"Its amazing to me how much Scholar personally attacks. I can't understand how this sort of behaviour is acceptable in any way. "--ackack ==================== It's always been said that if you can't defeat the message, kill the messenger!!! I believe that's what "scholar"(?) has been doing to you, Auld Soul... but I'm sure you already know that! You naughty boy is probably just trying to further expose scholar's unflattering intellectual deficiency. Take him squirming, several notches down, eh? I keep on wondering what posters like scholar and jw are doing in a chat room such as this one. Doesn't the mother org tell them not to mix with thinking people like many who are here? Hey scholar, did you forget what mommy org said?.... "Bad association spoils useful habits." Don't you feel guilty about associating with admitted "apostates"--- WT Rule#1 ??? Well, just a reminder.........
607
by Zico 290 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Lady Liberty
I keep on wondering what posters like scholar and jw are doing in a chat room such as this one. Doesn't the mother org tell them not to mix with thinking people like many who are here?
I agree, that is why I asked Scholar if he counts his time here. Notice his reply was, that was none of my business! I am sure the ONLY reason he posts here is to claim hours for his monthly feild report. He certainly has made it clear he by no means cares to change anyones beliefs by his posts. So with that in mind, WHY is he here?? You would think he would give up and be productive somewhere. Unless of course like I said he is only counting "time".
Sincerely,
Lady Liberty
-
scholar
helppls
The date of 597 is wrong because it fails to account for the biblical fact of the seventy years which as a historic period of exile, servitude and desolation ran from the Fall in 607 until the Return in 537 BCE. This period of seventy years clashes with the supposedly astronomical fixed date of 587 or 586 BCE for the Fall. The date of 607 is derived directly from biblical history wheras 587 or 587 is based upon an interpretation of astronomical evidence which shows a twenty gap between the secular and biblical chronology.
The date 537 is in fact derived from the interpretation of astronomical evidence but his where methodology comes to the fore as the chronologist must select a method which agrees with the available evidence from both the secular and the biblical and in the case of the celebrated WT scholars have decide that the biblical seventy years must take precedence over so-called astronomical evidence .
scholar JW
-
scholar
Lady Liberty
I do have access to Grayson's work but what point are you trying to make by comparing his material with the Insight article on 'Nebuchadnezzer. Does Grayson's research accommodate the biblical 'seventy years' if not Why not? Because if the secular records do not accommodate the seventy years then such evidence is simply unreliable and must be treated with care in order to construct a biblical chronology.
scholar JW
-
moomanchu
When is the celebration for the celebrated watchtower scholars I wanna go.
-
Jeffro
I do have access to Grayson's work but what point are you trying to make by comparing his material with the Insight article on 'Nebuchadnezzer. Does Grayson's research accommodate the biblical 'seventy years' if not Why not? Because if the secular records do not accommodate the seventy years then such evidence is simply unreliable and must be treated with care in order to construct a biblical chronology.
'scholar' likes to tout "the biblical 'seventy years'", as if there is no valid interpretation of the scriptures that is consistent with the known secular evidence. On the contrary, the secular evidence regarding this period can be completely reconciled with the bible, as I have previously indicated. It is sheer ignorance to insist on an interpretation that is at odds with the evidence - even more so when a completely compatible interpretation exists.
-
Lady Liberty
Scholar,
Here is the information that I am refering to. Please take note that the seventy years are fully intact! The Insight book Vol.#2 under Nebuchadnezzar quotes from this book and insert their own date, when in reality, on page 100 it gives the exact quote but with NO date! The Society inserts THEIR date. Leading the reader to believe that this expert supports their dates, which in fact he DOES NOT!! No one would even know this UNLESS they had the book to compare. And when you do see that they have deliberatly been misleading, you cannot help but feel angry! So my question is, why do they NEED to be deceptive? They do because there IS NO PROOF for 607! So they need to try and deceptively CREATE it!
The Seventy Years: 609 to 539 BCE
609- Nabopolassars 17 th reignal year. Babylon was dominating all surrounding nations. See Jer. 25:11, 25:17- 26. 27:6-8, 12-13(All the nations will have to SERVE the king of Babylon seventy years.) The 70 years begin. ( Babylonian Chronicle 3- BM 21901)
607- Nabopolassars 19 th reignal year. Nebuchadnessar was not even in power yet! He was only a crowned prince at this time. (Babylonian Chronicle 4 –BM 22047)
605- Nabopolassars 21 st reignal year. Battle of Carchemish , between Egypt and Babylon. Nabopolassar dies and Nebuchadnezar accends the thrown. This is year 0 for Nebuchadnezzars reign. Daniel finds himself exiled to Babylon, as well as the Royal offspring of Jerusalem, the utensils of the house of Jehovah were carried to Babylon. See Daniel 1- 2:1. Jer. 29:1,20 (Babylonian Chronicle 5- BM 21946)
603- Nebuchadnezzars second reignal year. See. Dan. 2:1
586/587- Jerusalem burned. Nebuchadnessars ninteenth reignal year. See Jer. 52:12-16 (There were still lowly ones left remaining in the city.)
562-End of Nebuchadnezzars reign.
557-Neriglissars third reignal year. ( Chronicle 6 –BM 25124)
556- Nabonidus becomes King. (Nabonidus Chronicle 7- BM35382)
539- 70 are fullfilled. Nabonidus is King of Babylon at this time. Cyrus overtakes Babylon in one night. Handwriting on the wall. Jews released from servitude. See- Dan. 5:25-26 Jer. 25: 12 ( Nabonidus Chronicle: Chronicle 7-BM 36304)
L.L.
-
scholar
Jeffro
Your interpretation of the seventy years akin the Jonsson hypothesis fails and is flawed because it denies the basic facts that this period was one of a period of desolation, one of servitude and one of exile all being concurrent. from 607 until 537 BCE.
scholar JW
-
scholar
Lady Lliberty
All that the writers of the Insight volumes have done is to insert accurate biblical dating by means of parenthesis to alert the reader when the regnal dates occur in history. This appropriate academic practice as the brackets show that these dates were not in the quoted source.
scholar JW
-
KW13
Scholar. i am sure you'll agree there is a difference between quoting a source and changing what it says.
i am not gonna look here again, if you wanna bring anything to my attention just pm me.
The insight book Volume 2,
[Picture
on page 326]Babylonian chronicle that tells of Nebuchadnezzar’s capturing Jerusalem, seizing the king, and appointing one of his own choice; 617 B.C.E.
-------------
That tablet is in the British Musuem.
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/index.html
Search 597 after clicking Continue with Compass. note how the British musuem and the Society have different ideas completely about what it says.