Re: Nehemiah found at Persepolis!!!
- From: "Peter Jason" <PJ@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:59:05 +1000
How do you know the bible wasn't the "pulp fiction" of its day?
Some people will believe anything in print!
"larswilson" <wilsonl035@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:nZcce.7310$R46.5530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Is Persepolis avoided by archaeologists because it creates too many
> puzzles or supports the Bible too much? Case in point:
>
> 1. Ezra 6:14,15 says Darius died in his 6th year. Persepolis began to be
> built in the 4th year of Darius. He completed only a palace which took
> about 2 years and then his son Xerxes had to finish the city, proving he
> died after only 2 years investment in the city.
>
> 2. Ezra 6:14,15 names "Artaxerxes" as the successor to Darius. History
> confirms that "Xerxes" succeeded Darius. But Persian custom for the kings
> included their adopting a new name when they became king (Darius II was
> Nothus, Artaxerxes II Mnomon, Artaxerxes III was Nothus, Darius III was
> Cadomannus, etc.). What was the althernative name for Xerxes? It was
> Artaxerxes. But this convention not well known or established allowed him
> to claim he was his own son after he lost to the Greeks at Salamis and
> they became a threat. Thus the bad king with the bad reputation died, and
> a new king emerged. The chronology was adjusted and extended to account
> for the age difference and extra rulership.
>
> 3. NEHEMIAH. But Nehemiah also presents a problem. It is clear he
> returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel in the 1st of Cyrus and served as
> the king's secretary who made all the decisions. But the Bible indicates
> he lived down into the reign of Darius II. If he were around 30 when he
> returned he'd have to be over 143 years of age. Yet Persepolis shows
> Nehemiah was already the prime minister and chief cupbearer with Xerxes
> and Darius when they were co-rulers. Below gives the bas-reliefs to
> compare that shows the same Jewish cupbearer with Artaxerxes with Darius.
> But that might be the problem. If you identity this cupbearer with
> Artaxerxes as Nehemiah, you have to explain why he was preseent earlier
> with Darius.
>
> When checking out Nehemiah note that the Persians are identified by their
> fluted caps, the Medes their round ones. Nehemiah is wearing a hooded cap
> which is the Jewish ethnic reference (Note King Jehu had a hooded cap on
> in a bas-relief of Shalmaneser III).
>
> Thus the hard archaeological evidence, the buildings, the bas-reliefs, not
> things easily changed, agree with the Bible. Faked business documents and
> some inscriptions, which are easily added to buildings or created reflect
> the revised chronology. This was effectively done, paying off Greek
> historians to rewrite the new history (like Herodotus) but the original
> timeline, thanks to the double-dating to 511BCE for year 37 of
> Nebuchadnezzar found in the VAT4956 allow us to resolve this
> contradictions, which are only "historical contradictions" and not true
> "archaeological" contradictions as we see from Persepolis.
>
> Unfortunately, abundant and interesting subtleties and details that we
> could learn about Nehemiah which are at Persepolis is lost when
> revisionism is not considered part of ancient investigation. Generally
> the Bible is just dismissed as being incorrect and then other evidence
> ignored such as at Persepolis. Fortunately artwork and buildings are
> harder to revise than clay tablets and inscriptions.
>
> L. Wilson
>
> =============
> So sometimes "lack of evidence" argument when it comes to chronology might
> simply be due to not recognizing revisions in the timeline.
>
> On the other hand, the "lack of evidence" argument is applied to Darius
> whom the Bible claims (Ezra 6:14,15) ruled for just six years!!! versus
> 36. In this case, therefore, we would look for critical evidence beyond
> his sixth year in archaeology. But guess what? There is none! He began
> Persepolis in his fourth year and finished his own palace in just two and
> everything else he started had to be finished by his son Xerxes, who had
> changed his name to Artaxerxes. Darius was gung-ho about building up the
> monuments of Pesia to match that of Greece. Why in 36 years is there only
> a few buildings? Why is Artaxerxes I buried between Darius I and Darius
> II? And why did Darius I stop talking after Besitun? He was so talkative
> and documentaroial about everything he did, but only for the first couple
> of years. Nothing in the last 30 years of his reign, when there should
> have been an abundance? Instead, an abundance of excuses and explanations
> where there should be buildings come forth to explain his longer reign.
> Of course business clay tablets and inscriptions were faked as one would
> be expected but you can get past that easily. Further, once you know that
> Xerxes and Artaxerxes were the same king, the archaeological comparisons
> are quite revealing. For instance, Artaxerxes was known as "Longimanus"
> for his longer hand. At Persepolis, it is Xerxes who has his hand on
> display from both sides as he stands behind Darius I. The reason for that
> was because his hand anomaly was already fmous! The sculptors showed it
> from both sides to help preserve it for antiquity.
>
> Below are photos of the two bas-reliefs in question that link Xerxes to
> Artaxerxes by his famous hand. This scene with Darius, Xerxes and
> Nehemiah(chief cupbearer who was already in that position with
> Dariux-Xerxes co-rulership) is shown from both sides with nothing of
> significance other than the hand of Xerxes is seen from the inside and the
> outisde, the best way to scupt a famous hand. Furthermore, this hand was
> turned sidewise behind the throne for the purpose of scultiping the hand
> in lieu of the material gesture taken elsewhere, which is with him holding
> onto the throne (palm down) indicating the co-rulership. .
>
> Here is the outer hand of Xerxes/Artaxerxes on display:
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_4.html
>
> (outer)
>
>
>
> Go here to see the same scene only his inner hand and notice how odd the
> hand looks in comparison to the rest of the scrupture!! The hand creases
> are sculpted in detail for emphasis. If this was considered Artaxerxes
> "Longimanus" no one would questoin why the hand is prominent in these
> bas-reliefs.
>
>
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3C5_4.html
>
> (inne r)
>
> Go here to see Xerxes behind Darius in a simlar pose on his hand is palm
> down holding onto the back of the throne, a gesture indicating he was
> actually "sharing" the throne and not simply succeeding. The size of
> Darius and Xerxes are equal and their heads are higher than all others but
> also equal, thus definitely a co-rulership. Why don't archaelogists
> recognize this co-rulership?. When the timeline is reduced and corrected,
> Xerxes begins his rule in the 3rd year of Darius. Darius begins building
> Perspolis in his 4th year while they were co-rulers, reflecting this, but
> dies after two years. When Xerxes finished the cities after taking up the
> throne name "Artaxerxes" which was the Persian custom, he depicted himself
> alone and claims he had to fiinish the buildings his father had begun. If
> we didn't have to deal with the revisionism, Persepolis would show not
> only the co-rulership, the emphasis on the longer hand anomaly of
> Xerxes/Artaxerxes, but that Darius died shortly aftre beginning this city.
> Still archaeologists should be able to confirm that the buldings in
> question were all completed within 5 years or could have been. But
> Persepolis is by far an "untouchable" topic.
>
>
>
> http://www.babyloniangal.com/files/tours/Tripylon_Darius_1.jpg
>
>
>
> Finally, it's quite embarrassing so see that the cupbearer for Darius and
> Xerxes is a Jewish enuch, who must be Nehemiah! This is the "evidence"
> that is there because you can see Nehemiah following behind Artaxerxes as
> his cupbearer!!! He is Jewish because his clothing depicts him with a
> hood and not a fluted cap (Persian) or a rounded cap (Mede) even though he
> holds the highest court position and follows right behind Xerxes when he's
> in the scene with Darius and Xerxes. Which is another issue. If you look
> for evidence of the cupbearer of Artaxerxes who is supposed to be Nehemiah
> at Persepolis, you find it!!! You find him in at least three scenes at
> Persepolis with Artaxerxes with his distinctive covered beard, hooded cap
> (Jewish) and his badge of office, his cuptowel. But this is the very same
> Jewish-eunuch-cupbearer with Darius and Xerxes when they were co-rulers,
> dating Nehemiah in the court of Darius and Xerxes. The Bible, of course,
> says Nehemiah returned with Zerubabbel and was first the secretary to
> Cyrus (the "Tirshatha"). So this shows he got a promotion. So the
> Biblical evidence is there, that Nehemiah was the cupbearer to Artaxerxes,
> but also Xerxes and Darius, which lends to Xerxes being the same king as
> Artaxerxes since he would have kept this same cupbearer. So
> archaelogists, influenced by poor history or well-done fake history either
> ignore or misinterpret what is right before them.
>
> Take a look at these and let me know what you think:
>
> Nehemiah series:
>
> Here is Jewish cupbearer, notice hooded cap, covered beard (eunuch) and
> cuptowel in hand.
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_4.html
>
> Here is same cupbearer with - obserse
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2E9_4.html
>
>
>
> Again the another scene with Nehemiah behind Artaxerxes...
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F3_72dpi.html
>
>
>
> To show how favored he was, here is Nehemiah with Artaxerxes alone...
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F9_72dpi.html
>
>
>
> Now if I were reading the Bible and just looking at the evidence at
> Persepolis, the archaeology woudl fill in the blanks of the Bible. It
> would tell us that after being the secretary to Cyrus at first when the
> Jews returned to Babylon, he then became the Prime Minister of all of
> Persia beginnig with the co-rulership of Xerxes and Darius and then when
> Xerxes became sole ruler and changed his name to Artaxerxes he remained
> the favored Prime Minister (cupbearer) until Artaxerxed died at age 59.
> Nehemiah survived him into the reign of Darius II. Persepolis would also
> show me that Darius died 2 years into building the city (only 11
> buildings!) which if he began in his 4th year it would mean he died after
> just two years.
>
> Now that we know for sure the Persian Period was artificially expanded
> because the VAT4956 evidence, why is it the archaeologists didn't figure
> all this out before? Why are Biblicalists jumping up and down that they
> have evidence of Nehemiah as cupbearer to Artaxerxes? It's right here,
> its just ignored.
>
> So some "lack of evidence" arguments are present because evidence is
> destroyed or supprssed or selectively ignored. Who knows what the British
> Museum is sitting on in their vaults and haven't decided to release to the
> public?
>
>
>
> Thanks, again for your commentary. Let me know what you think about
> discovering Nehemiah at Persepolis!!
>
> L. Wilson
>
>
> So sometimes "lack of evidence" argument when it comes to chronology might
> simply be due to not recognizing revisions in the timeline.
>
> On the other hand, the "lack of evidence" argument is applied to Darius
> whom the Bible claims (Ezra 6:14,15) ruled for just six years!!! versus
> 36. In this case, therefore, we would look for critical evidence beyond
> his sixth year in archaeology. But guess what? There is none! He began
> Persepolis in his fourth year and finished his own palace in just two and
> everything else he started had to be finished by his son Xerxes, who had
> changed his name to Artaxerxes. Darius was gung-ho about building up the
> monuments of Pesia to match that of Greece. Why in 36 years is there only
> a few buildings? Why is Artaxerxes I buried between Darius I and Darius
> II? And why did Darius I stop talking after Besitun? He was so talkative
> and documentaroial about everything he did, but only for the first couple
> of years. Nothing in the last 30 years of his reign, when there should
> have been an abundance? Instead, an abundance of excuses and explanations
> where there should be buildings come forth to explain his longer reign.
> Of course business clay tablets and inscriptions were faked as one would
> be expected but you can get past that easily. Further, once you know that
> Xerxes and Artaxerxes were the same king, the archaeological comparisons
> are quite revealing. For instance, Artaxerxes was known as "Longimanus"
> for his longer hand. At Persepolis, it is Xerxes who has his hand on
> display from both sides as he stands behind Darius I. The reason for that
> was because his hand anomaly was already fmous! The sculptors showed it
> from both sides to help preserve it for antiquity.
>
> Below are photos of the two bas-reliefs in question that link Xerxes to
> Artaxerxes by his famous hand. This scene with Darius, Xerxes and
> Nehemiah(chief cupbearer who was already in that position with
> Dariux-Xerxes co-rulership) is shown from both sides with nothing of
> significance other than the hand of Xerxes is seen from the inside and the
> outisde, the best way to scupt a famous hand. Furthermore, this hand was
> turned sidewise behind the throne for the purpose of scultiping the hand
> in lieu of the material gesture taken elsewhere, which is with him holding
> onto the throne (palm down) indicating the co-rulership. .
>
> Here is the outer hand of Xerxes/Artaxerxes on display:
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_4.html
>
> (outer)
>
>
>
> Go here to see the same scene only his inner hand and notice how odd the
> hand looks in comparison to the rest of the scrupture!! The hand creases
> are sculpted in detail for emphasis. If this was considered Artaxerxes
> "Longimanus" no one would questoin why the hand is prominent in these
> bas-reliefs.
>
>
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3C5_4.html
>
> (inne r)
>
> Go here to see Xerxes behind Darius in a simlar pose on his hand is palm
> down holding onto the back of the throne, a gesture indicating he was
> actually "sharing" the throne and not simply succeeding. The size of
> Darius and Xerxes are equal and their heads are higher than all others but
> also equal, thus definitely a co-rulership. Why don't archaelogists
> recognize this co-rulership?. When the timeline is reduced and corrected,
> Xerxes begins his rule in the 3rd year of Darius. Darius begins building
> Perspolis in his 4th year while they were co-rulers, reflecting this, but
> dies after two years. When Xerxes finished the cities after taking up the
> throne name "Artaxerxes" which was the Persian custom, he depicted himself
> alone and claims he had to fiinish the buildings his father had begun. If
> we didn't have to deal with the revisionism, Persepolis would show not
> only the co-rulership, the emphasis on the longer hand anomaly of
> Xerxes/Artaxerxes, but that Darius died shortly aftre beginning this city.
> Still archaeologists should be able to confirm that the buldings in
> question were all completed within 5 years or could have been. But
> Persepolis is by far an "untouchable" topic.
>
>
>
> http://www.babyloniangal.com/files/tours/Tripylon_Darius_1.jpg
>
>
>
> Finally, it's quite embarrassing so see that the cupbearer for Darius and
> Xerxes is a Jewish enuch, who must be Nehemiah! This is the "evidence"
> that is there because you can see Nehemiah following behind Artaxerxes as
> his cupbearer!!! He is Jewish because his clothing depicts him with a
> hood and not a fluted cap (Persian) or a rounded cap (Mede) even though he
> holds the highest court position and follows right behind Xerxes when he's
> in the scene with Darius and Xerxes. Which is another issue. If you look
> for evidence of the cupbearer of Artaxerxes who is supposed to be Nehemiah
> at Persepolis, you find it!!! You find him in at least three scenes at
> Persepolis with Artaxerxes with his distinctive covered beard, hooded cap
> (Jewish) and his badge of office, his cuptowel. But this is the very same
> Jewish-eunuch-cupbearer with Darius and Xerxes when they were co-rulers,
> dating Nehemiah in the court of Darius and Xerxes. The Bible, of course,
> says Nehemiah returned with Zerubabbel and was first the secretary to
> Cyrus (the "Tirshatha"). So this shows he got a promotion. So the
> Biblical evidence is there, that Nehemiah was the cupbearer to Artaxerxes,
> but also Xerxes and Darius, which lends to Xerxes being the same king as
> Artaxerxes since he would have kept this same cupbearer. So
> archaelogists, influenced by poor history or well-done fake history either
> ignore or misinterpret what is right before them.
>
> Take a look at these and let me know what you think:
>
> Nehemiah series:
>
> Here is Jewish cupbearer, notice hooded cap, covered beard (eunuch) and
> cuptowel in hand.
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_4.html
>
> Here is same cupbearer with - obserse
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2E9_4.html
>
>
>
> Again the another scene with Nehemiah behind Artaxerxes...
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F3_72dpi.html
>
>
>
> To show how favored he was, here is Nehemiah with Artaxerxes alone...
>
> http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F9_72dpi.html
>
>
>
> Now if I were reading the Bible and just looking at the evidence at
> Persepolis, the archaeology woudl fill in the blanks of the Bible. It
> would tell us that after being the secretary to Cyrus at first when the
> Jews returned to Babylon, he then became the Prime Minister of all of
> Persia beginnig with the co-rulership of Xerxes and Darius and then when
> Xerxes became sole ruler and changed his name to Artaxerxes he remained
> the favored Prime Minister (cupbearer) until Artaxerxed died at age 59.
> Nehemiah survived him into the reign of Darius II. Persepolis would also
> show me that Darius died 2 years into building the city (only 11
> buildings!) which if he began in his 4th year it would mean he died after
> just two years.
>
> Now that we know for sure the Persian Period was artificially expanded
> because the VAT4956 evidence, why is it the archaeologists didn't figure
> all this out before? Why are Biblicalists jumping up and down that they
> have evidence of Nehemiah as cupbearer to Artaxerxes? It's right here,
> its just ignored.
>
> So some "lack of evidence" arguments are present because evidence is
> destroyed or supprssed or selectively ignored. Who knows what the British
> Museum is sitting on in their vaults and haven't decided to release to the
> public?
>
>
>
> Thanks, again for your commentary. Let me know what you think about
> discovering Nehemiah at Persepolis!!
>
> L. Wilson
>
>
.
- References:
- Nehemiah found at Persepolis!!!
- From: larswilson
- Nehemiah found at Persepolis!!!
- Prev by Date: Re: More anatase myth killing. Re: More anatase
- Next by Date: Re: The Vinland Map's Ink
- Previous by thread: Nehemiah found at Persepolis!!!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
