Posts by thirdwitness

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.

i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!

http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm

thirdwitness

Yes it is off topic. This is a topic about the Neo-Babylon Kings and 587 Vs 607. NO doubt because you have failed to accomplish your purpose in disproving the 40 year desolation of Egypt it is time for a subject change.

If you want to discuss something so simple and basic as the 6 days of creation I would have to bring up the kindergarden kids for the debate. But really I do not have any desire nor the time to discuss such a simple and basic teaching of the Bible.

We know it is not literal 24 hour days. The Bible does not call for it to be literal 24 hour days and this has been easily proven in the WT publications. My advice to you is to read them along with your Bible or search out JWs in your area and ask for a home Bible study.

My purpose is to get the true information out there that apostates use most to try to mislead people. The holy trinity of the apostates as it were: Child abuse policy of JWs, NGO, and 607.

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.

i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!

http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm

thirdwitness

It has been claimed by some that thirdwitness in his summation of this thread has misrepresented the arguments made against the 40 year desolation of Egypt. For example, AlanF boldly states: On virtually every point of contention, thirdwitless misrepresents the arguments. He has no choice, because to represent them fairly, he would have to admit that his claims are demonstrably false. What's particularly sad, for someone who defends a religion that prides itself on its Godly honesty, is that thirdwitless has been corrected about these misrepresentations many times.

Is this true? Can it be factually proven by rereading this thread that thirdwitness has not misrepresented the arguments made? Yes it can. It can be shown without a doubt that the masters of deception are the apostates who make false claims to deceive any who might be reading this. Lurkers and readers, now please take note of their outright deception. We will take my summation one point at a time. Did I misrepresent their arguments?

Nebuchadnezzar's desolation of Egypt took place when he brought more exiles to Babylon in his 23rd year not in his 37th year.

This was an argument made previously by Ros at H20 (http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=311102&CategoryID=2967&startcat=401&ThreadID=2430261). Ros said: still disagree with your conclusion that Ezekiel's prophecy was fulfilled in the 27th year. He is pretty explicit that is was in the 12th year of exile or very shortly thereafter. The Jews who disobeyed Jeremiah's and Isaiah's warnings were to be punished, and they fled about a year after Jerusalem was destroyed (587 BC). Either way, there are more than 40 years til the fall of Babylon.

In another prophecy about Tyre Ezekiel said Tyre would never be rebuilt but it was, therefore since the Tyre prophecy is figurative then the Egypt prophecy must be figurative.

Rassillion said: The prophecy about Tyre did not get fufilled during this time period. In fact the Insight book indicates it did not until several hundred years later.

WHY then do you claim that this 40 years for Egypt must be fufilled during this time period.

AlanF concurs: The reason is that every possible way cannot contravene the simple fact that a literal fulfillment of a crucial part of the prophecy about Tyre failed, and that once that is established, all bets about the "40 year prophecy" for Egypt are off. And AlanF says: Now, if there exists in a Bible book an unambiguous prophecy whose fulfillment ("the city will never be rebuilt") can be directly observed today to be false (the city exists as a vibrant community), then other prophecies in that book that are contradicted by solid historical data are extremely likely to be false, or they were never intended to be fulfilled literally. Ezekiel's "40 year prophecy" is a case in point.... You're well aware that you cannot wiggle away from the simple fact that Ezekiel's prophecy about the ultimate fate of Tyre was false, and therefore that everything else he prophesied is called into question.
Jeffro: He is pointing to the fact that there is no reason to take the 40 years as a literal period applied specifically to Egypt, just as there is no reason to take Tyre's 70 years as a literal period applied specifically to Tyre.Jehovah told Jonah to tell Nineveh that it would be overthrown but when Ninevah repented he did not carry it out so likewise Egypt.

Leo said: Neither does a presumption of biblical inerrency necessitate that prophetic warnings must always be fulfilled (the book of Jonah is a case in point).

Leo then said: Your unsophisticated attitude towards ancient prophecy is such that because Jonah said that Jehovah would destroy Ninevah back in the 9th century BC, then Jehovah must've really done it. That would be parallel to your insistance that Jehovah must've desolated Egypt for 40 years just because he said he would. There is no secular evidence that gives any indication that Egypt was desolated during this time period.

Jayhawk said: Where is the Babylon Empire's cronicling it happening? I mean to be so powerful to wipe out another nation for 40 years deserves bragging rights!Where is there proof in Egypt that it happened?

Hellrider: Except for the fact that history shows us that this never happened

Leo: Yet there is no trace anywhere that such an event had in fact occurred as Ezekiel had warned. ... What evidence is there of their exile in whatever land they were assigned to?

auldsoul: ANY statement of fulfillment of Ezekiel 29-32 is pure conjecture without something else to back it up. A single witness cannot prove a thing, can it? There is no way that Babylon could have displaced millions of Egytians.

Leo: And if several million Egyptians were relocated, where did they go?

Additionally on page 7 VM144 relates the population of Egypt and the large land mass that Egypt inhabited inferring that it could not have happened literally.

qcmbr: Third - that prophecy was never fulfilled..Egypt wasn't desolate for 40 years. If it was how on earth was it in a position at the end of it to suddenly be able to rasie and army and be considered for a military alliance.

Jayhawk: Why would a whole nation be left without people for 40 years? Why did it take that long for Egypt to recover?Further, what could be so devistating that it would take 40 years to rebuild?Ezekiel was a false prophet and neither the Tyre prophecy nor the Egypt prophecy came true.

Jayhawk: The Bible says Tyre would never be rebuilt. It was.The Bible says Egypt would be inhabitable for 40 years. No proof other than the Bible says so.Why are these subjects being discussed in a 607 thread? Because the Bible is inaccurate. What else can it be wrong on?

Allan boldly declared: Ezekiel demonstrably falsely prophesied about the ultimate rebuilding of Tyre, and all of his other prophecies are called into question...The simple fact is that Ezekiel prophesied falsely, and therefore his words cannot be taken as gospel.

Jehovah called off the desolation of Egypt because Nebuchadnezzar went too far in his harsh treatment of Judah thus God decided not to give Neb the spoils of Egypt.

Jeffro: The bible indicates that Jehovah would allow Nebuchadnezzar to conquer Egypt for helping to bring the foretold judgement against Jerusalem.However, Nebuchadnezzar went too far. Zechariah 1:15 indicates Jehovah's indignation towards the nations because, although Jehovah used them to bring judgement against Jerusalem, he was only indignant "to a little extent", though the nations "helped toward calamity", causing more destruction than was necessary. ...So, because Nebuchadnezzar acted beyond what was required in the judgement of Jerusalem, it is perfectly valid that he was not permitted to have as thorough a conquest of Egypt as implied at Ezekiel 29:12.

40 years is not literal. 40 is symbolic of many years.

AlanF quoting another source: The number forty is neither a round number (Hitzig) nor a very long time (Ewald), but is a symbolical term denoting a period appointed by God for punishment and penitence (see the comm. on ch. iv. 6), which is not to be understood in a chronological sense, or capable of being calculated.Outlaw: 3rd Witness,It rained on Noah`s ark for 40 days and 40 nights...Mose`s was in the mountains for 40 days...Jesus was in the wilderness for 40 day`s...How did the number 40 get so lucky in the BIBLE?Was this as high as anybody could count in ancient times?Maybe it was the only number invented at the time?..In ancient eastern literature the number 40 means:"Many,Many."

Now after reviewing exactly what the enemies of 607 have said I ask you: Have I misrepresented their arguments against the 40 year desolation of Egypt. As you see I have positively shown the proof for each argument as stated by the posters on this thread. Any honest person can see that I have not even remotely misrepresented the arguments made by the defenders of 587. It is clear who is trying to misrepresent who. Lets use the words that AlanF used about thirdwitness and apply it to who it should be applied to: The apostates have no choice, because to represent them fairly, they would have to admit that their claims are demonstrably false.

Now the question that honest persons who really are seeking truth should be asking is:

Who really are the masters of deception?

124

thirdwitness and other pseudo-scholars: Let's discuss the Hillah Stele

by AuldSoul in

thirdwitness and other pseudo-scholars, .

firstly, i offer this disclaimer: i am not a scholar.

but i can add and subtract.

thirdwitness

Meanwhile...

I am really amazed that such pagan stories about the false gods of Babylon are held in such high esteem as if they were equal to the Bible. Normally if someone tells of some event that happens and they include wild stories about their pagan gods and what their gods did you would discredit anything in the story because it is built around falsehoods. But not these Babylonian tales. They are highly esteemed despite this fact. Some even putting them above God's word.

And this, despite the fact that we know nothing about the authors or the copyist except that they were pagans who liked to embellish the accomplishments of their kings and people. We have no idea of their accurately recording information. Take for example the Hillah Stele. By simple changing the 5 to a 7 we have made it 74 years instead of 54 years. Who knows if a copyist changed the figure? Who knows if the original writer wrote what he believed to be the number of years but was inaccurate. Or was writing it in support of the popular chronology in his day. Can anyone say for certain that this was not done since these writings were not inspired of God. Really, we have no idea. Just because the event described was said to occur on an eclipse that could only have happened that year does not mean the figures written down or accurate. By merely inserting whatever number the writer desires he has just proven that his theory is the correct one.

You have asked why doesn't the WT address the Hillah Stele Chronicle. Because they do not need to. There is no need to address every little piece of 'evidence' that secular historians claim disproves 607. Because we know from what the Bible says that 607 is the correct date. While you work from secular evidence and then fit the Bible around that. We start with the Bible and fit the secular evidence around what it says. The Bible evidence is overwhelming as shown in this link.

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/607/default.html

But you want us to put these pagan false stories above the inspired writings of the Bible. Why should we? Time and again the Bible has proven accurate.

And so it is that the WT accurately points out:

as in the case of Ptolemy, even though the astronomical information (as now interpreted and understood) on the texts discovered is basically accurate, this does not prove that the historical information accompanying it is accurate. Even as Ptolemy used the reigns of ancient kings (as he understood them) simply as a framework in which to place his astronomical data, so too, the writers (or copyists) of the astronomical texts of the Seleucid period may have simply inserted in their astronomical texts what was then the accepted, or "popular," chronology of that time. That accepted, or popular, chronology may well have contained errors at the critical points dealt with earlier in this article. To illustrate, an ancient astronomer (or a scribe) might state that a certain celestial event took place in the year that, according to our calendar, would be 465 B.C.E., and his statement may prove correct when accurate computations are made to verify it. But he may also state that the year in which the celestial event took place (465 B.C.E.) was the 21st year of King Xerxes and be entirely wrong. Simply stated, accuracy in astronomy does not prove accuracy in history.

And so since this is the case the WT does not need to disprove every claim made by secular historians. Simply because the original writer or the copyist could have put any number he wants to prove whatever he desires. As in the case I present above where the writer could have wrote 54 or 64 or 74 or whatever date he thought to be accurate or wanted to prove.

But some say what about when there is more than one line of secular evidence that seems to disprove 607? How can they all reach the same inaccurate conclusions. Can it be that the writers definitely did not use the same source of evidence popular in their day. If the source is false and many are using that source then there will be many that reach the same false conclusions. Can anyone say for certain that the Hillah Stele or Adad Stele are based on absolutely accurate information? And that the figures have not been changed? We will show evidence that in the case of Adad-Guppi Stele that the figures were most definitely changed by someone somewhere along the way. If one is changed then how do you know that others weren't also changed. And if future writers are basing their work on the changed inscriptions then they will all reach the same inaccurate conclusions.

First off auldsoul said: As to any "inconsistencies" inherent in the Adda-Guppi Stele, please refer to any publication wherein the WTS has discussed these. There are no inconsistencies in the Adda-Guppi Stele, so I am fascinated by your recollection of a discussion of these. Are we about to witnesses a retraction from you, thirdwitness, or will you follow the example of your leaders and obfuscate any false statements into oblivion as though they never occurred?

Then auldsoul said: I wonder if thirdwitness will ever apologize for remembering a WTS discussion that never took place?

Since it has been shown that there was indeed a WT publication discussing the aforementioned inscription I will throw the last question you posed right back at you.

Then I will show you how the Adda-Guppi just has a fancy tail and Hillah Monster is just a Big Foot tale that do not prove 587.