Friday, August 3, 2018

A nice symmetry about Ezekiel 4:5-6’s ‘390 days’ and ‘40 days’


 Related image

 

by

 

Damien F. Mackey

 

 

 

 

 

 

“I have assigned you the same number of days as the years of their sin.

So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the people of Israel.

After you have finished this, lie down again, this time on your right side, and bear the sin of the people of Judah. I have assigned you 40 days, a day for each year”.

 

Ezekiel 4:5-6

 

 

 

 

 

Israel’s period of Monarchy

likened to servitude in Egypt

 

 Rev. Arnold J. Tkacik (O.S.B), writing on “Ezekiel” for The Jerome Biblical Commentary (1968), has equated Ezekiel’s 430 (390 + 40) ‘years’ under monarchical rule with the 430 years of servitude experienced by the ancient Hebrews.

The Jews are to undergo a “second Exodus”.

Thus Fr. Tkacik writes (21:24):

 

The suggestion here [in Ezekiel 4] is that 390 years is approximately the number of years from the beginning of the monarchy to the great reform of Josiah (climaxed by the destruction of the altar at Bethel). From that point to the destruction of the Temple is another generation, or 40 years, when the second Exodus will take place from which a new people will be formed. Thus, the monarchy is compared to the servitude in Egypt, which also lasted 430 years (… Gal 3:17). The Exile is a new Exodus: “I will lead you to the desert of the peoples” (20:35).

 

 

Building a chronology

around the 430 years

 

Dr. John Osgood has, in his most important article “The Times of the Judges — A Chronology” (EN Tech. J., vol. 1, 1984), arrived at basically the same span of time in relation to the history of Israel as had Fr. Tkacik. Dr. Osgood writes on p, 156, in support of his view for a shorter-than-usually-accepted reign for king Saul (Osgood’s BC dates here are not necessarily mine): https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j01_1/j01_1_141-158.pdf

 

… further evidence in support of a short reign by Saul is given in Ezekiel. In Ezekiel 4:5-6 the years of Israel and Judah’s ‘iniquity’ are given as 390 + 40 which is 430 years. The prophecy refers to the siege of Jerusalem which began in 588 BC (Ezekiel 24:1-2, Jeremiah 52:4-6) and continued into 586 BC.

…. The 40 years of Ezekiel 4:5-6 (the sins of Judah) must be calculated back from 10th day of 10th month of 9th year of Ezekiel, that is 588 BC. This brings us back to the 12th year of Josiah 628 BC (see Thiele, “A Chronology of the Hebrew Kings”). Significantly, in that year Josiah began to purge the whole land of Israel and Judah (2 Chronicles 34:3-7). The further 390 years of Ezekiel 4 then bring us back to the beginning of the kingdom and the inaugural year of the reign of Saul, that is, 1018 BC.

If the period of Israel’s sins was 430 years, its starting point would have been 1018 BC (measuring back from the start of the siege). This is less than a decade before David’s accession to the throne. Such a statement only seems to make sense if it refers to Israel’s KINGDOM, beginning of course with its first king, Saul. This is clearly consistent with the above interpretation of the length of Saul’s reign.

 

This leads Dr. Osgood into an account of the “70 years of desolation” to be found in various OT texts, and to his highly different-from-usual interpretation of an integral part of Daniel 9, namely the “62 weeks”:

 

These 430 years of the kingdom would then explain the strange 70 years of desolation of the land as substitution for missed years of Sabbath (Jeremiah 25:11-12, Daniel 9:2, 1 Chronicles 36:21, Leviticus 26:34), the 70-year figure being arrived at in the following manner:

430 years gives 62 Sabbath years (to the nearest Sabbath in front) or to be precise 61.5 missed Sabbath years, plus 8 (or more correctly 8.5) Jubilee years (Exodus 23:10-11, Leviticus 25:1-17), giving a total of 70 years. ….

Thursday, July 19, 2018

Biblical Nehemiah and Nehemiah ben Hushiel







Nehemiah directs the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and the posting of guards


Biblical Nehemiah and

Nehemiah ben Hushiel

 



Part One:
A very “poor” history indeed

 



 


by

 

Damien F. Mackey

 

 

 

“The historical records from this period are poor. Nehemiah ben Hushiel is thought

to be an historical figure and leader of the Jewish revolt against Heraclius”.

 

https://alchetron.com/Nehemiah-ben-Hushiel

 

 

 

 

The “historical records … are poor” because there never was any historical C7th AD Jewish leader Nehemiah ben Hushiel. The whole reconstruction is a weird projection into supposed AD time of a real history that had occurred way back in BC time, during the Persian empire.

I have shown this abundantly in my series:

 


 


 

Two Supposed Nehemiahs: BC time and AD time. Part Two: The Nahum Factor

 


 

Two Supposed Nehemiahs: BC time and AD time. Part Three (i): A Late, Fake Persian Empire

 


 

and (continued):

 


 

It therefore follows that this fake (supposedly second) “Nehemiah” could not have been the leader of the Jewish revolt against Heraclius”.

Not only, though, because the AD Nehemiah did not exist, but also because of some very serious historical anachronisms associated with “Heraclius”.

See e.g. my multi-part series, beginning with (Part One):

 

Heraclius and the Battle of Nineveh

 


 

See also the related and extensive:

 

Ghosts of Assyria's Past Haunting 'Middle Ages'

 


 

All of this terrible, pseudo-historical mish-mash has resulted in a duplication of:

 

  1. officials Nehemiah; of
  2. Sanballats; possibly of
  3. priests Jaddua; of
  4. Sheshbazzar (the AD version of him being Shahrbarāz); of
  5. Persian-Sassanian Cyrus-Chosroes; of
  6. Persian into Parthian (Sassanian) empires.  


Part Two:


Mixing Persian and Maccabean eras


 


“Nehemiah ben Hushiel and his "council of the righteous" were killed along with many other Jews, some throwing themselves off the city walls. The surviving Jews fled to Shahrbaraz’s encampment at Caesarea”.


https://alchetron.com/Nehemiah-ben-Hushiel


 
 


This episode concerning Nehemiah ben Hushiel and his “council”, albeit un-historical, seems to me to conflate the Persian era - biblically the time of Cyrus and Sheshbazzar (cf. Ezra 1:8), who here becomes (as already noted in (Part One) Shahrbaraz” - with the Maccabean era and the demise of the elder, Razis, who did indeed jump off a wall (2 Maccabees 14:43-46):


 


[Razis] … rushed to the wall and jumped off like a brave hero into the crowd below. The crowd quickly moved back, and he fell in the space they left. Still alive, and burning with courage, he got up, and with blood gushing from his wounds, he ran through the crowd and finally climbed a steep rock. Now completely drained of blood, he tore out his intestines with both hands and threw them at the crowd, and as he did so, he prayed for the Lord of life and breath to give them back to him. That was how he died.


 


Now, what makes the description of Nehemiah’s council of the righteous … [throwing] themselves off the city walls” is the fact that I have identified Razis above, from 2 Maccabees, with Ezra himself:


 


Death of Ezra the Scribe


 




 


whom, in turn, I have identified (albeit tentatively) with Nehemiah:


 


Ezra the Scribe Identified as Nehemiah the Governor


 




 


Although the Persian empire period would not actually be perfectly contemporaneous with the Maccabean and Hellenistic period, as the above mish-mash might suggest, the two periods are far closer in time (by centuries) than the conventional history would have it.


And the biblical Nehemiah may perhaps be the link:


 


Nehemiah bridges Persia and Greece


 




 


And even more so now would this apply if Nehemiah were also to be identified with the Maccabean Razis, a connection I would not want to force at this early stage.


 


However, if this connection does apply, then the conventional Persian-Greek history will need to be shrunk even more radically still.




Part Three:


“No contemporary accounts” of Nehemiah ben Hushiel


 


“… Nehemiah ben Hushiel was appointed governor of Jerusalem. There are reports that he was a strong young man, handsome and adorned in royal robes, but actually we know very little about his reign because no contemporary accounts have survived”.


Meir Loewenberg


 
 


There are “no contemporary accounts” of Nehemiah ben Hushiel because he was not a real AD personage, but was a phantom based upon the biblical Nehemiah of BC time.


 


That is why the character is variously described as “enigmatic”, as ‘poorly attested historically’, or “thought to be a historical figure”.


 


According to what we read of “Nehemiah ben Hushiel” at The Free Social Encyclopedia: https://alchetron.com/Nehemiah-ben-Hushiel


 


Nehemiah ben Hushiel is an enigmatic figure. He is thought to be a historical figure and leader of the Jewish revolt against Heraclius. Nehemiah ben Hushiel is best known as a figure who appears in many medieval Jewish apocalyptic writings. In these writings he is cast as the Messiah ben Joseph who is an Ephraimite.


 


Background


 


In 590-591 CE according to Karaite sources the Exilarch Haninai was put to death by Khosrau II for supporting Bahram VI


 


Mackey’s comment: I have already discussed in various articles the historical anomalies associated with Heraclius (e.g. Nineveh).


The name “Haninai” here is suspiciously like the “Hanani” and “Hananiah” connected with the biblical Nehemiah (7:2): “I put in charge of Jerusalem my brother Hanani, along with Hananiah the commander of the citadel, because he was a man of integrity and feared God more than most people do”.


 


The next Exilarch Haninais' son Bostanai would not reign until around 640 CE. Bostanai would be the first Exilarch under Arab rule. This would leave a fifty-year gap where no Exilarch would have reigned.


….


It is thought that after Haninai was put to death, Khosrau II suspended all forms of Jewish self-governance and created many difficulties for rabbinical academies. By 609 CE, both of the major academies Sura and Pumbedita are known to have been holding classes and led by a Geonim.


 


Account


 


The historical records from this period are poor. Nehemiah ben Hushiel is thought to be an historical figure and leader of the Jewish revolt against Heraclius.


Jacob Neusner guesses that Jews of the west supported Khosrau II against the Byzantines either not knowing or not caring about his persecution of the Exilarchs and suppression of Jews in the east. Frank Meir Loewenberg speculates that in order to gain Jewish support Khosrau II appointed an Exilarch of his choosing. Named Hushiel, this Exilarch had a son named Nehemiah - hence Nehemiah ben Hushiel. According to this guess Nehemiah was placed as the symbolic leader of the Jewish forces.


The Persian Sassanians, commanded by Shahrbaraz, were joined by Nehemiah


 


Mackey’s comment: As also previously discussed, this is an appropriation of the era of Ezra-Nehemiah, the ancient Persian era, with “Khosrau” replacing Cyrus; Shahrbaraz replacing Sheshbazzar; and Nehemiah ben Hushiel replacing Nehemiah ben Helcias.


 


… and the wealthy Jewish leader Benjamin of Tiberias, who had mustered a force of Tiberian Jews. The combined force captured Jerusalem in 614 CE without resistance. Nehemiah was then appointed the ruler of Jerusalem. He began the work of making arrangements for the building of the Third [sic] Temple, and sorting out genealogies to establish a new High Priesthood.


 


Mackey’s comment: Is this not basically what the biblical Nehemiah did?


 


After only a few months, a Christian revolt occurred. Nehemiah ben Hushiel and his "council of the righteous" were killed along with many other Jews, some throwing themselves off the city walls. The surviving Jews fled to Shahrbaraz’s encampment at Caesarea. The Christians were able to briefly retake the city for 19 days before the walls were breached by Shahrbaraz’s forces.


In 617 CE, the Persians reversed their policy and sided with the Christians, probably because of pressure from Mesopotamian Christians. It has been suggested that Nehemiah ben Hushiel was killed then. However, it does not appear that Jews were violently expelled from Jerusalem as Sebeos thought. Instead, Modestos’ letter seems to imply that further Jewish settlers were banned from settling in or around Jerusalem. A small synagogue on the Temple Mount was also demolished.


 


Otot ha-Mašiah (Signs of the Messiah)


 


Another medieval Hebrew apocalypse the Otot ha-Mašiah also casts Nehemiah ben Hushiel as a Messianic leader. It gives a less detailed account but is also thought to be dated to this period.


The following texts also mention Nehemiah and they are all similar to ’Otot ha-Mašiah (Signs of the Messiah). For example, Nehemiah will confront Armilos with a Torah scroll in all of them and in some cases the text is almost identical. The texts are Tefillat (Prayer of) R. Shimon b. Yohai, ’Otot of R. Shimon b. Yohai and Ten Signs ….


 


Mackey’s comment: “Messianic”?


If I am correct with my radical revision of the Infancy of Jesus Christ, as set out in my article:


 


A New Timetable for the Nativity of Jesus Christ


 




 


then the life (very long, I believe) of the biblical Nehemiah may just have overlapped with the beginnings of Jesus Christ as a child on earth.


 


Image result for child jesus