Posts by John Kesler

13

Which school of thought is right about How long were the Israelite's in Egypt 215 or 430 years?

by terrypike in

a lot is out there about how long the israelite's were in egypt which can be devided into two schools of thought, those for bishop ushers 215 model or the ex 12: model which stays faithful to the 430 years to the very day ex 12:41 the israelite's left egypt.. historically the dispute goes back a long way at least to the time of jophesus who advocated the view that the isarelites were in canaan before they entered egypt true enough when taken at face value, but look more closely at what the bible says about when jacobs name was changed to israel and then ask the question is there any evidence in the bible that israel was used for the decendent's of abram, isaac or jacob before god changed the name of 97 year old jacob to israel?

a jw i invited to research this confirmed none could be found so that done it remains to look again at the definitions 'decendents' and 'israelite's' to further clarify.. the 400 years affliction as in gen 15: speaks of the decendents of abram only, nowhere does it say anything about the israelites, ex 12: on the other hand refers to the israelite's who came out of egypt 430 years to the very day and says nothing about the decendent's of abram so ex 12: is referring to 'israel' the decendent's of jacob not the decendent's of abram.

consider here that isaac the first born of the line of the promise and a decendent of abraham, died 180 years of age never having set foot in egypt, 10 years before 130 year old jacob/israel entered to reunite the tribal family's as one people, so by no stretch of the imagination can isaac be confused with the israelite's as is so easy to do when the ex 12: 430 year timeline is tied back to the days of abraham as is advocated by the bishop usher model that argues the israelite's were only in egypt 215 years.. gal 3: can be a problem only when read in isolation of other texts, use the same procedure as you would if someone said there was a contradiction with the gospels saying different things and ask them to read all four gospels to get the full picture, like wise with gal 3: which appears to be saying, by itself, that there are only 430 years between the circumcision covenant and the law covenant , read gen 47: and acts 7: to get a more complete picture of what paul has not said about 130 year old jacob's entry into egypt in the second year of famine.. to get the age of jacob start with 30 year old josephs age when he stood before the ruler of egypt and add the 9 year total of 7 years plenty plus two years famine which makes joseph 39, then take josephs 39 years off the age of 130 year old jacob to get 91 the age of jacob when joseph is born as jacob completes his 7 years work with laban for rachael.. jacob then agreed to work on for the beasts and he confirms he had worked a total of 20 years when laban caught up with him: 7 for leah, 7 for rachael, and 6 for the beasts.gen 31:38-41.. the key question when talking with jw's is how old was jacob when his name was changed, ask the questions and let them confirm from the book they trust what it really teaches.. terry.

John Kesler

You may want to see this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/194288/length-israelites-egyptian-sojourn-unsolvable-bible-error?size=10&page=1

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.

John Kesler

Here is another numerical discrepancy that results if we accept Acts' 40-year reign for Saul:

1 Samuel 7:1-2 reads as follows:

1 And the people of Kiriath-jearim came and took up the ark of Yahweh, and brought it to the house of Abinadab on the hill. They consecrated his son, Eleazar, to have charge of the ark of Yahweh. 2 From the day that the ark was lodged at Kiriath-jearim, a long time passed, some twenty years, and all the house of Israel lamented after Yahweh.

The problem is that the ark was taken to the "house of Abinadab on the hill" before Saul became king (1 Samuel 10:1), Saul reigned for forty years (Acts 13:21), and the ark wasn't retrieved from "the house of Abinadab on the hill" until Saul's successor David was king (2 Samuel 6:1-3). After a three-month stopover at the "house of Obed-edom the Gittite" (2 Samuel 6:10-11), it was taken to "the city of David," an area that had been under Jebusite control for at least seven and a half years into David's reign (2 Samuel 5:5), meaning that around 50 years elapsed between the delivery of the ark to Abiadab's house and its retrieval by David. That's around a thirty-year discrepancy, which can't just be waived off with the copyist-error excuse.

35

Does the Bible contradict itself?

by exwhyzee in

our old jw friend who is about to shun us says,there's nothing in the bible that contradicts itself?.

.

can anyone think of certain scriptures that could prove otherwise?.

John Kesler

A contradiction that you may not have seen before concerns who made the ark. Was it Bezalel or Moses?

Bezalel:

Exodus 35:30-33; 36:1-2; 37:1-2

30 Then Moses said to the Israelites: See, Yahweh has called by name Bezalel son of Uri son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah; 31 he has filled him with divine spirit, with skill, intelligence, and knowledge in every kind of craft, 32 to devise artistic designs, to work in gold, silver, and bronze, 33 in cutting stones for setting, and in carving wood, in every kind of craft...Bezalel and Oholiab and everyone skilful to whom Yahweh has given skill and understanding to know how to do any work in the construction of the sanctuary shall work in accordance with all that Yahweh has commanded. 2 Moses then called Bezalel and Oholiab and everyone skilful to whom Yahweh had given skill, everyone whose heart was stirred to come to do the work...Bezalel made the ark of acacia wood; it was two and a half cubits long, a cubit and a half wide, and a cubit and a half high. 2 He overlaid it with pure gold inside and outside, and made a moulding of gold round it.

Moses:

Deuteronomy 10:1-5

10:1 At that time Yahweh said to me [Moses], ‘Carve out two tablets of stone like the former ones, and come up to me on the mountain, and make an ark of wood. 2 I will write on the tablets the words that were on the former tablets, which you smashed, and you shall put them in the ark.’ 3 So I made an ark of acacia wood, cut two tablets of stone like the former ones, and went up the mountain with the two tablets in my hand. 4 Then he wrote on the tablets the same words as before, the ten commandments, that Yahweh had spoken to you on the mountain out of the fire on the day of the assembly; and Yahweh gave them to me. 5 So I turned and came down from the mountain, and put the tablets in the ark that I had made; and there they are, as Yahweh commanded me.

Tha contradiction is so apparent, in fact, that the 11th-century French rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki, better known as Rashi, posited that the Deuteronomy-10 ark was a separate ark from that made by Bezalel!

11

30 pieces of silver

by leaving_quietly in

zechariah 11:12,13 is viewed as a prophecy pertaining to judas, and fufilled at matt 26:14-16 and matt 27:9. judas, as we know, sold out jesus for 30 pieces of silver.

i noticed something when reading the verses in zechariah, though.

judas sold out and betrayed jesus, however zechariah is a prophecy being spoken by jehovah and pertaining to himself.. vs 12: "then i said to them:" who is the "i"?

John Kesler

NT writers employed a different hermaneutic than moderns do--one that freely takes verses out of context and applies them to different situations--so there will not always be a direct correspondence between texts. It's also possible that Matthew, in his eagerness to connect Jesus to another OT "prophecy," made up the amount. Note that Matthew alone gives the amount as thirty pieces of silver:

Mark 14:10-1110 Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them. 11 When they heard it, they were greatly pleased, and promised to give him money. So he began to look for an opportunity to betray him.

Luke 22:3-6
3 Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was one of the twelve; 4 he went away and conferred with the chief priests and officers of the temple police about how he might betray him to them. 5 They were greatly pleased and agreed to give him money. 6 So he consented and began to look for an opportunity to betray him to them when no crowd was present.

Matthew 26:14-16
14 Then one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests 15 and said, "What will you give me if I betray him to you?" They paid him thirty pieces of silver. 16 And from that moment he began to look for an opportunity to betray him.

18

Matthew 10:23

by pixel in

"23when they persecute ?you?

in one city, flee to another; for truly i say to ?you, you?

will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of israel until the son of man arrives.".

John Kesler

Leolaia wrote: John....No, I'm not the debating type. I'm more discussion oriented. I'll mention later on if you wish the problem I find with preterism (which does do justice in part with early Jewish/Christian eschatological expectation), but I'm off in a few minutes to see the Hobbit.

I was hoping to have a Leolaia post for Christmas. One problem with the preterist view is that it, like the futurist-view, rests on a misidentification of Daniel's fourth kingdom as Rome instead of Greece. Without a proper understanding of the book of Daniel, no eschatology can be correct, even if one views the Bible as authoritative.

18

Matthew 10:23

by pixel in

"23when they persecute ?you?

in one city, flee to another; for truly i say to ?you, you?

will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of israel until the son of man arrives.".

John Kesler

Leolaia, yes, I'd like your thoughts. I've studied preterism, and I have my own views about its problems, but I'd like to see your take.

18

Matthew 10:23

by pixel in

"23when they persecute ?you?

in one city, flee to another; for truly i say to ?you, you?

will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of israel until the son of man arrives.".

John Kesler

Leolaia, do you have any archived debates with preterists? Would you consider challenging J.P. Holding to a debate on preterism?

18

Matthew 10:23

by pixel in

"23when they persecute ?you?

in one city, flee to another; for truly i say to ?you, you?

will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of israel until the son of man arrives.".

John Kesler

Aside from the fact that Matthew 10:23 anticipates the return the "Son of Man" in the lifetime of Jesus' hearers, the promise that this would occur before the apostles had "gone through all the towns of Israel" conflicts with Matthew 24:14, which says that, "this good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the world, as a testimony to all the nations; and then the end will come."

24

Evidence regarding Daniel 11 & Antiochus IV

by Bobcat in

i was doing research on daniel 8 and 11. what i was wondering was if there was any evidence that the jews saw daniel 8 and 11 fulfilled in antiochus iv.. the explained fulfillments (re: antiochus; non-wt explanations) make a lot of sense, but what specifically i was wondering was if the jews (after the time of antiochus iv) saw the daniel prophecies as being fulfilled in him?

or if there are any threads that discuss this, a link would be appreciated.. thank you in advance.. take care.

John Kesler

John Kesler: Why didn't the author of 1 Maccabees also claim that Antiochus IV died in Palestine, unless he didn't view Daniel 11:45b as dependent on 11:45a regarding the place of death? Instead, the author states in 6:1-16 that Antiochus died in Persia. Also, do I understand correctly that you think the pagan altar was erected in 168 B.C.? I thought 1 Macc. 1:54 dates it to 167? Thanks for your insights.

Leolaia: I don't think the author was basing his account on Daniel; he was writing an account mostly of happenings in Judea. The story of the death of Antiochus is clearly fictional (reminiscent of the repentance of Manasseh), and while the author may have known some details (such as where he died) he may not have known others (such as the time of year). There is a definite uncertainty about the timing of Antiochus' death when you compare the two accounts 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees. The latter (the more unreliable account) had moved many events preceding Antiochus' death to the period after his death, moving the date of the death to a point several months earlier in time. Probably the author was just confused and the similarity in timing with Daniel is just a coincidence. Or possibly there was influence from ch. 11-12 of Daniel. It is interesting that the legendary account of Antiochus' death has the king at that moment intending to return to Judea and massacre the whole population of Jerusalem.

Thanks for this. Since you doubt that the author of 1 Maccabees used Daniel as a source regarding the death of Antiochus, do you think that the use of "desolating sacrilege" (so NRSV), so similar to the wording of Daniel 9:27 and 11:31, is also independent of Daniel? If not, since the death of Antiochus is, as you say, "clearly fictional" as reported in 1 Maccabees, why not say that Antiochus died in Palestine to bring the account in line with Daniel? Is there anything grammatically in the Hebrew that requires that Palestine be understood as the place of Antiochus's death in Daniel 11:45b just because that's where 45a says that's where he "pitch[ed] his palatial tents" (NRSV)? I know that most mainstream commentators say that Palestine is predicted in Daniel 11 as the place of Antiochus's death, but I don't see that the text requires that. What am I missing?

24

Evidence regarding Daniel 11 & Antiochus IV

by Bobcat in

i was doing research on daniel 8 and 11. what i was wondering was if there was any evidence that the jews saw daniel 8 and 11 fulfilled in antiochus iv.. the explained fulfillments (re: antiochus; non-wt explanations) make a lot of sense, but what specifically i was wondering was if the jews (after the time of antiochus iv) saw the daniel prophecies as being fulfilled in him?

or if there are any threads that discuss this, a link would be appreciated.. thank you in advance.. take care.

John Kesler

Leolaia: Also 1 Maccabees 1:54 (late second century BC) refers to the pagan altar installed in the Temple as the "abomination of desolation", using the same language found in Daniel. Bear in mind that the author expected the king to die in a different way than what really happened...

Why didn't the author of 1 Maccabees also claim that Antiochus IV died in Palestine, unless he didn't view Daniel 11:45b as dependent on 11:45a regarding the place of death? Instead, the author states in 6:1-16 that Antiochus died in Persia. Also, do I understand correctly that you think the pagan altar was erected in 168 B.C.? I thought 1 Macc. 1:54 dates it to 167? Thanks for your insights.