“From the beginning, I foretell the outcome; and from earlier times, what has not yet been; but I say My plan will stand, and I will carry out My desire.” Isaiah 46:9-10
True or False?
Based on my studies, 
I am fully persuaded that the 
text we have is reliable, 
not letter perfect in some 
single ms, but reliable.
Since I have already explained that here, I won’t take any additional time to explain it again now. However, you can ask me questions about it afterwards.
The Problem
Of recent, some ‘leaders’ in the Messianic movement have attempted to call into question some of the books of the Bible, Hebrews just to mention one. 
They are not alone
However, this is not a ‘Root Problem’,
it is just a symptom. 
Let’s identify the ‘Root Problem’
•	Author: Satan
•	Goal: Destroy the faith of ‘Believers’ by portraying the Scriptures as being inaccurate (and thereby untrustworthy)
Two-fold Strategy:
•	a) Demonstrate that the historical events recorded in the Scriptures are in conflict with the ‘accepted conventional chronology of ancient Egypt’ established through archaeology.
•	b) Demonstrate that prophecies foretelling the coming of the Messiah disqualify Yeshua from being The Messiah.
Current level of success:
Approaching the pureness of 
Ivory Soap!
We’ll focus on strategy ‘a’ first and then 
address strategy ‘b’ later.
How bad is it?
Kathleen Kenyon, archaeologist
•	“It is a ‘waste of time’ to study Bible history from Abraham to David.
•	The Biblical records are ‘garbled traditions’, written hundreds of years after the events”.
•	Archaeology of the Holy Land, 1985, pp 204-209
In 1991, the Biblical Archaeology Society and the Smithsonian Institute 
co-sponsored a symposium on the 
“Rise of Ancient Israel”. 
Baruch Halpern, William Dever, and 
Kyle McCarter, Jr., all with doctorates from Harvard, were chosen as the principle speakers. 
All three agreed that Israel’s Exodus from Egypt and Israel’s Conquest of Canaan are ‘myths’ rather than true history.
May/June 1995 BAR contains lists of the 
top ten archaeological accomplishments 
in the previous 20 years. 
David Ussishkin, professor of archaeology at Tel Aviv University, included on his list the following ‘scholarly consensus’:
•	“The archaeological data do not support the historicity of the Biblical stories of the patriarchs, the sojourn in Egypt, the Exodus, and Joshua’s conquest of Canaan in a SINGLE campaign.”
•	Scholars Speak Out, p. 32.
July/August 1996 BAR, Hershel Shanks editor, interviewed William Dever. 
•	He called Dr. Dever “one of the most widely respected senior archaeologists today”.
•	Shanks asked Dever, “Many scholars have rejected the Israelite conquest of Canaan as described in the Bible.” “Is that correct?” 
•	Dever answered, “I would say ALL archaeologists today.”
•	BAR Interviews With William Dever, Part 1, p. 37
March/April 2000 BAR, Thomas Thompson labeled Bible history as containing ‘traditions’ that ‘do not share in reality’.
 Can You Understand This, pp 36-37
Harper Magazine, March 2002 issue proclaimed
•	The Old Testament is A False Testament and affirmed in the subheading,
•	Archaeology Refutes the Bible’s Claim to History.
•	The author, Daniel Lazare, claims that Abraham, the Exodus, the Conquest 
of Canaan, and even David and 
Solomon are all fictional characters.
Dallas Morning News, March 30th, 2002, Religious section
•	Rabbi David Wolpe, senior rabbi at Los Angeles Sinai Temple told his congregation the following words:
•	“The story of the Exodus did not happen the way the Bible depicts it, if it happened at all.”
How about something more current
How about 3 quotes from the March/April 2006 BAR, William Dever, in the section called Archaeological Views, wrote an article entitled “The Western Cultural Tradition is at Risk” pp 26, 76.
1. “The Biblical narratives about Abraham, Moses, Joshua and Solomon probably do reflect some historical memories of actual people and places, but the ‘larger-than-life’ portraits of the Bible are unrealistic and are, in fact, contradicted by the archaeological evidence.”
2. “Some of Israel’s ancestors probably did come out of Egyptian slavery, but there was no military conquest of Canaan, and most early Israelites were displaced Canaanites.”
3. “Monotheism may have been the ideal of Biblical writers, but many, if not most, Israelites throughout the Monarchy were polytheists.”
What an onslaught. 
How does this impact the NT?
•	The NT refers to Moses 80 times.
•	Events surrounding the Exodus are mentioned 40 times.

I perceive these aforementioned statements as impugning the character of Yeshua. 
That puts his Messiahship on the line. 
What position do we take concerning
these anti-God positions?
Title: A Journey to Strengthen Your Faith
•	This presentation is going to point you in the right direction concerning these accusations.
Time for class
•	If everyone would please don their thinking caps, class can begin.
Our first lecture is entitled ‘God Logic’. 
I shall ask a series of questions and 
we shall ‘reason’ together. 
NAS Isaiah 1:18a Come now, and 
let us reason together, Says hw"hy>..
1. Was the written historical account of Israel (known as Tanakh) inspired by God?
If no, then we ought to be able to conclude that the chronological information contained within it ought to be as trustworthy as any other ancient record, and its failure to synchronize results from:
•	a) Our failure to correctly apply that information.
•	b) Our current knowledge of history is Flawed.
If yes, then we ought to be able to conclude that non-alignment between the Biblical Chronological information and History results from:
•	a) Our failure to correctly apply that information.
•	b) Our current knowledge of history is Flawed.

 Notice that both answers similarly conclude, that if we do not wish to dispense with the Academic Understanding of History, then failure to synchronize the chronological information results from our failure 
to apply it correctly.
2. When the chronological data was written into the account of Israel, did they intend for it to represent specific facts of reality?
If no, then Academics demonstrate a highly unscientific approach to history, when using Scripture to support various archaeological 
and Historical propositions.
If yes, then…
3. Since there is a conflict between the Biblical Chronological information and the AUOH, could we be experiencing textual criticism issues?
If yes, then don’t use the dates that cannot be verified from at least 3 different sources.
If no, then…
4. Since I don’t want to give up the AUOH (revised version) and there are no real textual criticism issues of merit, it would appear that we are not applying the chronological data contained within 
the Biblical text correctly. 
Since it conflicts ‘on its face’ and since we know that there has been more than one calendar system throughout time, could the problem be that a different calendar system is being used to 
understand the dates?
5. Are there other major Jewish documents that have this same problem?
Yes
•	The Damascus Document/Community Rule and Josephus.
So now we have 3 writings that contain chronological information and none of them line up with AUOH. Doesn’t that just seem odd, especially for the DD since it was written in the late 1st century b.c.e. You would think they certainly should have gotten something right!
End of lecture 1.
Before I talk about a different calendar system, let me talk about the 
Academic Understanding of History. 
The following is taken from: 
The Revision of Ancient History – 
A Perspective by P. John Crowe, 
presented to the Society for 
Interdisciplinary Studies Jubilee Conference, Easthampstead Park, Sept. 17-19th 1999.

•	Ancient History as taught today is a disaster area. Nothing fits convincingly together.
•	The development of the arts, cultures and technologies from earliest times shows inexplicable incongruities. Art historians and archaeologists are in disarray. Why?
•	Because the chronology of the first and second millennium BC is badly wrong. How did this disaster happen?

•	As accident investigators well know, the sequence of events leading up to major disasters is invariably a sequence of highly unlikely and unexpected happenings and coincidences. These conspire, often in chances of many millions to one against, to cause the disaster.
•	Ancient historian revisionists believe the real disaster for ancient history is the conventional chronology of ancient Egypt.

•	This has been assumed correct, and used directly or indirectly to date nearly all the other early civilizations throughout Europe and the Near East. Such is the measure of control exerted by today's academic establishment that they would not tolerate a revisionist movement from within.
•	So interested outsiders, including some brilliant scholars and innovative thinkers, who call themselves ancient history revisionists, are having to act as the accident investigators for this disaster.

•	They are investigating all the relevant evidence, with painstaking thoroughness, to discover and expose all the events and unlucky coincidences that led to the adoption of the conventional chronology.

•	The Society for Interdisciplinary Studies was founded in 1974 to promote discussion and further study of the ideas of Immanuel Velikovsky.
•	He was one of the first to make the public aware that Egypt's ancient chronology was, and still is, badly wrong.
•	As a result, the pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty (D18), which most famously include Queen Hatshepsut and Tutankhamun, are made too ancient by several hundred years.

•	He reached this conclusion after comparing the early histories of the Hebrews and the Egyptians.
•	In the Old Testament (OT), the ancient Hebrews recorded such major events as their Descent into Egypt, the Sojourn, Oppression, and Exodus from Egypt, and later campaigns against them by the Egyptian rulers Shishak and Zerah.

•	However, no clear reference to any of these events can be found in the conventional chronology of Egyptian history.
•	However, if the Academic Understanding of History timeline of the conventional chronology of ancient Egypt is shifted (that is ‘revised’), what happens?
•	The entire Biblical record fits archaeological finds just like a puzzle.
Just so you know, I have not finished all my research as of today. My plan is to have it finished by the time the fall Feast of Tabernacles takes place this year. 
I hope to share it at the Season of our Joy festival at Lake Murray in October.
Now back to the calendar issue we mentioned 
at the end of lecture one.
•	What do I mean by a different calendar system?
•	Example: The Prophetic calendar is 360 days per year.  (http://www.360calendar.com/)
One prophecy I particularly like is the calculation of the end of the punishment of the House of Israel. That involves Leviticus 26:18, 22, 24, 28; Ezekiel 1:1-3; and Zechariah 1:7-16. It demonstrates that 
the punishment ended to the day on 
May 14th, 1948. 
Could be a coincidence.
•	My definition of coincidence:
•	The Most High was present and active but wanted to remain anonymous.
•	Here is a good place to note that quite often He leaves bread crumbs in more places than just in Israelite history.
Results from the ‘God Logic’ class
•	DD and Josephus is off
•	Kings of the North and the South are off in the Biblical text
•	When the 336 day calendar in plugged in to all 3, They all line up with AUOH (revised).
Remembering that the 
Common Chronology of 
Egypt is ‘Under Siege’, 
let’s proceed.
Who is…
•	Ipuwer
•	High priest of  Ra
•	Recorder of The Ten Plagues –                     Live From Egypt
•	From Papyrus Leiden 334
•	http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/texts/ipuwer.htm
The Ten Plagues - Live From Egypt
   IPUWER PAPYRUS
      LEIDEN 344  	           TORAH - EXODUS
•	2:5-6 Plague is throughout the land. Blood is everywhere. 
•	2:10 The river is blood. 
•	2:10 Men shrink from tasting human beings, and thirst after water 
•	3:10-13 That is our water! That is our happiness! What shall we do in respect thereof? All is ruin. 
•	7:20 …all the waters of the river were turned to blood. 
•	7:21 ...there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt …and the river stank. 
•	7:24 And all the Egyptians dug around the river for water to drink; for they could not drink of the water of the river. 
   IPUWER PAPYRUS
      LEIDEN 344  	           TORAH - EXODUS
•	2:10 Forsooth, gates, columns and walls are consumed by fire. 
•	10:3-6 Lower Egypt weeps... The entire palace is without its revenues. To it belong [by right] wheat and barley, geese and fish 
•	6:3 Forsooth, grain has perished on every side. 
•	5:12 Forsooth, that has perished which was yesterday seen. The land is left over to its weariness like the cutting of flax. 
•	9:23-24 ...and the fire ran along the ground... there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, very grievous. 
•	9:25 ...and the hail smote every herb of the field, and broke every tree of the field. 
•	9:31-32 ...and the flax and the barley was smitten; for the barley was in season, and flax was ripe. 
•	But the wheat and the rye were not smitten; for they were not grown up. 
•	10:15 ...there remained no green things in the trees, or in the herbs of the fields, through all the land of Egypt. 
   IPUWER PAPYRUS
      LEIDEN 344  	           TORAH - EXODUS
•	5:5 All animals, their hearts weep. Cattle moan... 
•	9:2-3 Behold, cattle are left to stray, and there is none to gather them together. 
•	9:3 ...the hand of hw"hy is upon thy cattle which is in the field... and there shall be a very grievous sickness. 
•	9:19 ...gather thy cattle, and all that thou hast in the field... 
•	9:21 And he that did not fear the word of hw"hy left his servants and cattle in the field. 
   IPUWER PAPYRUS
      LEIDEN 344  	           TORAH - EXODUS
•	9:11 The land is without light 
•	4:3 (5:6) Forsooth, the children of princes are dashed against the walls. 
•	6:12 Forsooth, the children of princes are cast out in the streets. 6:3 The prison is ruined. 
•	2:13 He who places his brother in the ground is everywhere. 
•	3:14 It is groaning throughout the land, mingled with lamentations.
•	10:22 And there was a thick darkness in all the land of Egypt. 
•	12:29 And it came to pass, that at midnight hw"hy smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive that was in the prison. 12:30 ...there was not a house where there was not one dead. 12:30 ...there was a great cry in Egypt. 
   IPUWER PAPYRUS
      LEIDEN 344  	           TORAH - EXODUS
•	7:1 Behold, the fire has mounted up on high. Its burning goes forth against the enemies of the land. 
•	3:2 Gold and lapis lazuli, silver and malachite, carnelian and bronze... are fastened on the neck of female slaves. 
•	13:21 ... by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night. 
•	12:35-36 ...and they requested from the Egyptians, silver and gold articles and clothing. And hw"hy made the Egyptians favour them and they granted their request. The Israelites thus drained Egypt of its wealth.
A coincidence? – A novel written by an Egyptian with no basis in fact? 
“What the ancestors foretold has arrived”
•	Before we go there, let’s review Exodus 3 and the incidents at the burning bush.
•	His name was…
•	‘hidden’.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/pyt/index.htm
10. The Deceased King in Heaven,
Utterances 272-274.
•	399a. It is Unas who judges with him whose name is hidden,
•	399b. (on) this day of slaying the eldest.
•	400a. Unas is he who eats men and lives on gods.
“Unas Pyramid Texts” in Ancient Egyptian Literature at 1.1.36-38 by Miriam Lichtheim
•	“Unas will judge with ‘Him-whose-name-is-hidden’ on the day of slaying the eldest.”
•	“Unas is he who eats men, feeds on gods.”
In Bible Review, VI.13, June, 1990, p. 21, 42, in an article entitled “Three Ways to Look at the Ten Plagues”, Ziony Zevitt deduced that “these texts indicate that an ancient tradition in Egypt recalled the slaying of all, or some, of the first-born gods on a particular night”.
NAS Exodus 12:12 For I will go through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike down all the first-born in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments-- I am hw"hy>..
Additional note: According to an article in Tel Aviv 4 1977 (also cited by Zevitt, Bible Review above as well as footnote 37 of Exodus 12, 
The Net Bible) 
“The Smiting of the First-Born – 
An Egyptian Myth?” by M.Gilula, 
Unas’ prophecy of the death of the firstborn is found inscribed centuries later in many Middle Kingdom tombs all over Egypt. Amenemhet IV, the last male Pharaoh of the 12th dynasty to rule Egypt (his son never sat on the throne) looks like a good fit here. And neither he nor his son has a pyramid. More on this later.
Behold, Egypt is fallen to pouring of water, and he who poured water on 
the ground has carried off 
the strong man in misery.

Behold, the Serpent is lured from its hole, and the secrets of the 
Kings of Upper 
and Lower Egypt are divulged.
This is from Chapter 7. Notice two points. First, ‘Egypt is fallen to pouring water’ and second, ‘the Serpent is lured from its hole’. 
Exodus 14:3-4 NAS
•	v3 For Pharaoh will say of the sons of Israel, They are wandering aimlessly in the land; the wilderness has shut them in.
•	v4 Thus I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and he will chase after them; and I will be honored through Pharaoh and all his army, and the Egyptians will know that I am hw"hy>..

And the coincidences continue to mount. 
•	Interesting how this is such a great fit if the conventional chronology of ancient Egypt is adjusted.
Now let’s move on to the next strategy. 
First, a review.
 
•	Strategy 1: Demonstrate that the historical events recorded in the Scriptures are in conflict with the ‘accepted conventional chronology of ancient Egypt’ established through archaeology.
•	Strategy 2: Demonstrate that prophecies foretelling the coming of the Messiah disqualify Yeshua from being The Messiah.

What is…
•	The Seder Olam Rabbah
•	How about: 5766
What is the Seder Olam Rabbah? 
•	Jewish literature of second century A.D
•	Dated to about 160 AD.
•	It was first printed in 1514.
•	It is a Midrashic chronological work
•	Generally regarded as a work of the tanna R. Yose b. Halafta. [The ‘tannaim’ were the masters of the ‘oral law’, i.e. the men who wrote the Talmud.] Yevamot 82b and Niddah 46b.
What is the Seder Olam Rabbah?
•	Results in Adam having been created in 3760 B.C.
•	It attempts to chronologize ancient history from various ancient Israelite historical works.
•	It is a chronological record extending from Adam to the revolt of Bar Kokba.
What is the Seder Olam Rabbah?
•	It is complete only up to the time of Alexander the Great.
•	From Alexander to Hadrian occupies a very small portion at he end of chapter 30.
•	In its present form the work consists of thirty chapters.
•	Each ten chapters forms a section, or ‘gate’.
What is the Seder Olam Rabbah?
•	The 2nd part dealing with the post-Alexandrian period, has been lost.
•	Many passages quoted in the Talmud are missing in the present edition of the SOR.
•	The writing style follows that of the Sadducees.
•	It is similar to the Ethiopic Book of Jubilees, although more coherent.
What is the Seder Olam Rabbah?
•	It says the Persians ruled for 52 years.
•	It states that the 52 years spanned the reigns of 3 Persian kings and 1 Medean king.
•	It records the destruction of the Second Temple as the year 3828 from Creation.
•	The author relates the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel to the time between the destructions of the 1st and 2nd temples.
AUOH (revised) states that the 
Persians ruled Israel from 539 BC 
to 332 BC (207 years) 10 kings. 
Rabbinic chronology (SOR) says the Persians ruled for 52 years.
AUOH (revised) dates the destruction of the first temple to around 587/6. 
SOR dates the destruction of the first temple to 420/1. Adding 490 years (Daniel’s 70 weeks) brings the year to around 70, the time when the second temple was destroyed.
Daniel 9:25-26 Let’s Review
•	v25 So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. 
•	v26 Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut-off.

The SOR dates the end of the 70 weeks as 
the destruction of the second temple 
(somewhere between 68-70).
With a week equal to 7 years, the SOR states that the Messiah would be ‘cut-off’ somewhere between 61-63. Since Yeshua had been ‘cut-off’ over 30 years earlier, he is thereby disqualified from being the Messiah because he was not ‘cut-off’ at the correct time.
SOR understands the phrase ‘from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem’ to be the exact date when the first temple was destroyed.
Vocabulary Building
•	Implicit: 1. capable of being understood from something else though unexpressed : IMPLIED
Implications of adhering to SOR: 
Anyone who subscribes to the 
Rabbinic chronology (SOR, 5766) 
implicitly denies Yeshua as Messiah.
Why?
•	Belief that 5766 is the correct date ‘implies’ acceptance of the SOR as correct and thereby allows the unexpressed understanding that the ‘cutting-off’ took place between 61 and 63 which therefore eliminates Yeshua as Messiah.
Remember we are evaluating Strategy 2
•	Note: This is not rabbi bashing, for even Peter was used by Satan in an attempt to de-rail the plan of the Most High.
Before we continue with the prophecies of Daniel and the removal of the ‘Revelation of The Most High to the World’ mantle from the Jews, some of you may be wondering about whether there is a consensus among rabbis past and present as to whether or not they support the SOR as being without error.
It just so happens I have some evidence to report on that very subject.
•	15. Saadiah Gaon (882-942): Commentary on Daniel, pp 177, 193-4 states that there were 17 kings.
•	14. Seder Malkhei Romi (10th century): Presents 2 separate chronologies a)according to the sages b) according to the books of the Romans 10 Persian kings.
It just so happens I have some evidence to report on that very subject.
•	13. Josippon (10th century): Ambiguously states that there were more than 4 kings in that period.
•	12. Issac Abravanel (1437-1508):The Sages did not reject that there were more than 3 Persian kings. They did not count them. They mentioned only those who had consequences for Israel, whether for good or for bad.
It just so happens I have some evidence to report on that very subject.
•	11. Azariah de Rossi (1574): Cites the testimonies of the ancient Greek historian Xenophon, Philo, Josephus, Ptolemy, Eusebius, and Jerome to show that the Persian period was longer than SOR has. Additionally, he sites Niddah 46b in saying the R. Yose did not always agree with the figures he included in his work.
It just so happens I have some evidence to report on that very subject.
•	10. Isidore Loeb (1889): Writes that the rabbinic chronology from creation to the destruction of the Second Temple is only a symbolic chronology.
•	9. Baer Ratner (1894): Writes that the Sages certainly knew that the Persian period spanned the reigns of more Persian kings than the ones included in.
It just so happens I have some evidence to report on that very subject.
•	8. Abraham Akavya (1953): Writes that the Jews at the time of R. Yose knew very little about the events of the period after TANAKH was closed.
•	7. Simon Schwab (1962): Posits that the Sages purposely stated an incorrect chronology.
It just so happens I have some evidence to report on that very subject.
•	6. Judah Rosenthal (1972): Calls the SOR ‘confusion’.
•	5. Mordechai Breuer (1973): Believes that the SOR was not meant to be taken literally or understood as a statement of historical fact.

It just so happens I have some evidence to report on that very subject.
•	4. Samuel Kedar (1984): Writes that the Sages purposely stated an incorrect chronology in order to prevent people from using their chronology to accurately predict the time of the coming of the Messiah.
•	3. Samuel Hakohen (1988): Agrees with Kedar.
It just so happens I have some evidence to report on that very subject.
•	2. Abraham Ibn Ezra (12th Century): States that he does not follow SOR.
•	1. Rashi (11th century): Records more kings then SOR
Also, two editions of  TANAKH published by Orthodox institutions: 
The Soncino Books of the Bible 
(1945-1952) and Da’at Mikra 
(1970 on) consistently adopt the 
AUOH with barely a mention of the SOR chronology of the Persian period.
And… The timeline recently published by the Orthodox Union in connection with the ‘Jerusalem 3000’ celebration does not support the SOR. If it did, the 3000 year celebration of David’s capture of Jerusalem would not occur until the year 2134.
There are many more rabbis and testimony. How much does it take to demonstrate the point. 
•	Evidence exists that many rabbis knew or know of the differences and stated so in their written works that they disagreed in someway with SOR.
To sum up this section, 
Brad Aaronson says it best:
•	Brad Aaronson (1991): “If we cannot believe the Sages when they made historical statements, how can we believe them about anything?” He also claims that those who disagree with the SOR accept a picture of history that snaps the chain that links Baruch, the son of Neriah (the disciple of Jeremiah) and Ezra, thereby implicitly denying the claim that there is an unbroken chain of tradition from the time of Moses until the present.
Where does that leave us? 
•	We have a reliable text.
•	We have most it not all the tools.
•	We have archeology (adjusted).
•	We have multi-nation time links.
•	We are in pursuit of the truth.
•	We know the plan of the enemy
It doesn’t get much better than that!
House of David
School of Biblical Studies

Thank you