Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink 160 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  scholar

  isaacaustin

  Post 4211

  The KISS method assumes much but proves little. Put it to the test. Provide one proof that proves 586 or 587 BCE and disproves 607 BCE. Celebrated WT scholars have never provided a regnal list of the Neo-Nabylonian period that can be used as chronology for all that they have done is simply given the regnal years for certain rulers of the period that are accepted by scholarship.

  This is the fact of the matter because it is impossible to construct an exact chronology for the entire Neo-Babylonian period that is consistent with all of the available evidence even Carl Jonsson who would argue otherwise has not succeeded in this crucial matter.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Greenland

  Post 4884

  It does in mine in fact in all of my many translations. Perhaps you should begin with Genesis and read a portion daily.

  scholar JW
• 

  bohm

  scholar: What the heck, i will bite. You have read about the ca. 5000 buisness tablets that have been catalogized from the periode and show no sign of the 20 extra years. What is your oppinion on that?

  By the way, i wrote a thread about daniel and two questions i had about the societys position. Perhaps you can help me there? :-). http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/183895/1/Two-simple-stupid-questions-about-607
• 

  White Dove

  You are right, Scholar! Reading Genesis took me directly to 607 BCE! Wow, was I blinded.

  If it is such an important date, then why is the Bible mum on that specific number? Why can't you find it in any concordance anywhere? Look up 607 in the concordance. Did you find it?

  God surely would have put it in number form if he wanted us to pay attention to it. A loving god doesn't play mind games with his people.
• 

  scholar

  pSacremento

  Post 1851

  Well is not chronology about people? So, it is most appropriate to quote or refer to people when dealing with such matters. I corressponded with Jonsson by letter and later by e-mail many years ago.

  Besides I have responded already with one major argument or basic fact proving 607 BCE if you have been reading my posts carefully. That fact is that of the seventy years accompanied with my challenge to all.

  scholar JW
• 

  isaacaustin

  pseudo said: isaacaustin

  Post 4211

  The KISS method assumes much but proves little. Put it to the test. Provide one proof that proves 586 or 587 BCE and disproves 607 BCE. Celebrated WT scholars have never provided a regnal list of the Neo-Nabylonian period that can be used as chronology for all that they have done is simply given the regnal years for certain rulers of the period that are accepted by scholarship.

  This is the fact of the matter because it is impossible to construct an exact chronology for the entire Neo-Babylonian period that is consistent with all of the available evidence even Carl Jonsson who would argue otherwise has not succeeded in this crucial matter.

  scholar JW

  My reply: LOL nice try Pseudo. These so-called celebrated Wt scholars you speak of are merely Russelites, as you have admitted...not scholars in any sense. Thus what they say is not a respected source, or 'bible' in any sense. 586/7 is confirmed by the reigns of the kings of Babylon- to which you have no answer except to call speculatory but offer no other option, astronomy, precise banking records, archaeology and the Bible itself- using 70 years from 539BCE.
• 

  scholar

  PSacremento

  Post 1848

  Yes he has and such can be viewed at the Catastrophism Review website.

  scholar JW
• 

  isaacaustin

  of course Pseudo, because it disproves a pivotal point to your 7 Gentile Times.

  Bye pseudo, go play in the sandbox.
• 

  PSacramento

  Scholar, thanks for the info.

  Is this debate available to be viewed online?

  On that website all I found was this:

  Studies in Persian Chronology - A Response to Jonsson, by Rolf J. Furuli
• 

  scholar

  PSacremento

  Post 4212

  If you believe that I have been defeated by the likes of Leolaia, Alan F and others of their ilk then where are they now? If they truly were lovers of truth then why are they now so silent when people need them? Scholar debated with them over many years on nearly every point raised but it is for others to make their own judgements as to any victor for scholar he is just happy to be around to say something for he cares nothing about whether he has convinced certain people for that is not his business.

  scholar JW