PLEASE HELP! Assist in 1914 Rebuttal...

by Jared 63 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  City Fan

  Pete

  The author ofn Daniel 9:25 undestood that lenngth of exile for the elite of Judah to be 49 years long, this agrees with modern scholarship and Jewish belief.

  That's a very interesting point. This passage could be influenced by the sabbatical theology of Leviticus 25-26. According to Leviticus 25:1-55 a jubilee or 'seven weeks of years' (49 years) was the maximum period that land could be alienated from its ancestral heirs or that a person could be kept in slavery. At 2 Chronicles 36:18-21 Jeremiah's prophecy is interpreted in the light of Leviticus "to fulfill the the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed its sabbaths." The notion in this passage that the desolation made up the sabbatical rest of the land could infer that the reference was to seventy sabbatical years, or seventy weeks of years.

  Daniel 9 extends the period of desolation to seventy weeks of years, or 10 jubilees. A division of history into ten "weeks" or seventy periods was characteristic of early Enochian literature. (1 Enoch 10:11-12). The Apocalypse of Weeks in 1 Enoch 93; 91:11-19 divides all of history, from Adam to the final judgement, into ten "weeks". The exile is placed at the end of the sixth week, and the whole post-exilic period in the seventh.

  The Masoretic Text places a punctuation (atnah) between the seven and sixty two weeks in Daniel 9:25, and this must be correct as there is no other reason for dividing the period into seven and sixty two. So then the seven weeks "to the coming of an anointed one" would probably refer to the time period until Cyrus came to power in 539 BC. Cyrus is referred to as the Lord's anointed one at Isaiah 45:1 "Thus says the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped". The word that went forth to restore Jerusalem would then be a divine word and not the word of a Persian king. This divine word would not have gone forth to rebuild Jerusalem before it was destroyed in 587/586 and 49 years from then to Cyrus is almost exact.

  But with Daniel 9 being dated to the first year of the fictional 'Darius the Mede', there should be no reason for any of his calculations to be exact.

  CF.
• 

  City Fan

  Pete,

  Just another thought on why the seven weeks of Daniel 9:25 could be counted from the destruction of Jerusalem is the context of the whole chapter. It is generally thought that the later chapters of Daniel including chapter 9 were written during the Seleucid persecutions around 167 BC. So the writer is basically saying: Hold on a minute God, didn't you say to Jeremiah that the period of desolation would be only 70 years and yet the temple is still desolated (as it was by Antiochus Epiphanes) hundreds of years later? (Dan 9:") Then God says in verse 24: Did I say 70 years? What I meant to say was 70 weeks of years! So both the 70 years of Jeremiah and the seventy weeks of years of Daniel 9 started from the same point, at the beginning of the period of desolation.
• 

  City Fan

  Scholar, I just wanted you to explain a few of your other comments in this thread:

  The biblical chronology espoused by the Lord's people is simple and harmonizes with secular evidence and biblical history. I for one, would rather base my belief on cumulative texts and the direct secular evidence.

  Again, could you provide any of this secular evidence that allows the dating of the destruction of Jerusalem as 607 BC? Can I also direct you to look at a previous thread where you continually failed to do this http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/64436/1.ashx

  (Sometimes the language you use implies you're not really a JW at all e.g. "the Lord's people")

  Jonsson discusses this problem in pages 293-4 but rather than saying that Jerusalem fell in 586-7 or 586/587 he says it must be 587.

  Do you have the page reference where Jonsson says the date must be 587?

  Other scholars such as Thiele says it must be 586 so any ambiguity is not disclosed to the reader.

  All reference works I have on the subject give balanced arguments for both 586 and 587 so I'm not sure what your point is.

  I believe that this discrepancy is not a problem of what calender should be used or type of reign but rather it is a methoological problem

  Again you either don't understand the difference between ascension and non-ascension year dating and the difference between Nisan-Nisan and Tishri-Tishri calendars, or you're being deliberately stupid. If you feel there is some other 'methodological problem' then please let us know about it.

  CF.
• 

  AGuest

  dear Toreador... to the Most High God, the Most Holy One of Israel, whose name is JAH... of Armies... to His Son and Christ, my Lord, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH... by means of and through whom I "know" these truths... and without whose spirit I most certainly would not.

  But I thank you, truly, for you most kind words. May the undeserved kindness and mercy of my God and Father, JAH... of Armies... and the peace of His Christ be upon you, if you so wish it, to time indefinite.

  Your servant... and a slave of Christ,

  SJ
• 

  peacefulpete

  test
• 

  peacefulpete

  I had a nice post but it was lost. I'm having this happen far too often. City Fan...I agree, with only the opinion that the first "annointed" be High Priest Joshua not Cyrus. The wording allows for the transaltion, "an annointed AND a prince" which naturally reminds us of Joshua and Zerubbabel. The later "prince that brings desolation is naturally Antiochus IV. The later "annointed" that is cut off is cerainly High Priest Onias III whose was murdered under Antiochus. The sacrifice ceasing for 3 1/2 years is testified in 1 Macc. Tho Cyrus could be the first "annointed" this seems to differ from the religious use of the term just a few verses later. Interestingly the Melchizedek Scroll (2:18)in quoting Daniel uses the expression "annointed of the spirit" further strengthening IMO a religious annointing over a political one.
  The 'going forth of the word to rebuild' is an expresssion of Divine decree not necessarily a human one so then may be a reference to Jeremiah material that "fortold" the end of Israel's oppresser Babylon, thereby making the sentence read straightforward. Or if the fictional words of Cyrus being commissioned to rebuild (Ezra 1) are meant then it is a case of thought regression, the 7 years implied to have been completed at the time of the "going forth of the word to rebuild".
• 

  AGuest

  rejoice, dear Daddy-O... and the greatest of love and peace to you, my dear friend! Thank you for presenting me the opportunity to respond to your "concerns"!

  You direct me to "Quit being a 'slave'." I tell you, however, that I cannot no more than I can stop breathing and live. NOT because I HAVE to be a slave... but because I WANT to. A certain one died for me... that I might live. He has not only taught me the TRUTH... about himself and about God... which TRUTH has set ME free... to live... and love... whom I wish to AS I wish to, but he has taught me HOW to live... and love. Without restraint... without hypocrisy... without concern for what I would "get out of it" or in return. I cannot TELL you how... LIBERATING such living and loving is, dear D.! I am free to love even your grumpy butt... and I do! So much so, that I am your "servant", even if you do not "want" it. And for THAT... being able to live and love IN FREEDOM... I am SO grateful to the One who taught me HOW... that I want nothing more than to repay him for such releasing. But... what do I have that is of value to him? What can I give him that could make up for what he has given me? Nothing. I have nothing of value... other than my undying declaration of love to HIM... and my "service" to him. He did not ask me to be his slave - he offered me his friendship and brotherhood. I... have willingly become his slave, in the same way that a man will when another man saves his life. To me... it is a DEBT I owe... based on my OWN conviction... that I can never repay. My service, then, is all I have to offer.

  Life is tough enough without having to be anybody's "slave."

  Indeed! And as a member of the human race, citizen of the USofA, and full-time employee of some of THE most (well, the word "imbecilic" comes to mind!) folks I've ever had the privilege to work for, I understand YOUR connotation - burdensome - of the word "slave." But such word is only a burden if the MASTER is "exacting" - if he or she is unloving and/or unkind... unwilling to do the work they put upon YOU... and unwilling to see the burden but only wishing to place even heavier "loads" on you. My Master... is not like that. Not at all. Because he is MILD-tempered and LOWLY in heart... HIS yoke is KINDLY... and HIS load... is light. By means of it, I have literally found REFRESHMENT for MY soul... and not hardship. Do you know what it feels like, dear D., to have absolutely NO anger, NO chagrin, NO animosity, NO hatred and NO fear... of ANYONE? I did not. But now... I do. Can you BUY that? If so, tell me, from whom? I know of no such person among earthling man who can give it to me. And some will say, "Well, you can give that to yourself." To that I would say, "Perhaps, some can. I could not. And so I am grateful for and to the One who taught ME how to live that way."

  Besides that, Christ or even God doesn't need any "slaves."

  Indeed, they don't NEED... anything... from ANYONE... let along pitiable me. Don't think that I don't know that, dear D. I absolutely know it. Again, I know that I cannot "repay" the debt I owe for what I have received. But I want to do SOMETHING... and this is all that I know of to do... besides living the "law" that my Lord gave me: to love God with my WHOLE heart, soul, mind and strength; to love my neighbor AS myself; and to love my enemies, even pray for them!

  They're doing just fine.

  Indeed.

  They have everything the need: they're well fed, have a good army of angels to do their bidding.

  No disputing here. But by means of them, I have the very same things!

  They don't pay any taxes.

  Had I no need of roads and schools and hospitals and emergency response and libraries and public transportation... and... and... I wouldn't pay any either! But I do have need of such things... and more... so long as I am in the flesh. When that is put off, however, there will remain no need for such things... and thus, no need to pay taxes.

  They never get sick and live forever and their lifestyle is not affected whether they have human "slaves," or not. On the otherhand, humans like you and I have to live our short lives with TONS of problems.

  As someone who "battles" diabetes, I can understand where the limitations of the flesh... and the relatively short term of life... would bring some remorse. But Daddy-O, the very fact that it IS so short... means we should spend as much time as we can LIVING it... ENJOYING it... REJOICING in what IS good about it... LOVING one another... and waste not ONE moment regretting, decrying, maligning and hating. Waste not ONE moment. For we spend WAY too much time doing and thinking things that we later look back on and go "DOH!"... why did I do that... why did I say that... why did I think that? We spend WAY too much time regretting our past... and dreading our future. But it is as you say: life's... too short. Live... and love... dear D... NOW.

  I for one, will not add the extra burden in my life of being a "slave" to some supernatural being who doesn't even have the common decency to call me on the phone once in a while.

  The phone... is an empirical device used by beings of flesh... to communicate with beings of flesh. God... is a SPIRIT, dear one. All you need DO... is dial Him up... with YOUR spirit! Just use the SPIRITAL "phone"... that is Christ. Talk THROUGH him. Yes, it's that easy.

  I have enough burdens as it is and those in that august heavenly body who judge us for all eternity because some of us rejected being their "slaves" despite the difficulties THEY created for us during our short stay in life, have the nerve to ask more of us than just to live, suffer and die as we all do. Screw them.

  Ahhh, but it is YOU who is ENTIRELY in error here, Daddy-O... and I must admit that I am surprised, truly. For your statement SMACKS of what you were once taught by earthling man, which I feel you should have entirely let go of by now. Or are you simply "playing Devil's Advocate?" If the latter, I bid you, take care, for even if you did not intend to, you have made a completely false accusation against God and Christ, here, and I believe you KNOW it. For God and Christ do NOT require anything of you that you cannot do! What DO they require? It was written for you, so that you could see and read it with your eyes of FLESH... because you obviously fail to hear and know it with your SPIRIT. Indeed, their "requirements" are QUITE simple: 1. "Is THIS not the "fast" that I choose? To LOOSEN the fetters of wickedness, to RELEASE the bands of the yoke bar, and to SEND AWAY THE CRUSHED ONES... FREE, and that you people should TEAR IN TWO EVERY yoke bar? Is it not the dividing of YOUR bread out to the hungry one, and that YOU should bring the afflicted, homeless people into YOUR house? That, in case YOU should see someone naked, YOU must cover him, and that YOU should not hide YOURSELF from your own flesh (kinfolk)? - Isaiah 58:6, 7 2. "He has told you, O earthling man, what is GOOD. And what is JAH asking back from YOU but to EXERCISE JUSTICE and to LOVE KINDNESS and to be MODEST IN WALKING WITH YOUR GOD?" - Micah 6:8 3. "I am giving you a NEW commandment, that you LOVE one another; JUST AS I HAVE LOVED YOU, that you also love one another." - John 13:34 4. "You must love JAH your God with your WHOLE heart and with your WHOLE soul and with your WHOLE mind...You must love YOUR NEIGHBOR as you love YOURSELF." - Matthew 22:37, 38 5. "The form of worship that is ACCEPTABLE to God is to look after widows and orphans in their tribulation..." - James 1:27

  Fooeey on that crap! I want nothing to do with vindictive and evil Gods who use humans as pawns and demand love and worship in return for misery on earth and "some" future reward. Where I come from, we call that "extortion" or "blackmail." Either way, it's ugly and BibleGod is UGLY.

  And yet, in light of those items above, here is what the TRUE God says to you... and ALL of Israel with "ears" to "hear"... and ALL those who go with them: "In THAT case (the case of Isaiah 58:6,7) YOUR light would break forth just like the dawn; and speedily would recuperation spring up for YOU. And before YOU... YOUR righteousness would certainly walk; the very glory of JAH... would be YOUR rear guard. In THAT case, YOU would call... and JAH... Himself... would answer; YOU would cry for help, and HE would say... HERE I AM!" "If YOU would remove from YOUR midst the yoke bar, the poking out of the finger and the speaking of what is hurtful; and YOU will grant to the hungry one your OWN soul, and YOU will satisfy the soul that is being afflicted, YOUR light would ALSO certainly flash up... even in the gloom... and YOUR gloom... WILL be... like midday." "And JAH will be BOUND... to lead you... CONSTANTLY... and to satisfy YOUR soul... even in a SCORCHED land... and He will invigorate YOUR very bones... and YOU (too!)... MUST become like a well-watered garden... and the SOURCE OF WATER... the water of which... DO NOT LIE." Isaiah 58:8-11 And there is MUCH more regarding what God is BOUND... by HIS own LAW... to do for us... if only we obey these few commandments. That is what a "covenant" IS... as agreement between two parties... one do something in exchange for something from the other party. And what, I ask you... is so burdensome about these commandments and the covenant that they endorse, a covenant to agree to be bound by a "law"... of LOVE... in exchange for God's blessing, protection and guidance? What is SO difficult, SO incomprehensible, so "beyond" our abilities? I say... there is nothing. I say that we CAN love God... we CAN love our neighbor... and we CAN love even our enemies... all in the way prescribed to us by God... and DEMONSTRATED for us... by Christ. All we have to DO... is what Christ did: WANT to. As always, I bid you the greatest of love and peace, by dear brother "Israel"... and will wait for you to catch up, as I have absolutely NO doubt that you will. Sooner... or later... and either is "good." Your SERVANT, friend, sister... and a (very willing) slave of Christ... ALL to time indefinite... Shelb
• 

  scholar

  City Fan

  Your questions to me are frankly stupid and show that you do not understand the matters set before you. Firstly, it is plainly evident to the reader that Jonsson endorses the 587 date over the alternative 586, you ask for a page number well why not read his book. Secondly, the secular evidence for 607 is found for the fall of Babylon calculated for 539, there is secular evidence for the decree of Cyrus who released the exiles in 537 followed by secular evidence for the conquest of Jerusalem during the reigns of Neb and Zedekiah. There is also scriptural evidence for all of these facts and the exile - desolation of the land for seventy years.So 607 is firmly based on historical attected in secular materials and the biblical data.

  Yes, scholars to a man show a distinct preference for either 586 or 587 and sometimes the comparison will be discussed, But the very fact that is a different date shows that scholars gave a problem. Also, I believe that the problem lies with methodology which is particularly evident in Thiele's research and that has to do with calendrical problems at best, But it is the attitude to the Bible and whether higher criticism should outweigh the plain statements of scripture that is the root of the methodology and best favours the Witnesses who are truly loyal to the Word.

  scholar
• 

  XQsThaiPoes

  Maybe I am missing the boat, but the watchtower is not guilty of anything heinous by claiming 1914 was a religious event. Many churches put the flood of Noah around 2370 including JWs (a numerical impossibility). Using the same fish story methods the watchtower does with 1914. This is not deceit this is religion. THe date 1914 in the future will go one of the was stay the same, dissolve into obscurerity, or be replaced by new light. Because of the internet and the clear evidence that 607 is flawed or not definative JWS in good standing along with wipper snapers at bethel will have to act on it because the churches will make this a popular exploit as 1975.

  Also if you read modern watchtowers they rationalize and understate everything to the point you wonder if they believe God has any personal connection with the watchtower they have went from God's prophet to God's public relations. I believe that only apostates believe they use these 1914 to establish credibility. The Watchtower uses nothing to establish its credibility anymore (maybe that is worse).

  They seem to have fallen into a trap. They can't explain how they are better than other faiths except for their legalism, lack of idolatry, and chastity. We have no divine revelations because ever president is erased from WTS history upon their deaths and with the new arrangement nobody can clam any personal revelation anymore. The watchtower is now a strictly academic theological journal now and sadly the scholars consider it inept pulp. Also being a false prophet means nothing God used false prophets to do his will too.

  Trying to turn people against the watchtower using facts seems to me not worth while, for there is no single fact that makes people believe it is the irresponsibility of ?Christianity? that makes JWs appealing. The Watchtower comforts those that come from broken faiths. I can?t see the sense of urgency people have to get rid of a single religion, but if you read the boards of the world there is a strong calling to destroy or humiliate the WTS. All I ask is why?
• 

  City Fan

  Scholar,

  it is plainly evident to the reader that Jonsson endorses the 587 date over the alternative 586, you ask for a page number well why not read his book.

  But that isn't what you said is it? You stated that Jonsson says in GTR that the fall MUST have been in 587. Now if he prefers the date 587 to 586, and he certainly uses this date in his charts, then that is much different than him saying it must be 587. This is no different to scholars such as Donald Wiseman (who prefers 587) or Joan Oates and Abraham Malamat (who prefer 586), and who also discuss the alternative dates. And since I have read the book and don't recall Jonsson saying the fall must have been 587, all I asked for was a page reference. The very fact that Jonsson discusses the ascension/non-ascension year and calendrical problems in the Appendices shows he knows the date cannot be pinpointed with 100% certainty.

  the secular evidence for 607 is found for the fall of Babylon calculated for 539,

  No, this is secular evidence for 539 BCE. Once again I'll direct you to a previous thread where this was pointed out to you. http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/64436/1.ashx

  I believe that the problem lies with methodology which is particularly evident in Thiele's research and that has to do with calendrical problems at best,

  Well I did ask you which methodological problem scholars did have, if it wasn't anything to do with calendars or ascension/non-ascension systems. Your answer so far is that it "has to do with calendrical problems at best". Are you now agreeing with me? If not, what are some of the other problems?

  But it is the attitude to the Bible and whether higher criticism should outweigh the plain statements of scripture that is the root of the methodology and best favours the Witnesses who are truly loyal to the Word.

  So are you now saying that the methodology that scholars should follow is to give priority to wild prophetic speculation before any secular evidence? When you say "loyal to the Word" don't you mean "loyal to Watchtower biblical interpretation"?

  Once again I'll ask, please could you provide just one piece of secular evidence which is in 'harmony' with 607?

  CF.