Posts by Doug Mason

12

JW's ransom sacrifice DOGMA

by The Fall Guy in

it-2 p. 735 ransom - “the real ransom (a) sacrifice.....would have to correspond (b) to the perfect adam......and enslavement into which their first father adam had sold them.

only thereby could he satisfy god’s perfect justice (c) that requires like for like...(d)’”.

a) can a ransom redeem something which wasn't lost – i.e.

Doug Mason

Who received the "ransom" payment?

Who was holding humankind hostage?

Doug

6

While resrarching Evolution/Creation, I came across 'The Blob'

by Doug Mason in

my research into evolution/creation is taking me down many roads.

on one journey, i came across 'the blob'.. it made me wonder what life was like when the environment was far different.. https://jwstudies.com/_blob__slime_mould_with_720_sexes.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Hi,

My research into Evolution/Creation is taking me down many roads. On one journey, I came across 'The Blob'.

It made me wonder what life was like when the environment was far different.

https://jwstudies.com/_blob__slime_mould_with_720_sexes.pdf

Doug

277

Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

by Doug Mason in

i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

(1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

Doug Mason

Hi Scholar,

Thank you for the reference to the paras in "Insight" volume 1.

This means that the WTS accepts the ability of scholars to accurately calculate the dates of astronomical phenomena. I have copies of the original material that is referred to by these paras in "Insight", and they consistently are able to provide the dates of the eclipses during all of the period in question.

This is great news, for these same scholars also list the eclipse in 605 BCE during Nabopolassar's reign and the 567 BCE eclipse during Nebuchadnezzar's 37th regnal year.

I am equally delighted to see that the WTS has to rely on the secular chronology to arrive at 539 BCE.

Their reliance on Parker and Dubberstein is also obvious, because the WTS changed the date from 538 BCE to 539 BCE following the 1942 release of P&D's work.

Doug

277

Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

by Doug Mason in

i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

(1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

Doug Mason

Hi Scholar,

So you don't know how the WTS arrives at its starting point of 539 BCE.

Maybe you should ask the WT (through its expert Rolf) to provide you with an article that shows its method for arriving at 539 BCE.

Doug

277

Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

by Doug Mason in

i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

(1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

Doug Mason

Scholar,

You write: "The establishment of 539 BCE as the date for the Fall of Babylon and as Pivotal date for the dating of the OT is based on known secular sources and the Biblical record."

Give me the details, including the sources. Which "secular sources" and which "Biblical record"?

The date is calculated from the secular absolute dates which are unacceptable to the WTS and from secular chronologies that are likewise unacceptable to the WTS. Yet the WTS accepts their conclusions.

Doug

277

Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

by Doug Mason in

i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

(1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

Doug Mason

Hi Scholar,

Prove 539 BCE without relying on secular scholars' absolute dates and chronology.

Doug

277

Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

by Doug Mason in

i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

(1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

Doug Mason

Hi,

I came across another article that supports the 587 BCE date.

https://www.critiquesonthewatchtower.org/new-articles/2019/02/Jerusalem_587_586.pdf

I think that concreting in the correct date provides further information that deals blows to the WTS's imaginary 607 BCE date. Working through the process provides mental discipline that defies the method that the WTS uses to arrive at their date.

Doug

277

Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

by Doug Mason in

i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

(1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

Doug Mason

Apologies for misspelling "Jerusalem"

277

Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

by Doug Mason in

i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

(1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

Doug Mason

I came across this article written in 2004 by an Evangelical.

“When did Jerusalem Fall?”, Rodger Young, Journal of the Evangelical Society [JETS], 47/1 (March 2004), 21-38.

http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf

These are the Conclusions of the 18-page analysis

(1) Jerusalem fell in the fourth month (Tammuz) of 587 BC. All sources which bear on the question—Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 2 Kings—are consistent in dating the event in that year.

(2) Ezekiel consistently dated events from the time that Jehoiachin was taken captive in early 597 BC. He used Tishri years in all his reckoning.

(3) Similarly, 2 Kings 24–25 consistently used Tishri years and non-accession reckoning for Judean kings. For Nebuchadnezzar, non-accession years, starting in Nisan, were used.

(4) In the writings of Jeremiah (which excludes the ﬁfty-second chapter), Jeremiah consistently used Tishri years for Judah, as did Ezekiel and the source for the last chapters of 2 Kings. This is in harmony with the usage of Judah throughout the monarchic period, in contrast to Thiele’s assumption that Jeremiah and Ezekiel used Nisan reckoning for Judah. Jeremiah used non-accession years for the kings of Judah and for Nebuchadnezzar. There is not enough information to determine if he started the years for Nebuchadnezzar in Tishri or Nisan; both assumptions ﬁt the data.

(5) All three sources are internally consistent and consistent with each other. There are no texts which bear on the question of the chronology of the last years of the Judean monarchy and the fall of Jerusalem which do not ﬁt the methods described here regarding how the biblical authors treated the history of their times.

(6) None of these conclusions was arrived at by forcing presuppositions on the data found in the scriptural text received from the Masoretes, except perhaps the presupposition that when the data conﬂicted with one of our hypotheses, then any reasonable set of hypotheses which did not conﬂict with the data was to be preferred over the set which produced conﬂict. This approach may be contrasted with an approach which says that when a favorite set of hypotheses conﬂicts with the data, the data will be declared in error and no further effort will be expended to see if another set of hypotheses offers a better explanation.

(7) The use of Decision Tables reveals that previous studies have overlooked many possibilities that were entirely consistent with the ideas of the author of the study, but which were not explored simply because they were never thought of. This failure to explore all the possibilities has been a major problem in the studies of OT chronology, and one that has led to signiﬁcant confusion in the chronologies produced. It is to be hoped that future studies will not declare that some new solution is to be preferred, or the text needs to be emended, until it is demonstrated that there are no other sets of hypotheses that better explain the data. Ignoring this practice will reduce the credibility of the study.

16

Bring to ruin those ruining the earth, but what if we change.

by pleaseresearch in

this has come up recently with two family members who are jws.

if they are talking about this you can bet that others are too.

they seem to be all excited that a lot of attention in the news right now is about climate change, greta, extinction rebellion etc... as you can image they are very smug saying see.

Doug Mason

I have witnessed Fundamentalist Evangelicals saying there is nothing to be concerned about because God created the Earth and he will not allow it to be ruined.

Planet Earth has seen at least 5 major extinctions and at least 90% of species that ever lived are now extinct. Mankind is not immune.

Perhaps the tag should be: Accelerated Climate Change. Variation is normal but the present rate of change is not permitting Nature to adapt.

Large swathes of Australia is in the grips of a great drought. The government is going to fix the problem by spending $1 billion on dams!

Doug