“Insight on the Scriptures” relies on secular sources for 539 BCE

by Doug Mason 2 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Doug Mason

  Sorry. After starting the previous Thread I realised that I had been using Firefox, so here it is through IE.

  The “Chronology” article in "Insight on the Scriptures" accepts from secular sources the date of 539 BCE for the Fall of Babylon. It must do so since it is not possible for pre-Christian sources to provide dates in terms of present-day calendars.
  
  The “Chronology” article, however, denigrates the dates, source material, and chronologies employed by those who provide it with that date.
  
  My study is available at:
  
  http://www.jwstudies.com/Insight_s_reliance_o...
  
  Doug
• 

  moggy lover

  Absolutely marvelous and well crafted. Wish I had your gift.

  It is a total mystery to anyone with even a modicum of understanding of this subject, how the Watchtower writers could be so scholastically naive when discoursing on Biblical chronology. How the hell can anyone accept Finnegan's date of 539 BC for the fall of Babylon, when he calculates it from other dates that are in fact rejected by the Watchtower?

  Evidently, these same Watchtower writers believe that the date 539 fell out of the back of a bus, is independent of any other dating, and is as mystical as it is relevant to their theology.
• 

  breakfast of champions

  Nice job! I think I'll print this out.