could we have a show of hands to see if jeffro should be included in the queens NY honours list?
The Gentile Times Reconsidered (607 B.C.E.) -Part A1 - Jeremiah 25:10-12 Reviewed
by FaceTheFacts 259 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
ScenicViewer
UnapologeticLWT said,
I have no interest in having discussions with any of you. Please save your questions for someone who cares.
The question I asked was very simple and doesn't require a discussion at all, just a Yes or No.
Have you been on this site under another name?
-
rip van winkle
I just want to say, I'm only on this site for 6 months- my first discussion site-ever! For the past 4 months , the first thing I look at is the posting count. If they are a new poster or have a very low count, although being a member for years, I will check their name to see what threads they have started or what they have responded to or whether they have made an introduction.
-
Jeffro
jookbeard:
could we have a show of hands to see if jeffro should be included in the queens NY honours list?
Gee thanks. Except I'm actually Australian, so you would need to nominate me for the analogous Australia Day Honours list instead. (I was in the UK for some time, and I've since been unable to change my location on the forum.)
-
Jeffro
FaceTheFacts (as Macho) said:
I have already explained to you on page one that "all" is idiomatic in Hebrew and is often used to convey a significant or substantiated amount. I already proved to you that a sinificant amount of nations were exiled to augment Neb's military force by the time of Jerusalem's destruction and thus the prophecy doesnt require that EVERY nation go into exile simultaneously but that a substantiated amount are all serving as slaves at any point during the seventy years.
This was in response to comments I made such as:
What is evident is that a) all the nations were not exiled to Babylon for 70 years...
Now, of course I am not ignorant of hyperbolic usage, which may allow for 'all' to mean 'a substantial amount'.* But the troll's argument still fails, for a couple of reasons.
*However, thirdwitness' Jehovah's Judgment website expects readers to believe that when the Bible says "without an inhabitant" or "all the princes" (and other elements), these 'must' be interpreted literally, and not as figurative or idiomatic hyperbole.
Firstly, in the JW interpretation, Jerusalem is affected first by the 70 years, and then the other nations are affected at various later times during the 70 years. So in his scenario, there were not a "substantiated" (or substantial) number of nations already in exile as part of the 70 years. And any exiles who were there before the 70 years started (as were most of the Jewish exiles), were there for longer than 70 years anyway, rendering their literal interpretation of the 70 years meaningless.
Secondly, Jeremiah 27:8-11 quite clearly indicates that exile would only befall nations that didn't submit to Babylon's dominance, rather than a substantial number of nations.
-
soft+gentle
omg ftf, macho
Sidenote: FaceTheFacts here. Apparently I was banned in the middle of having a debate (what a shocker!). Ive come to realize this forum has no value for me, since the people dont even read your arguments but would just like to believe what they want. Thereare far BETTER, scholarly, debate platforms out there. This site has deteriorated into an intellectual waseland and is simply a daycare for scared adults too weak and powerless to deal with their own problems.
If anyone is interested, TheologyWeb is where you should go. I'll be posting under the name Agnosco and we can continue the discussion there.
quite insulting arn't you, facethefacts, macho or whatever you are calling yourself. there is a lot more going on on this site than "scholarly argument" where everyone is supposed to agree with you. is that what you mean by scholarly argument?
If you accepted that we all have different perspectives on the debate instead of insisting on your own then you may be allowed to stay. As to "scared adults who are too weak and powerless to deal with their own problems" ----- come on now. we have all won and are winning against the WTS and we don't rest on our laurels but continue to strengthen our instincts. as you can see you have been sniffed out and shown to be a charlatan.
-
AnnOMaly
QC mentioned he felt cheated that the discussion hadn't progressed to the '607' bit. I doubt that it would have progressed to that stage on this thread. However, there are dozens of threads on JWN that do discuss the nitty-gritty of '607.' Do a search. A poster called 'Thirdwitness' was named earlier (similar type to whatever-his-name-is-now). There were several '607' threads he was involved in. Hugely entertaining and educational too. There was another long one with a poster called 'djeggnog' which was mainly to do with how the Tyrian kinglist in Josephus fits with the conventional chronology. Check them out.
And yes, kudos to Jeffro!
-
Witness My Fury
Point to note for future reference: Recovery (from now on known as LEGION) always has at least 3 active accounts here ....
-
Jeffro
It's little wonder our resident apologist didn't want to go near the archeological evidence. It's worth noting for beginners that the JW chronology is so badly flawed, that it's not simply a matter of shifting everything by their erroneous '20 year gap'. See below for the relative things that are broken (shown in red) by the spurious JW chronology.
Most of the problems are caused by their fraudulent 'kingship = vassallage' drivel. As a result, their botched chronology is irreconcilable with BM21946, which otherwise co-incides perfectly with the biblical record of the events. This includes the periods for when the chronicle says Nebuchadnezzar collected tributes in the Hatti land, which do not fit even when adjusted by the missing 20 years.
They actually reduce the period for which Jehoiakim paid tribute from 3 years to about 2 years, though they still say it was 'about 3 years'.
Note that the ambiguity of 621/618BCE for Nebuchadnezzar attacking Egypt is because the Watch Tower Society won't assign a year for that event. In reality, this is the attack on Egypt that caused Jehoiakim to stop paying tribute after 3 years, and it happened in 601BCE; it should not be confused with the Battle of Carchemish in 605BCE. The problem (for them) is they really need it to be after Jehoiakim paying tribute for 3 years, but there isn't sufficient time there to squeeze it into their reckoning of 618BCE; simply shifting it by 20 years to 621 is awkward because that's before Jehoiakim started paying tribute (in their chronology). So they remain silent about it instead.
Note also that JW literature assigns 609 for the beginning of the siege that they have ending in 607, though the real beginning was Januay 598BCE. They do correctly state that it was an 18-month siege, and they have it ending in July 607, but they start it in 609BCE anyway. I haven't worked out their logic there.
-
tornapart
The reason for 'Legion's' (nice one WMF) multiple personas...
' Myself and other well known JW "apologists" are engaging in a collaborative project. We would like as many current JW's as possible to be involved. Please PM me if interested. Thanks.' = Still Recovery post#41
There was also a character called 'Reniaa' who was also accused of being multi persona/ multi accounts.. also a JW apologist, a few years ago... used exactly the same tactics as 'Legion'.