanezer, he removed the Israelites out of their country, and placed therein the nation of the Cutheans, who had formerly belonged to the inner parts of Persia and Media, but were then called Samaritans, by taking the name of the country to which they were removed; but the king of Babylon, who brought out the two tribes, (17) placed no other nation in their country, by which means all Judea and Jerusalem, and the temple, continued to be a desert for seventy years; but the entire interval of time which passed from the captivity of the Israelites, to the carrying away of the two tribes, proved to be a hundred and thirty years, six months, and ten days."

The above 70 years are dated from the last deportation, year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar, when the nation was removed out of their land.

Antiquities 11.1.1 "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."

Here, the "poor people" is a reference to the poor people left in the land after Babylon had been destroyed in year 19 of Nebuchadnezzar, which poor people later ran down to Egypt, from which they were then deported to Egypt in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar. Thus the 70 years of desolation are linked with the servitude of these poor people for 70 years at Babylon. Now of note, Josephus is dating this from year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar linked with the last deportation. The Bible agrees with this, and, in fact, the above reference is almost a direct paraphase of scripture at 2 Chronicles 36:

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."

2 Chronicles here calls the poor people "those remaining from the sword" and is a reference of those who escapled the sword of Nebuchadnezzar during his 23rd year campaign. Jeremiah 44:14 and 28 clearly notes that a few ones remaining from the sword in Egypt would return to the land of Judah. Deportations to Babylon were customarily at the very end of the year (beginning of Spring) so these last remnants of the Jewish people apparently were in Judea a very short time, perhaps only passing through Judea via the main highway from Egypt to Babylon. The WTS, therefore, ignores and contradicts both Josephus and the Bible by claiming the 70 years began the year Jerusalem fell. At any rate, you have two quotes from Josephus as to seventy years, not fifty years. Now here is his quote for seventy yeras in his final work, Against Apion 1.19:

1:19 "And when he was relating the acts of this king, he describes to us how he sent his son Nabuchodonosor against Egypt, and against our land, with a great army, upon his being informed that they had revolted from him; and how, by that means, he subdued them all, and set our temple that was at Jerusalem on fire; nay, and removed our people entirely out of their own country, and transferred them to Babylon; when it so happened that our city was desolate during the interval of seventy years, until the days of Cyrus king of Persia."

Okay? Now, rather mysteriously, just 2 paragraphs later at 1.21, he mentions these "fifty years" that everybody focuses on, ignoring the previous 3 references to the "seventy years", including the one above in the same work of Against Apion:

1:21: "These accounts agree with the true histories in our books; for in them it is written that Nebuchadnezzar, in the eighteenth year of his reign, laid our temple desolate, and so it lay in that state of obscurity for fifty years; but that in the second year of the reign of Cyrus its foundations were laid, and it was finished again in the second year of Darius."

So just so that all know, the fifty-year reference seems to be a cryptic one or it is a direct contradiction of the 70 years noted 2 paragraphs earlier in 1:19 and in consistent agreement with his two earlier references in Antiquities. So it is there to discuss and comment on and speculate on. Even, so, many always quote from 1:21 as if this 50-year reference supports the revised timeline.

MY THEORY, JUST IN PASSING: My personal take on this is that you can get around the obvious self contradiction here by Josephus if you recognize that Cyrus had two rulerships, 20 years apart. That is, by saying the temple was laid desolate for fifty years is not a contradiction if you are referencing the first fifty years before Cyrus came to the throne. Cyrus then ruled 20 years over the Persian part of the empire while Darius the Mede, his uncle-in-law, ruled over the Median part o the empire. When Babylon was conquered, Darius the Mede ruled over Babylon for 6 years. Then he abdicated to Cyrus who then became king over Greater Persia which included Babylonia, and began to restart this new rule over the entire Medo-Persian empire with year 1. So one way to harmonize the two references is within the context that the 50-year desolation occurred up to the time when Cyrus first became king over Persia Minor, but continued desolated for the next 20 years before Cyrus became king over Persia Major (including Babylonia), a period of 70 years.

Otherwise, this appears to be a contradiction and it is up for grabs why the two references are made. Even so, again, most discussants don't know about the three 70-year references, only the 50-year references that fits well into the revised chronology of the NB Period. Don't forget, per the Bible, the NB Period is 26 years longer! Many discussants like to quote Josephus' 50-year reference and apply it to 587-537 BCE, which fits into the reduced revised timeline, ignoring three 70-year references specifically beginning year 23 to the 1st of Cyrus. But that's how propaganda works in the context of ignorance, that is, ignorance about the complete references by Josephus.

29

Seven times

by Jeffro in

the book of daniel was almost certainly written in the 2nd century bce, probably based on some historical accounts mixed with jewish folklore.

with that in mind, and given that there isn't any evidence that nebuchadnezzar went insane for seven 'times', is there any other period from which the reference to "seven times" at daniel 4:13-17 may be derived?.

i continued beholding in the visions of my head upon my bed, and, look!

Larsinger58

Okay, all of this is so confusing. But I will add another version to this since many are enjoying discussing this.

REVISED HISTORY, 455 BCE VIEW

1. Leolaia claims Herodotus calls "Labynetus" = Nebuchadnezzar. This is only because the revised history ends up dating a famous eclipse, that of Thales, to a revised date in 585 BCE (reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, year 20, revised history) rather than 478 BCE, year 2 of Nabonidus, Biblical timeline). This eclipse was famous because it was predicted by Thales. Now in the 455 BCE version of this history, Nabonidus rules for 19 years, 17 years of which was co-ruled by his son, Belshazzar. Records confirm that Nabonidus left the throne to his son in his third year, thus there were only 2 years of sole rule by Nabonidus. In this reference by Herodotus, this famous eclipse caused a peace agreement between Lydia and the Medes and this peace agreement was mediated by "Labynetus" who was king of Babylon at the time. So once you realize there was revision of the Neo-Babylonian records, this famous eclipse would have to have a match when Labynetus was on the throne during his two-year co-rulership.

Per the 455 BCE chronology, which dates the 1st of Cyrus that year, Darius the Mede rules for 6 years just prior to the rule by Cyrus. Thus Darius the Mede rules from 461-455 BCE. The fall of Babylon would have occurred the year before in 462 BCE, which would be the last year of the 19-year rule of Nabonidus. Perhaps Herodotus calls Belshazaar "Labynetus II" because in the revised history, 2 years were removed from the rule of Nabonidus, assigning him a 17-year rule. Be that as it may, the 19-year rule of Nabonidus would have begun in 480/479 BCE. His 2-year sole reign on the throne would have been from 480/479 to 479/478 BCE. This would be the short period where we would look for this famous, predictable eclipse by Thales, an eclipse which he predicted would occur over Ionia. The redated eclipse in 585 BCE does not occur over Ionia.

Now, in those days the only type of predictable eclipse known to the ancient historians was an exegismal eclipse pattern that occurred 54 years and 1 month apart and approximately 8-9 degrees farther north. That would mean the predicting ecliipse track would have been observed over Egypt where Thales studied astronomy for 7 years. Thus the way Thales was able to predict this eclipse wasn't a prediction at all. He found out about an upcoming predictable eclipse from the Egyptians who were expecting one over Ionia based on the one they experied 54 years and 1 month earlier in 532 BCE. So Thales, simply "warned" the Ionians about this upcoming eclipse and when it happened he became famous for "predicting it." The 585 BCE eclipse which was the redated eclipse for the revised history is not a predictable eclipse. But an eclipse in early 478 BCE is a perfect match for this predictable eclipse occurring over Ionia. As noted, this eclipse event does fall late in the 2nd year of Nabonoidus when he was still sole ruler on the throne and thus there to negotiate this peace agreement caused by the eclipse. So in the 455 BCE Biblical timeline for this period, this predictable eclipse is now used to confirm that Nabonius was ruling in early 478 BCE. So because of the direct relevance here of matching this famous eclipse to the reign of Nabonidus, it is quite dismissible that, as some claim, Herodotus was referring to Nebuchadnezzar.

But more pertinent, perhaps, is the fact that Herodotus' history only reflects the first revision of the Persian Period. The Persian history was revised twice using Greek historical propagandists, like Herodotus and Xenophon. Herodotus lived down into the beginning of the Peloponnesian War and reflected the revised history of 30 years added to the reign of Darius I, expanding the Persian Period by 30 years, adding 30 years to the 6-year rule of Darius I (Ezra 6:13,14). But this revision was partially adjusted by removing some 26 years from the Neo-Babylonian kings, so there is a 4-year mismatch in the timeline. This is why Darius I, who died at Marathon and which sparked that conflict, mysteriously dies 4 years later. But after that the revised and true timelines are in sync and that is reflected by Herodotus by another eclipse which occurs during the year of Xerxes' invasion in 424 BCE. The second revision was mastered by Xenophon along with his friends Plato and Aristotle who added an additional 58 years to the Greek timeline. But this was long after the death of Herodotus. That second revision is what distorts the Neo-Babylonian timeline by 58-57 years during the time of Nebuchadnezzar II. This distortion is where an eclipse in 585 BCE, which is not an exact match to the eclipse Herodotus mentions nor is a predictable eclipse is dated by historians now, which occurs during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, which is totally incidental to the revision, having nothing to do with who was reigning at Babylon at the time. So in no way was Herodotus exchangeably referring to Herodotus. The practice was to go along with the revised history but to use cryptic references, especially eclipses to point back to the true timeline.

But clearly, not knowing the above, since the closest match to this eclipse in the revised chronology is found in 585 BCE, observers think that Herodotus was exchanging "Labynetus" for Nebuchadnezzar II. But this is quite dismissible and should be politely ignored, suppressing strong urges to burst out laughing. (smile)

Now some might challenge the above and request additional back-up proof. I'm not doing that here as much as simply adding to the context of this discussion how those who date the 1st of Cyrus to 455 BCE handle this eclipse and the presumption that Herodotus was interchanging an event that occurred in year 2 of Nabonidus with year 20 of Nebuchadnezzar II.

14

Is "Gog of Magog" Satan?

by leaving_quietly in

for as long as i can remember, eze 38 was, and still is, an end-times prophecy about how satan would come up against jws because jws would be "dwelling in security" (ez.

38:14) after all the other religions are destroyed.

this is pretty much the most terrifying chapter in the bible for me, understanding it as jws do.

Larsinger58

"Gog of Magog" represents Nazism/white supremacy. So white supremacists will take a lead in opposing Christ and the elect after the 1000 years ends.

Gog of Magog attacks God's people, the Jews and desolates them during the "great tribulation" and thus the Holocaust. So "Gog of Magog" are white descendants of Japheth/Magog, in this case, Nazi Germany. Satan uses racism to divide people and will inspire that same hatred after the 1000 years ends.

52

So, Jesus had a wife.....

by oldlightnewshite in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><![endif].

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:en-us;} </style> <![endif].

Larsinger58

Just for the record, Jesus' wife in heaven was once Satan, the most beautiful angel in all heaven. Jesus got divorced in Eden but will get a new wife, this time from the earth and fully tested when he returns during the end-times. Thus Jesus marries the "church" and they take the place of Satan in heaven on Mt. Zion.

But Jesus had no earthly wife and otherwise was in love with John.

17

Deep thought provoking questions about Satan's description in Ez 28

by EndofMysteries in

it's taught that ezekiel 28 is speaking about satan, the cherub who is covered in gems, was in the garden of eden..... anyway there are a few things that stand out and so far no explanation yet.

the whole part is ez 28:12-19.. it says he was full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

he is the annointed cherub 'that is covering'.

Larsinger58

Satan as a woman and who was once the wife of Jesus survives in Christian artwork.

The female Satan

17

Deep thought provoking questions about Satan's description in Ez 28

by EndofMysteries in

it's taught that ezekiel 28 is speaking about satan, the cherub who is covered in gems, was in the garden of eden..... anyway there are a few things that stand out and so far no explanation yet.

the whole part is ez 28:12-19.. it says he was full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

he is the annointed cherub 'that is covering'.

Larsinger58

EOM asks: "It says he was full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. He is the annointed cherub 'that is covering'. What exactly does that mean, the annointed cherub that is covering?"

Satan is one of the "covering cherubs" depicted on top of the Ark of the Covenant. Jesus Christ is the other one. Thus Satan was unique at one time in a special position of holiness along with Jesus Christ (Michael, the archangel). The Ark of the Covenant represens Holy Mount Zion out of which Satan was cast at his rebellion.

The two covering cherubs were considered husband and wife and thus the relationship with Jesus Christ at first with Satan was extremely special and extremely close. Of course, it is appropriate that Jesus' wife in heaven would be the most beautiful angel in heaven. But this beauty and "wisdom" corrected Satan.

Genesis 3:15 thus calls Satan "the woman" and the reference to the "woman and her seed" is a reference to Satan and his/her rebel angels. Now it is clear to most that the indictments in Eden pronounced by Jehovah was one to Satan, but actually, one was to Jesus as well.

To Michael the Archangel/Jesus Christ: I will put enmity between you and the woman (Satan) and between your seed and her seed (Satan's rebel angels).

To "the woman" Satan: He (Jesus) will bruise you in the head and you will bruise him in the heel.

Thus the five principals addressed in Eden were the literal serpent, Adam, Eve, Jesus and Satan (the woman) and the "covering cherub" depicted on the Ark of the Covenant.

Therefore, the anointed whom Jesus is said to marry later on taken from the earth take Satan's place in heaven as God's temple on holy mount Zion. So you can understand the resentment of the elect by Satan, especially since Christ's new bride is taken from humanity and are elevated higher than any angels.

Now, in passing, the concept that Satan was a woman is very much a part of esoteric Christian artwork, where even on the ceiling of the Sistine chapel you see Satan depicted as a woman. Google "Lillith" and you will find much artwork showing Satan as a snake-woman.

Further, the constellation VIRGO, which depicts a "virgin holding a branch" is just another version of "the woman and her seed" since a branch represents descendants. So Satan as a woman, an extremely beautiful woman survives in pagandom, such as Venus, or the "woman and her seed" as the Modonna and child, the same as a woman holding a branch. She is often depicted as a "virgin", though, because her children are not her own, but adopted from God's household.

Anyway, Satan was originally one of the "covering cherubs" depicted on the Ark of the Covenant. The alternating figures of a cherub and a palm tree is another indication one of the cherubs was considered a feminine figure, and thus the wife to the other covering cherub.

17

Deep thought provoking questions about Satan's description in Ez 28

by EndofMysteries in

it's taught that ezekiel 28 is speaking about satan, the cherub who is covered in gems, was in the garden of eden..... anyway there are a few things that stand out and so far no explanation yet.

the whole part is ez 28:12-19.. it says he was full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

he is the annointed cherub 'that is covering'.

Larsinger58

Okay, about Tyre. There were two cities, one in the water and one on the shore. The bible says the one in the water would be destroyed and never rebuilt. The city that was rebuilt was not the one in the water though, but the one on the shore, which the Bible itself says would become an active seaport city.

Isa 23: 17

"And it must occur at the end of seventy years that Jehovah will turn his attention to Tyre, and she must return to her hire and commit prostitution with all the kingdoms of the earth upon the surface of the ground. 18 And her profit and her hire must become something holy to Jehovah. It will not be stored up, nor be laid up, because her hire will come to be for those dwelling before Jehovah, for eating to satisfaction and for elegant covering."

So the prophecy about Tyre's destsruction did come to pass. The island city was destroyed in the time of Alexander the Great. But the mainland part of the city did survive to become a great seaport trading center as the Bible prophesies. Bottom line, the latter city called Tyre that was not destroyed is recognized in the Bible.

Even so, both cities were comletely destroyed at the time of Nebuchadnezzar II. Josephus records that the siege of Tyre was 13 years from year 7. The Bible says that Jerusalem would be the first to drink of Nebuchadnezzar's rage and would be "forgotten for 70 years." This simply reflects the year of the last deportation of the Jews from Egypt in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar. 13 years after year 7 agrees with the Bible that Tyre was destroyed after Jerusalem, that is, in the 20th year of Nebuchadnezzar. Even so, just as Jerusalem was destroyed in year 19, a remnant of the people were allowed to remain. That was the Babylonian policy until everyone was finally deported out of the land in year 23, thus the 70 years of Tyre being forgotten is the same 70 years beginning in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar II at the time of the last deportation of the Jews. Likely some remnant citizens of Tyre may have been left as in the case of Judea, but by year 23, the entire land of both Judah and Israel, including foreign seaport cities like Ashkelon and Tyre had everyone deported as well.

Now in case someone is suggesting that there was not a full 70 years of desolation, I'll only acknowledge this is a point of debate, but Josephus definetly claims a 70-year period from year 23 to the 1st of Cyrus. The WTS twists Josephus' reference and claims the 70 years are from the fall of Jerusalem, but this is not true. So the Bible and Josephus date the 70 years from year 23 to the 1st of Cyrus. This totally contradicts the popular Neo-Babylonian timeline which is about 26 years shorter. But that's the debate. Per the bible, the Neo-Babylonian Period is 26 years too short and the Persian Period is 82 years too long. Per the Bible the 1st of Cyrus must fall in 455 BCE, but the WTS follows pagan records and dates the 1st of Cyrus in 538/537 BCE, which reflects the reduced Neo-Babylonian Period timeline, though they add 20 years to their dates prior to 539 BCE to allow for the 70 years of desolation. But that is another debate.

In Summary, the prophecy about Tyre, all of them, have been fulfilled, both that it would be a thriving city again and that it would be destroyed completely, never to be revived, as well as a 70-year desolation period.

52

So, Jesus had a wife.....

by oldlightnewshite in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><![endif].

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:en-us;} </style> <![endif].

Larsinger58

if you follow esoteric Christian art you'll see that John is oft decpited as very feminine. In "The DaVinci Code" they go as far as to claim John is actually Mary Magdalene, the wife of Jesus. This only represents what was esoterically believed, which means 'the disciple Jesus loved" was his "companion." In other words, they saw John as Jesus' chosen lover. No "lover" in the sense of anything inappropriate, that is, both men were single and celibate. But his "companion" in the sense of being a eunuch (gay).

So to cut to the chase, Jesus being a "eunuch" would not have been attracted to any women, plus further it is clear who his companion of choice one, his own cousin, the Apostle John.

That Jesus was a "eunuch" (gay) is referenced by several scriptures but one reference in particular is that he is called a "Nazarene" In the Bible, a eunuch is someone who has no decendants. A tree with many branches represents your family of descendants. But a "twig" or "branch" is a euphemistic reference to a eunuch, who does not marry and have children. "Nazareth" means "branch town" and so it is a subtle reference to Jesus being a "branch" or a eunuch when he is called a "Nazarene."

When esoteric and occult references substitute Mary Magdalene with John, they are subtly acknowledging that the person Jesus was in love with was John. But it is more polite to turn this special relationship with John into one between a man and woman than between two men. Eunuchs openly loved each other as John and Jesus did, but it was completely above board. They were seen as a "couple" but were viewed as two relatives. There was, of course, no sex. Being a "eunuch" was considered a "gift of singleness" not an excuse for homosexuality.

I know a lot of people can't even begin to deal with this, but that's the way it is. Bottom line, Jesus in no way was married to, nor interested in any woman romantically.

12

Another point about "between the evenings"

by WontLeave in

according to the footnote on page 28 of bearing thorough witness about gods kingdom:.

prayers were offered at the temple in conjunction with the morning and evening sacrifices.

the evening sacrifice was held at the ninth hour, or about three in the afternoon.. this sacrifice is the one ordered in exodus 29:38-42:.

Larsinger58

TWO CRITICAL ISSUES BEING MISSED BY ALL:

1) Insight Book, Vol 1 under "day" page 592 says: "The Hebrews were not the only ones who reckoned a day from evening to evening; the Phoenicians, Numidians, and Athenians also did so. The Babylonians, on the other hand, counted the day from sunrise to sunrise; while the Egyptians and the Romans reckoned it from midnight to midnight (as is commonly done today)." Note it is a documented historical fact that the Egyptians counted their day from midnight to midnight. Question is, while the Isralites were in Egypt, did they do the same thing? The answer is: YES! I reflect on their concept that "evening" began when the Sun began to set at noon. If you conceive that in the concept of the Sun's travel around the earth that it begins to "set" begins at noon, then you would conceive that it must begin to rise at midnight. Thus midnight, to you, would clearly have the concept of a new day or new"morning" at least with respect to the DATE. Thus the Israelites when they left Egypt had a concept of two evenings, one beginning at noon, the other at sunet, and two mornings, one beginning at midnight and the other at sunset.

If so, then this solves the issue over the confusion of Nisan 14 vs Nisan 15 in connection with the seder meal vs. the solemn assembly. That is, if you follow Jewish tradition regarding the passover meal itself, it ends specifically at midnight. Historical references as pointed out by Leolaia clearly shows the lambs were sacrificed from 3 p.m. But the seder meal itself was not eaten until after sunset. The key point here is, though, that if the Israelites were following Egyptian tradition to change the date from the 14th to the 15th at midnight, then it was still Nisan 14th from sundown to midnight. Thus passover was eaten on the 14th until midnight, but the Israelites, that same night, are recorded as leaving on the 15th.

So that is a critical part of where the confusion is for many, the presumption that the Israelites changed their date at sunset when they began their sabbath day. Is this the correct concept though?

Of course! We all know the same night the Israelites ate passover is the same night they left Egypt. But they left Egypt on the 15th. The WTS, though, correctly notes many refereces that the passover seder was eaten on the 14th. That is precisely correct. Only the 14th extended up to midnight when that meal ended. In that way, you can eat passover on the 14th and still leave Egypt the "same night" on the 15th. The WTS ignores the scriptures that clearly show the Israelites left Egypt on the 15th and focus on the passover being eaten on the 14th, only they believe the date changes at sunset.

Thus they end up celebrating passover on the wrong day. When the Jews celebrate passover on the 15th per their calendar, like every sabbath day, they actually begin that day at sundown the previous day. Passover to them is not just the seder meal, but also the solemn assembly commanded to be celebrated on the 15th. So just as they identify the sabbath as Saturday, they actually begin that sabbath day on Friday after sundown.

So that's another point. Jews actually eat the passover meal the previous day from sunset to midnight on the day that appears on their calendar.

Further confirming the date change at midnight is Exodus 12:18 "In the first month, on the FOURTEENTH day of the month, in the evening, you are to eat unfermented cakes down til the twenty-first day of the month in the evening." Thus the seven days of UFC are 1-14/15th, 2-15th/16th, 3-16th/17th, 4-17th/18th, 5-18th/19th, 6-19th/20th, and 7-20th/21st. See? Eight calendar days but only seven ceremonial days. That's because the first part of every day belongs to one date but ends on another date that changes at midnight. This solves all the issues and confusion over 14th vs 15th. No problem eating passover on the 14th up until midnight and then leaving Egypt on the 15th.

2) Note how the WTS twists Luke 22:7 which clearly states: "The day of undermented cakes now arrived, on which the passover [victim] must be sacrificed; 8 and he dispatched Peter and John..." Now. When did he dispatch the two disciples? Clearly it was earlier that day since one of them had to take the lamb to the temple to be sacrificed beginning around 3 p.m. Even so, it was not until after sundown that Jesus and the other disciples arrived to eat the passover meal, which was eaten from sundown until midnight. Key point here is that the day the disciples were sent out was a different day the passover was eaten! The WTS though claims that the 2 disciples were sent out on the 13th! WRONG. This directly contradicts Luke 22:7 that clearly shows they were sent out the day the lambs were killed. Now note how easy that works when you have the correct understanding,.

Jesus could send them out say in the morning where they begin the prepare the meal. At some point one of them, likely Peter, takes the lamb to the temple to get in that long line so the priests could slaughter the lamb. When he returns, the lamb is quickly roasted and readied for the passover meal that evening. The lambs are killed on Nisan 14th, a day of preparation. But when sunset occurs, a new day begins. This day is a sabbath day, the first day of UFC. Even so, it remains the 14th until midnight. So see how that works when you have the correct understanding? You can send out the 2 disciples on the day the lambs were killed, Nisan 14th, and still eat passover on the 14th, yet celebrate the solemn assembly the very same day on the 15th. Thus when the Bible commanded not to leave anything from the meal "until morning" it was a reference to midnight. When it commanded not to leave the homes until "morning," it was also a reference to midnight. So even though they left at night after midnight, they did not disobey that command not to leave until "morning", since morning for them back then was the same as morning for us, which begins at 12:01 a.m.

A further note here is very critical. PASSOVER IS EATEN ON THE 1ST DAY OF UNFERMENTED CAKES, A SABBATH DAY! Once you realize that passover is eaten on the 1st day of UFC, which is a special sabbath day, then you know Jesus could not have died the same day he eats passover, and you know he was arrested on the 15th. So what day of the week did Jesus die? Two criteria:

A) He must die on a Thursday because he is in the tomb for "three nights" (Matthew 12:40). We know he rose on a Saturday night, so this is academic. If Sataurday night was the third night, then two nights earlier is the first night: Saturday, Friday, Thursday.

B) He must die on a day of "preparation for passover", that is, a preparation day prior to one of the two special "high sabbaths" of passover, one of which was the 15th and the other the 21st, the 1st and 7th days of UFC. Since The special days of preparation just prior to these dates would be Nisan 14th and Nisan 20th.

So our only question is, in 33 CE, was Nisan 20th a Thursday? The answer is, of course: YES!

How does that work out with the rest of the context of his death? Well, he would be resurrected a week later. After his resurrection he was around for 40 days then rose. Pentecost is 50 days after the 15th. So those in the upper room would have been up there waiting for holy spirit for 10 days! But if he rose the following Sunday, they would have been in the upper room for only 3 days! See how that fits the context of Pentecost much better than when you have Jesus rising a week earlier than he actually did?

SO IN SUMMARY:

1. The passover seder meal is eaten on the sabbath day of the first day of unfermented cakes, which begins on Nisan 14th after sunset, from sundown to midnight, after which the DATE changes to Nisan 15th. Thus Jesus was arrested on Nisan 15th, early Saturday morning in 33 CE.

2. "Between the two evenings" is a specific reference to around 3 p.m., the hour Jesus died on the following Thursday, Nisan 20th, after which he spent parts of "three nights" in the grave, which were Thursday night, Friday night and Saturday night, the night he rose.

3. Otherwise, in comparing and harmonizing scriptures, when the bible refers to "evening" it can mean any time from Noon to nightfall. Further, references to when the sun is going down can also be an exchangeable reference to after noon, which is the end of the day. The normal Jewish day begins and ends at NIGHTFALL, not sunset. Only the sabbath days begin at sunset but also end at nightfall. Please confirm this if you wish. This means the sabbath day is about 1 hour longer than the normal day, and "preparation" is shorter, having given its "evening" to the sabbath. The sabbath day is holy and there is a specific beginning and end to a sabbath day. The sabbath ends officially when a candle is lit ending the sabbath, which is at NIGHTFALL. The sabbath day traditionally begins about 18 minutes before sunset.

What the Samaritans and Kariate Jews did after the temple period ended is irrelevant. We know in the 1st Century, the Jews took their lambs to the temple and they were killed from the "ninth to the eleventh hours" which in no way contradicts the context of the gospel account. But if Jesus ate the traditional passover, which he did, then he was arrested on the 15th. The WTS is blindsided by needing Christ to fulfill being the passover lamb and somehow, to them, as long as he dies within 24 hours of Nisan 14th, that is fulfilled. Well, Passover was a full week with two special sabbath days, so he still would be considered the passover lamb if he died anytime that week. Apparently, the fulfillment parallels the type of day and the time of the day of the sacrifice. The lambs were killed at 3 p.m. on the 14th, Jesus died at 3 p.m. on the 20th. The 14th is a day of preparation, the day before a sabbath; Nisan 20th is a day of preparation. That's enough to fulfill his connection with being the passover lamb.

Thanks, one and all for your comments. Clearly this can be a confusing issue when so many references are "lost in translation" as far as Jewish tradition goes.

13

WOW! Watchtower week of 3/19/2012

by Sheep2slaughter in

i was supervised no one has posted anything about today's watchtower study.

if i missed the thread and this is a repost...my bad.

basically today's watchtower was an attempt at guilt tripping the entire borg.