by Swamboozled 601 Replies latest watchtower bible
thirdwitness, I've noticed that you often fail to preface your posts with basic information that informs readers about to whom or to which post you are replying. Please do our readers the courtesy of quoting at least a bit of material, and informing them of exactly who it is you're replying to, so that they know what you're talking about.
AlanF
Alan F:
Now, if there exists in a Bible book an unambiguous prophecy whose fulfillment ("the city will never be rebuilt") can be directly observed today to be false (the city exists as a vibrant community), then other prophecies in that book that are contradicted by solid historical data are extremely likely to be false, or they were never intended to be fulfilled literally
Brilliant. You explained it so even a jw should be able to understand it.
Thirdwitness:
I would also like to hear how exactly the WTS placed the 40 years of desolation for Egypt into the 588-48 - time frame. What was their approach? Could the approach have been something like...: we know that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 because of the momentous date of 1914 and counting backwards 2520 years, prophetic or regular years, whatever, who cares, noone will ever notice the difference...and then we need to stick those 40 years of Egyptian desolation somewhere where it suits our "chronology", and 588-84 is as good as any...
See how the "third witness" evades the most simplistic way to answer the question of kings rule. Like Scholar he will never show his work, lest he be shown a liar.
Ask yourself, why did the Towers tell Carl Jonnson to keep his work quiet?
Thanks Al, once again beating the fool at his own game.
EW
Thirdwitness, do you know who the "Celebrated Watchtower Scholars" are? The person known as Scholar has not told me who they are, despite calling these men "Celebrated Watchtower Scholars" repeatedly. I need a list of who they are and what scholastic papers they have written. Thanks in advance for your list! As a college student I have taken a great interest in scholastic papers.
So Alan F and others, your defense is this:
Ezekiel was wrong when he said that Egypt would be desolated for 40 years without an inhabitant in the land by Nebuachadnezzar. We know it was never fulfilled and was an inaccurate prophecy because secular history records no such 40 year desolation of Egypt therefore it has to be wrong. It surely couldn't be secular historians that are incorrect. So it must be Ezekiel and thus Jehovah who have mispoken. So who is putting who above the Bible's recorded words? It seems some even have decided they should denounce the Bible rather than admit JWs are right.
How much did you say you were selling the Brooklyn Bridge for again?
If you don't have an answer there is nothing wrong with admitting that you can't explain it. Could it be that JWs are right after all? No, we mustn't admit that. We must come up with unreasonable explanations to discredit them at all cost. 40 years does not really mean 40 years. It is symbolic. Desolated with no inhabitant doesn't really mean NO inhabitant.
Here is an argument you would probably also like by Timothy Kline. 'Thirdwitness would probably say that Jehovah's name is Jehovah. That of course is nonsensical.'
i have a suggestion thirdwitness.
why dont you add all the years the babylonian kings ruled from 539, keep going till you get to 607. (if it equals that).see firstly, i may not know all the answers but i have the proof to show yours wrong even from the Society's own literature.
Here are all the WBT Society's quotes http://www.reexamine.org/quotes/607bce.htm - feel free to check them elsewhere too.
Nabonidus -- 17 year reign
Labashi-Marduk -- less than 9 month reign
Neriglissar -- 4 year reign
Evil-Merodach -- 2 year reign
Nebuchadnezzar II -- 43 year reign
I get to 605 B.C.E from adding those. This fits perfectly with when Nebuchadnezzar took the crown according to Secular history, now isnt that amazing? i managed to get Bible and Secular history to work together.
The link above is meant to be to a tablet at the British Musuem, that basically supports the idea that the 70 years would of been from 609-539 with the destruction in 586.
(should the above link not work, click http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass and click on Continue with compass. Then search 605. Out of the tablets that appear on that page, you want the 2nd row down and 2nd one in)
And as for your argument about Tyre you are merely shifting the argument to something else. Are you arguing that the Bible is wrong and that Tyre proves that? And since the Tyre prophecy is wrong then the Egypt prophecy is wrong? Why not take it a step further and say that if these prophecies are wrong then other Bible prophecies are no doubt wrong and thus the Bible is nothing but a man made book of some true prophecies but some false prophecies so it really cannot be depended on at all. I know you would not be arguing that because that would surely make you an apostate and I'm sure you are not an apostate, are you?
I believe if you did a little research you would find that the ancient ruins of Tyre still sit over there in Tyre and that those ruins have not been rebuilt.
"Of the original Tyre known to Solomon and the prophets of Israel, not a vestige remains except in its rock-cut sepulchres on the mountain sides, and in foundation walls . . .
Alexander made her a bare rock and threw debris into the water to make the causeway; fishermen now spread nets over the site (there is a city of Tyre today, but it is located down the coast from the original Tyre); the old city of Tyre has never been rebuilt, even though a great freshwater spring is located at the site, providing 10,000,000 gallons of water daily. It is still an excellent site today but has never been rebuilt, although many have tried.
The very fact that it was prophecied at Ezek 26:5 that A drying yard for dragnets is what she will become in the midst of the sea.’ shows that it would have people there and that it would not be totally abandoned. But the ancient city still lies in ruins.
kw13, your argument has already been covered.
ThirdWitness:
40 years does not really mean 40 years. It is symbolic. Desolated with no inhabitant doesn't really mean NO inhabitant.
No, it sure doesn`t, as the Bible makes perfectly clear. According to Jeremiah 52:30, there were captives taken away from Judah even in Nebuchadnezzars 23rd year. Even if we use the Societys own calculations, with Nebuchadnezzar becoming king in 625 bc, this means that the land was not desolate for more than 65 years (602 would be Nebucahdnezzars 23rd year withing the insane WTS-"chronology", and from 602-537 there is 65 years). So you, and the WTS are of course admitting that "no inhabitant doesn`t really mean NO inhabitant".
where's scholar?
