by ithinkisee 129 Replies latest watchtower bible
ithinkisee
A list of books that merely quote various dates and cannot agree on a single date is useless. If such authorities cannot agree on a single calender date then after all this time and with the abundance of so-called cumulative evidence thatc a single date cannot be endorsed or universally accepted is a real worry. So, you listy of books simply reveal a state of confusion and uncertainty amongst scholars and apostates.
scholar JW
Scholar,
First off ... there has been confusion about 586-590 ... certainly. But there is NO CONFUSION about 607 BC - because it is a made up date. All scholars (not you), archeologists, historians, religious leaders, and even the BIBLE agree that 607 BC is not even in contention.
Second, the only time I get confused is when I read the Society's literature.
A clear and almost unanimous picture comes into focus as soon as one ditches the mismatched dates of the Society's literature. This is why my pioneer/missionary book study conductor and his pioneer assistant cannot explain 607 BC.
The Society's chronology is like a bad supermarket tabloid. Some of it is fact, some of it is rumor, some of it is downright lies. The trick with a tabloid is to determine what stories are real and what are lies. WT Chronology is nothing different.
I am reminded of what my non-JW father used to tell me ... once you start with one lie ... you then need to tell tons of other little lies to keep the original lie intact.
607 is nothing more than this. Besides ... there have been 30+ page threads on this forum where you have had to admit you were wrong. I guess you're hoping that the newbies on here won't find it?
-ithinkisee
What difference does it really make what year Jerusalem was sacked. Zedekiah blinded and killed and removed from the typical davidic throne. Etc etc etc. The whole process of understanding what Jesus meant by Jerusalem being trampled on by the nations should be looked at from the original author's point of view and who his intended audience was. Scholar, do you really think the Lukian writers concerned themselves with a date far far off in the future, 1800 or so years later?
Hellrider
Yes, that is correct. The Jonsson hypothesis simply provides aview of chronology that is not widely accepted amongst scholars. What is accepted by some scholars is his presentation of Babylonian chronology, 587 and his interpretation of the seventy years. The very fact that Jonsson has not had his material peer-reviewed and his lack of qualifications means that his opinions merely amount to 'cult bashing' or a diatribe against his previous religious adherence. It is not a serious piece of scholarship.
The WT publications have informed the scholarly community of a correct, biblical chronology which cannot be refuted by scholars as it based upon a God's Word which is far superior than the opinions and theories of secular scholars.
scholar JW
Scholar,
You have NEVER backed up your blathering with facts outside of the WT pubs. Oh, wait. You seldom even quote them!
LOL
You are a joke, buddy. Entertaining, but a joke.
J
I remember the feelings of trepidation and excitement when investigating this at the library for myself over eight years ago. Sorry, Watchtower, but you've got a 20 year gap you just can't fill with any evidence. I remember way back on H2O Zach's posting on this 20 year gap and how he showed how the Society's explanations were so vapid as to be stupifying. And I recall emailing AlanF some eight years ago with a king list of the neo-Babylonian epoch. And how gracious he was in reply, step by step. He's still that way, if I can insert a plug for my old buddy, who was also gracious for,listening to my incessant babbling on the phone tonight for 90 minutes.
Cygnus
The matter was important to Doctor Luke for in Luke 21:24 he wrote concerning the appointed times of the nations or the Gentile Times. He was interested in an event that was yet to finish in relation to the Kingdom of God and so all sincere Bible Students are interested in that same fulfillment of prophecy even right up to the present. Therefore, celebrated WT scholars have ensured that mankind is fully informed regarding chronology and the importance of such dates as 607 and 1914 because these are things that the Bible really teaches.
scholar JW
Scholar.....A God's Word? I'm assured English isn't your native language... but that 20-year gap makes the WT's chronicling of the neo-Assyrian/Babylonian kinglist a mess, whereas Jonsson's explanations make both secular and biblical sense. You've not shown otherwise. Neither does the Appendix to Let Your Kingdom Come. All you can do is spout some wishful thinking and hand-waving and you'll continue to make bluntly stated assertions that have no definitive or even theoretically possible substantiation.
The Lukian community post-temple destruction was trying to make sense of why Jehovah allowed Titus' armies to destroy the centerpiece of his worship to be destroyed. The text has nothing to do with a 2520 year time period and to read such into the text does severe violence to it. There is really no other inescapable conclusion, and the Society's (and Adventist's for that matter) calculations and speculations are not and never have been taken seriously by honest-to-goodness bible interpreters and scholars.
Again with the celebrated WT scholars
Who are these celebrated WT Scholars? I know most of the guys in the Writing Dept, as we were in the same Kingdom Hall for many years. They couldn't POSSIBLY be the ones you speak of could they?
-ithinkisee
