Blog or Article?
Blogs often focus on personal opinion, experiences, views, anecdotes or advice. Blogs tend to have a relaxed and conversational feel, such as in storytelling and are generally 300-500 words.
Articles aim to deliver well-researched, informative content with solid evidence to back up the points made. Articles are usually more formal, organized and frequently range 500-1000 words.
Comments
I did not mean to say "thanks for sharing Ken with respect" computer jumble
I thought i was saying Trinitarians speak of him with respect
anyway I also stumbled on this by Earnest Martin
http://www.askelm.com/prophecy/p980304.htm
Thanks for sharing Ken with respect
The trinitarians speak of him
http://www.reformation.org/newton.html
Even Islam respects him
I See Newton as a very important figure in the church , even the trinitarians embrace him as" not so bad"
I found this on line tonight
I never heard of Antsey before
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1913_anstey_romance.html
I found this in his Online book 10. Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727), the illustrious natural philosopher., was born at Woolsthrope Manor in Lincolnshire. He was the greatest mathematician of modern times. He discovered the binomial theorem, and the method of fluxions, and in 1666 the contemplation of the fall of an apple led to his greatest discovery of all, that of the law of gravitation. The following year he discovered the composite nature of light. He held the Chair of Mathematics at Cambridge for 33 years. In 1699 he became Master of the Mint. He represented his University in Parliament, and was elected President of the Royal Society, a post which he occupied for 24 years. He was knighted in 1705. He lived to his eightieth year, and was buried in Westminster Abbey. Bishop Burnet described him as the "whitest soul he ever knew." Sir Isaac Newton made a hobby of Chronology, and became an ardent student of the subject during the last 30 years of his life. He read widely, and thought deeply on the problems of early Chronology, and came to the conclusion that the Greeks and the Latins, no less than the Babylonians, the Assyrians and the Egyptians, had greatly exaggerated their antiquity, from motives of national vanity. In his great work The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, which was published posthumously in 1728, the year after his death, he endeavoured to construct a system on new bases, independent of the Greek Chronologers, whose unsatisfactory method of reckoning by generations, reigns and successions he exposed, laying bare the foundations on which their Chronology rested, and thereby overthrowing the elementary dates of Greek, Latin and Egyptian Chronology. He reduced the date of the taking of Troy from B.C. 1183 to 904. He followed Sir John Marshall in identifying Sesostris with Shishak, whose date he thus reduced from B.C. 1300 to 965. Newton cites Thucydides and Socrates, the musician Terpander, and the Olympic disk of Lycurgus, he uses his calculation of the precession of the equinoxes since the time of Hipparcus, and he substitutes a reckoning of 20 years each instead of 33 for the succession of the Kings of Sparta. Newton cannot be said to have established his point, but he has certainly destroyed the possibility of regarding the Chronology of the Greeks as a stable foundation for any system of Chronology that can be used as a standard by which to judge, and correct, the testimony of the Old Testament. Yet this conjectural Chronology of the Greeks is the foundation upon which the Canon of Ptolemy rests, and the Canon of Ptolemy is the only obstacle in the way of the establishment of the Chronology of the Old Testament.
(5) Sir Isaac Newton's "Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended."
Before dismissing this subject, a reference must be made to that most fascinating work of Sir Isaac Newton, The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended. The book was published in 1728, the year after he died. We learn from the account which he gave of it, some five months before his death, to his friend Dr. Pearce, Bishop of Rochester, that Chronology was a pet subject of his. "He had spent 30 years," Dr. Pearce tells us, at intervals, in reading over all the authors, or parts of authors, which could furnish any materials for forming a just account of the subject, that he had in his reading made collections from these authors, and had at the end of 30 years, composed from them his Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms, and that he had written it over sixteen times, making few alterations therein, but what were for the sake of shortening it, leaving out, in every later copy, some of the authorities and references on which he had grounded his opinion." A few days before his death, Bishop Pearce visited and dined with him at Kensington. "I found him," says Dr. Pearce, " writing over his Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms without the help of spectacles, at the greatest distance in the room from the window, and with a parcel of books on the table casting a shade on the table. "Sir," said I, "you seem to be writing in a place where you cannot well see." His answer was, "Little light serves me." He then told me that he was preparing his Chronology for the press, and that he had written the greatest part of it for that purpose."
In this work Sir Isaac Newton brings to bear upon a most intricate and difficult subject the wide and long continued reading, the unrivalled astronomical knowledge and the acute and penetrating insight of an intellectual giant.
His main conclusions, so far as they bear upon the antiquity of man, may be briefly summarized as follows:-
"Greek Antiquities are full of poetic fictions. They wrote nothing in prose before the Conquest of Asia by Cyrus. A little after the death of Alexander the Great (B.C. 323) the earliest Greek historians began to set down generations, reigns, and successions, and by putting reigns and successions as equipollent to generations, and 3 generations to 100 or 120 years, they have made the antiquities of Greece 300 or 400 years older than the truth. Eratosthenes wrote about 100 years after the death of Alexander the Great. He was followed by Apollodorus, and these two have been followed ever since by Chronologers. Plutarch quotes Aristotle as arguing from the Olympic disc which had the name of Lycurgus on it, making him contemporary with Iphitus and his companion in ordering the Olympic Festivals on the first Olympiad, B.C. 776. But Eratosthenes and Apollodorus, and others, computing their Chronology by the succession of the Kings of Sparta, make him 100 years older. Plutarch relates the unquestionably historic interview of Solon with Croesus, but the Chronologers, by their method of computing, make it out that he was dead many years before the date of his visit to Croesus."
"The Chronology of the Latins is still more uncertain. The records of the Latins were burnt by the Gauls B.C. 390, i.e. 64 years before the death of Alexander the Great, and Quintus Fabius Pictor, the oldest historian of the Latins, lived 100 years after that King."
"The Assyrian Empire began with Pul and Tiglath Pileser, and lasted 170 years; accordingly Herodotus made Semiramis only 5 generations, or 166 years older than Nitocris, the mother of the last King of Babylon. But Ctesias made Semiramis 1,500 years older than Nitocris, and feigned a long series of Kings in Assyria whose names are not Assyrian, and have no affinity with the Assyrian names in Scripture."
"The priests of Egypt so magnified their antiquities as to tell Herodotus that from Menes to Moeris, whose date is B.C. 755, was 11,000 years, and they filled up the interval with feigned Kings who had done nothing, thus making the date of Menes and the commencement of civilization in Egypt B.C. 11,755."
"Eratosthenes and Apollodorus compute the time between the return of the Heraclides and the Battle of Thermopylae by the number of the Kings of Sparta, viz. 17, and reckoning 36 1/2 years to each King they make the period 622 years."
Newton suggests that 18 or 20 years would be a more accurate estimate, and reduces the period to 340 years, a reduction of 278 years. He makes the taking of Troy 80 years earlier than the return of the Heraclides. The Argonautic Expedition he places a generation before the taking of Troy, viz. 33 years instead of 42, and the Wars of Sesostris in Thrace another generation, or 28 years instead of 75, before the Argonautic Expedition. Thus:-
Leading Events of Early' Greek History.
Received Chronology. Sir Isaac Newton.
B.C. B.C.
Wars of Sesostris 1300 965
Argonautic Expedition 1225 937
Taking of Troy 1183 904
Return of the Heraclides 1103 825
Battle of Thermopylae 480 480
[Hence] From Wars of Sesostris to Battle of Thermopylae 820 485
485
A difference of 335 years
Thus, according to Newton, the Chronologers, by their computation, have exaggerated the antiquity of Greek history, and antedated its earlier events by 300 or 400 years.
"The Europeans had no chronology at all before the times of the Persian Empire, and whatsoever Chronology thay now have of ancienter times hath been framed by reasoning and conjecture. First Pherecydes, the Athenian, wrote of the antiquities and ancient genealogies of the Athenians in the reign of Darius Hystaspes (B.C. 521-485). He was one of the first European writers of this kind, and one of the best. He was followed by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Epimenides the historian, Hellanicus and Hipparchus. Then Euphorus, the disciple of Isocrates, formed a Chronology of Greece from the return of the Heraclides to the 20th year of Philip of Macedon. These all computed the years by the number of generations, or successive priestesses of Juno, or Archons of Athens, or Kings of Sparta. The Olympian Era was not used at all, and not even mentioned, nor any other Era till after the Arundelian Marbles were composed, 60 years after the death of Alexander the Great (in the fourth year of Olympiad 128) B.C. 264."
"Not till the following Olympiad, when Timaeus Siculus wrote his history of Greece, was Chronology reduced to a reckoning of years. His Chronology was computed in the same way as that of his predecessors, but was expressed in terms of four years called Olympiads. Eratosthenes wrote 100 years after the death of Alexander the Great (B.C. 220). He was followed by Apollodorus, and these two have been followed by Chronologers ever since."
We see clearly that the basis and foundation on which the structure of Greek Chronology was erected was largely subjective and fanciful, and we readily agree with the conclusion of Newton that, so far as the records of the history of the race are concerned, "Mankind cannot be much older than is represented in Scripture."
Great stuff you shared.
I am amazed when I read his works ,(i can understand his Bible stuff).
That Newton site is a great resource.
Rick
Newton is quoted as having attributed ALL of his scientific discovery to the working of the holy spirit.
He also rejected the trinity on the grounds that it was "repugnant to reason." He recognized the parenthesis of Colossians 1:16 and 17 long before we were taught it by Dr. Wierwille.
When Newton gave up the chair of mathematics at Oxford University, he was replaced by one William Whiston (upon Newton's recommendation). Whiston was also non-trinitarian. He was more vocal about it than Newton was. He wrote and distributed tracts on the subject. He was not as famous as Newtown and didn't last long, comparatively speaking. He was canned for making this stand.
Whiston is most famous for his translation of Joseph's history. It is still the most widely accepted translation of Joseph. If you have a copy of Joseph's work, it probably has Whiston's name on the binder.
Thanks again.
Bless,
Ken