Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > General Discussions > Christianity

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-15-2011, 07:20 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 17,004
Default Monarchy in Assyria/Babylonia/Persia, book of Daniel Descrepancy?

soooo...

The book of Daniel names several Kings of Babylon. The problem is, the names and chronology are WAY out.

Nebu is fine, we know he built the hanging gardens, was slightly mad, invaded Jerusalem, killed the Jewish King (who deserved it btw) destroyed the Temple, and displaced the jews.

But Daniel talks about the King after Nebu...and...well there is no such record of this King...worse...Daniel then writes about other Kings...and he places Darius before Cyrus...which is strange because they actually happened the other way round.

Then to make things really confusing. some of the Kings went by different names depending on which country you were in because they took over the thrones of different countries...and not long after Nebu we have the shift of Babylon to Persia...and it seems like the lines of EACH throne continue with the SAME person called by a DIFFERENT name

Anyway....after a little research in terns out the Daniel is calling a Prince Regent, a King...coz the actual King goes away and leaves his son in charge...so King Belshazzar, is not really a King...that is to say, you wouldnt find his name on the King lists because he is Prince Regent whilst his Father is actually still alive. His Father being someone who isnt directly after Nebu...but within the decade so thats reasonable chronology.

But then we have "Darius the mede" which is annoying because Darius The Great is not really a Mede...he is a persian...its just that he conqured Media before he conqured Babylon...fair enough....

BUT according to Daniel, Cyrus becomes King after Darius...not according to the King List which says Cyrus was before Darius, and Darius actually rebbelled against him.

I think that the Manuscript is deliberately confusing the names of the Kings. It is using the names of Kings around the century...So There is a King called Darius...but Daniel is not refering to him when he talks about King Darius...We could probably work out who is who from the King list.

I think he does this because he is writing as an insider in the Kings Court and the Kings he mentions are too sympathetic to the Hebrew GOD. By the time you get to the REAL King Darius...he is calling himself "The King of Kings" which is a term applied to GOD. Therefore these things have entered the language of the Nobility...but the meaning hasnt.

I strongly suspect that whilst sympathetic, the Kings that Daniel mentions are, for political reasons, private practitioners...the rest of the Empire may not know that they have, basically, undergone a conversion.

You will notice the only King who is who he is written to be is Nebu...and the prince regent, and those two fit with the undeniable facts, Nebu invaded Jerusalem...and the Prince Regent was a tyrant who got what was coming to him.

The question is...what are the names of the two Kings who have been code named Cyrus and Darius
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-15-2011, 08:07 PM
Chris F
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyburn View Post
soooo...

The book of Daniel names several Kings of Babylon. The problem is, the names and chronology are WAY out.

Nebu is fine, we know he built the hanging gardens, was slightly mad, invaded Jerusalem, killed the Jewish King (who deserved it btw) destroyed the Temple, and displaced the jews.

But Daniel talks about the King after Nebu...and...well there is no such record of this King...worse...Daniel then writes about other Kings...and he places Darius before Cyrus...which is strange because they actually happened the other way round.

Then to make things really confusing. some of the Kings went by different names depending on which country you were in because they took over the thrones of different countries...and not long after Nebu we have the shift of Babylon to Persia...and it seems like the lines of EACH throne continue with the SAME person called by a DIFFERENT name

Anyway....after a little research in terns out the Daniel is calling a Prince Regent, a King...coz the actual King goes away and leaves his son in charge...so King Belshazzar, is not really a King...that is to say, you wouldnt find his name on the King lists because he is Prince Regent whilst his Father is actually still alive. His Father being someone who isnt directly after Nebu...but within the decade so thats reasonable chronology.

But then we have "Darius the mede" which is annoying because Darius The Great is not really a Mede...he is a persian...its just that he conqured Media before he conqured Babylon...fair enough....

BUT according to Daniel, Cyrus becomes King after Darius...not according to the King List which says Cyrus was before Darius, and Darius actually rebbelled against him.

I think that the Manuscript is deliberately confusing the names of the Kings. It is using the names of Kings around the century...So There is a King called Darius...but Daniel is not refering to him when he talks about King Darius...We could probably work out who is who from the King list.

I think he does this because he is writing as an insider in the Kings Court and the Kings he mentions are too sympathetic to the Hebrew GOD. By the time you get to the REAL King Darius...he is calling himself "The King of Kings" which is a term applied to GOD. Therefore these things have entered the language of the Nobility...but the meaning hasnt.

I strongly suspect that whilst sympathetic, the Kings that Daniel mentions are, for political reasons, private practitioners...the rest of the Empire may not know that they have, basically, undergone a conversion.

You will notice the only King who is who he is written to be is Nebu...and the prince regent, and those two fit with the undeniable facts, Nebu invaded Jerusalem...and the Prince Regent was a tyrant who got what was coming to him.

The question is...what are the names of the two Kings who have been code named Cyrus and Darius
Darius was never a "king" of the empire. In fact Darius is a title not a name. Darius is actually Cyaxares II, Astiages, last king of the Medes, thus the reason he is called Darius the Mede in the bible. Darius was given the Kingdom of Babylon as a viceroy from Cyrus. So since the bible is ethnocentric Daniel was right in thinking Darius was a king and there is not error in scripture. Hope this helped Dave.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-16-2011, 06:43 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 17,004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris F View Post
Darius was never a "king" of the empire. In fact Darius is a title not a name. Darius is actually Cyaxares II, Astiages, last king of the Medes, thus the reason he is called Darius the Mede in the bible. Darius was given the Kingdom of Babylon as a viceroy from Cyrus. So since the bible is ethnocentric Daniel was right in thinking Darius was a king and there is not error in scripture. Hope this helped Dave.
Wait...are you saying that the name Darius...is being used as a description??
Darius is a name that means "he who is Wealthy and Royal" it may have been used as a title prior to being accepted as an actual name though...after Cyrus...there are Kings with the actual name Darius...but thats also in the same time frame that the phrase "king of kings" has entered the society...the original meanings of both seem to have been lost from when they were invented...to the time when people were physically called words reflecting both sentances....indicating possibly how much of an influence Daniel and other wise men taken from Israel had...because with the monarchic succession you can see words and phrases Daniel used (remember he became quite an important politician with the Royal Courts) that two or three generations later some of these phrases have become imbeded within the culture spoken by the Physical Kings of themselves (perversion of symbology...and very quickly) we do know the terms cant have come prior Nebu because he was polythestic...and to apply something like King of Kings to a parthanon of gods makes no sense...similarly if the culture doesnt fully adopt judaism, later generations have the phrases but no way of application to the old system of religion...sooo they naturally end up being applied to the person.

I do love how they always start with the term "Oh King, Live Forever" when its obvious the King ISNT imortal...nor even thought to be!

Sooo you are saying that King Darius...was a local King of the city state of Babylon whilst Cyrus was on the Throne...and then when Darius dies...Cyrus takes complete control?

but that he is not actually a King? that he was a King...but is now downgraded to nobility under King Cyrus??...So he is just the highest ranking official in the city...and so Daniel has bascially called him "the king who is like a king"



if thats what you mean then YES it helps...if not...can you clarify further
__________________

Last edited by Tyburn; 09-16-2011 at 06:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-16-2011, 09:11 PM
Chris F
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyburn View Post
Wait...are you saying that the name Darius...is being used as a description??
Darius is a name that means "he who is Wealthy and Royal" it may have been used as a title prior to being accepted as an actual name though...after Cyrus...there are Kings with the actual name Darius...but thats also in the same time frame that the phrase "king of kings" has entered the society...the original meanings of both seem to have been lost from when they were invented...to the time when people were physically called words reflecting both sentances....indicating possibly how much of an influence Daniel and other wise men taken from Israel had...because with the monarchic succession you can see words and phrases Daniel used (remember he became quite an important politician with the Royal Courts) that two or three generations later some of these phrases have become imbeded within the culture spoken by the Physical Kings of themselves (perversion of symbology...and very quickly) we do know the terms cant have come prior Nebu because he was polythestic...and to apply something like King of Kings to a parthanon of gods makes no sense...similarly if the culture doesnt fully adopt judaism, later generations have the phrases but no way of application to the old system of religion...sooo they naturally end up being applied to the person.

I do love how they always start with the term "Oh King, Live Forever" when its obvious the King ISNT imortal...nor even thought to be!

Sooo you are saying that King Darius...was a local King of the city state of Babylon whilst Cyrus was on the Throne...and then when Darius dies...Cyrus takes complete control?

but that he is not actually a King? that he was a King...but is now downgraded to nobility under King Cyrus??...So he is just the highest ranking official in the city...and so Daniel has bascially called him "the king who is like a king"



if thats what you mean then YES it helps...if not...can you clarify further
It is exactly what I am saying. As you mentioned in those days city states were the norm and it would be nothing to sell or give away a city state to another. "Darius" was related to Cyrus. Cyrus took over the empire after words. This is why many atheist try to say the bible has errors. The problem is they only pay attention to the historical accounts but ignore the fact that to understand any writing you must know the context. Daniel would have understood Darius to be the king of where he was. Especially in Babylonian exile. If anything he would have been more of a governor than a king. But as history teaches city state rulers were often referred to as kings.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-18-2011, 09:14 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 17,004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris F View Post
It is exactly what I am saying. As you mentioned in those days city states were the norm and it would be nothing to sell or give away a city state to another. "Darius" was related to Cyrus. Cyrus took over the empire after words. This is why many atheist try to say the bible has errors. The problem is they only pay attention to the historical accounts but ignore the fact that to understand any writing you must know the context. Daniel would have understood Darius to be the king of where he was. Especially in Babylonian exile. If anything he would have been more of a governor than a king. But as history teaches city state rulers were often referred to as kings.
I UNDERSTAND!!!

Daniel has already sort of made this mistake before by refering to a Prince Regent under a City State King between Nebu and Cyrus as "King" when he was acting King for another King under the Main King....but if Daniel was an exhile (and when he made the first mistake he wasnt even high on the political spectrum) then he is unlikely to understand...when Nebu was King of Babylon...it was SYNONOMOUS with King of Babylonia. When Cyrus was King of Babylonia...Babylonia was part of Persia....Thus the City State is no longer the Key State for the Empire...that would lie with the major city state in Persia....Daniel at this point is only a ranking official WITHIN the city of Babylon...he is unlikely to know, or understand much about the world beyond that...which is ALREADY alien to his native culture.

Yes...I can accept that no problem.

Thank you for your help
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.