Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday

by slimboyfat 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  A standard retort from JW apologists about the Jews returning from Babylon to Judea in 'only' 6 months after Cyrus' decree is that it 'wouldn't allow time for preparations'. This retort never includes any kind of breakdown of just how long it would take to prepare, nor does it account for the fact that the size of the group allowed for division of labour for the preparations. Instead, it is simply a fallacious argument from incredulity.
  

  Exact preparation times can only be speculated, but tasks could be divided among teams for responsibilities such as leadership, logistics, supplies, route planning etc, which would greatly reduce the time required for overall preparations. So the claim that it would be 'impossible' is entirely unfounded, particularly for people who were highly motivated to make the trip. And some of the many Jews who remained in Babylon might also have helped with the preparations.

  As far as the journey itself goes, covering just 25km per day (allowing for a comfortable 5km per hour with several rest periods) and allowing 3 rest days per week, the complete journey could be done in about 16 weeks (112 days), if taking the long route of about 1,600km as proposed by the Watch Tower Society rather than the more direct route of about 800km.

  --

  Nice to see that some level of journey preparation was necessary and that some consideration of the travel itself is now considered but you expect others to suspend their credibility and except that all such occurred within a few months in support of the ridiculous and impossible date of 538 BCE. If you are so confident about 538 BCE for the Return then why not present a breakdown of events with precise date beginning from the time of Cyrus' Decree?

  Prof. Andrew Steinmann in his From Abraham To Paul A Biblical Chronology proposes that the preparations and journey would have taken five years thus the Jews became resettled and built the altar in 533 BCE. (201, Concordia Publishing House, ST. Louis, pp.190-191).

  Further, Steimmann in his article 'A Chronological Note: The Return Of The Exiles Under Sheshbazzar And Zerubbabel (Ezra 1-2) in JETS, Sept, 2008, pp.513-522 states "Since no date is given in Ezra for Zerubbab's mission to Jerusalem, the date is usually given as 537 BC by those who accept Ezra's chronological statement as accurate but this date is usually offered with some reservation".A footnote '3' is affixed and it refers to the EBC commentary Ezra-Nehemiah, 1988 by Edwin Yamauchi "To express his uncertainty Yamauchi gives the date '537?'

  Thus, as you frequently refer to our Insight publication then you consider our explanation as to the historical and minor chronological reasons why 537 BCE is the only possible date for the Return.

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  🤦‍♂️ Poor addled ‘scholar’. He imagines that preparation and travel has ‘only now been considered’. He makes the same kind of pathetic jibe every time it is ‘acknowledged’ that ‘there was an exile’ (as distinct from the nonexistent ‘70-year exile’) as if it’s new Information. 🙄

  Desperate to claim 538 BCE is ‘impossible’, he throws 537 BCE under the bus by pointing out that one person suggests 533BCE. 😂

  In reality, there was no ‘decree’ just for the Jews, but a general policy on Cyrus’s part of allowing former exiled peopleto be repatriated to quell social unrest. The biblical story is greatly overstated and it is indeed true that many scholars recognise that the full number took a much longer time to return, with several separate groups returning at different times. As I already showed, the stories in Ezra and Nehemiah obviously conflate details, evidenced by the fact that they can’t decide whether it was Jeshua or Ezra who officiated. However, there is no problem at all for an initial contingent to have returned in 538 BCE.

  All of this has previously been pointed out on this forum but ‘scholar’ is a slow one. It’s also somewhat ironic that the claim of ‘impossibility’ Is coming from someone who believes that all of Egypt was exiled to Babylon for forty years, not to mention all the other ridiculous stories in the Bible like the ‘flood’. Maybe after ‘scholar’ provides the logistics of getting the kangaroos back to Australia, I’ll give a breakdown of the preparations for returning to Judea. 😂
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Poor addled ‘scholar’. He imagines that preparation and travel has ‘only now been considered’. He makes the same kind of pathetic jibe every time it is ‘acknowledged’ that ‘there was an exile’ (as distinct from the nonexistent ‘70-year exile’) as if it’s new Informatio

  --

  The said scholar has pushed and prodded you to concede the necessity of sufficient passage of time for not only the length of the Return journey but also the preparations required and now you whine and squeal because you are forced to make this concession in a vain attempt to support the nonsense date of 538 BCE

  --

  Desperate to claim 538 BCE is ‘impossible’, he throws 537 BCE under the bus by pointing out that one person suggests 533BCE

  --

  The fact is that Chronologist Steinmann recognizes what WT scholars have long said that there must be sufficient time of preparation as one of the many historical factors necessary for calculating the date of the Return in 537 BCE.

  ---

  In reality, there was no ‘decree’ just for the Jews, but a general policy on Cyrus’s part of allowing former exiled peopleto be repatriated to quell social unrest. The biblical story is greatly overstated and it is indeed true that many scholars recognise that the full number took a much longer time to return, with several separate groups returning at different times. As I already showed, the stories in Ezra and Nehemiah obviously conflate details, evidenced by the fact that they can’t decide whether it was Jeshua or Ezra who officiated. However, there is no problem at all for an initial contingent to have returned in 538 BCE

  --

  What other rubbish. The Decree was for the Jews specifically and its nature and circumstances are well discussed by the scribe and historian Ezra thus there is no problem at all for an initial contingent to have returned in 537 BCE as fully explained in WT publications.

  All of this has been thoroughly discussed on this forum but Jeffro has been misled by COJ's masterful deception and thus robbed of thinking ability.

  scholar JW

  
  
• 

  Jeffro

  🤦‍♂️

  🦘
• 

  Pierre1977

  I didn't like to have seen the start of a doctrinal discussion after a person died. This is all scholar JW's fault! Why did you start it? Don't the Jehovah's Witnesses know about the verse about throwing pearls to pigs? Do you think any Jehovah's Witness will read this here and be assured of his faith or do you seriously expect any non-believes to be convinced. You should have kept your opinion to yourself. But anyway, while we're at it I am going to respond to some points here. Note: I believe in the Bible and the Biblical God. But I don't care about the Jehovah's Witness' issue of 538 vs. 537 B. C. E. here.

  Atheist Jeffro wrote:

  As I already showed, the stories in Ezra and Nehemiah obviously conflate details, evidenced by the fact that they can’t decide whether it was Jeshua or Ezra who officiated.
  

  I disagree because I don't see a contradiction. Jeshua/Joshua was the high priest at that time (Haggai 1:1; Zechariah 3:1). We know that there was always only one high priest at a time, while there were many priests. Ezra was only a normal priest according to most Jews and Christians that don't accept contradictions in the Bible. Rabbinic tradition agreed. However, Eastern Orthodox people use 1 Esdras, the uninspired Greek Septuagint version of Ezra, that describes him as high priest. Only they get a problem here. Most other groups don't: We simply think both Jeshua and Ezra officiated at that time — one as high priest, the other as normal priest, but both had leading religious roles together (and also prince Zerubbabel a. k. a Sheshbazzar as state figure).
  
• 

  Pierre1977

  And another point about the Chaldean lands: I agree that you can count the land as uninhabited if the original places where the cities stood were not rebuild. Today, there are many cities and other settlements in Iraq where the Neo-Babylonian Empire was. However, the ancient ruins are desolate and left alone. It is an extreme interpretation of the Biblical passage to demand the total depopulation of all land once occupied by the Neo-Babylonian Empire. The cities are enough to list the prediction as fulfilled. Obviously, when I had discussions with non-believers, they always said: "Yes, they were destroyed, but out of so many prophecies of cities to be destroyed, it was clear that some would fall eventually and be ruined. This doesn't prove Biblical inspiration." And I agree with this moderate postion, by itself, this doesn't prove the whole Bible, however, I disagree with them being unfilfilled because some Iraqi strips of land where original Babylonian cities were are populated today.
• 

  scholar

  Pierre1977

  I didn't like to have seen the start of a doctrinal discussion after a person died. This is all scholar JW's fault! Why did you start it? Don't the Jehovah's Witnesses know about the verse about throwing pearls to pigs? Do you think any Jehovah's Witness will read this here and be assured of his faith or do you seriously expect any non-believes to be convinced. You should have kept your opinion to yourself. But anyway, while we're at it I am going to respond to some points here. Note: I believe in the Bible and the Biblical God. But I don't care about the Jehovah's Witness' issue of 538 vs. 537 B. C. E. here

  --

  The said scholar began the discussion of COJ's thesis in response to the initial post of slimboyfat and it was felt that the other side of the story with some corrections was necessary.

  scholar JW
  
  
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Just seeing this.

  Sad news.
• 

  Jeffro

  Pierre1977:

  Atheist Jeffro wrote:

  Gotta love the irrelevant ad hominem. Anyway, I think Jonsson would be glad that others are continuing to point out JW lies.

  We simply think both Jeshua and Ezra officiated at that time — one as high priest, the other as normal priest, but both had leading religious roles together

  There is no evidence Ezra had even been born yet in 538BCE let alone officiating as a priest, particularly since he was still alive in 457BCE when he went from Babylon to Jerusalem (and continued living for some time after that). A Jewish priest had to be at least 30, so unless you think Ezra was 111 when he traveled to Jerusalem in 457 BCE, then you’re obviously wrong. Hence the details of the stories are obviously conflated with Ezra’s much later journey to Jerusalem.
• 

  Jeffro

  Pierre1977:

  The cities are enough to list the prediction as fulfilled.

  Which means Tyre is still a definite failure. And so is Babylon since Hillah occupies the same land with only a small heritage protected area of ruins a few hundred meters across.