Posts by kepler

12

Another problem with Daniel

by kepler in

i know, if i got a name associated with anything beside an early 17th century astronomer, it's from picking apart the book of daniel.

much of fundamentalist & apocalyptic thought (sic) arises from explanations of this book's passages and i protest.

we could review other points, but let me note the following discrepancy: the end of chapter 1 and the beginning of chapter 9.. chapter 1 begins with the 3rd year of jehoiakim's reign with a nebuchadnezzar raid.

kepler

Vidqun,

If one insists that Daniel was an historical figure of the 6th century BC as described:

Arriving in Nebuchadnezzar's court and immediately assuming duties similar to a prime minister, for one, it makes him a partner in the destruction of the Temple and overseeing the sundry details of the deportations. While he might not be able to stomach Babylonian court food, it appears that there was considerably more in his duties that he could choke down.

His recollections, writing in 3rd person in chapter 3, appears to include a number of Persian officials ( satraps) in King Nebuchadnezzar's court.

Your grammatical argument ( remain, reside etc. into the period of the first year of the reign of Cyrus) in 3rd person authorship, still does not address how it can be the first year of Cyrus's reign (555 BC) or how he can be writing testimonies several years afterward.

None of what you say seems to address the biggest holes in the argument about "Darius the Mede":

Why would a Mede king have a Persian name?

How do you explain the references of Thucydides and Herodotus?

The Peloponnesian War: Book 1, Paragraph 19:

"Not many years after the deposition of the tyrants, the battle of Marathon was fought between the Medes and the Athenians....So that the whole period from the Median war to this, with some peaceful intervals.."

Thucydides makes at least 50 references to the Persian invaders as Medes - and the Battle of Marathon was 490BC. Darius (the Mede) was king of Persia at that time, not in 538 BC.

Here is a section from Herodotus describing the later invasion of Greece under Xerxes:

[7.136] And afterwards, when they were come to Susa into the king's presence, and the guards ordered them to fall down and do obeisance, and went so far as to use force to compel them, they refused, and said they would never do any such thing, even were their heads thrust down to the ground; for it was not their custom to worship men, and they had not come to Persia for that purpose. So they fought off the ceremony; and having done so, addressed the king in words much like the following:-

"O king of the Medes! the Lacedaemonians have sent us hither, in the place of those heralds of thine who were slain in Sparta, to make atonement to thee on their account."

Then Xerxes answered with true greatness of soul "that he would not act like the Lacedaemonians, who, by killing the heralds, had broken the laws which all men hold in common. As he had blamed such conduct in them, he would never be guilty of it himself. And besides, he did not wish, by putting the two men to death, to free the Lacedaemonians from the stain of their former outrage." Book 7 - section 136.

While Herodotus probably was off by an order of magnitude in describing the invasion fleet of Xerxes, he identifies him much the same as Thucydides, but more explicitly - as a Mede or as a Persian interchangeable with such an identity. Herodotus also relates a complicated story of the origin of Cyrus as the son of Astyages - and Josephus morphs it into Darius.

Ahasuerus is the Hebrew derived form of the same monarch known among Greeks as Xerxes, Khshayārshā in the Persian inscriptions.

Consequently, a writer who speaks of "Darius the Mede" conquering Babylon has his historical memory scrambled, filtered no doubt by obtaining ancient history via an education influenced by the 2nd century BC Hellenic occupation.

12

Another problem with Daniel

by kepler in

i know, if i got a name associated with anything beside an early 17th century astronomer, it's from picking apart the book of daniel.

much of fundamentalist & apocalyptic thought (sic) arises from explanations of this book's passages and i protest.

we could review other points, but let me note the following discrepancy: the end of chapter 1 and the beginning of chapter 9.. chapter 1 begins with the 3rd year of jehoiakim's reign with a nebuchadnezzar raid.

kepler

I know, if I got a name associated with anything beside an early 17th century astronomer, it's from picking apart the book of Daniel. Much of fundamentalist & apocalyptic thought (sic) arises from explanations of this book's passages and I protest. We could review other points, but let me note the following discrepancy: the end of chapter 1 and the beginning of chapter 9.

Chapter 1 begins with the 3rd year of Jehoiakim's reign with a Nebuchadnezzar raid. That would be about 604 BC or thereabouts in "conventional" chronology. The narration is 3rd person relating how Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar bid that the sons of nobles of Israel ( Judah) be brought to his court, including one Daniel "who had determinined in his heart not to pollute himself with the delicacies of the king and drinking wine." ..."And Daniel continued on until the first year of Cyrus the king." (Daniel, I:21).

Let me repeat: "Daniel continued on UNTIL the FIRST year of Cyrus the king."

If you look at a Concordance, Cyrus is mentioned again in Daniel in two places:

Chapter 10:1 "In the 3rd year of Cyrus the king of Persia, there was a matter revealed whose name was called Belteshazzar [Daniel]" The narration is in first person.

Then there is also chapter 14, written in Greek and not included in many Bibles, but a feature of the Vulgate & Septuagint:

"When King Astyages ( the Mede) joined his ancestors, Cyrus of Persia succeeded him. Daniel was very close to the king, who requested him more than any of his friends....:" Astyages was the last king of the Medes. See Herodotus for details - though I suspect many of these are questionable as well.

OK. So far, so good, right? Maybe Daniel didn't leave in the first year of the reign of Cyrus. And what is the first year of Cyrus after all - since he was already king of Persia? Cyrus revolted against Astyages in 555 BC and, according to Herodotus, kept Astyages at his court.

But what about chapter 9?

"It was the 3rd year of Darius son of Artaxerxes, a Mede by race who assumed the throne of Chaldea. In the first year of his reign, I Daniel...

Elsewhere this is translated as Ahasuerus, but the problem is the same. Darius ( Daryavoosh roughly in Persian) is a Persian name and is a SUCCESSOR to Cyrus. This contradicts events recorded elsewhere if we are to interpret them as a predecessor to Cyrus. And the first book of Daniel says Daniel left Babylon within a year of the entry of Cyrus. It is in ISAIAH that Cyrus is announced as the victor over Babylon. And his proclamation of return is the beginning of Ezra as well as a cuneiform artifact. The key to who Darius the Mede is in near contemporary accounts of the Battle of Marathon by the Greek historian Thucydides who declares the Athenians victors over an army of Medes in 490 BC. Same with Herodotus calling Xerxes the king of the Medes as well.

In chapters 7 and 8, Daniel also attests to visions in the respective first and third years of Belshazzar's kingship. The trouble is, Belshazzar is the son of King Nabonidus who never abdicated. Nabonidus is never mentioned in Daniel - and in 8 the text reverts back to Hebrew from Aramaic. Go figure, considering that the testimonies are supposedly two years apart.

I'll just let chapters 5 and 6 have a rest - for now, save that Darius the Mede is credited with Persian satrap government structure - attributed as well to Nebuchadnezzar in chapter 3.

The visions as described appear to be much the same as historical events related much less metaphorically in Maccabees or Josephus. But it is much more difficult to construct the houses of cards with an admission that Daniel was written first for an audience of about 165 BC with a persecution as bad (or worse - abominations in the Temple) than the one suffered under the Babylonians. It is also awkward to tote Bibles with Maccabees or Bel the Dragon included. Someone might actually notice a discrepancy or two.

30

Faith in the Flood,-- a Dud.

by prologos in

for the next two weeks, wt will attempt to lay the basis for their imitation "faith" by discussing the "imitate their faith" book, chapter on the flood.

a golden opportunity to share faith strengthening details with your believing friends.

do not miss it!.

kepler

Just caught the NOVA episode on building an ark - or a coracle - according to Babylonian specifications.

It's based on the Irving Finkel book about translating a four thousand year old ark account.

I won't give it away, but it's on line.

54

Paranoia after today's Watchtower

by Truthexplorer in

boy oh boy did i feel paranoid at today's wt.

not only are we to watch our associations outside of the congregation, but also watch our associations 'within' the congregation.

this was emphasised by the wt study conductor.

kepler

The last time I got a knock on the door by a couple NWT toting individuals, they asked if I was familiar with the organization. I said, "Yes, and I have studied it quite a bit?" When they asked me if I wanted to join, I in turn asked them why? Everything I saw was that most anyone in the organization was afraid of or hated half of the rest of the organization. Some appeared to be the most unhappy people I had known, save for the KGB official I met once who was crying in his drink to another Russian friend of mine.

But it was the same reason. As the KGB guy was trying to turn people, he was constantly looking over his shoulder afraid that he would have to report to his leads how someone had tried to turn him - or that he had been caught in some covert activity - like maybe reading the Wall Street Journal - some damning equivalent of reading Raymond Franz.

We never got to any particulars after that.

81

WT Society SEC Records : Hedge Funds, Cayman Islands, Financial Losses - Links

by flipper in

so my wife and i were curious so i researched some financial links and found records indicating that the wt society has been operating at a loss since the year 2012. as you read the links it shows a loss of 10 million $$$ in 2012, about 16 million $$$ in 2013, and a whopping loss of 56 million $$$ in 2014 - where the expenditures exceeded the revenues for each of those years in the amount i've mentioned.

also there is a link on this same website with the sec records indicating that the wt society and it's representatives funneled 40 million $$$$ into hedge funds in the cayman islands as early as 2007. if you look online on other sites you can see evidence that indicates the wt society attended hedge fund conferences to look into more shadiness in 2011 and isn't it curious that by 2012 the wt society started showing losses.

anyway here is the link : https://www.watchtowerlies.com/the_watchtower_revenue.html .. feel free to check this link out and other links on that link indicating the cayman island connection.

kepler

Simon,

Not a frequent watcher of South Park, but for me one of the ironies of the show was that I opened an account at that very bank about 30 years ago when I moved to the south side of Denver.

No longer there.

Nor is my money.

But I had better luck than that.

"Past performance.... " "Your mileage may vary..."

Or how about "Don't place all your life savings in one financial plan." I believe that was the take-away from ENRON.

20

It's easy to gloat about WTS problems ...

by Simon in

jw
friends

.. and fun too !

:d. what?

were you expecting a "but"?

kepler

Thanks to that photo with the gang up there, I can now visualize that favorite JW publication term:

FRUITAGE

Do you suppose the choir director is the guy really running the show?

4

If there are 4 Gospels, then why only 1 book of Revelations

by kepler in

one can picture authors with agents submitting canonical manuscripts to a publishing house.

but who is the house?.

how about "athanasius press"?.

kepler

One can picture authors with agents submitting canonical manuscripts to a publishing house. But who is the House?

How about "Athanasius Press"?

Then you get re-issues of the anthologies. Especially in the 16th century. And finally a statement on what is canonical, about the same time Bibles were wielded by the laymen like the cross would be wielded against vampires in horror movies. Odd?

Then along came the re-issues and anthologies.

I notice the more adamant people are about inerrancy, the fewer loose ends and "deutero-canonical" segments are included. I mean, suppose Daniel chapter 14 were included connecting Daniel to Cyrus... Or one could read Maccabees and wonder if Nebuchadnezzar might not have been comparable to Antiochus... Would one suppose that apocalyptic (and inerrant) speculations might be a little overblown?

27

For me the worst thing is not having a helper anymore

by John Aquila in

one of the things that gave me confidence in life was that i believed i had the almighty creator/god watching over me, directing me, guiding my every step, protecting me from harm, and answering my prayers.

i now know that is not the case anymore.

i finally stopped praying.

kepler

I think one of the most damaging things about an organization like the WT is the after tase it leaves in the mouths, minds and soul of those who were caught in its path.

In this forum I usually come down with the rationalist side - looking at Biblical texts from a different point of view.

And since the effect of the WT was to tear up things in my life because of the people it influenced, I have to say that I never believed in what it said. I was just brought up on grounds where its seeds wouldn't grow. It was not something I had any demonstrable control over as a child or adolescent - it was circumstances.

But I can't buy the idea that prayer is useless or that no one or nothing hears.

I don't believe that if the WatchTower falls, so does God or Jesus or anyone else who stood for what was decent.

If we don't have an afterlife, I disagree with Dostoevski. I believe that integrity is not meaningless and that we should conduct our lives as if there were. I can't think or understand any better choice.

Our parents, our friends and those that cared about us, but we did not care about while they lived or never knew, somehow perhaps they are watching over us. While Protestantism "protested" because Catholic authorities seemed to dangle the fate of the dead in their hands with the notion of indulgences, the movement got it wrong thereafter. Those that are dead and alive, their fates are still mingled, I believe. And if that is true, it is because of a creator and purpose. Our purpose is to leave this campsite in better shape than we found it. To do so, sometimes a few moments of prayer and reflection are required.

No, a lot of moments. And don't give up.

21

A problem with the book of Daniel

by wozza in

left the wts some years ago, but just before i left we were studying the daniel book that they produced in the book study .. i noticed something wrong in the bible account of daniel and brought this up at the end of the study when the conductor asked if everyone understood that nights study,.

i think i may have started a topic here some years ago about this event ,it was a time when i started to question the wts in my heart and mind.the scriptures are lengthy so i will just shorten things by describing the stories in daniel and how one point really got me thinking about things and perhaps made the brothers wierd out about me sand distance themselves ,here it is..........dan ch 1-4. daniels ( who came to be called belteshazzar)in babylon along with shadrach,meshach & abednego ,daniel,after praying with these 3, interprets and states what nebuchadnezzars dream is( we all know this ,the image with the head of gold body of iron and copper etc) and they are rewarded by being positions of authority.

daniel made ruler of the province and chief prefect over babylons wise men ,the 3 were made overseers of the administation of the province ,all very important jobs ,.

kepler

Thank you, Caleb. This is an interesting subject. I am glad that families who lost so much in Spain have been invited to return with some recompense. But as to the question of how or when they arrived, I still have to wonder.

It seems like plenty of more likely opportunity in subsequent centuries. Nebuchadnezzar besieged Phoenician cities, but I don't see how he inherited regions that ended up as part of the Carthaginian Empire. Very murky part of history.

21

A problem with the book of Daniel

by wozza in

left the wts some years ago, but just before i left we were studying the daniel book that they produced in the book study .. i noticed something wrong in the bible account of daniel and brought this up at the end of the study when the conductor asked if everyone understood that nights study,.

i think i may have started a topic here some years ago about this event ,it was a time when i started to question the wts in my heart and mind.the scriptures are lengthy so i will just shorten things by describing the stories in daniel and how one point really got me thinking about things and perhaps made the brothers wierd out about me sand distance themselves ,here it is..........dan ch 1-4. daniels ( who came to be called belteshazzar)in babylon along with shadrach,meshach & abednego ,daniel,after praying with these 3, interprets and states what nebuchadnezzars dream is( we all know this ,the image with the head of gold body of iron and copper etc) and they are rewarded by being positions of authority.

daniel made ruler of the province and chief prefect over babylons wise men ,the 3 were made overseers of the administation of the province ,all very important jobs ,.

kepler

Caleb,

I know this is a little off topic, but I can't help being curious about the assertion of a Hebrew community in Spain since the 6th century or so BC, connected with a Diaspora induced by Mesopotamians ( Assyrians or Babylonians).

How were they supposed to have reached there? Via Tyre or some other Phoenician trade route? What's the evidence?

Granted the community got there somehow between "then" and 1492, but more obvious routes would be via the Roman and Islamic civilizations that arose in the meantime.

Kepler