there are good reasons to belief that paul wrote hebrews.
i am convinced he wrote it.
is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?.
Fisherman:
Paul may have deliberately omitted his name in writing to the Hebrews in Judea, since his name had been made an object of hatred by the Jews there. —Acts 21:28
The writer of Hebrews was in Italy and was associated with Timothy. These facts fit Paul. —Heb. 13:23, 24
Haha. I knew in advance that you’d just do a quote grab from the JW “All Scripture” book (page 243). Very bad form not citing your source.
Those aren’t reasons, they are speculation.
there are good reasons to belief that paul wrote hebrews.
i am convinced he wrote it.
is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?.
Fisherman:
There are good reasons to belief that Paul wrote Hebrews.
Are there? What are they? Authorship was already unknown at the end of the first century and it isn’t in Paul’s style.
Is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?
One would expect so, since you say there are good reasons for 'beliefing' it.
i've added to it in bold letters:.
january 2023 study watchtower, page 20, pars.
1 - 3.. almost 2,000 years ago, jesus gave his life in our behalf, opening the way for us to gain everlasting life.
It’s interesting (?) that the January 2023 Watchtower gloats about the ‘record attendance’ for the 2021 Memorial. But no mention of attendance for 2022? Have they even released that figure yet (they were already boasting about the figure for 2021 in November of that year)? It was especially easy to ‘attend’ in 2021 and 2022 because no one had to even leave home, but it seems that maybe some lost interest (perhaps a result of no regular in-person meetings)? Unless they’re just keeping everyone in suspense about an even more ‘amazing’ attendance for this year?
for what it is worth to those interested.
1914.. tel-aviv university.
"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.
Earnest:
My intention is not to raise a debate about carbon 14 dating, but only to say it is not precise and if the curve of the archaeomagnetic intensity is strongly based on the carbon dating then that, too, is not fixed in stone.
This would be a very valid point if the archaeomagnetic data and the Bayesian analysis thereof were based on a very small dataset and the researchers had no idea what they were doing.
for what it is worth to those interested.
1914.. tel-aviv university.
"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.
Fisherman:
WT conclusions or interpretations are on what the scriptures mean, the best evidence for that is the ancient text.
Wrong. WT conclusions ignore the plain reading of various Bible verses that directly contradict their interpretation. As such, the Watch Tower Society elevates itself above the Bible.
for what it is worth to those interested.
1914.. tel-aviv university.
"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.
No. The curve for the archaeomagnetic intensity is based on a broader dataset than would be significantly affected just by changing the assumed date for the Beth-Shean event, and in particular is strongly based on carbon dating for the relevant period in the 10th century BCE.
This research demonstrates how an archaeointensity curve constructed from a dense archaeomagnetic dataset in which the chronology rests on radiocarbon (for periods before the eighth century BCE) and firm historical ages (from the eighth century BCE and on) can be used as a powerful chronological tool.
for what it is worth to those interested.
1914.. tel-aviv university.
"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.
The blue rectangle below indicates the range of archaeomagnetic intensity levels that would be expected for a site burned in 993 BCE. The red dot indicates the level that would be expected for the destruction of Beth-Shean if the Watch Tower Society's chronology were correct.
It is a little disappointing that there is a need to explain how to interpret a chart in this thread, but there are others in the thread who are excited that some words are similar to other words, so... 🤷♂️
for what it is worth to those interested.
1914.. tel-aviv university.
"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.
Rattigan350:
It is more correctly based on an incorrect date assigned to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in addition to other superstitious numerology.1914 is not based on the fall of Jerusalem.
Just because Nelson Barbour thought it had to, does not mean that Jehovah God thought it did.
🤦♂️ So you just need to establish that your preferred deity exists and that anything you claim about it is actually true. I think all of your work is still in front of you. 😂
for what it is worth to those interested.
1914.. tel-aviv university.
"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.
Earnest:
Archaeomagnetic data says nothing about the date in itself, but can be used for establishing whether destruction events happened at the same time.
Incorrect. The study applied the use of archaeomagnetic intensity data and other data to correlate the timing of burn sites, and that method does not establish the date itself. But the archaeomagnetic intensity data itself - represented by the shaded curving band in the graph - does invalidate 993 as a valid date for the destruction of Beth-Shean. Of course, I don’t need to rely on that fact though, because all the other evidence already establishes that the Watch Tower Society chronology is wrong.
for what it is worth to those interested.
1914.. tel-aviv university.
"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.
Which means it definitely wasn’t in 993 BCE, which remains incompatible with the archaeomagnetic intensity data. 🤦♂️
