Posts by Larsinger58

35

Bad chronology - Samuel, Saul and David

by Jeffro in

according to 1 samuel 13:1, in the oldest hebrew manuscripts, saul ruled for two years (assuming saul actually existed at all, for which there is no hard evidence).

however, various [christian] translators assume this 'must' be an error because acts 13:21 says saul reigned for forty years.

saul's age at 1 samuel 13:1 is conveniently missing from the oldest manuscripts.

Larsinger58

mP: Its funny how so many jewish kings ruled 40 years. Saul , David, Solomon, Moses , thats obviously utterly stupid.

Good point, but I think we have to consider manipulation. Case in point the 70 years of exile and the sabbath payback of the land. It is exactly 70 years after the people were deported off the land. But it took some time after the fall of Jerusalem and the conquering of the other cities to completely empty the land. The deportation of the nations out of that region took up to 23 years. That is, Daniel was first deported in the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar and the last deportation was in year 23.

But there was some fine tuning. Some people were left in the land after the fall of Jerusalem and the last major deportation in year 18. Then the main remnant of the Jews ran down to Egypt, leaving at least the land of Judah completely desolate of people after Gedeliah died in year 20 of Nebuchadnezzar II. So that would have ordinarily begun the 70 years of desolation, at least for Judea. But God commanded the Jews to return to Judea, which they didn't. They were thus killed and a small remnant did return to Judea in year 23, being deported that same year. (Jer. 44:14,28) By this time, likly a small remnant of other peoples were all that were left that needed to be deported from the Northern Kingdom area as well.

Thus I would think it is possible that the precise times of the death of these kings being precisely 40 has some significance. In the meantime, it would not have been difficult for Jehovah to extend the lives of certain kings so that their rules ended after 40 years. The period of Saul, David and Solomon is a period of 120 years, the same as a generation of Noah's day. So maybe there is a hidden message for this period for these kings. I favor divine manipulation vs. simply coincidence, though.

35

Bad chronology - Samuel, Saul and David

by Jeffro in

according to 1 samuel 13:1, in the oldest hebrew manuscripts, saul ruled for two years (assuming saul actually existed at all, for which there is no hard evidence).

however, various [christian] translators assume this 'must' be an error because acts 13:21 says saul reigned for forty years.

saul's age at 1 samuel 13:1 is conveniently missing from the oldest manuscripts.

Larsinger58

Just as a general note, we have other instances of very aged persons in the Bible. Daniel maybe was say 10 years of age when he was first deported in the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar II. If so, in year 23 he would have been around 34 years of age. This was followed by a 70-year exile which would have made him 104 when Cyrus began his rule. He was still alive 3 years into the rule of Cyrus and thus would have been 107 years of age.

Plus, there is a reference that some who saw the second temple completed still remembered the first temple. I remember the assembly hall I attended when I was 10 years of age and got baptized. If someone was ten years of age when the temple was destroyed in year 19 of Nebuchadnezzar II, they would be around 105 years old when the second temple was completed. Moses was 120 when he died, but I think that was exceptional.

35

Bad chronology - Samuel, Saul and David

by Jeffro in

according to 1 samuel 13:1, in the oldest hebrew manuscripts, saul ruled for two years (assuming saul actually existed at all, for which there is no hard evidence).

however, various [christian] translators assume this 'must' be an error because acts 13:21 says saul reigned for forty years.

saul's age at 1 samuel 13:1 is conveniently missing from the oldest manuscripts.

Larsinger58

I'm still looking at this, but Saul was a young man when he became king, too young to have adult sons.

You said: Attempted semantic apologetics don't solve the problems with the ages of Saul or Samuel.

The KJV renders the focal text in question at 1 Sam. 13:1 as ""Saul reigned one year; and when he had reigned two years over Israel, Saul chose him three thousand men of Israel... " So in this case, I need only switch translations.

But, indeed, this chronology remains problematic. If his youngest son, Ishboseth was 40 when Saul died, then Saul may have been 80 years of age at the time after 40 years of rule. But that also meant that he began to rule around age 40. that would explain how he could have a grown son, Jonathan, his eldest, at least age 20 or slightly more 2 years into his reign.

In the meantime, David was just a boy when he began to interact with Saul but was 30 years of age when he became king. If David was around 15 years of age when he killed Goliah, then Saul would have been 65 years of age and Jonathan as much as 45 years of age. Isoboseth would have been 25 years of age.

If Samuel were 60 years of age when Saul was appointed as king, then 25 years later he would have been 85. If Josephus is correct about him living another 18 years then he would have been 103 years of age at the time of his death.

This would mean that Saul was rejected as king after 25 years of rule.

But your focus on the issue of whether Saul ruled for 2 years would not apply to the KJV translation of 1 Sam. 13:1 since it does not assign this 2-year rule to Saul at all, but merely states that after two years is when he then appointed the army, at which time Jonathan was at least 20 as you stated. The fact that Saul was likely 40 years of age when he became king is also confirmed by a 40-year son at the time of his death, meaning his youngest son was born the same year he became king.

Thanks for drawing our attention to this issue.

35

Bad chronology - Samuel, Saul and David

by Jeffro in

according to 1 samuel 13:1, in the oldest hebrew manuscripts, saul ruled for two years (assuming saul actually existed at all, for which there is no hard evidence).

however, various [christian] translators assume this 'must' be an error because acts 13:21 says saul reigned for forty years.

saul's age at 1 samuel 13:1 is conveniently missing from the oldest manuscripts.

Larsinger58

Hi Jeffro: According to 2 Samuel 4:2, David becomes king when he was 30 years old..

Yes, I stand corrected. I hadn't researched this thoroughly enough before speaking.

35

Bad chronology - Samuel, Saul and David

by Jeffro in

according to 1 samuel 13:1, in the oldest hebrew manuscripts, saul ruled for two years (assuming saul actually existed at all, for which there is no hard evidence).

however, various [christian] translators assume this 'must' be an error because acts 13:21 says saul reigned for forty years.

saul's age at 1 samuel 13:1 is conveniently missing from the oldest manuscripts.

Larsinger58

JEFFRO: According to 2 Samuel 4:2, David becomes king when he was 30 years old...

I think you mean 2 Sam 5:4 don't you? Simple typo or whatever. No biggie!! Or maybe this was a test to see how many people actually bothered to look all this up?

BTW, the 2-year reference does not say Saul's rule was a total of 2 years but only indicates that he had ruled for two years before the events described followed. So there is no conflict with Acts' reference to the 40-year rule.

1

J.w's are easily proven False Teachers

by Composer2005 in

if bible story book jebus was really originally a mighty heavenly angel (michael) as j.w's assert lately?

lol!, then it was never a real human being, but a divine being dressed up in human flesh to deceive us.

much like the analogy of a human that dresses up to trick us it is actually a literal father xmas!.

Larsinger58

You cannot be flesh and angelic at the same time. You have to alternate.

25

I am confused by the "reserrection" doctrine. Who will be raised first Old testament people or people who die right before Armaggeddon?

by booker-t in

i have always wondered who will be raised first people such as noah, job, enoch, etc; or people who die right before armaggeddon?

if noah, job, are raised first would not they be terrified with all of the modern inventions they will see such as cars, airplanes, clothes, watches, tvs, radios, and all of the modern technologies.

also, if people lived to 900 years back then would not methusalan be shocked if a person raised tells him they were only 20 years old when they died?

Larsinger58

mP: Well the reason i mentioned Daniel is because his life is given as an example of faith and all commentary is positive. Nobody ever mentions or corrects his lack of faith and apostasy when he changed his name and became a magician and astrology for the king of Babylon. Surely thats downright wrong and yet nobody says anything. If anybody were to copy his example today they would be condemned for their lack of faith.

LARS:

Daniel always demonstrated faith in his god. I don't know of any reference where he deflected from that faith, even when he was very young and first was deported to Babylon. Taking up a Babylonian name isn't being unfaithful.

There are plenty of other things in the Bible you can prove to be false, why turn to this sort of exaggeration and bias?

13

Another big hole in 1914

by leaving_quietly in

1914 is the year for two major events: the end of the gentile times and the beginning of the last days.. .

the gentile times prophecy (luke 21:24) is a supposition that the "seven times" of daniel 4 had a second fulfillment, thus the 2,520 years prophecy was born with 607 c.e.

as the starting point.

Larsinger58

The consensus and understanding of some is that the reference in Luke to Jerusalem is not part of the signs of the last days or the last generation but it comes BEFORE these things. Note Luke:

10 Then he went on to say to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; 11 and there will be great earthquakes, and in one place after another pestilences and food shortages; and there will be fearful sights and from heaven great signs.

12 “But before all these things people will lay their hands upon YOU and persecute YOU, delivering YOU up to the synagogues and prisons, YOU being haled before kings and governors for the sake of my name. 13 It will turn out to YOU for a witness. 14 Therefore settle it in YOUR hearts not to rehearse beforehand how to make YOUR defense, 15 for I will give YOU a mouth and wisdom, which all YOUR opposers together will not be able to resist or dispute. 16 Moreover, YOU will be delivered up even by parents and brothers and relatives and friends, and they will put some of YOU to death; 17 and YOU will be objects of hatred by all people because of my name. 18 And yet not a hair of YOUR heads will by any means perish. 19 By endurance on YOUR part YOU will acquire YOUR souls.

20 “Furthermore, when YOU see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then know that the desolating of her has drawn near.

Thus Matthew and Mark mention Daniel and th one-time event great tribulation, which was the Holocaust. Luke also relates details of that sermon but is the only gospel mentioning Jerusalem specifically and he specifies that the desolating of Jerusalem will occur "BEFORE the previously mentioned signs. Thus the desolating of Jerusalem is not part of the one-time great tribulation which occurs during the end-times. The desolation of Jerusalem is not part of the signs of the last days, but occurs before then.

So there is no conflict. The one-time event of the "great tribulation" that never happened before nor would happen again, thus an event that would stand out and shock the world was the Holocaust. Notably aimed at Jews and JWs who serve as God's "holy ones" or "chosen ones." There was a specific focus on Jews and JWs by the Nazis, thus fulfilling the "disgusting thing in a holy place that causes desolation."

42

Is it GOOD that God KILLS BABIES??? Help needed in debate

by Bloody Hotdogs! in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> </w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif]hello all,.

my wife and i are atheists, raised and living as jehovah's witnesses.

Larsinger58

In a way, the babies of wicked parents killed are considered sacrifices for the righteous. Without the ransome sacrifice, that is, where the sins of the father are transferred to the children, then no righteous could be saved. By this rule, a righteous father could save his righteous children. That is, just as the sins of the fathers are transferred to the sons, so the righteousness of the father can be transferred.

Righteous parents are able to save their minor children via their righteousness; but wicked parents cannot save their children just because of the sentimentality of these children being "innocent" and not of the majority.

That's what I call "collateral damage" that is part of the formula. Just as the snake paid for being chosen by Satan though an innocent bystander, we kill a pony that kills a child. that's part of the sacrifice. That's part of the price paid to save the righteous.

55

Signs - Jesus - Has the Scripture Been Misread ?

by *lost* in

meletivivlon.com - interesting and enlightening theory on jesus and the signs.. wars, earthquakes, food shortages.. what if jesus meant the very opposite ?

jesus said - look out that nobody misleads you.

( jesus warning us as a safegaurd for us not to be mislead about exactly when the time would come ) .

Larsinger58

John, Paul and others from the 1st Century were never to die. So 'THIS GENERATION" never did pass away before Christ arrived in 1992.

The idea that "this generation" would mean everyone would die within the usual timeframe contradicts scripture. Ultimately, the Bible is true. Jesus was simply saying some from his time would never die. He was not saying he would return before the last person from that generation passed away within 80-100 years.