Hubby is Researching 607...

by cognac 183 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Chalam

  i mentioned to a friend today im going to research 607bce, asked me why, said id been told that the year was wrong so i wanted to see for myself....I got a look of Death/disbelief!!!!!!!!!!

  Remember, research is not allowed!

  Personally, I do not think becoming a historian will help you to be a Christian although I am not against studying history.

  If you want to be a Christian the study Christ. Read all about Him, what He has to say, what He likes and what He does.

  1 Thessalonians 1:6 (New International Version)

  6 You became imitators of us and of the Lord

  Who is the Lord? See three verses earlier...

  3 We continually remember before our God and Father your work produced by faith, your labor prompted by love, and your endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ.

  Also here Romans 10:9 1 Corinthians 12:3

  All the best,

  Stephen
• 

  AnnOMaly

  In Russell's day, the date was 606. ("Celebrated" WT scholars moved it from 606 to 607 in the year 1943) At the time, this was a widely held date by Bible students of various denominations, but the discovery of the Nabonidus Chronicle in the late 1870's changed all of that in just a few years.

  It also has to be remembered that the widely held date of 606 (or thereabouts) was widely understood by Bible number-crunchers to be the BEGINNING of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, not his 18th/19th year and not the year of Zedekiah's dethronement and Jerusalem's destruction.

  Russell, on the other hand, insisted that 606 was when Zedekiah was dethroned, Jerusalem destroyed, etc. etc. for the reasons he gave in Studies, Vol. II, p.51, 52.
• 

  scholar

  AnnOMaly

  Post 1108

  I have a better idea in addition to you setting up a thread on this subject for my benefit and education. My proposal is as follows:

  1. You select those issues that you feel are significant in falsifying Furuli's hypothesis.

  2. That you write to Furuli either by letter or email concerning those issues.

  3. That you forward to me copies of this corrresspondence and Furuli's replies.

  4. If these issues are similar or identical to that of Carl Jonsson then these references be noted.

  5. With all of this information to hand I will proceed to have these matters independently adjudicated by contacting either other experts in the field of ancient astronomy and by making a submission to the Observatory of NSW, Australia which would have the last astro programs.

  scholar JW
• 

  bohm

  I would abselutely love to see someone stand up to scholars challenge. Im really sorry i am not knowledgeable enough to pick up the gauntlet :-).
• 

  Black Sheep

  

  I would abselutely love to see someone stand up to scholars challenge. Im really sorry i am not knowledgeable enough to pick up the gauntlet :-).

  Searching the forum will provide you with many very entertaining threads from the past where AlanF, Leo and many others have discussed Furuli etc. with Scallop.

  I quite enjoy the thread where Scallop destroys Allymom's K.I.S.S. approach.
• 

  bohm

  BLACK SHEEP: Do you have a reference for that thread with Scallop? Im very interested in WT arguments for 607. I cant even find Scallop in the member index.
• 

  Bangalore

  Bohm here it is.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/55372/6/586-587-the-K-I-S-S-approach-no-VAT4956-Ptolemy-Josephus-needed

  Bangalore
• 

  AnnOMaly

  Thank you for your suggestions, Neil. As you'll remember I've not been averse to following them up in the past. It was you who suggested I engage with Furuli on the New Chronology forum and I did, asking him a few questions on his methods and reasoning. After a brief exchange, he posted a message saying he would answer my 'technical' questions privately (the discussion would've gone beyond the scope of the board's purpose). He never bothered. If we could find an appropriate forum we'd both feel comfortable posting on, I wouldn't mind picking up where we left off.

  For me, the internet is the best place to air these issues rather than hidden away in some esoteric journal or email that hardly anyone will see. That way, anyone can have access to the information and assess it for themselves. And again why, even if I had some professional stature, would I submit a paper to an astronomical journal trying to prove what is already widely accepted by the scholarly community?!

  Anyhoo, I am selecting a few issues that help to falsify Furuli's hypothesis. I can only do this piecemeal - real life interferes, the subject is huge and Furuli's two books are replete with muddled methods and misinformation. Naturally, Jonsson has already done the real spade work and it would be pointless rehashing what he's already put online, although there is bound to be some overlap.
• 

  AnnOMaly

  I quite enjoy the thread where Scallop destroys Allymom's K.I.S.S. approach.

  Now there's a 'Chart of Mischief' to beat all 'charts of mischief'!

  ('Scallop' - LOL)
• 

  PSacramento

  That thread is full of some serious info !!

  I mean, you only get more detail from Carl's book, the Gentile Times reconsidered.