Of the anointed? Is anyone going to mention the claims that he was a Freemason?
Sir Isaac Newtron wrote about chronology and published his "A Short Chronicle" where the details of Neo-Babylonian and Persian history are found. Freemasons the "Illuminati" have a special tie to the popular chronology which they know is incorrect. So Newton and his credibility factor as someone being smart and scientific adds credibility to that fake timeline. That is, more than likely Newton understood the timeline was false but felt it important to add his credibility to the false timeline and explain some of the glitches.
What is interesting is that you can see how trying to establish the phony timeline by modern Freemasons has changed since Newton. Newton, for instance, clearly represented Darius the Mede as a real person and recognized him in the esoteric histories of Xenophon and Herodotus, easily done by comparisons of what Darius the Mede did in the Bible. But now there is a near total denial that he ever existed or that he was somehow actually Cyrus (i.e. CO Jonsson). That is in the face of the "daric" which was first coined by Darius the Mede and is named after him. So I guess at this point, Newton is somewhat of an embarrassing and out of date reference to the phony timeline. Of interesting note, also, is that Newton clearly understood Darius the Mede abdicated to Cyrus after a 2-year reign while the Jews were still in exile. The Bible actually establishes this was a 6-year rule. Now, the WTS and others like CO Jonsson wants us to think the rulership by Cyrus was parallel to the rule of Darius the Mede and he is accorded no years of sole rule, which is just a joke, especially when you see how Newton lays out the timeline.
So he is more likely an "anointed" Freemason than an anointed Christian in my opinion. It all boils down to whether he was privy to the original chronology and timeline or not? If he was in the higher echelons of Freemasonry, then he certainly would have known about the alternative chronology and the revisions.
Anyway, it is interesting to contrast his timeline with that of Carl Olof Jonsson. That is, just to compare and note the differences, particularly in reference to Darius the Mede, who has been seen as a liability historically of late. He wasn't suppressed in the time of Sir Isaac Newton, but there seems to be a need to suppress him now. Maybe the issue of the "70 years" of exile has become the more recent focus and a non-existent Darius the Mede accommodates the new theories. ??
One theory is that the "Illuminati" was then and now currently behind the revised timeline, for various reasons, and Newton was used to help validate it, knowingly so.
My research even turned up a reference that knew that Aristotle and Socrates were lovers. Thus the boy-lover (eromenos) of Socrates in the revised history, "Phaedo" is really a reference to Aristotle, who with Plato and Xenophon revised the Greek history of that time involving Socrates and the Peloponnesian War, etc.
Aristotle and Socrates were Lovers: