by cognac 183 Replies latest jw friends
scholar Post 1714
You ask for names of those non JW scholars who support 607 BCE:
Jerry Leslie
Julian T Gray
Paul S Johnson
Morton Edgar
Charles f Redeker
One of the most profound posts in the past 6 months. It is a timeless truth:
Jerry Leslie = pyramidologist
Julian T Gray = pyramidologist
Paul S Johnson = pyramidologist
Morton Edgar = pyramidologist
Charles f Redeker = pyramidologist
scholar JW = pyramidologist
But Scholar, you still have not explained how you can get 607 by using 624 for Neb. first rule. The Bible plainly says at 2Kings 25:8-9 it was Neb. 19th year when Jerusalem was desolated. Explain if you can.
celebrated WT scholars?
if they are 'celebrated', then they are well-known - at the very least, their work would be well known. so who are they? would anyone on the street know who they are and what they claim? would any respected secular authority? would anyone know them or their work?
if you've spent 30 years researching this and this is all you have to show for it ... wow, how sad.
cheerios,
I assume the "celebrated WT scholars" have been invisibly present since 1914.
And, of course, "invisibly present" = "visibly absent"!
or mentally vacant ..
cognac:
I'm not sure if it will be the beginning of the end for your husband's faith in the religion but here's hoping. I've challenged my wife to find proof for the 1914 date that the society has given. She went to the library and discovered that 607 was not the date given for the desolation of Jerusalem but instead 586 or 587 B.C.E.. Somehow, my wife ignored that and instead looked at 539 B.C.E. and the 70 years that was prophisized and decided that 607 was close enough for her. BOING!!!!!
I told her that she needed to reresearch that because she obviously has something wrong. She must have done something because sometime later she began to say that I may perhaps be right about 1914. When I told her that I predict that the society will eventually drop the 1914 teaching, she stated that it was the foundation for a lot of what they consider to be the truth so they cannot drop it. I said that I think they will but they will do it very subtly and within about 10 to 20 years, there will be new Jehovah's Witnesses who will have never heard of that date.
Scholar sounds similiar to Third Witness.
Bangalore
Re: 'skol-drinker' #1755 and 'blaming the Bible.'
OK then. Forget the secular evidence (except the 539 starting point - keep that one, of course). In which year did Nebuchadnezzar destroy Jerusalem? Was it his 18th year (Jer. 52:29)? Or was it his 19th year (Jer. 52:12; 2 Kings 25:8)? Which date are you going to go for - scripturally? The 18th year or 19th year?
But there's a problem with the 'celebrated WT scholars' dates too. Neb ascended the throne, succeeding his father at his death in 624 BCE according to WT chronology ...
... or would that be 625 BCE if his dad died in his 21st and final year and it was the year of the battle of Carchemish? The dates from the Insight article and Daniel book don't add up here (see Daniel's Prophecy, pp. 18-19, 31, 63). ...
But anyway, let's go with the WTS' 624 BCE date as his accession year.
624 - acc.
623 - 1
622 - 2
621 - 3
620 - 4
619 - 5
618 - 6
617 - 7
616 - 8
615 - 9
614 - 10
613 - 11
612 - 12
611 - 13
610 - 14
609 - 15
608 - 16
607 - 17
606 - 18
605 - 19
Did Jerusalem fall in 606 BCE (18th year) or 605 BCE (19th year)?
Or if we count Neb's accession year as Year 1 instead of his accession year, did Jerusalem fall in 607 BCE (18th year) or 606 (19th year)?
Pick a date. I look forward to your deep scholarly insights on which one is more in keeping with the scriptural and WT records.
Re: - 'skol-drinker' #1756 and 'Furuli's proof'
I have read with interest your debates with Furuli and others on this subject and at every turn your criticisms have been dealt with.
ROFL. Furuli side-stepped my questions and has left them unanswered, and the 'others' couldn't refute the hard facts presented. The criticisms have been dealt with in the sense that the demolition of a wall has been dealt with by using a soggy mackerel to hit it with :-)
If you are such an authority on the subject then why not have your research published in a respected journal or is it simply fact that you are not a expert in ancient astronomy?
Even if I was an authority (which I'm not - and neither is Furuli for that matter), why would I? It's been done already. Those who are authorities have already published their research which has helped to establish the ancient timelines we have now. What would be the point of re-inventing the wheel?
Cognac, this is great news! Here's hoping he has an epiphany.
It seems to me that the same uncertainty regarding the precise Julian year xx7 vs. xx6 would exist in Watchtower chronology as well. This isn't a problem with the secular evidence and it's not even really a problem with the Bible either. It's just impossible to tell what calendaring system is being used all the time. "Celebrated" Watchtower scholars are certainly aware of it:
"For the same reason, they have realized that the prophecy in Daniel chapter 4 regarding the "seven times" began counting in 607-606 B.C.E. and that it pinpointed 1914 C.E. in the autumn as the year when Christ was enthroned in heaven as ruling King and this world entered its time of the end" (The Watchtower March 15, 1989 p. 22)
