607

by Zico 290 Replies latest jw friends

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    Um...did he post any source for the scholars that he claims support his view? Or even any articles citations for the WT scholars to support his view? If he did, I missed it. If he didn't, par for the course. He pretends to know his subject and quotes non-existent scholars who agree that 537 marked the beginning of the desolation of Babylon...then he can't cite ONE source—not even a Watchtower agrees with him.

    Ah well...I'm firmly convinced, AlanF. Your name for this poster is correct, "Scholar Pretendus"

  • DJ
    DJ

    http://www.607challenge.org/

    Have you guys seen this? A jw can make almost a half a million in US dollars if they can prove that 607 is correct .

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    AuldSoul wrote:

    : Um...did he post any source for the scholars that he claims support his view? Or even any articles citations for the WT scholars to support his view? If he did, I missed it. If he didn't, par for the course. He pretends to know his subject and quotes non-existent scholars who agree that 537 marked the beginning of the desolation of Babylon...then he can't cite ONE source—not even a Watchtower agrees with him.

    That has been this charlatan's modus operandi since he first posted on this board. I've caught him in dozens of outright lies, and probably several hundred ridiculous and transparently dishonest distortions of the facts. The guy has Jon Lovitt's old Saturday Night Live character The Pathological Liar beat by a mile.

    AlanF

  • scholar
    scholar

    Auld Soul

    I answered your five questions on my own behalf but evidently you are still not satisfied which of course comes as no surprise. There are scholars who do not support the Jonsson nonsense that Jeremiah 25:12 applies only to the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE, but I have long argued against this perverted interpretation maintaining the opinion that the prophecy of judgement againt Babylon would only be fulfilled after the seventy years ended which was not 539 but 537 BCE and this judgement was not the demise of Babylon but its desolation.

    An article dealing on the subject of the seventy years examining all of the principal texts was published in 1997 and is the most recent and exhaustive study on the subject unbeknown to the laziness and incompetence of Jonsson and his 'phantom' editors. On page 92 the scholar stated "In 25:12 it moves to the punishment of Babylon after seventy years" followed by the observation on page 96 " 25:12 prophesies that Babylon will be punished and desolated after seventy years". Nowhere in this study is an application of 539 BCE in reference to Jeremiah 25:12 so the interpretation of matters as presented by the celebrated ones and yours truly has at last been vindicated. This ground-breaking article was cited in a recent bibliography on Jeremiah in a recenly published reference work on the Old Testament, 2005.

    scholar JW

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    scholar pretendus said to AuldSoul:

    : I answered your five questions on my own behalf

    Actually you merely made numbered replies. Those replies contained no answers, but merely your usual subterfuges and lies.

    : but evidently you are still not satisfied which of course comes as no surprise.

    Lies should satisfy no one who has integrity to facts.

    : There are scholars who do not ;support the Jonsson nonsense that Jeremiah 25:12 applies only to the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE,

    Who? You have yet to support this claim that you've lately been making. If you think that your stupid argument about a mysterious 1997 paper supports this, see below.

    : but I have long argued against this perverted interpretation

    For no reason other than the Watchtower organization logically collapses if it's true.

    : maintaining the opinion

    Good choice of words!

    : that the prophecy of judgement againt Babylon would only be fulfilled after the seventy years ended which was not 539 but 537 BCE and this judgement was not the demise of Babylon but its desolation.

    You have yet to set forth an iota of proof that 537 is the correct date. You've merely set forth you personal opinion, and that of the Society, about it.

    Your statement that "this judgement was not the demise of Babylon but its desolation" is ridiculous on its face, and a perfect example of special pleading. The demise of Babylon -- which you correctly distinguish from its later desolation -- occurred when the Babylonian empire ended in 539 B.C. Jer. 25:12 explicitly mentions the king of Babylon's "punishment" or "calling to account", and there can hardly be a better example of such punishment than the demise of the empire headed by the kings of Nebuchadnezzar's dynasty. To claim that such demise was not the punishment mentioned by Jeremiah, but that a desolation occurring at least 800 years later, after the 4th century A.D., is pure special pleading.

    : An article dealing on the subject of the seventy years examining all of the principal texts was published in 1997

    Like Mommy, you've failed to provide source references. Like Mommy, you're afraid that critics will examine your sources.

    : and is the most recent and exhaustive study on the subject unbeknown to the laziness and incompetence of Jonsson and his 'phantom' editors.

    If you ever provide a source reference, I have no doubt that you're going to eat your words.

    I also have no doubt that your words also show "the laziness and incompetence" of "celebrated WT scholars", since they will not have referenced your source anywhere.

    : On page 92 the scholar stated "In 25:12 it moves to the punishment of Babylon after seventy years"

    This is perfectly consistent with a punishment in 539, where the death of Belshazzar and the dethroning of Nabonidus, along with the overthrow of Babylon itself, mark the end of the 70 years of Babylonian domination over the Middle East. So your reference is meaningless as to proving your claims.

    : followed by the observation on page 96 " 25:12 prophesies that Babylon will be punished and desolated after seventy years".

    Ditto. The statement allows that such punishment and desolation can take place anytime after Babylon's demise as ruler of the Middle East.

    : Nowhere in this study is an application of 539 BCE in reference to Jeremiah 25:12

    And I'm sure that there is no mention of 537, either. Otherwise you'd be crowing loudly about trouncing "apostate higher criticism". This again illustrates your dishonesty and double standards.

    : so the interpretation of matters as presented by the celebrated ones and yours truly has at last been vindicated.

    LOL! Not at all. And if you actually manage to set out a source reference for this article, it will be carefully examined by the various amateur scholars on this board, and again I have no doubt that it will contain information that blows away your claims. My statement is based on long experience with your dishonest "scholarship" and quoting practices.

    : This ground-breaking article was cited in a recent bibliography on Jeremiah in a recenly published reference work on the Old Testament, 2005.

    This being in the public arena, you should have no qualms about posting full source references. But I won't hold my breath.

    AlanF

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    What article is this, "scholar"? It's not that hard to give the title, author, and journal....all you give us to go is the year. Please give a proper citation... I'd like to read what it says.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    I think it could be this paper:

    "Jeremiah and the seventy years in the Hebrew Bible : inner-biblical reflections on the prophet and his prophecy". By: Applegate, John Source: Book of Jeremiah and its reception, p 91-110. Louvain : Leuven Univ Pr, 1997 ; Louvain : Peeters

  • MuadDib
    MuadDib

    "I have over thirty years studying chronology and have completed postgraduate studies in Religion, Theology and Philosophy so I think I have good experience in all such matters."

    Really? I only have about six years of studying history under my belt and I can tell you're so full of shit you can't tell your ass from your elbow. You possess absolutely none of the "intellectual credibility" you claim - in fact, everything you have said so far in this thread demonstrates exactly the opposite; that you have no intellectual credibility (and, I suspect, no accreditation or achievement to your name at all) and you are completely ignorant of academic methodology. No wonder you profess not to care for secular studies - you'd be laughed out of any serious dicussion with real scholars so fast so your head would spin.

    Well, keep rambling. The world will continue to move on, and with any luck you and your toxically ignorant ilk will be left behind to molder in your own self-aggrandized delusions. The rest of us - those who actually take scholasticism seriously and know what the hell they're talking about - take great comfort that we have a better handle on things.

  • scholar
    scholar

    Leolaia

    Correct, this is the paper and it is cited in the Bibliography to the Article 'JEREMIAH' written by P.J. Scalise in the Dictionary of the Old Testament Historical Books, Editors: Bill T Arnold & H.G.M. Williamson, 2005, pp.538-41, InterVarsity Press: Illinois.

    This paper was either ignored or by its omission from Jonsson's 4th edition of his GTR on the grounds of research incompetence and overides his somewhat dogmatic interpretation of the seventy years. I do not agree with everything the article says but many of Applegate's conclusions concur with that of the celebrated WT scholars and 'scholar' himself.

    A remarkable statement which disagrees with the Jonsson hypothesis is the fact that "In Zechariah, Jeremiah is not mentioned, although the book has signs of Jeremianic influence" on page 109 of Applegate's study. Jonsson in his 4th edn GTR, p.227 claims that "the seventy years mentioned in the text do not refer to the prophecy of Jeremiah'. With this false conclusion along with others it is easily discerned how Jonsson and his cronies have got the seventy years so wrong.

    scholar JW

  • scholar
    scholar

    Muadib

    If you do not like or enjoy my posts then don't read them. My posts for the last five years have been most challenging for all of the intellectuals who have and currently post on this board in reponse to my postings.

    scholar JW

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit