dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

Anonymous ID: a59f17 Dec. 11, 2022, 9:12 p.m. No.17926967 🗄️.is 🔗kun >>6999

What the fuck? Wiki says Daniel and book of Daniel in the bible are not real or even historic as the book invents a fourth King that does not exist, Darius, and many other things. I just found out. Check this out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Daniel

So I found out a while back that the book of Daniel is the only book in the Ketuvim that is in Aramaic. The placement of the book of Daniel in the Christian Holy Bible, is placed in it's chronological order, but it is not in historical order. The jews have added the book to the Ketuvim, it's in there. So that means there is something wrong. You see the Aramaic was a language that was being used to write some scriptures at the specific time of the Maccabees. During this time is when the book of Daniel was written. You see the The Holy Bible puts this in the Neviim. This is incorrect…more.

The book of Daniel has strong connection to Christians apocalyptic prophecies, for example the dream of the statue and the rock that destroys it. Again, the apocalyptic visions in the book could be inspired by the times, which just after the times of the Maccabees, is the destruction of the temple and the end of Judea and the line of Israel as a nation, or piece of nation.

The jews that wrote Daniel also wrote Dead Sea Scrolls which are largely in Aramaic. This has been what some jews that have to do with the archeological research in Israel today going on around Dead Sea caves say is controversial to Christians.

So the book was written out of the time that it was placed into, when we are talking about the Holy Bible. In actuality it was written during the chaos of the end of the second temple period.

Now….They say Daniel himself is not real, like Moses, Virgin Mary, others, we can't find them in history, but as for Moses, the history surrounding Egypts third dynasty has to do with the Hyksos, a canaanite force that took over Lower Egypt, Goshen, for about 100 years. Throughout the story of what happened in the third dynasty, there are a lot of Moses's. If you take time to read and look, or watch a video on it, you'll see what I'm talking about. They, the stories in the bible, written by hebrews/israelites/jews, are and have been parabolic.

After so many years of actually trying to study the historicity of the scriptures and religion, the results is that the Holy Bible is really no different than what jews write in Hollywood movies. So they are fake stories mixed with some truths here and there. Hollywood sells us some truths, wrapped in fantasy and inspiration and art.

Something is definitely wrong with the bible in general. Many things in it that don't make actual sense. Like why are they writing about Annunaki that comes from Sumeria? Well maybe the two accounts, yes two accounts of Genesis in the beginning of every bible gives us some clues. First of all, why two? My theory is that the first account is part of the original. The second account now includes what they thought was in the original to the closest they can get it. I think this specifically because of the Mishnah. Once upon a time the jews were passing things down orally, that were not written….the entire point of this paragraph is that Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came down there the first time around and annihilated. Temple destroyed Priesthood of Zadok killed off. Conquered and the royals and administrators of government were taken into exile to Babylon for 70 years, the book of Daniel.

Anyway the original ideas all came from Sumeria, where Abraham also came from, the city of Ur.

The Anunnaki were actual deities and their names come from the old god of the sky 'Anu', the original creator of the universe. That is where Anunnaki comes from.'

But when you look deeper into the Sumerian tablets, you start to notice that there is a stark comparative relationship between the Bible and what these ancient cultures believed in. When you begin to look deep into the Bible, you’ll see that there are some similarities that often go overlooked by even the most religious people.

Such occurrences include Giants in the Bible, the Nephilim. This also comes from the Sumerians.

look at pic related

the giants

The world is real and it is a creation. God created this. My theory is that God sacrificed for the creation and now lives in us. In our lives is the gift that comes from God. Our body, is the temple to the life, the spirit. Where ever you go, God is with you, not in a symbol or a statue or temple made of hewn stones. Hard truths, but without the truth then what is the point? If we walk down a dark path with a trap set before us, how would we know if light is not shined upon it so that we don't fall in?

shitp[ost concluded.

>>17926999

>Darius (the Great) 550BC, son of Hystaspes, King of Kings, Pharoh of Egypt and 3rd King after Cyrus the Great

That is not the Darius that they speak of even though I thought the same as you.

Darius the Mede

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Daniel

Darius the Mede: No such person is known to history (see Levine, 2010, p. 1245, footnote 31). "Darius" is in any case a Persian, not a Median, name. The Persian army which captured Babylon was under the command of a certain Gobryas (or Gubaru), a Babylonian and former provincial governor who turned against his royal master, on behalf of Cyrus, the Persian king. The author of Daniel may have introduced the reference to a Mede in order to fulfill Isaiah and Jeremiah, who prophesied that the Medes would overthrow Babylon, and confused the events of 539 with those of 520 BC, when Darius I captured Babylon after an uprising. See Hammer, 1976, pp. 65–66.

-It goes off on this part:

Historical background

The visions of chapters 7–12 reflect the crisis which took place in Judea in 167–164 BC when Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Greek king of the Seleucid Empire, threatened to destroy traditional Jewish worship in Jerusalem.[24] When Antiochus came to the throne in 175 BC the Jews were largely pro-Seleucid. The High Priestly family was split by rivalry, and one member, Jason, offered the king a large sum to be made High Priest. Jason also asked—or more accurately, paid—to be allowed to make Jerusalem a polis, or Greek city. This meant, among other things, that city government would be in the hands of the citizens, which meant in turn that citizenship would be a valuable commodity, to be purchased from Jason. None of this threatened the Jewish religion, and the reforms were widely welcomed, especially among the Jerusalem aristocracy and the leading priests. Three years later Jason was deposed when another priest, Menelaus, offered Antiochus an even larger sum for the post of High Priest.[25]

Antiochus invaded Egypt twice, in 169 BC with success, but on the second incursion, in late 168 BC, he was forced to withdraw by the Romans.[26] Jason, hearing a rumour that Antiochus was dead, attacked Menelaus to take back the High Priesthood.[26] Antiochus drove Jason out of Jerusalem, plundered the Temple, and introduced measures to pacify his Egyptian border by imposing complete Hellenization: the Jewish Book of the Law was prohibited and on 15 December 167 BC an "abomination of desolation", probably a Greek altar, was introduced into the Temple.[27] With the Jewish religion now clearly under threat a resistance movement sprang up, led by the Maccabee brothers, and over the next three years it won sufficient victories over Antiochus to take back and purify the Temple.[26]

The crisis which the author of Daniel addresses is the defilement of the altar in Jerusalem in 167 BC (first introduced in chapter 8:11): the daily offering which used to take place twice a day, at morning and evening, stopped, and the phrase "evenings and mornings" recurs through the following chapters as a reminder of the missed sacrifices.[28] But whereas the events leading up to the sacking of the Temple in 167 BC and the immediate aftermath are remarkably accurate, the predicted war between the Syrians and the Egyptians (11:40–43) never took place, and the prophecy that Antiochus would die in Palestine (11:44–45) was inaccurate (he died in Persia).[29] The most probable conclusion is that the account must have been completed near the end of the reign of Antiochus but before his death in December 164 BC, or at least before news of it reached Jerusalem, and the consensus of modern scholarship[30][31][32][33][34][35][36] is accordingly that the book dates to the period 167–163 BC.[37][38]

>>17927016

You see, so that is why some of the things are wrong in the book of Daniel, because it was not written during the time that we think it was written, yet it is presented to us by people who probably already know this, as being a religious truth.

Let me add that some Apocrypha are also about Daniel. For example, I had found out that the bible was changed. It was changed because once upon a time the bible had the story of Daniel, Bel and the Dragon….THE FUCKING DRAGON

Apocrypha, Daniel Kills the Dragon

23 Now in that place[a] there was a great dragon, which the Babylonians revered. 24 The king said to Daniel, ‘You cannot deny that this is a living god; so worship him.’ 25 Daniel said, ‘I worship the Lord my God, for he is the living God. 26 But give me permission, O king, and I will kill the dragon without sword or club.’ The king said, ‘I give you permission.’

27 Then Daniel took pitch, fat, and hair, and boiled them together and made cakes, which he fed to the dragon. The dragon ate them, and burst open. Then Daniel said, ‘See what you have been worshipping!’

28 When the Babylonians heard about it, they were very indignant and conspired against the king, saying, ‘The king has become a Jew; he has destroyed Bel, and killed the dragon, and slaughtered the priests.’ 29 Going to the king, they said, ‘Hand Daniel over to us, or else we will kill you and your household.’ 30 The king saw that they were pressing him hard, and under compulsion he handed Daniel over to them.

So they took this out of the bible. The excuse I found was that it was hard to believe in, so they took it out. Vatican bastards….you know the Virgin Mary is real, but they covered up anything that has to do with her because a pope said, she ascended to heaven like Jesus. There are archeological sites, gravesites, but they are all on church grounds, so they don't allow us to find out about Mary so they can keep lying about her.