PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Like what?
ps instead of reading an anti-bible tract on Babylonian captivity,
read a pro-biblical one for comparison.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is it Possible to Prove Being the Messiah?
- Thread starter wizanda
- Start date
Like what?
ps instead of reading an anti-bible tract on Babylonian captivity,
read a pro-biblical one for comparison.
He has no evidence that the experiences were during flat line only hearsay and assumption.
So i guess there are no scans/recordings to validate his claims
See Brain scans uncover a key sign of consciousness | Science News
sooda
Veteran Member
Rather than the book having been written during the Babylonian Exile. The book contains serious historical errors around the time of the Babylonian Exile, but becomes more accurate as it talks about later centuries, up to the second century BCE.
The book of Daniel shows that writer knew of the desecration of Yahweh's altar by Antiochus IV in 168 BCE, but not of the restoration of worship by Judas Maccabeus three years later. Either the divine foresight that inspired Daniel loses focus between 168 and 165, or that is when the book was actually written.
The book of Daniel exhorts believers to have the same uncompromising faith and obedience that Daniel had.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Explain this
Daniel 9:26
“And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the
prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.
1 - how is this Judah the annointed one or Messiah?
2 - what is this? some 500 years after the rebuilding of the temple the Messiah will come?
3 - the Messiah is cut off but not for himself. Is this dying for his people ?
4 - who are the people of the prince who destroy the city and sanctuary?
5 - desolations are determined - who brought the desolation, Greek or Roman?
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
It is said the Jewish sacred canon was sealed with the return from Babylon.
How come Daniel is in this canon, and Maccabees is not?
Why isn't Daniel incorporated into Maccabees?
Could the Greeks have destroyed Jerusalem and the temple and it's not recorded,
even by the Maccabees themselves?
How did the Greeks kill this Judah?
sooda
Veteran Member
Abomination of Desolation is the defilement of the Temple.. Greek or Roman.
Titus was a "prince".. He commanded Romans as well as Egyptians, Syrians and Arabs who fought for the Roman Empire.
There was no flood.
- After Mattathias’ death about one year later in 166 BCE, his son Judas Maccabee led an army of Jewish dissidents to victory over the Seleucid dynasty in guerrilla warfare, which at first was directed against Hellenizing Jews, of whom there were many. The Maccabees destroyed pagan altars in the villages and circumcised boys..
- Judah or Judas was the son of a priest.
rosends
Well-Known Member
No, a jot comes from the Greek iota, unless you think that the Greek alphabet came from the Hebrew (which I have certainly heard of as possible). In which case, you still have the problem of putting a yod in front of a noun. A noun can't be changed in tense.
Yes, nouns get a possessive ending. But verbs don't. You can't make up new rules because the extant ones don't fit your schema. I mean, I guess you CAN, but that's intellectually dishonest.
Oh, so putting a yod before binary makes sense to you.
If you invent what symbols mean then in your system, they can be whatever you want. You could, in some case, insist that the hand represents beging held in the palm of the divine, or being given "a hand" by God so adding it means the involvement of God. But in another case, the same symbol could mean "being pushed away." If you start with your definition, you can justify whatever you want. Also intellectually dishonest.
OK, then symbolically, but not literally, and not predictively. You want the names to be both literal and predictive. But that's not what names are and do.
So it means either one thing or the other, depending on what you feel it needs to mean in a given case. Either way, the name does not mean that. If you knew Hebrew you would see that. The name includes elements that can be symbolically pieced together to refer to a concept, but adding a letter doesn't change the tense of a name. More intellectual dishonesty on your part.
If you want to live in your own world making up rules as you go along, then do so. You started with a statement about Hebrew, that a certain construct is a Hebrew swear word. You have played fast and loose with words and linguistic structures, shifting things when it suits you. That's all well and good for your private little universe. It just doesn't play in the real world.
sooda
Veteran Member
Judah was the third son of Mattathias the Hasmonean, a Jewish priest from the village of Modiin. In 167 BCE Mattathias, together with his sons Judah, Eleazar, Simon, John, and Jonathan, started a revolt against the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who since 175 BCE had issued decrees that forbade Jewish religious practices. After Mattathias's death in 166 BCE, Judah assumed leadership of the revolt in accordance with the deathbed disposition of his father.
sooda
Veteran Member
Why the Maccabees Aren't in the Bible | My Jewish Learning
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/omitting-the-maccabees
The Maccabees were a priestly family, while the rabbis who may have determined the final form of the biblical canon at Jamnia were descended from the Pharisees. Is it possible that the exclusion of the Books of Maccabees was one of the last salvos in the battle between the Pharisees and Sadducees?
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/omitting-the-maccabees
The Maccabees were a priestly family, while the rabbis who may have determined the final form of the biblical canon at Jamnia were descended from the Pharisees. Is it possible that the exclusion of the Books of Maccabees was one of the last salvos in the battle between the Pharisees and Sadducees?
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Actually, like many other post Babylon texts, they were no incorporated because
the Jewish bible was canonized or sealed by this time. Books which found the
bible shut to them included Esdras, Tobit, Maccabees, Bel etc..
If Daniel had been written during or after the Greeks it wouldn't be in the Old
Testament.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
We understand that the Romans and allies came in like a flood.
There were so many they "flooded" the land. All the trees were
cut down. Cities burnt. These things were "determined" after
the cutting off of the Messiah, according to Daniel. It was the
vengeance of God, for the Jewish Rejection that was predicted
way back in Jacob's day.
sooda
Veteran Member
I'm not Jewish so I just go by what the Jews say.
Of course Daniel is in the old testament. The Maccabean Revolt was 160 years before the birth of Jesus.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
sooda
Veteran Member
The Books of the Maccabees were both written in the first century BCE.
I Maccabees was originally written in Hebrew as an official court history for the Hasmonean Dynasty.
II Maccabees was originally written in Greek and based on earlier work written by Jason of Cyrene. This revolt of the Jews sets a precedent in human history.
I Maccabees was originally written in Hebrew as an official court history for the Hasmonean Dynasty.
II Maccabees was originally written in Greek and based on earlier work written by Jason of Cyrene. This revolt of the Jews sets a precedent in human history.
sooda
Veteran Member
Both books of the Maccabees were written in the first century BC.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
No book from the time of the Maccabees was allowed to be a part of the Jewish canon.
sooda
Veteran Member
BOTH were written in the first century BC.. Check ANY source.
As a prophecy, that's no more profound than saying sh*t happens (or, will happen). Wholly unauthenticated as to the precise terms of the predictions, hopelessly broad and vague ('they will dislike someone I like', 'there will be war', 'nothing lasts forever', just blah blah blah that you can fit to WW2 or Trump's election or your cat getting run over or a really annoying traffic jam), and used mainly in pollitics.
sooda
Veteran Member
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com
jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10237-maccabees-books-of
There are four books which pass under this name—I, II, III, and IV Maccabees. The first of these is the only one of the four which can be regarded as a reliable historical source.
I Maccabees: The First Book of the Maccabees covers the period of forty years from the accession of Antiochus (175 B.C.) to the death of Simon the Maccabee (135 B.C.).
jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10237-maccabees-books-of
There are four books which pass under this name—I, II, III, and IV Maccabees. The first of these is the only one of the four which can be regarded as a reliable historical source.
I Maccabees: The First Book of the Maccabees covers the period of forty years from the accession of Antiochus (175 B.C.) to the death of Simon the Maccabee (135 B.C.).