aChristian:
Thank you for your words of wisdom in approaching biblical chronology. Rest assured that I am quite amenable to the various dates that we have been given by historians unless there is good reason for doubt. And I certainly do not include personal convenience or Bible-code type games as good reason. On the other hand I am also aware that historians are humans too, and they can have their own agenda as to how history should be interpreted. But that shouldn't normally affect the dates themselves. I trust you will let us know when you do publish your work so we can devote a thread to your conclusions. Seriously, I am sure many (including myself) will be interested to read it.
AlanF:
Earnest : I don't think we should limit our study simply to avoid agreement with any aspect of WTS chronology.
AlanF : Agreed. What specifically did you have in mind?
When I initially read the chronological texts in Daniel I had the impression that there was more to the reigns of Jehoiakim and Nebuchadnezzar than met the eye. That impression still remains although I am not certain how they should be understood. But whatever my conclusions are they should be considered on their own merits and not be immediately classed as either for or against the WTS. I have to agree it is sometimes difficult to know whether conclusions we reach are by reason or indoctrination, whether we believe because it is true or simply because we want to believe. And presenting our conclusions on a public forum can certainly help us examine ourselves. But truth must remain the criterion by which we measure things, and not acceptance or rejection of WT dogma.
In this respect I wonder if I may comment on the recent discussion of 2 Chronicles 36: 7,10,18. I am at a bit of a loss to understand the significance of whether the "utensils" of verse 7 are different from the "desirable articles" of verse 10. I cannot see how that affects how many deportations there were. But having said that, I must then say that I do think the distinction in translation of keliy in verse 10 is well-grounded.
The word keliy itself has a myriad meanings and that is because it can refer to "anything finished, made, produced" (Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 1929, p.479) It can have the meanings of (1) an article or object, especially something of value; (2) a utensil, implement or apparatus including a weapon, an implement of music, a tool, a yoke, sacred utensils; (3) a receptacle such as a sack, a bag, an earthenware cooking pot; and (4) a reed-boat.
The context in which it is used in 2 Chronicles 36 limits it to a sacred utensil but even that has a wide range. The Lexicon (p.480) has this to say:
2.f. as general term for utensils and furniture of Solomon's palace [1 Kings 10:21=2 Chronicles 9:20]; especially (very often) of the tabernacle [Exodus 25:9,39; 27:3] (in Hex always P), and temple [1 Kings 7:45,47,48; 2 Kings 12:14]; of both palace and temple [Jeremiah 27:18,19,21]; combinations are utensils of the tabernacle [Exodus 27:19], utensils of the altar [Exodus 38:3], utensils of Jehovah [Isaiah 52:11], utensils of the House of Jehovah [Jeremiah 27:16; 28:3,6; Ezra 1:7], desirable articles of the House of Jehovah [2 Chronicles 36:10], utensils of the House of God [2 Chronicles 28:24,24; 36:18; Nehemiah 13:9; Daniel 1:2], utensils of the Sanctuary [Nehemiah 10:39], utensils of ministry [Numbers 4:12], service utensils [Numbers 4:26; 1 Chronicles 9:28; 28:14,14], utensils of the service of Jehovah's House [1 Chronicles 28:13], equipment [Numbers 4:32]; also holy utensils [1 Kings 8:4; 1 Chronicles 9:29]; of appliances of idol-worship [2 Kings 23:4].
The NWT pretty much keeps to its standard of "assigning one meaning to each major word and holding to that meaning as far as the context permits". There are instances where a word other than utensils is used. For example, in 1 Kings 10:21 & 2 Chronicles 9:20 it says :
"And all the drinking vessels [keliy] of King Solomon were of gold, and all the vessels [keliy] of the House of the Forest of Lebanon were of pure gold..."
Clearly, in this verse the utensils of King Solomon were qualified as being drinking utensils and so it had a more specific meaning than the word had elsewhere. Another interesting verse is Numbers 4:32 which reads :
"and the pillars of the courtyard round about and their socket pedestals and their tent pins and their tent cords together with all their equipment [keliy] and all their service. And by their names you will assign the equipment [keliy] for which they are obligated, as their load."
Here again the context demands a meaning that will embrace more than utensils and so 'equipment' is used. Other translations are 'furnishings' (NKJV), 'instruments' (Webster's). Now the difference between 2 Chronicles 36:10 and verses 7 & 18 is that the utensils [keliy] in verse 10 are qualified as being "desirable" [chemdah] whereas those in verses 7 and 18 are not. So a different (but equally correct) word is used to show there is a distinction between the two types of keliy which would not have been as obvious if the same English word had been used.
I really do not think it was done in order to obfuscate the issue about how many deportations there were. The text seems quite clear without such silly arguments, as you demonstrated to "scholar". But it is equally clear that the writer was making a distinction between keliy and chemdah keliy.
Earnest
Edited by - Earnest on 1 February 2003 3:7:58