WTBS article prove 587/586 BC fall of Babylon

by crazies 84 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AuldSoul

  scholar,

  if you read crazies post again and follow the years the WATCHTOWER SOCIETY provides for the terms of reign, you count backward to secular chronology (and Bible chronology, for that matter), but not Watchtower chronology.

  In other words, according to nothing more than what they have printed, a missing king or kings who reigned for collectively 20 years is required. However, this same king or kings would have had to place a stay on the Egibi family's transactions to miss appearing in a single record during the period in question.

  AuldSoul
• 

  scholar

  AuldSoul

  Neo-Babylonian chronology is a 'dog's breakfast' because for the Babylonian Gap problem of twenty years shown by comparing it with WT biblical chronology. There is also the problem of the missing seven years of Neb's absence from the throne and there is the confusion over the length of the reign of Evil Merodach as to whether he reigned for two years or sixteen years.

  Celebrated WT scholars have shown much wisdom in not using this secular chronology for the purposes of constructing a biblical chronology which accepts the reality of the seventy years.

  scholar JW
• 

  Enigma One

  Scholar when you use "celebrated watchtower scholars"......exactly who are they CELEBRATED by? Given the lame education these morons have I'd be "The most exalted, celebrated Enigma scholar". Puleeeze. I just threw up a little in my mouth.
  
  LOL
• 

  AuldSoul

  Neo-Babylonian chronology is a 'dog's breakfast' because for the Babylonian Gap problem of twenty years shown by comparing it with WT biblical chronology.

  It is the WT Chronology that has a gap of twenty years, if you go by the dating of events as quoted above. Secular history does not have such a gap. Astronomical dating fixes several key events in the timeline to within days of its occurrence.

  Just so you know, the Watchtower Society knows that present-day archeological discoveries destroy their pretenses for keeping the 607 BC date. They aren't confused about it. I have talked with a lady who was part of a party from a European Branch Office. These people were sent scouring Europe to the various musems to take pictures of all sorts of archeological finds. The other night she lamented that she never saw a single one of the photographs.

  A ancient-language expert overheard what they were doing at one of the musems and walked around with them, reading the texts to them as they went.

  No, I think you have got something mistaken that even the Society knows the truth about. 1914 was NOT what they say it is was.

  AuldSoul
• 

  scholar

  AuldSoul

  I repeat Neo-Babylonian chronology is a 'dog's breakfast' because it used as a principal base for all secular chronologies which simply are the 'deep things of Satan' who seeks to deceive and misleed the many by chronologies that are the product of higher critics. Such people fail to uphold the integrity of the Bible and its chronology as fully explained by celebrated WT scholars and such mischevious ones are condemned to spiritual darkness.

  There is a twenty year gap between the secular and sacred chronology and there remains Nebuchadnezzer's missing 'seven years unaccounted for by this chronology. Present day archaeological discoveries are of great interest WT scholars and his material simply confirms the date of 607 for the Fall because of the increasing date over what has become known as the 'Babylonian Gap ' problem. Scholars the world over show a marked preference for 586 rather than the apostate date of 587 so before you demonstrate any triumphialism you need to sort out what date is supposedly correct: 586 or 587?

  scholar JW
• 

  AuldSoul

  scholar,

  I don't have to sort that out at all. I merely have to establish that 597 BC was the year of Jehoiachin's exile to take the teeth out of your celebrated WT scholars overly-aged mouths regarding 607 BC. That is easily accomplished, which is why they distract attention from the many lines of proof for that year—including the identical line of proof for 539 BC as the fall of Babylon.

  Besides, the closest thing they had to a "scholar" (to say nothing of a "celebrated" one) died some years ago.

  I repeat ...

  I've noticed, much to my chagrin. I believe it is crazies who has to substantiate any claims he made on this thread.

  AuldSoul
• 

  mkr32208

  I repeat Neo-Babylonian chronology is a 'dog's breakfast' because it used as a principal base for all secular chronologies which simply are the 'deep things of Satan' who seeks to deceive and misleed the many by chronologies that are the product of higher critics. Such people fail to uphold the integrity of the Bible and its chronology as fully explained by celebrated WT scholars and such mischevious ones are condemned to spiritual darkness.

  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
  AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
  AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
  AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
  AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

  Nuff said! The facts don't agree with the JW's so Satan musta caused the facts too be wrong! Obviously Satan is more powerful than Jehober then noncelebratedneedtogotoschooler! Maybe your worshiping up the wrong tree!?
• 

  ellderwho

  is the confusion over the length of the reign of Evil Merodach as to whether he reigned for two years or sixteen years

  See scholar, you have no where to go. You really dont and you know it. You have nothing to show. I challenge you here and long ago to shut every ones mouth.

  Simply show your kings list with years reign. You cannot, lest you be shown as the fraud you and the tower are.

  And what a corner you and the tower have been painted into by the first post of this thread exposing your kings lists from the so-called faithful and discreet slaves food at the proper time. Paper trail has truely exposed you and the tower.

  All this nonsensical bologna you bring. Its nothing but typical smoke and mirror tower style. Alleymoms' total disemboweling of you should have been enough for you to realize you and the tower have 0, thats zero.
• 

  scholar

  elderwho

  This post has already posted the presentation of the regnal data for the Neo-Babylonian period as referred in the Insight to the Scriptures so there is no need for me to comment on this. The regnal data simply conflicts with biblical history with its regnal data for the Divided Monarchy so we utilize the same data as all scholars but we employ a different methodology and interpretation of matters. The Insight volumes shows the regnal data for the Divided Monarchy under the article 'Chronology' so our chronology is accurate, in harmony with the Bible and blows the apostate chronology out of the water. So there!

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  AuldSoul

  You cannot prove that 597 was the year of Jehoiachin's exile because you are in error by twenty years as celebrated WT scholars have long shown that this event falls in 617 BCE. The Jonsson hypothesis attempts such 'proof' in the GTR, 4th edn but it fails utterly because it has the history of the period in a mess because it of its inaccurate presentation of the reign of Jehoiakim.

  scholar JW