[geocentrism] Re: 666
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 22:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
In Blue
Martin Selbrede <mselbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 23, 2007, at 9:30 PM, Allen Daves wrote:
That is not even remotely possible..... would make the " many" priest that
saw the first temple who saw the latter (refer to Persian kings chart) ~154
year old at birth the first time they saw the first temple destroyed even
though scripture implies they remembered so you need ot tack on another 10
years or so for a whopping 164 years of age if they were only ten at the time
of the first temple was destroyed as well as push NEb first year to ~543BC
Okay, I think I see the problem (Or as Daffy Duck had put it so well, "Aha!
Pronoun trouble!")
The problem is that you think that Daniel 9:24-25 is talking about the temple
being rebuilt.
I don?t think Daniel 9:24-25 has anything to do with the temple being rebuilt
....Dan 9:25....the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem
My problem is that the word temple is nowhere mentioned in those verses.
agreed, absolutely! .. although temple could be included in a restoration
of the city since it is the crown jewel so to speak but the specific ref is to
city not temple..
Ezra was given permission only to work on the temple, NOT to build the city.
I belabored this repeatedly in the opening salvos: temple permission first,
with permission to build a city with walls (a fortified city that represented a
threat to the occupying nation) withheld until Nehemiah the cupbearer spilled
his soul out to the king in Nehemiah 1 & 2.
The weeping over the foundation layout of the second temple wasn't something
that occurred in the 20th year of Artaxerxes, but much earlier.
no it took place later ..That is whole point of my last two or three post. I
have proven via scripture that it was not and could not be earlier but was for
sure ~14 years after the 20th year of Artaxerxes and ther is no way around that
fact to be found in scripture.. see my last two post
The event of Ezra 3:12 (the mixed weeping and rejoicing over the foundations)
occurred only 52 years after the destruction of the temple. When Haggai 2:3
poses the question, "Who is left among you that saw this house in her first
glory," this was uttered 18 years later, at the 70 year mark after the temple's
destruction at the end of Zedekiah's reign, as the contemporary remark at
Zechariah 1:12 makes irrevocably clear: "Then the angel of the Lord answered
and said, O LORD of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and
on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these seventy
years?" So, all these accusations about 154-year-old people is a fiction
caused by applying your faulty charts, and not the Scriptures, which provide
quite reasonable dates for these events. The temple was completed and finally
dedicated in the sixth year of Darius, 516 BC. You must be assuming that the 70
years during which the temple was destroyed is the same
time period as Jeremiah's 70 years of land sabbaths imposed later on the
city-at-large. The city was completed later under Nehemiah.
The city, the wall for sure, was restored in the 20th year of Artaxerxes
under Nehemiah in 490 BC and the text does not allow for a differnt date for
multiple reasons.... my last post or two point this out quite vividly due to
the imparitive of the texts outline of the relationships between the Persian
kings and Jerimiah's 70 years of desolations. The city as well as the temple
was also restored dunder Herod the great after the quake of ~40 BC
Herod is directly asssociated with troublesome times or time of trouble
Danile 8, 11& 12..(At that time12:1 he is part of that whole "in the days of
these kings")
I'd be interested to know whether YOU, personally, would regard it as a time
of affliction (KJV: 'troubles times," the word "troublous" occurring only here
in the entire KJV Bible) if you were called to work on a city construction
project under the following conditions:
bad times sure..........The problem is that the word toublesome times or time
of trouble is nowhere mentioned in those verses but it is specificaly mentioned
elswhere in the bible. So, even if you do personaly consider it as such the
fact remains that that "time of trouble" andor "troublsemon times" are still
specificaly associated in relation to 1. the time of the end 2. the
desctrution of jersusem and 3. king out of the latter time of the.third empire
4. the abomination of desolation Daniel Ch 8,11&12 and the arguments would
still be valid there in kjv since 9:25 says even in troublesome times (Plural
not singular)....therfore you could not exclude it from the count becasue it is
speicficaly referencd as a "time of trouble" and at least associated with it
directly due to that and the fact that Herod rebuilt and restore the city
Jeruselem too...to include the temple.
But when Sanballat, Tobiah, the Arabs, the Ammonites and the men of Ashdod
heard that the repairs to Jerusalem's walls had gone ahead and that the gaps
were being closed, they were very angry. They all plotted together to come and
fight against Jerusalem and stir up trouble against it. But we prayed to our
God and posted a guard day and night to meet this threat. Meanwhile, the people
in Judah said, "The strength of the laborers is giving out, and there is so
much rubble that we cannot rebuild the wall." Also our enemies said, "Before
they know it or see us, we will be right there among them and will kill them
and put an end to the work." Then the Jews who lived near them came and told us
ten times over, "Wherever you turn, they will attack us." Therefore I stationed
some of the people behind the lowest points of the wall at the exposed places,
posting them by families, with their swords, spears and bows. ... From that day
on, half of my men did the work, while the other
half were equipped with spears, shields, bows and armor. The officers posted
themselves behind all the people of Judah who were building the wall. Those who
carried materials did their work with one hand and held a weapon in the other,
and each of the builders wore his sword at his side as he worked. ...So we
continued the work with half the men holding spears, from the first light of
dawn till the stars came out. At that time I also said to the people, "Have
every man and his helper stay inside Jerusalem at night, so they can serve us
as guards by night and workmen by day." Neither I nor my brothers nor my men
nor the guards with me took off our clothes; each had his weapon, even when he
went for water. -- Nehemiah 4:7-23 (NIV)
I know, Allen, I know. You've been very clear that the above doesn't
describe a "troublous time" at all. Things are just hunky-dory with Nehemiah's
situation. How dare anyone affirm that the conditions above even come close to
being a time of trouble for the builders of Jerusalem. How silly of me to
think the above situation has any hint of trouble in it. I must be inventing
the alleged trouble in the above passage. My bad. Somehow, when I read the
above description from the eyewitnesses to the building of Jerusalem's wall,
this unjustified thought keeps creeping into my head: it sure sounds like
trouble brewin'. But you assure me that such an idea is just crazy talk. What
a relief to know the above situation doesn't reflect a scintilla of trouble.
Someone must have overreacted.
Bad times for sure.... but i am interested and trying to draw the attention
to a more direct correlation of scripture not how bad we feel it must have been
at all the "bad times" the bible mentions in history.. All those "bad times"
do not prevent or supersede the fact that there are specific "Troublesome
times" or "a time of trouble" associated with specific events and people and
those are the times i am specifically concerned with and they show a specific
relationship within scripture and other similar contexts......... not how I or
anyone feels about all the bad times ever mentioned ....the assumption that
time of trouble is generic misses the fact that it is
1.Ch 8, 11 & 12 specific in its associations ( ie deliverance12:1, time of
end and Herrod, abomination of desolation, time times and half a time12:7 et
al) those associations are identical to events found in Daniel ch 9.
(deliverance or for your people?.destruction of jeruselem/ time times half a
time also mentioned in revelation in the same context of the city being
destroyed and Jesus remarks)
2. Regardless of whether or not Nehemiah?s day was or is Bad
times???Troublesome times? & or ?time of trouble? is directly and specifically
verbatim associated with both Herrod?s day discussed in Dan ch 8, 11 & 12 as
well in what ever time frame Dan 9 is discussing.
Therefore, the associations being the same and the fact that it is
specifically referenced as a ?time of trouble? or ?troublesome time? Dan 8, 11
& 12 must Included as part of that time frame in any reckoning of Ch 9?s
?troublesome times?
Allen
Martin
Other related posts:
