Are you saying that there are multiple Babylonian chronologies? Can I have some references please?
ackack
The 1914 Doctrine and The Threat of the Egibi Business Tablets
by VM44 349 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
VM44
Do not Orthodox Jewish scholars, who uphold the accuracy of the scriptures, see no problem with the 587BCE date?
If that is so, then the WT's claims that 607 is Biblical, but 587 is not does not hold water, as a verious religious group (Orthodox Jews) hold that the 587 date is correct.
The only reason that The Watchtower claims that the 607 is Biblical is that it fits in with the adventist calculation of the date for the end of the Gentile times. A calculation that The Watcthower says is Bible Based, and hence Biblical, and which they hold dearly as a prime doctrine.
BTW, Being "Bible Based" is not the same a "Biblical". Anyone can come up with a doctrine based upon a selection of Bible scriptures, it does not mean the doctrine is therefore "Biblical" (that is, taught by the Bible)
--VM44
-
a Christian
Scholar JW,
There is no reply from you to COJ's two questions to you posted at Channel C.
So, how bout doing us a favor and posting answers to those questions here?
Again, COJ asked you these two questions:
1.) Jeremiah 25:11 explicitly states that "these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years." The real question FOR YOU to answer, therefore, is this one: WHO are "these nations" and WHEN did they begin to serve the king of Babylon?
2.) Why do you ignore the primary sources (the contemporary cuneiform documents) on which the Neo-Babylonian chronology is based, and turn to the conflicting statements of a late, secondary source like Josephus?
-
scholar
ackack
No there are not multiple Babylonian chronologies at all but many secular chronologies within Christendom which are based upon Babylonian chronology.
scholar JW
-
scholar
VM44
Orthodox Jewish scholars do not accept 586 or 587 at all but have widely different dates for the Fall of Jerusalem as their chronology is not based upon Babylonian chronology. The chronology long advanced by celebrated WT scholars is both Bible based and a totally biblical chronology which is simple and easy to understand.
scholar JW
-
scholar
a Christian
I have responded to Jonsson's questions and I am waiting for these to be posted if in fact Jonsson does not reply soon then I will forward my responses to you if you send me your email address or I will in fact post them on this board if I can do it otherwise I have to rewrite them whikch is a bit of a nuisance. Let us pray that Jonsson will respond if he dares.
scholar JW
-
a Christian
Scholar JW,
Concerning your reply to COJ's questions to you on Channel C, you wrote: "I will in fact post them on this board if I can do it otherwise I have to rewrite them whikch is a bit of a nuisance."
You are kidding, right? You have used a computer for years and you don't know how to copy and paste? Your E-Mail program has a feature that saves a copy of all recently sent mail. Find the mail you recently sent to Channel C or to COJ containing your response to his questions. While pressing your left mouse button drag your cursor over the text you want to copy, highlighting that text. Now press and release your right mouse button which will make the word "copy" appear. Move your cursor to that word and press your left mouse button. Now you have copied the text you just highlighted. Now begin a reply to this post here on JWD. Move your cursor to the little clipboard symbol at the top of the page. Left click on it. Your copied text will appear.
Not so tough. Maybe this partly explains why you have had so much trouble understanding what people here have been trying to help you understand for years.
-
gumby
Scholar...Concerning your reply to COJ's questions to you on Channel C, you wrote: "I will in fact post them on this board if I can do it otherwise I have to rewrite them whikch is a bit of a nuisance."
You are kidding, right? You have used a computer for years and you don't know how to copy and paste?
LMAO !
Gumby
-
VM44
I still hold that the Babylonian banking and business tables, of which the Egibi tablets are only portion of, establish once and for all the relative chronology of the Neo-Babylonian time period.
The tablets also show there are no "extra" kings to account for a "missing" 20 year period required to get the year 607.
I really don't understand why the matter is not settled once and for all.
Well, actually I do, without 607, there is no 1914, and no 1918, the year when Jesus and Jehovah inspected all the churchs and then picked the Watchtower to be the representative of God's kingdom on earth.
And what is the reason The Watchtower was picked in 1918? Simple, Rutherford was the president of the WTBTS, and they liked him so much that they just had to choose The Watchtower Society over all other groups.
--VM44
-
Alleymom
I still hold that the Babylonian banking and business tables, of which the Egibi tablets are only portion of, establish once and for all the relative chronology of the Neo-Babylonian time period. The tablets also show there are no "extra" kings to account for a "missing" 20 year period required to get the year 607. I really don't understand why the matter is not settled once and for all.
VM44 ---
As you know, the matter IS settled in the world of scholarship. Outside of the WTS, there is no dispute regarding the relative chronology of the neo-Babylonian empire.
There are literally thousands of contemporary dated cuneiform tablets which establish the relative chronology.
In May 2000 Professor Janos Everling listed 7,797 dated neo-Babylonian tablets which have been catalogued for the following kings:
Nabopolassar -- 485 dated tablets
Nebuchadnezzar II -- 2,828 dated tablets
Amel-Marduk -- 167 dated tablets
Neriglissar II -- 249 dated tablets
Labashi-Marduk --- 12 dated tablets
Nabonidus -- 3,915 dated tablets(plus an additional 141 damaged tablets with reconstructed dates)
Source: "Chronological List of Texts from the First Millennium B.C. Babylonia," Janos Everling, May 2000.
Marjorie