For those who researched 607...

by AwSnap 95 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  garyneal

  Farkel

  The fact that there is no year zero is irrelevant when dealing with dates starting and ending before the Common Era.

  Yes, I know. I was just illustrating to scholar (and everyone else) that 624 - 18 = 606 and pointing out that the WTS used to teach 606 as the starting year for the gentile times before (oops) it was discovered that year zero does not exist.

  Now the documentation put forth by thetrueone at http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm uses 625 BCE as the starting date for Neb's reign so the math works. This makes me suspect that the WT use to teach 624 and now teaches 625 after discovering the fact that there is no year zero. Either that or scholar just got his dates confused.
• 

  thetrueone

  Biblical Data:

  The son of Nabopolassar; became king of Babylon in 604 B.C. as Assyria was on the decline; died 561.His name, either in this spelling or in the more correct form, Nebuchadrezzar (from the original, "Nabu-kudurri-u?ur" = "Nebo, defend my boundary"), is found more than ninety times in the Old Testament.

  Slays Jehoiakim.

  Nebuchadnezzar's first notable act was the overthrow of the Egyptian army under Necho at the Euphrates in the fourth year of Jehoiakim (Jer. xlvi. 2). It is entirely reasonable to suppose that at the same time he descended upon Palestine and made Jehoiakim his subject (II Kings xxiv. 1). This campaign took place in 605. The next year Nebuchadnezzar became king of Babylon; and he ruled for forty-three years, or until 561. Jehoiakim served him for three years, and then rebelled. He doubtless incited the neighboring tribes (ib. verse 2) to persecute Judah and bring its king to respect his oath. In 598 Nebuchadnezzar himself came westward, took Jehoiakim (II Chron. xxxvi. 6) and probably slew him, casting out his dead body unburied (Jer. xxii. 19, xxxvi. 30), and carried captive to Babylon 3,023 Jews (Jer. lii. 28). He placed Jehoiachin, the dead king's son, on the throne. Three months were sufficient to prove Jehoiachin's character (Ezek. xix. 5-9). He was taken with 10,000 of the best of the people of Jerusalem and carried to Babylon. His uncle Mattaniah, whose name was changed to Zedekiah, was put on the throne by Nebuchadnezzar in 597.

  
  
  Read more: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=154&letter=N#ixzz0bgwQfeE4
• 

  garyneal

  Scholar

  Post 1855

  You are correct in that secular scholars do use the Bible, secular sources and scholarship to prove 586 or 587 BCE but the celebrated WT scholars use and can use the same identical information to prove 607 BCE.

  So you are saying that celebrated WT scholars can use sources like Ptolemy's Canon along with tens of thousands of cuneiform documents to prove 607 BCE?
• 

  isaacaustin

  Scholar you truly are an idiot.
• 

  thetrueone

  One thing to learn from all of this is, religions who have made strong pronouncements

  involving their own self constructed doctrines, will hardly ever revert their position

  revealing their own created diverse ignorance. Religions such as the JWS operate and sell themselves

  on creating an illusion that they are unique and have special status among other religions.

  To make a move in changing vital doctrine would crack and break open this illusion.

  There seems to be an enormous amount of information now through archaeological findings regarding when

  ancient Jerusalem was invaded by Nebuchadnezzar that give evidence to the 586 BCE date. Will

  the leaders of the WTS. ever confirm that themselves, I hardly doubt it, they aren't really concerned

  about the truth or facts per-say , instead they're only concerned about up holding the truths that

  they themselves created in developing their organization.

  In effect religions taint the truth to support and serve themselves.
• 

  Georgiegirl

  You know...I suddenly had a thought. Do you think that maybe Scholar is actually an ex-JW (or anti-JW) who posts stuff like this to deliberately illustrate how lacking the JW reasoning really is? I mean, he/she just says the same thing over and over and the catchphrase "celebrated JW scholars" has become a huge joke. Maybe he/she is making the point that JWs are ridiculously dogmatic, ignore clearly presented evidence, don't reason on the facts, and don't think for themselves - by posing as an example. Just wondering...
• 

  thetrueone

  This been brought up before Georgiegirl, but being a long time JW myself he does expresses himself

  with what typical JWS would think and say, that being so it would lead the conclusion that he is indeed

  a JW apologetic with all the ingrained mind controlling factions.
• 

  OUTLAW

  You are correct in that secular scholars do use the Bible, secular sources and scholarship to prove 586 or 587 BCE

  but the celebrated WT scholars use and can use the same identical information to prove 607 BCE.

  So you have a big problem here! For equally the facts in support of 607 BCE are available for all to check.

  scholar JW

  Scholar..

  You have repeatedly ignored Any Information..

  "Not" WBT$ Approved..

  Your own actions,prove you to be a LIAR..

  ..................... ...OUTLAW

  
  
• 

  OUTLAW

  CELEBRATED WBT$ SCHOLARS!!..

  "Thirdwitness" and "Scholar JW"..

  

  The Best..

  The WBT$ has to Offer!..

  ..................... ...OUTLAW
• 

  thetrueone

  Its interest phenomena when people will lie and perjury themselves for the sake of other liars.

  Isn't religion grand ?

  I had to laugh when he used the term celebrated scholars of the Watchtower society.

  The noted scholars of the WTS are only concerned about using information that

  supports their own devised doctrines, which isn't too surprising since their organizational kingdom

  would crumble and the money and support would falter.

  So once again the truth of the Watchtower publishing corruption is not really the truth,

  but rather corporate marketing corruption.