Cyrus of Persia captured Babylon peacefully without a battle in the year 539 BCE. The next ruler of Babylon after Cyrus of Perisa was his relative "Darius the Mede" according to the Book of Danay'al (Daniel) where the royal succession in Babylonia after the Persian takeover is first Cyrus (Dan. 1:21), then Darius the Mede (Dan. 6:1-27; 9:1-2; 11:1), then Cyrus again for a second time (Dan. 6:28; 10:1). This succession order is dismissed as an error by conventional historians who believe Darius the Mede is a fictional king who never existed.
However, I maintain that Danay'al, an eyewitness of the events, knew what he was talking about and that conventional historians are wrong.
The desolations of Yaroshalam (Jerusalem) were initiated by the Neo-Babylonians in the year 589/588 BCE when the Babylonian army of Nebuchadnezzar II began its siege of the city in the tenth month and on the tenth day of the month (2 Kgs. 25:1; Jer. 39:1; 52:4; Ezek. 24:1–2). This converts to Friday, January 7, 588 BCE, in the Gregorian calendar.
The desolations of Yaroshalam were determined to last 70 years according to Yaram-Ya'oh 29:10 and Danay'al 9:2. The first year of Cyrus as king of Babylon after the Persian takeover was 538 BCE. This was only the 51st year of the desolations of Yaroshalam and not the 70th year.
Thus, the year 538 BCE was not the "first year" of Cyrus when the scriptures tell us he issued his decree for the rebuilding of the temple in Yaroshalam (2 Chronicles 36:21-23; Ezra 1:1–4). The real "first year" of Cyrus which was also the 70th year of the desolations of Yaroshalam was the year 519 BCE. This is because Cyrus became king of Babylon twice, first in 539 BCE and again in 520 BCE. We know his first term as king of Babylon lasted 9 years and ended in 530 BCE. So the reign of Darius the Mede as king of Babylon lasted 10 years from 530 BCE to 520 BCE.
Danay'al was studying the Book of Yaram-Ya'oh (Jeremiah) in the first year of Darius the Mede in 529 BCE when it suddenly occurred to him that the 70 years for the desolations of Yaroshalam were still in progress (Dan. 9:1–2). The first year of Darius the Mede was only the 60th year of the desolations.
He knew at that point that the desolations were going to continue for another 10 years. He may not have known that Cyrus would be back on the Babylonian throne in 10 more years but he did live to see it happen. He lived to witness Cyrus of Persia succeed Darius the Mede to become king of Babylon for a second time with his own two eyes and he wrote it down (Dan. 6:28).
For whatever the reason, after Cyrus issued his decree to rebuild the temple in Yaroshalam in 519 BCE, in the "first year" of his second term as king of Babylon, he did not wish to remain alone on the throne this time around as the sole king of Babylon. So he appointed his son Cambyses to be king of Babylon alongside him in the fall of the year 519 BCE.
After the death of Cyrus in 517 BCE, in his "third year" (Dan. 10:1), it was his son Cambyses who ordered a complete halt to the rebuilding work in Yaroshalam after it was reported to him that the returnees were not just rebuilding the temple but that they were also rebuilding the city, "the rebellious and bad city," and that was not part of the Cyrus decree (Ezra 4:7–24; 6:3–5).
If Cyrus of Persia did not order a city to be built, and he absolutely did not, then who is the man mentioned in Yashai-Ya'oh (Isaiah) 44:28 who orders a city to be built?
The local Akkadian word for Babylon is "Bab-ili/ilu" which means "gate of god". This word would have been relatively easy to transliterate into biblical Hebrew but it never was in the bible. The biblical authors always call Babylon by the biblical Hebrew word "Babal" which means "confusion" according to Genesis 11:9. There is never an instance to the contrary. The reason is because the biblical authors did not care what the locals called their land. They only cared about what their own ancestors who spoke biblical Hebrew, before and after the confusion at the tower, called it. That's all that mattered to them. If it was called "Babal" the same day as the confusion of tongues at the tower, it means Akkadian is one of the languages that came into existence at that time in order to confuse man and to divide him. Biblical Hebrew has no precursor. It is mankind's original language.
The bible does not say Abrahm was from Ur of the "Chaldees". It only says that in the faulty translations of the bible made by heathen strangers. The actual word in the Hebrew text is כשׂדים ("Chashadaym") and not "Chaldees".
The Chashadaym were the Kassites. There were no "Chaldees" in existence until the 9th century BCE. Abrahm was born in 2001 BCE. There were no "Chaldees" around then, but there were Kassites around then. They existed in the 3rd millennium BCE and they gained control of Babylonia after the fall of the Old Babylonian Empire.
Also, Abrahm was not born in the southern Mesopotamian city called Ur. He was born in the northern Mesopotamian city that is now called Ur-Kesh. This was the Ur of the Chashadaym (i.e. Kassites).
The reason why many of you think the bible is full of errors and contradictions is because you don't know how to read biblical Hebrew. You can only read translations made by heathens. You can compare different translations but you cannot read the actual text from which the faulty translations are made. It also means you have never actually read this book.
And YA'OH will cause [x] to utterly destroy the tongue of the sea of Matsraym, and he will wave his hand upon the river via the vehement heat of his rokh, and he will smite it for the seven streams, and he will cause [x] to tread in sandals.
- Yashai-Ya'oh 11:15
Literally, the "tongue of the sea of Matsraym" would be the Gulf of Suez or the Gulf of Aqabah. Figuratively, the "tongue of the sea of Matsraym" has to be the prophetic Matsraym, i.e. the empire of the United States of America, with the word lashon ("tongue") signifying the extension and continuation of Old Matsraym across the sea and into the Americas in the west.
The Creator is hardly angry at a literal body of water. His wrath is aimed at a nation in the west and that nation is prophetic Matsraym-Babylon-Ashor. This is what He intends to obliterate and we are witnessing the signs in the catastrophic weather.
The "river" in this verse would correspond literally to the Nile River in Old Matsraym with its famous seven branches spanning the Nile Delta, but once again, like "the tongue of the sea," the river stands for the empire of the United States of America. The "vehement heat of the rokh" of YA'OH will dry the river up, which points to catastrophic weather related phenomena ripping the country apart, and this will be done "for the seven streams," i.e. on their behalf.
Thus, the "seven streams" are not literal bodies of water either. They are the people who have vacated prophetic Matsraym prior to its destruction, analogous to the way in which the seven branches of the Nile River vacate Old Matraym by emptying into the sea.
That YA'OH will cause these people to "tread in sandals" after leaving prophetic Matsraym recalls the experience of the first Exodus. The sandals of the people did not wear out during the entire forty years they spent in the wilderness (Thorah 5.29:5). The imagery is intended to convey the truth that the remnant who escape prophetic Matsraym will be nourished and sustained in the wilderness for a lengthy period of time.
HaGhabaray
From Ravenous Bird
Cyrus of Persia captured Babylon peacefully without a battle in the year 539 BCE. The next ruler of Babylon after Cyrus of Perisa was his relative "Darius the Mede" according to the Book of Danay'al (Daniel) where the royal succession in Babylonia after the Persian takeover is first Cyrus (Dan. 1:21), then Darius the Mede (Dan. 6:1-27; 9:1-2; 11:1), then Cyrus again for a second time (Dan. 6:28; 10:1). This succession order is dismissed as an error by conventional historians who believe Darius the Mede is a fictional king who never existed.
However, I maintain that Danay'al, an eyewitness of the events, knew what he was talking about and that conventional historians are wrong.
The desolations of Yaroshalam (Jerusalem) were initiated by the Neo-Babylonians in the year 589/588 BCE when the Babylonian army of Nebuchadnezzar II began its siege of the city in the tenth month and on the tenth day of the month (2 Kgs. 25:1; Jer. 39:1; 52:4; Ezek. 24:1–2). This converts to Friday, January 7, 588 BCE, in the Gregorian calendar.
The desolations of Yaroshalam were determined to last 70 years according to Yaram-Ya'oh 29:10 and Danay'al 9:2. The first year of Cyrus as king of Babylon after the Persian takeover was 538 BCE. This was only the 51st year of the desolations of Yaroshalam and not the 70th year.
Thus, the year 538 BCE was not the "first year" of Cyrus when the scriptures tell us he issued his decree for the rebuilding of the temple in Yaroshalam (2 Chronicles 36:21-23; Ezra 1:1–4). The real "first year" of Cyrus which was also the 70th year of the desolations of Yaroshalam was the year 519 BCE. This is because Cyrus became king of Babylon twice, first in 539 BCE and again in 520 BCE. We know his first term as king of Babylon lasted 9 years and ended in 530 BCE. So the reign of Darius the Mede as king of Babylon lasted 10 years from 530 BCE to 520 BCE.
Danay'al was studying the Book of Yaram-Ya'oh (Jeremiah) in the first year of Darius the Mede in 529 BCE when it suddenly occurred to him that the 70 years for the desolations of Yaroshalam were still in progress (Dan. 9:1–2). The first year of Darius the Mede was only the 60th year of the desolations.
He knew at that point that the desolations were going to continue for another 10 years. He may not have known that Cyrus would be back on the Babylonian throne in 10 more years but he did live to see it happen. He lived to witness Cyrus of Persia succeed Darius the Mede to become king of Babylon for a second time with his own two eyes and he wrote it down (Dan. 6:28).
For whatever the reason, after Cyrus issued his decree to rebuild the temple in Yaroshalam in 519 BCE, in the "first year" of his second term as king of Babylon, he did not wish to remain alone on the throne this time around as the sole king of Babylon. So he appointed his son Cambyses to be king of Babylon alongside him in the fall of the year 519 BCE.
After the death of Cyrus in 517 BCE, in his "third year" (Dan. 10:1), it was his son Cambyses who ordered a complete halt to the rebuilding work in Yaroshalam after it was reported to him that the returnees were not just rebuilding the temple but that they were also rebuilding the city, "the rebellious and bad city," and that was not part of the Cyrus decree (Ezra 4:7–24; 6:3–5).
If Cyrus of Persia did not order a city to be built, and he absolutely did not, then who is the man mentioned in Yashai-Ya'oh (Isaiah) 44:28 who orders a city to be built?
7 months ago | [YT] | 0
View 0 replies
HaGhabaray
The local Akkadian word for Babylon is "Bab-ili/ilu" which means "gate of god". This word would have been relatively easy to transliterate into biblical Hebrew but it never was in the bible. The biblical authors always call Babylon by the biblical Hebrew word "Babal" which means "confusion" according to Genesis 11:9. There is never an instance to the contrary. The reason is because the biblical authors did not care what the locals called their land. They only cared about what their own ancestors who spoke biblical Hebrew, before and after the confusion at the tower, called it. That's all that mattered to them. If it was called "Babal" the same day as the confusion of tongues at the tower, it means Akkadian is one of the languages that came into existence at that time in order to confuse man and to divide him. Biblical Hebrew has no precursor. It is mankind's original language.
1 year ago | [YT] | 0
View 0 replies
HaGhabaray
The bible does not say Abrahm was from Ur of the "Chaldees". It only says that in the faulty translations of the bible made by heathen strangers. The actual word in the Hebrew text is כשׂדים ("Chashadaym") and not "Chaldees".
The Chashadaym were the Kassites. There were no "Chaldees" in existence until the 9th century BCE. Abrahm was born in 2001 BCE. There were no "Chaldees" around then, but there were Kassites around then. They existed in the 3rd millennium BCE and they gained control of Babylonia after the fall of the Old Babylonian Empire.
Also, Abrahm was not born in the southern Mesopotamian city called Ur. He was born in the northern Mesopotamian city that is now called Ur-Kesh. This was the Ur of the Chashadaym (i.e. Kassites).
The reason why many of you think the bible is full of errors and contradictions is because you don't know how to read biblical Hebrew. You can only read translations made by heathens. You can compare different translations but you cannot read the actual text from which the faulty translations are made. It also means you have never actually read this book.
1 year ago | [YT] | 1
View 0 replies
HaGhabaray
And YA'OH will cause [x] to utterly destroy the tongue of the sea of Matsraym, and he will wave his hand upon the river via the vehement heat of his rokh, and he will smite it for the seven streams, and he will cause [x] to tread in sandals.
- Yashai-Ya'oh 11:15
Literally, the "tongue of the sea of Matsraym" would be the Gulf of Suez or the Gulf of Aqabah. Figuratively, the "tongue of the sea of Matsraym" has to be the prophetic Matsraym, i.e. the empire of the United States of America, with the word lashon ("tongue") signifying the extension and continuation of Old Matsraym across the sea and into the Americas in the west.
The Creator is hardly angry at a literal body of water. His wrath is aimed at a nation in the west and that nation is prophetic Matsraym-Babylon-Ashor. This is what He intends to obliterate and we are witnessing the signs in the catastrophic weather.
The "river" in this verse would correspond literally to the Nile River in Old Matsraym with its famous seven branches spanning the Nile Delta, but once again, like "the tongue of the sea," the river stands for the empire of the United States of America. The "vehement heat of the rokh" of YA'OH will dry the river up, which points to catastrophic weather related phenomena ripping the country apart, and this will be done "for the seven streams," i.e. on their behalf.
Thus, the "seven streams" are not literal bodies of water either. They are the people who have vacated prophetic Matsraym prior to its destruction, analogous to the way in which the seven branches of the Nile River vacate Old Matraym by emptying into the sea.
That YA'OH will cause these people to "tread in sandals" after leaving prophetic Matsraym recalls the experience of the first Exodus. The sandals of the people did not wear out during the entire forty years they spent in the wilderness (Thorah 5.29:5). The imagery is intended to convey the truth that the remnant who escape prophetic Matsraym will be nourished and sustained in the wilderness for a lengthy period of time.
1 year ago | [YT] | 1
View 0 replies
HaGhabaray
1 year ago | [YT] | 1
View 0 replies