Posts by kepler

51

Has anyone read Thucydides - beside the author of Daniel?

by kepler in

belshazzar was the son of nabonidus the king.

darius i was a persian king who reigned after cyrus from 522 to 486 bc.

he succeeded the son of neriglissar, labashi-marduk who reigned for only nine months and was put to death in a conspiracy.. .

kepler

AnnOMaly,

Of those three Ezekiel verses, I checked the New Jerusalem Bible - which I had referred to earlier - the JPS TaNaKh, the NWT and the KJ. Of those named, only the New Jerusalem Bible translated the name in Ezekiel as Danel.

Rationale for Danel are described in this excerpt from the Wikipedia:

The Book of Ezekiel in three verses (14:14. 14:20, and 28:3) writes "Danel", which according to the Masoretic Text should be read as "Daniel". This notwithstanding, parallels and contrasts with the righteous and wise Danel (without i) [8] of the Book of Ezekiel, placed between Noah and Job [9] and invoked as the very example of righteous judgement, [10] first pointed out by René Dussaud in 1931, [11] have led readers commonly to accept [12] or occasionally to reject [13] a degree of identification with Ugaritic Danel of the "Aqhat text", amounting virtually to the same figure. [14] The three figures referred to in Ezekiel 14:14 — "Even if Noah, Danel and Job were in it..." — links the name with two non-Israelites of great antiquity. In Ezekiel 28:3 , Danel is one noted for his wisdom in the prophecy addressed to the king of Tyre: "you are indeed wiser than Danel, no secret is hidden from you". The name, "Danel", had a long tradition in Hebrew culture: he is supplied as the father-in-law of Enoch in Jubilees. [15]

To this I would add that Ezekiel in addressing the King of Tyre, the Ezekiel assumes that the king and Tyre is going to go down. This would be early in the the siege. Ezekiel identifies the date ( if we assume Jerusalem's fall in 586) as the same year as Jerusalem's fall. If this is indeed a reference to the king of Tyre in Ez 28:3 - "So you are as wise as Daniel/Danel; no sage as wise as you." - this would be very early in Daniel's career. And considering it was Nebuchadnezzar that was laying siege to Tyre, it sounds a little implausible at that. But according to the text of Daniel, this was a period in which Nebuchadnezzar was off track for 7 years, having gone mad.

51

Has anyone read Thucydides - beside the author of Daniel?

by kepler in

belshazzar was the son of nabonidus the king.

darius i was a persian king who reigned after cyrus from 522 to 486 bc.

he succeeded the son of neriglissar, labashi-marduk who reigned for only nine months and was put to death in a conspiracy.. .

kepler

Soft+Gentle, AnnOMaly,

First, thanks for the lead to the Omega. Slow and painstaking, but this is the essential phrase that I wanted to illustrate:

τησ Ελλαδοσ ου πολλοισ ετεσιν υστερον και η εν Μαραθωνιμαχη Μηδων προσ Αθηνιουσ...

Chapter 18 -Book 1 Thucydides -The Landmark Thucydides – R. B. Strassler

[1] But at last a time came when the tyrants of Athens and the far older tyrannies of the rest of Hellas were, with the exception of those in Sicily, once and for all put down by Lacedaemon; for this city, though after the settlement of the Dorians, its present inhabitants, it suffered from factions for an unparalleled length of time, still at a very early period obtained good laws, and enjoyed a freedom from tyrants which was unbroken; it has possessed the same form of government for more than four hundred years, reckoning to the end of the late war, and has thus been in a position to arrange the affairs of the other states. Not many years after the deposition of the tyrants, the battle of Marathon was fought between the Medes and the Athenians.

Both of you had some questions about the connections between Daniel and Maccabees. As one of you put it, can I show that events described in Daniel and Maccabees are the same; or as the other put it, "How do times and events in Maccabees negate the historicity of events recorded in Daniel?"

We'll have to get to some specifics. After all, I am not saying that everything recorded in Daniel, including "a" and "the" is false. And I believe it was D. Wisemen who noted that at least one of the entries of the Annals of Chaldean Kings gave evidence of a raid on Jerusalem prior to 597 in which captives were taken. But saying that, that particular entry by no means said "Hey, we've got the young prince Daniel; let's turn him into a courtier."

Where we left off, I said that there is clear proof of who Belshazzar was ( son of Nabonidus; neither king nor son of Nebuchadnazzar). AnnOMaly said, well there is the POSSIBILITY that he is related to Nebuchadnezzar through a maternal line. OK. Then, Daniel said that Darius the Mede arrives in Babylon before Cyrus and he was his adviser, sometimes in 3rd person, sometimes in 1st; sometimes in Hebrew, sometimes in Aramaic. Nobody supports this chronology except Daniel. The first Darius carves in rock who he was and that he succeeded Cyrus. The second Darius who establishes the Satrapies reigned when Daniel was over a century old. Both of these guys put down Babylonian revolts where principal figures had names like Nebuchadnezzar and Nabonidus...And the third Darius got whacked in battle by Alexander's forces in the 4th century. And Daniel never mentions Nabonidus. Never.

Regarding Belshazzar and Opis: In writing my post I did say that Roux claimed Belshazzar was lost in battle at Opis. And that is the why I phrased it that way.

I cannot verify his argument. I might have the data from previous research - and then maybe not. But I see no evidence in Herodotus for Belshazzar attending a dinner, gazing at handwriting on the wall and calling on Daniel for clarification, nor in any other source. The idea that he was on the front at Opis, I would not dismiss out of hand. There was nothing secret about the mass of Persian troops; only that the Assyrian allies of Babylon (Gubaru /Gobryas ) went over to the Persian side.

Now what about the Maccabees? When the dreams are discussed in chapters seven, eight and eleven, many of the details can be matched up with events during the Seleucid era: the ten kings and ten horns, the short horn still growing and the reigning king Antiochus IV epiphanies. Even the Roman intercession in his plans to take on Egypt. Now when people talk about these dreams, I am not sure that everyone is talking about the same thing. I never had bothered to read the novels, but back in the 1970s Hal Lindsay must have made a fortune describing Armageddon in a series of novels about the armies of the North and South coming together in pitched battles right about now. I don't know how he handled 4th to 1st century BC history, but I suppose that was an interpretation of Daniel. Yet the most straight-forward interpretation of his "prophecies" would be accounts of events that were going on in his own day and preceding it. If it were done today, a magician's hat would be waved over a newly opened time capsule extracted from a building cornerstone.

Getting to assertions of desecrations of the Temple and its vessels, the accounts of the Maccabees and the historical revolt are definite events that can be corroborated with documents and archeological remains. Now as to whether there was a corresponding desecration of the Temple in the presumed time of Daniel, I would be fairly sure that the sacking in 586/587 BC would constitute such, but the account in Daniel indicates it was part of a feast more akin to what was going on during the reign of Antiochus. The king who should have been responsible had not been in town for years, but in Arabia. Too observant of moon god Sin vs.

Marduk. Belshazzar should have been too busy...

Yet as I indicated in posts on another topic, I was led to believe by the elders who instructed on What the Bible Really Teaches, that Babylon was literally destroyed for what had gone on at Belshazzar's feast - by Cyrus. This was certainly far from the truth and the details and Isaiah verses cited fit the actions of

Assyrian Sennacherib 100 years before Jerusalem's sacking by Nebuchadnezzar. So you can see why I am sceptical of this line of argument.

To get more specific about Daniel,

In 7:7 -7:8, ten horns on the fourth beast are mentioned and one is still growing: the Seleucid Dynasty had ten kings and Antiochus IV Epiphanes was tenth still reigning – thus, the horn was still growing.

“Thrones set in place and the one most venerable took his seat” can be regarded as a reference to the Book of Enoch also referenced in NT by Jude. The fourth beast vision is repeated toward the end of the chapter with variations and some of it could refer again to Antiochus IV, who “will plan to alter the seasons and the Law and the Saints will be handed over to him, for a time, two times and half a time” about the same period as his 3.5 year persecution.

Chapter 7 was written in Aramaic. Chapter 8 is in Hebrew. Dan 8:8 describes the breakup of the Alexandrian Empire at his death into four kingdoms and again concentrates on Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

When we consider the accounts of the Maccabees regarding the Temple and the Law during the reign and repression of Antiochus IV, then it can be said that his conduct was consistent with the description provided in Dan 8:9-12.

---

As noted in notes in the New Jerusalem Bible, the neo-Babylonian background of Daniel is described in words of Persian origin; the instruments in Nebuchadnezzar’s orchestra are given names transliterated from the Greek. The dates in the book agree neither with themselves nor with history as we know it, and they seem to have been placed in the chapter heads without much care for chronology. The author has made use of oral and written traditions still current in his own times. The Dead Sea manuscripts contain fragments of a Daniel cycle related to the canonical book, notably a prayer of Nabonidus reminiscent of Dn 3:31-4:34, in which the name of Nebuchadnezzar replaces that of Nabonidus…

The late composition of the book explains its position in the Hebrew Bible. It was admitted after the canon of the Prophets had already been fixed, and placed between Esther and Ezra among the varied group of ‘other writings’ forming the last sectin of the Hebrew canon.

In the same NJT Bible among the other deuteron-canonical books is the “wisdom book” of Ben Sirach, titled Ecclesiasticus among other names and not to be confused with Ecclesiastes. Ecclesiastes like Daniel is another canonical book posted in the TaNaKh under "writings". Written in Hebrew and translated by Jerome, two thirds of its original was discovered in Cairo in an old synagogue in 1896. Later, segments at Qumran and at Massada in 1964. The book is included in the Sinaiticus codex which is probably in Greek. In a foreword to the book the grandson of ben Sirach tells how he translated the book (into Greek ) when he went into exile in Egypt in 2nd century BC. The original manuscript is placed at roughly 200 BC.

In its 51 chapters, toward the last four or five Ecclesiasticus provides a “eulogy for our ancestors”.

Among these are eulogies for kings, prophets and other leaders. Chapter 48 calls out Elijah, Elisha, Hezekiah, Isaiah; 49, Josiah, Zerubbabel, Nehemiah. Ezekiel, Jeremiah, “Simon son of Onias who repaired the Temple during his lifetime” – but no Daniel. Despite his association with many miracles, being councilor to a succession of Babylonian and Persian kings starting with Nebuchadnezzar and surviving to centenarian age, if not more, depending on which Darius he served, there is no notice of him in this paean to Judean history, circa 200 BC. While there is mention of Daniel in the Maccabees, there is no mention of him in the OT any earlier save for the same-named book. As late as 200 BC he is an unknown or not worthy of remark.

51

Has anyone read Thucydides - beside the author of Daniel?

by kepler in

belshazzar was the son of nabonidus the king.

darius i was a persian king who reigned after cyrus from 522 to 486 bc.

he succeeded the son of neriglissar, labashi-marduk who reigned for only nine months and was put to death in a conspiracy.. .

kepler

AnnOMaly,

RE: You've focused on the paternal line. Have you considered the possibility that Belshazzar was descended from Nebuchadnezzar through the maternal line? A possibility... [citations above].

I have heard it suggested that the rationale for calling Belshazzar Nebuchadnazzar's son a maternal line. And let us consider it.

Since you brought it up, are you aware of anyone in this maternal line beside Nabonidus's mother? I suppose she was old enough to have known Nebuchadnezzar very well, but I have failed to note any reference to that. Had either of the two sources you mentioned given any particulars? If they had I presume you would have mentioned it.

Secondly, when I have read son of so-and-so in a case that could be similar to Belshazzar son of Nabonidus - it was in a litany of forebearers. In the current context citing Belshazzar as son of Nebuchadnazzar could be considered treasonous because he was NOT king. Nabonidus was. If Daniel was the supposed Talleyrand or Metternich of Mesopotamia, this would have been a very impolitic thing to do. Senseless if Belshazzar was going to be murdered the same night.

There are several accounts of what happened when Babylon was taken: that of Daniel, Xenophon, Herodotus, the Nabonidus and Cyrus cylinders. According to the Nabonidus cylinder compiled by the priests of Marduk, the main battle was outside of Babylon at Opis 50 kilometers away. George Roux interprets events as Nabonidus directing Belshazzar to meet the Persian flank - and he is lost in battle there. Curiously, it is Xenophon, Herodotus and Daniel that mention a feast in the city whether Belshazzar was there or not- though the complaint of the Marduk priests was that Nabonidus was neglecting ceremonies with his absence for proto anthropology or archeology in Arabia. So Daniel could be derivative of Greeks again.

---------------------------------------------------

While this line of argument about Daniel being literal focuses on a night of festivity in Babylon prior to its fall, it ignores what is chronicled elsewhere in the so-called deutero-canon of the Bible, I & II Maccabees. I Maccabees 1 & 2 are very specific about what happened during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, abrogating a charter of Antiochus III. Ironically it was recorded in Greek.

Example: I Macc 1:54-

"On the 15th day of Chislev in the year 145 ( of the Seleucid era) the king built the appalling abomination on top of the altar of burnt offering; altars were built in surrounding towns of Judah and incense offered at the doors of houses and streets. Any books of the Law that came to light were torn up and burned. Whenever anyone was discovered possessing a copy of the covenant or practising the law, the king's decree sentenced him to death. ... On the 25th day of each month sacrifice was offered on the altar erected on top of the altar of burnt offering..." Ceremonies for either Zeus or Baal.

The next line about women, children and others involved in circumcision rites is more grisly than I am willing to transcribe.

Later, in 1 Macc 2:12

See how the Holy Place, our beauty, our glory is now laid waste

see how the gentiles have profaned it.

In this same chapter Hannaniah, Azariah, Mishael and Daniel are all mentioned. But I maintain that the events described in Maccabees is less like folklore. And that the authors of Maccabees and Daniel are closer in space and time than some might think.

This desecration and suppression was real. As was the successful Maccabee revolt. But in the smoke and wind of 2520 year arguments, this is hardly ever regarded. Yet it is in the II Maccabees 7th chapter (pointed out one night in a public lecture I attended one night by an astronomer from the Vatican observatory) relating the martyrdom of the 7 brothers, their mother addresses the last of her sons before Antiochus himself just before his executioner dispatches this last boy under torture. "...I implore you, my child, look at the earth and sky and everything in them, and consider how God made them out what did not exist, and that human beings come into being in the same way. Do not fear this executioner, but prove yourself worthy of your brothers and accept death, so that I may receive you back with them in the day of mercy." Has something new happened since the time of the patriarchs?

30

Impact on the receiving end of "What the Bible Really Teaches"

by kepler in

several years ago my fiance had a traumatic experience and decided to return to being a jw.. .

as a result she insisted that we read "what the bible really teaches".

then later i agreed to take instruction with house visits by an elder and his associates on weekends with the same purpose.. .

kepler

I know, I'm getting tired of polemics too, but I feel obliged. I'm jumping around in the numerical sequence. Some of the questions are more ready for presentation than others. This is not entirely a question of presentation to the perhaps hypothetical questions from readers page. If these questions are of interest to me, I presume they might be of interest to someone else, or there might be some pretty good insight out there already.

To cite a similar situation, I was once trying to decide which of two vendors to purchase some software from. One specialized in software for writing code; the other produced such software as a sideline and was one of the primary makers of computer chips. When it came to questions about the code, the software company had a help desk available by phone or e-mail. The chip maker had a users' group. In that respect the Watchtower resembles Intel. Or am I wrong?

Question 33: 2 Peter

In 2 Peter 3: 15-17 there is a commentary on the delay of the day of reckoning where the old Earth will pass away.

“Think of the Lord’s patience as your opportunity to be saved: our brother Paul, who is so dear to us, told you this when he wrote to you with the wisdom that he was given. He makes this point too in his letters as a whole wherever he touches on these things. In all his letters there are of course some passages which are hard to understand, and tese are the ones that uneducated and unbalanced people distort, in the same way as they distort the rest of Scripture – to their own destruction.”

Paul’s letters seemingly already exist as a collection, and are put up on the same level as the Old Testament. And we are to presume that Peter is writing from distant Babylon sometime after Paul’s passing away?

Question 34: Jude and the Book of Enoch

If the brief epistle of Jude in the New Testament is part of the Canon and it refers to the Book of Enoch and the book of Enoch is extant, should we read this book as well? What are we to make of it? Does this book not have more resemblance to Zoroastrian writngs than anything else in the Hebrew Scriptures?

Question 35: Destruction of the Temple, First and Second

In the Gospels there is frequent reference to coming events. In some cases the grief and destruction faced by the generation that would witness the second destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem; not in the spare account of Mark, but in Luke 23:27-32. However, in Dispensationalist theory, little is made of this second destruction; only the second counts for prophetic judgments about our error? Why is this?

Question 36: The Remnant

In the 1954 Strachan vs. Walsh testimony of Vice President Frederick Franz, on page 30 of the text there is a discussion of the Remnant in terms of the living remaining anointed.

A:The remnant, we have reason to belive, are sufficient in umber on earth today to complete the membership of the Body of Christ, 144,000. However, the fact that a man or woman may be a member of the anointed today does not guarantee that one will pass through the further trials of faith and devotion in the future and come off victorious. There may be those who will succumb under the test and fall out, in which case they will have to be replaced by others who dedicate themselves to Jehovah God through Jesus Christ. … Those then will replace the unfaithful ones.

Q. Within the Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses is there a distinction between those who are of the remnant of the anointed and those who are not?

A. Yes, there is a distinction….

Q. Now one last matter on this little chapter. Can the theocratic direction which you have described as transmitting from God through his chosen instruments upon earth operate through the other sheep; or must it operate through the anointed?

A. The direction of the work must operate through the anointed.

Q. Does it therefore follow that , that it is only those who are of the anointed who can achieve and hold a position such as president or ordinary member of the Board of Directors of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society?

A. Yes, that is true, and we have a by-law which restricts the membership of the Board of Directors to the anointed class.

Q. Can you just tell his Lordship one other matter. How is the qualification of being one of the anointed evidenced? Is it self-determinative selection or is it determined by some external body or external agency?

A. No. Membership in the anointed body, of course, can only be determined by Jehovah God himself because it is a spiritual body and he is the only one who can beget those whom he accepts by His Holy Spirit and makes them as such with his Holy Spirit to be members of the Body of Christ and co-heirs with Jesus Christ in the Kingdom.

-----

Are there enough anointed alive and physically capable to fulfill the stated by-laws of the Society today? Have the bylaws been changed?

31

Scholastic Dishonesty - June 2012 Awake - Jewish Exile Timeline

by Ultimate Reality in

the june 2012 awake has another article on the exile of the jews by the babylonians.

once again the wt quotes dishonestly.. .

from page 14:.

kepler

In reviewing the discussion of the initial post, I have not seen much in defense of the application of Ephraim Stern's work in support of a period of 70 year desolation between 607 and 538 BC. In the context where I encountered it (spring 2011), students in the ministry school, if that is an apt description, were instructed to argue that Stern's Biblical Archeological Review article was evidence in behalf of Jerusalem's destruction in that year vs. 587/86. And subsequent to that, Watchtower articles were citing him as backup in overall chronology discussions.

The consensus was that this is dishonest. But there is still some disarray about how to characterize it and what can be done about it.

In the United States, for example, constitutional amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and religion make legal protest a slippery issue. I am NOT a lawyer, but I suspect that if a libel lawsuit saw the light of day, there are arguable defenses against it. Currently we are in the midst of political campaigns culminating in November and all manner of things spoken by public figures and written by writers are being taken out of context - and distorted.

I would be curious what a lawyer might say, but most likely it would be one tied already to the Watchtower...

On the other hand, it would be wise not to forget about the idea of "scholastic dishonesty". Does it matter? Consider two cases.

CASE A: The Watchtower certainly does not submit anything to journals with editors or peer review, but we can observe the effects of scholastic dishonesty in those journals when it occurs. In some cases the academic imperative to publish or perish has resulted in epic volumes of papers; in some cases re-examination of the material submitted has identified fraud. In a matter such as cancer research, where there has been some recent re-examination, the consequences can be very significant. Depending on how faked results transform treatment and prevention procedures of cancer, falsification willresult in the loss of lives when patients are veered off course in to pursue quack medicine. In such cases, where institutional researches are investigated and found to have produced fake results, they are dismissed by their institutions. They will also have an uphill battle of re-establishing their credentials. The institution's liability is not likely to cease either.

...But yet it is possible for an organization to petition you with faked evidence about spiritual matters right at your door. In instituting a government for the people and by the people in the country where I reside (which Lincoln addresses in his Gettysburg funeral oration) it was thought that the consequences of not allowing such activity would be worse. But when it should "perish from this Earth", near 98 years behind schedule, you can imagine who the beneficiaries might be.

CASE B: Whereas the above case involves conventional research which might find evidence for a medical cure, there are also investigations which are out on a limb in the first place. This is the case where institutions are devoted to researching a hypothesis which they have bought into a priori. It could be a modest proposition such as effects of vitamin C or it could be an institution devoted to creation science or UFOs. The point is NOT whether these things are true or not initially - because that is what investigation is for. But when an institution with the results spelled out in its middle name is caught with its thumb on the scales or falsifying the evidence, then there is no other conclusion than that the organization is simply the manifestation of a cult which sees itself with higher entitlement than merely attempting to seek any objective truths.

I would guess that more energy is being expended in research departments of CASE B organizations to get data to conform to a pre-conceived notion than to do any genuine research at all. If it were possible to compile ratios of such activity across the board, I am sure it would be fascinating reading with some interesting charts....

In an instance where the spokespersons deny responsibility for what they are saying and reading from a script; when questions cannot be directed to any identifiable authority; when all their publications are anonymous; when all their attributions are questionable; when any dissent is shut down with accusations of vanity and impudence, it make one wonder how any research can be engendered at all. I know of a number of organizations like this. If Jehovah has a theocracy here on Earth, how could he be pleased if it has placed itself in such company?

51

Has anyone read Thucydides - beside the author of Daniel?

by kepler in

belshazzar was the son of nabonidus the king.

darius i was a persian king who reigned after cyrus from 522 to 486 bc.

he succeeded the son of neriglissar, labashi-marduk who reigned for only nine months and was put to death in a conspiracy.. .

kepler

AnnOMaly, Quoting from your post above: With regard to Nebuchadnezzar being called his father, there are other instances where 'father' can have the sense of 'forefather.' Had a few moments to reflect on that observation while running some errands. Beside Thucydides, I think I can recommend another book. The 1992 Penguin Edition of Ancient Iraq by Georges Roux, a French mining engineer and, perhaps by default, an archeologist. In chapter 23 of his book he deals with Nabonidus and the fall of Babylon. Here are som excerpts from pages 380 on: "The last years of Nebuchadrezzar's reign are obscure All we know is that this great king died of an illnes in the first days of October 562 BC. His on Amel-Mardu ( Evil Merodach of the Old Testament) ruled for only two years. According to Berossus, 'Becuase he managed affairs in a lawless and outrageous fashion, he was plotted against and killed by his sister's husband Neriglisaros ( 'Neriglissar", Nergal-shar-usur) a businessman whom Nebuchadrezzar had entrusted with official functions..." Of his four years of reign (559-556 BC) [we know little save...] After his death Neriglissar was succeeded by his son Labashi-Marduk who was still a child but, we are told, exhibited such signs of wickedness that his friends plotted and nine months later, tortured him to death. The conspirators then met and decided to raise to the throne one of them, Nabu-naid (Nabonidus) (June 556 BC). But in the previous four years events had taken place that were to change, once again, the fate of the Ancient World. The Fall of Babylon Nabuna'id or, as we call him after the Greeks, Nabonidus (556-539 BC)... He was the son a certain Nabu-balatsu-iqbi, who belonged to the Babylonian nobility but was not of royal blood, and of a votaress of the god Sin in the city of Harran. A man in his sixties when he ascended the throne, he had held important administrative functions under Nebuchadrezzar and Neriglissar. Extremely fond of his mother - she died in 547 BC at the age of 104, and was buried with royal honors - he had inherited from her a keen interest in religious affairs and a special almsot exclusive devotion to the go she had served all her life. ... ---- Well, that's enough for a start. But note that the family ties to Nebuchadnezzar have been cut at least twice. He also comes to the throne at some sixty years of age. Coincidence. And, as it turns out, there is a Dead Sea manuscript that mentions him receiving cure for a long standing ailment from a Jewish practitioner of medicine, if that is appropriate prior to Hippocrates. Neriglissar is not the son of Nebuchadnezzar and Nabonidus is not the son of either. More details unfold, recounted on stellae. It turns out Nabonidus had a dream or two himself - and it was about Cyrus. On page 384 "...Betrayed by his own general, Astyages was captured by Cyrus, who in one day found himself the master of both the Persian and Median kingdoms (550 BC). This important event, long know to us from the work of classical authors, is also mentioned in the contemporary cuneiform texts. In one of his inscriptions, Nabonidus tells us that Marduk appeared to him in a dream and ordered him to rebuild E.hul.hul in Harran. As the king objected that Harran was in the hands of the 'Umman-manda' (Medes), Marduk replied: 'The Umman-manda of whom you speak , they and their land and the kings who side with them no longer exist. In the coming third year I shall make Cyrus, King of Anzan, their young slave, expel them. With his few troops, he will disperse the widespread Umman-manda. 'He (Cyrus) captured Astyages (Tshtumegu), King of Umman-mand and took him prisoner to his country.' Another more precise account of the conflict is given in the so-called 'Nabonidus Chronicle": King Ishtumegus clled up his troops and marched against Cyrus, King of Anshan, in order to meet him in battle. The army of Istumegu revolted against him and in fetters they delivered him to Cyrus.' The book provides a number of footnotes for journals, volumes and dates of publication for the translation of the cited sources.

51

Has anyone read Thucydides - beside the author of Daniel?

by kepler in

belshazzar was the son of nabonidus the king.

darius i was a persian king who reigned after cyrus from 522 to 486 bc.

he succeeded the son of neriglissar, labashi-marduk who reigned for only nine months and was put to death in a conspiracy.. .

kepler

RE: (above)

Medes in Thucydides refers to the Persians. A literal translation of Thucydides would use Medes to translate Μηδοι.

---

Thank you! Last night I tried to type the Greek in word math symbols, but my connection did not allow that to dispaly either. Now I'm on line without my memory stick...

Obviously I do not agree with AnnOmaly's answer about relevance. In order to make any sense out of what I am saying - and perhaps what others involved in this discussion might maintain - is that you have to examine two possibilities.

1. That Daniel was written by Daniel over a period from 607 BC to some date prior to the departure of Jews in Babylonian captivity, switching from Aramaic, Hebrew, 3rd person and first, recounting dreams about a Greek occupation future a couple of centuries hence and laying the ground work for a coded message about 2520 years, etc. And in the course of this, Daniel says a lot of strange things about 6th and 7th century Babylon and Persia, especially with regard to who was in charge - and not at all consistent with Isaiah.

2. That Daniel was written at the time of the Seluccid Greek occupation and during the Maccobee revolt ( described in the Deutero-Canonical books Maccobees I and II) with the details of history fading out after 165 BC. From Daniel we never learn the fate of Antiochus IV.

If you cannot consider the evidence for both of these propositions, then, of course, there is no relevance to what Thucydides says about Medes and the Persian King who was reigning during the time of the Battle of Marathon. But since the Seleuccid suppression of Judea under Antiochus IV was as ruthless as the Roman - and is documented by other accounts than Josephus, it can hardly be said that there was no reason for a 2nd century BC author of Daniel to write as he did in veiled terms that compared the tyrants of his day to those who ruled centuries before.

That Daniel, amid two languages and two narrative forms and numerous monarchy mistakes has extrapolated future history is one theory. Another theory is that Daniel had limited data about Persian and Babylonian monarchs 3 or more centuries previous, but derived some of it from Greek sources as it was taught to him in the equivalent of middle school whatever language he used. I am of the opinion of the latter and, of course, that the chronology from 607 BC has more fundamental problems than Olofson or others suggest.

30

Impact on the receiving end of "What the Bible Really Teaches"

by kepler in

several years ago my fiance had a traumatic experience and decided to return to being a jw.. .

as a result she insisted that we read "what the bible really teaches".

then later i agreed to take instruction with house visits by an elder and his associates on weekends with the same purpose.. .

kepler

One of the question issues came up on another topic discussion.

This was with regards to quoting Ephraim Stein as backup for 607 BC.

I hope to post some more questions over the weekend.

31

Scholastic Dishonesty - June 2012 Awake - Jewish Exile Timeline

by Ultimate Reality in

the june 2012 awake has another article on the exile of the jews by the babylonians.

once again the wt quotes dishonestly.. .

from page 14:.

kepler

I encountered this argument last year too. It is one of the things that kicked me into gear in protest.

Someone quoted it to me based on their ministry school:

Question 29:

In correspondence with someone who was close to me, I received the following:

Subject: Prophecy of 70 year desolation

Date: 3/3/2011 9:56:18 AM Central Daylight Time

From:

Reply To:

…I called you after I responded to your email to apologize to you for allowing my emotions to get in the way when we speak on these matters. Believe me I don't act that way in my ministry. I won't let it happen again. This question was on my Theocratic Ministry School Review that will be covered tonight:

How does 2 Chronicles 36:21 underscore the fulfillment of the prophecy recorded at Jeremiah 25: 8-11?

***w0611/15p.32DidJudahRemainDesolate?***

DidJudahRemainDesolate?

THE Bible foretold that the land of the kingdom of Judah would be devastated by the Babylonians and would remain desolate until the return of the Jewish exiles. (Jeremiah 25:8-11) The strongest reason to believe that this prophecy came true is the inspired historical account recorded some 75 years after the first group of exiles returned to their homeland. It states that the king of Babylon “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.” And regarding the land, it is reported: “All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath.” (2 Chronicles 36:20, 21) Is there any archaeological evidence to support this?

In the journal BiblicalArchaeologyReview, Ephraim Stern, professor of Palestinian archaeology at Hebrew University, points out: “The Assyrians and Babylonians both ravaged large parts of ancient Israel, yet the archaeological evidence from the aftermath of their respective conquests tells two very different stories.” He explains: “While the Assyrians left a clear imprint of their presence in Palestine, there is a strange gap after the Babylonian destruction. . . . We find no evidence of occupation until the Persian period . . . There is a complete gap in evidence suggesting occupation. In all that time, not a single town destroyed by the Babylonians was resettled.”

Professor Lawrence E. Stager of Harvard University agrees. “Throughout Philistia, and later throughout Judah,” he says, the Babylonian king’s “scorched-earth policy created a veritable wasteland west of the Jordan River.” Stager adds: “Only with Cyrus the Great, the Persian successor to the Babylonians, does the archaeological record begin again . . . in Jerusalem and in Judah, where many Jewish exiles returned to their homeland.”

Yes, Jehovah’s word concerning Judah’s lying desolate was fulfilled. What Jehovah God foretells always comes true. (Isaiah 55: 10, 11) We can put our complete confidence in Jehovah and in the promises recorded in his Word, the Bible.—2 Timothy 3:16.

88888

Subject: Re: Prophecy of 70 year desolation

Date: 3/6/2011 5:32:55 PM Central Daylight Time

From:

Reply To:

None of this supports a 70 year desolation. The Gap between 586 and 538 is 48 years. Stern also says Edomites moved into most of territories.

You are being deceived.

The Babylonian Gap

The Assyrians impressed their culture on Israel … the Babylonians left no trace

By EphraimStern

The Assyrians and Babylonians both ravaged large parts of ancient Israel, yet the archaeological evidence from the aftermath of their respective conquests tells two very different stories. Why?

In 721 B.C.E., the Assyrians brought an end to the northern kingdom of Israel. A little more than a century later, the Assyrians themselves suffered defeat at the hands of the Babylonians, who became the world’s new superpower. The Babylonians were no less bent on mayhem and destruction than the Assyrians had been: In 586 B.C.E., they burnt Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple, bringing an end to the southern kingdom of Judah and 400 years of Davidic rule.

BAR 28:03, May/Jun 2002 <<Previous | Table of Contents | Next>>

The people in the ministry school are instructed to deceive people like me. They become party to the deception.

51

Has anyone read Thucydides - beside the author of Daniel?

by kepler in

belshazzar was the son of nabonidus the king.

darius i was a persian king who reigned after cyrus from 522 to 486 bc.

he succeeded the son of neriglissar, labashi-marduk who reigned for only nine months and was put to death in a conspiracy.. .

kepler

I have attempted to insert the book 1 chapter 18 Greek text into a post, but so far without success.

In the first post, I had hoped that it would show as a figure, but it did not. What was supposed to be seen was the reference to the Medes, Athenians and Marathon in the Greek text. An alternate approach might be to type it out. Alfa ? It might work.

Judging from comments, I am not sure that everyone is carrying away the same message - which is fair enough. But in as much as I might not have made myself clear, I will elaborate some.

Several have mentioned that they intend to go back and take another look at Thucydides and the History of the Peloponnesian war. Some in English or their native tongue - and some perhaps in the classical Greek. All well and good. But in as far as it pertains to the issue at hand, the most important lines of the whole work ( about 500 pages) are related to Thucydides' discussion of the previous wars with Persia. I venture to say that as far as Thucydides and his readers are concerned, they were at war with the Medes and their king - Darius. But the book is mainly about war among Greeks. Let the reader be warned.

There is no corroborating account of what Daniel describes. Darius is derivative of the Persian name Daryvosh or thereabouts. Were there a Mede name that was similar, I challenge someone to turn it up. Coming into this a month ago, I would have been inclined to say much the same as AnnOmaly above, quoting my annotated New Jerusalem Bible, that Darius the Mede is unknown to history. But I would certainly not give an unknown to history a date of reign. At this juncture I would say that actually Darius the Mede is KNOWN to history by the usage of one of its first historians.

Whether the author or authors of Daniel actually read Thucydides is a matter of conjecture. But if the author lived in the 2nd century province of the Seleucid empire, his rulers had - and Persian history would be a dim memory. As I had noted elsewhere, it is late Christian compilers of the canon that conflat Daniel with the Prophets of the Hebrew Testament, the TaNaKh. When JW speaks of HT it is maintaining the Protestant convention even unto the sequence of books and organization. Daniel in the TaNaKh is placed neither in Prophets or Law, but in Writings. To say that it was translated into Greek in the Septuagint is true, but the Septuagint process started with the Pentateuch or Torah and expanded into later writings over centuries. Significantly, Daniel is the last book in the sequence - or presumed table of contents.

It should also be noted that Daniel as a book has segments written in Aramaic and Hebrew, 1st person and 3rd, segments that are acknowledged by all as later additions - and some repetition.Why a Judean captive of the 7th and 6th century should decide to write his story in Aramaic in the 3rd person and periodically switch to Hebrew or the first person - perhaps that's a good question from readers. But since the so-called Chaldean service that Daniel supposedly entered into was largely concerned with astronomical observation, it is also remarkable that he has nothing to say about this at all. Lots of sevens though. Furnaces get seven times hotter, for example, though I have no idea by what measure this is based, save that seven is a favored number in the account and its prophecies.

But in case anyone was wondering, I maintain that the Greek occupation prophecies are backdated. And that Darius the Mede is as garbled history as the assertion that Belshazzar was the son of Nebuchadnazzar, etc.