British museum bible tours

by inbetween 25 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Amelia Ashton

  A brother at my old KH did them. I did the Tiglath Pilesar one too. It was fascinating.
• 

  Phizzy

  I have posted this before, but when I went on one I was appalled at the ignorance of the WT approved "Guide". I can't remeber the Theme, but at one point the guide was prattling on about the first Bible in English, which he reckoned was around 1500 and someting ? Tyndale and all that. But as he spoke I was standing next to a Bible in the vernacular English of hundreds of years before.

  When we got to the Codex Sinaiticus he said to me "Do you want to see the divine name in here ?" "Yes" I said, I don't know why.

  He then said, " Look at the last few words on the right hand page" , and scuttled off. I searched and could not see the Name, either in Paleo-Hebrew or in Greek.

  I learned afterwards of course that the Name does not appear in any N.T manuscript.

  I have wondered since if the guy knew this, and was trying to wake me up, but I doubt it, I reckon he thought he had seen it in the unfamiliar (to him) script.

  Twat.
• 

  Pants of Righteousness

  I've been to the British Museum twice. The first as a gullible twit who dutifully took the WT sanctioned tour. The second time I was somewhat better prepared to check things out for myself.

  It was interesting to watch them in the Babylonian rooms. With bibles out, the guide spent an inordinate amount of time explaining one of the exhibits, then guided the group on to the next room - walking past, among other things, an artefact with explanatory notes placing Neduchadnezzer's 10th (?) year to a date incompatible with WT chronology.
• 

  billythekid46

  People sure love to disprove JW with their Past books, magazines, public talks, as if JW is the only religion in the world. What makes the works of any other religion any better or tangible? Someone who explained it better is more credible? History is especially interesting. Not even the people whose ancestors lived in those lands are as much ignorant as the story teller. If you people want to be credible with your criticism, you need to first learn to be a theologian, archeologist, and historian put together, then maybe you’ll see the chronology of Nebuchadnezzar is very confusing because of all that was going on at that time, Whether Nebuchadnezzar was a General when sacking Jerusalem or King when destroying it. How many battle fronts were accruing, who used what calendar, and best of all, how Muslim nations even today hide evidence that directly support bible chronology. Let me give you a view point thats not from JW's

  This apparent discrepancy with Daniel’s account below is actually a cultural difference of dating systems. Jeremiah, living in the land of Israel, naturally uses the Israeli dating system, which would place Jehoiakim's fourth year in 604 BC. Daniel, using the Babylonian system, places Jehoiakim's third year in 604 BC. The Babylonians considered a king’s first year to start on the first New Years day in his reign.

  To solve a case like this, it helps if we compare apples with apples.
  First of all the exact date is 607 BC according to Bishop Ussher, not 606 BC. This was indeed the first year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar if we just count as the Bible counts. And the first year of Jehoiakim starts in 610 BC. As our years don't fit nicely into the reigns of the kings (different starting month), the third year is 607 BC.
  Now to the supposed bad history. The author of the SAB quotes here Farrell Till as saying that the first invasion was at 597 BC, which would be the last year of Jehoiakim. Farrell Till concludes this from Babylonian records. And Farrell Till makes a second claim, namely that Nebuchadnezzar became king in 605 BC, two years after the Bible says he besieged Jerusalem. All these dates can be a bit confusing, so let me give a time line below (all dates in BC), and according to Ussher's chronology:
  610: Jehoiakim is made king by Pharaoh Nechoh, see 2 Kg. 23:34.
  608: Nebuchadnezzar is made viceroy.
  607: battle of Carchemish, where Egypt was defeated (fourth year of Jehoiakim), see Jer. 46:2.
  607: first siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar; Daniel and his friends taken and brought to Babylon, start of the 70 years of captivity.
  605: death of Nabopolassar, father of Nebuchadnezzar.
  604: Jehoiakim rebels (2 Kg. 24:1), it takes Nebuchadnezzar a few years to be able to respond.
  600: Nebuchadnezzar invades Judah, see 2 Kg. 24:2.
  599: second siege of Jerusalem; Jehoiakim's son Jeconiah, also Jehoiachin, was taken to Babylon (Jer. 27:20), see also 2 Kg. 24:12.
  589: last siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar.
  588: destruction of the first temple.
  Note that secular history gives 586 BC as the date that Solomon's temple was destroyed. And note that Bishop Ussher's starts the reign of Nebuchadnezzar two years earlier than secular history.
  We know the relationship between the reign of Nebuchadnezzar and Jehoiakim, and this allows us to match their reigns. According to Jer. 25:1 the fourth year of Jehoiakim falls within the first year of Nebuchadnezzar. From this verse we know that Nebuchadnezzar's reign began during the third year of Jehoiakim.
  So this allows us to solve the second “contradiction” claimed by Mr. Till: he compares Ussher's chronology as used in many Bible dictionaries with dates used by secular historians, and so obtains his contradiction that Nebuchadnezzar wasn't even king. In secular history, Jehoiakim begins his reign in 609, and Nebuchadnezzar begins his reign at 605. But secular dates are simply wrong, as the Bible does not contradict itself and internally aligns the reigns of these two kings perfectly and consistently. It's only when we start using dates obtained by some method outside the Bible that we can obtain a contradiction.
  It is correct that Nebuchadnezzar's father died in 605 BC. When that happened Nebuchadnezzar became sole ruler. But from the Bible we know that as viceroy he reigned already 2 years before that. It is the normal procedure in the Bible to count the reign of a king from the first year that he became a viceroy.
  This also explains why he was in Jerusalem in his first year. If he had become king, he probably would not have ventured too far outside his realm in the first year, but would be establishing his power base in his home country and close at home. But because his father still reigned, he was able to make fame for himself by venturing abroad to obtain glory and loot.
  There is one issue that might seem contradictory: from Jer. 46:2 we know that the battle of

  Carchemish was in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, while this verse seems to say that in the third year of Jehoiakim we find Nebuchadnezzar before Jerusalem, which happened after the battle of Carchemish. But it we read this verse correctly, it says that Nebuchadnezzar came in the third year, that is, he left with his army at the end of the third year of Jehoiakim. From Jer. 46:2 we know when he arrived: in the beginning of the fourth year of Jehoiakim.
  A different resolution is offered by Mark S. Haughwout, who claims:

  Having established the date of the siege, let us have a look at the claim that the first siege of Jerusalem was only in 597. This is unlikely. If we look at the Biblical record, we see that Pharaoh Nechoh was expanding his kingdom to the North and East, something the Babylonian Chronicles also record. On his way back from Harran, Pharaoh Nechoh disposed the king in Jerusalem and installed Jehoiakim, 2 Kg. 23:34. Farrell Till would make us believe that it took more then 10 years for Nebuchadnezzar to respond to this act of Pharaoh Nechoh. But this act of Pharaoh Nechoh is actually the reason we see Nebuchadnezzar before Jerusalem! In his first year as viceroy, he begins with his campaign to defeat Pharaoh, which he did convincingly at Carchemish. Afterwards he marches south to attack Pharaoh's allies and dispose his vassals. And that is why we find him before Jerusalem at this time and Daniel and his friends were taken to Babylon. His venture south ends with the full retreat of Pharaoh, see 2 Kg. 24:7.

  So the first siege was in 607, the second siege was in 599 (not 597 as secular history has it), and the third and last in 589 BC
• 

  Phizzy

  Billy, your post is off topic, perhaps you would like to start a new Thread on this ?

  I would be interested to see Jeffro's and AnnOmally's comments on your thoughts.
• 

  new hope and happiness

  Billythekid: To tell the truth i am grateful for the internet. To tell the truth i think this internet site was set up to tell the truth about the Jehovers Witness religion. To tell the truth a lot of people that post here do so because " freespeach" is not tolerated in the J.W religion. To tell the truth a lot of posters seem to come hete for love and support rather than doctrinal issues. To tell the truth in replying to your post i realize i am off topic...so back on topic, if you go to tje brittish museum be sure to buy some roasted chestnuts from the street vendurs outside they are jummy
• 

  AnnOMaly

  If you people want to be credible with your criticism, you need to first learn to be a theologian, archeologist, and historian put together, then maybe you’ll see the chronology of Nebuchadnezzar is very confusing because of all that was going on at that time, Whether Nebuchadnezzar was a General when sacking Jerusalem or King when destroying it. How many battle fronts were accruing, who used what calendar, and best of all, how Muslim nations even today hide evidence that directly support bible chronology.

  Yes, one needs to become well acquainted with history and archaeology. Many questioning JWs and ex-JWs have done just that and figured out where the WTS chronology has gone wrong. No need to preach to the choir ;-)

  Let me give you a view point thats not from JW's ...

  ... So the first siege was in 607, the second siege was in 599 (not 597 as secular history has it), and the third and last in 589 BC

  You're off by a couple of years. 'Secular history' has established with the evidence that the first siege mentioned in the Bible (Dan. 1:1) was 605 BCE, the second one mentioned in both the Bible and the Babylonian Chronicle occured in 597 BCE, and the last one mentioned in the Bible, which resulted in Jerusalem's destruction, was 587 BCE (some historians have said 586 BCE due to the Bible's ambiguity on Neb's regnal year).

  You might want to discuss this further on another thread rather than cluttering up this one?

  By the way, billy, was the research in your above post your own? Are you 'Berend de Boer'?
• 

  billythekid46

  Yes, one needs to become well acquainted with history and archaeology. Many questioning JWs and ex-JWs have done just that and figured out where the WTS chronology has gone wrong. No need to preach to the choir

  I not preaching as you say, I believe that's what your doing on your own by being judgmental of that religion. But to ease your mine. I'm an ex-witness. I thought we were discussing the British museum tour correct? How the JW like to obscure the tour to mislead the masses, just as your doing with your double talk.

  YOU PEOPLE JUST DISCRIBED EVERY RELIGION KNOWN TO MAN. What makes all religion any better?

  .What MAKES your YOUR TRUTH anymore tangible. If that’s your understanding, then the LIES, HYPOCRISY, AND ABUSE OF POWER comes from your end along side Catholics, Advents, Islam, Mormons, Evangelist, and Judaism ETC. So once again, what makes you any better? To speak the truth is not to force your view point on others, without corrupting bible principles.

  Your given that right to make a choice and then move on, Yahweh doesn't need anyone especially if they don't truly believe in him with their heart and mine, and have true faith in God, you guys have a wonderful day.
• 

  new hope and happiness

  Billythekid thanks for your post i thought it was great...

  Do i honestly expect you to believe that?

  Yes, Yes , Yes

  Oh all right then. No.

  No exactly..... In fact i put it to you that " Billy the Kid " was nothing more than a discusting minded evil murdering creep...as for " Billythekid46" hi and welcome to the board...
• 

  punkofnice

  I've seen some of the JW museum tours on video.

  Billythe kid46 - Why not start your own thread? Also, please tell us what is the true religion and why you think so......if you're not just a troll that is.