Many words are still being said on a current thread about 607 vs. 586/587 BC: - so the excellent material presented here by alleymom may be of interest to many. (It was to me, and just about gave another poster apoplexy!)
Bill.
Bungi Bill
JoinedPosts by Bungi Bill
-
147
586/587 the K.I.S.S. approach --- no VAT4956, Ptolemy, Josephus needed
by Alleymom innabonidus -- 17 years.
nebuchadnezzar -- 43 years.
nabonidus -- 17 years
-
-
-
492
607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)
by Witness My Fury inif this has been covered before i apologise in advance.
using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.
do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?
-
-
Bungi Bill
He's so carried away with his own ideas that he has failed to notice that he attributed statements to me that I did not make!
Bill.
-
492
607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)
by Witness My Fury inif this has been covered before i apologise in advance.
using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.
do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?
-
-
Bungi Bill
He's getting his wucking fords muddled now - attributing statements to me which I did not make!
Bill.
-
62
Br. Loesch - great tribulation, king of the north, generation overlap, new scrolls and more...
by Bonnie_Clyde injust got this email...... .
subject: zone report germany date: 5/17/11 2:02:57 am.
we thought we would share one of our interesting experiences with you.
-
-
Bungi Bill
VM44,
Many thanks for explaining what a "quintillion" is - and here I thought Loesch was using some nonsensical expression!
- it doesn't alter the fact that he was still talking nonsense, though!
Bill.
-
62
Br. Loesch - great tribulation, king of the north, generation overlap, new scrolls and more...
by Bonnie_Clyde injust got this email...... .
subject: zone report germany date: 5/17/11 2:02:57 am.
we thought we would share one of our interesting experiences with you.
-
-
Bungi Bill
I wonder how long a "quantillion" years actually is?
Even if the process of aging were somehow to be halted (whether by medical science or by some other means), all their talk about "living forever on earth" is still nonsense:
- simply because the sun is eventually going to run out of nuclear fuel, after which time any form of life on earth becomes impossible. (Actually, all life on earth would be destroyed prior to that event, when the sun - as a "red giant" - and expands in size so much that the earth is placed far too close for life to exist).
Perhaps by "quantillions" he means about 3.75 billion years in the future, when - because of altered solar conditions - life on earth will no longer be possible (human life, anyway).
Bill.
-
492
607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)
by Witness My Fury inif this has been covered before i apologise in advance.
using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.
do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?
-
-
Bungi Bill
TD:
The WTS though highly enough of the Nabunaid Chronicle to quote it at length in the Watchtower of August 15, 1968 (p.491):
(Incidentally, this one of those "non-existent" Watchtower texts that I was accused of inventing the other day!)
Other investigators say this "The Nabunaid Chronicle ... states that Sippar fell to the Persian forces VII/14/17 (Footnotes)"VII/16/17". The 7th Hebrew month Tishri, 14th day, 17th year of Nabonidus' reign (Oct 10, 539), that Babylon fell VII/16/17 (Oct 12), and that Cyrus entered Babylon VII/3/17 (Oct 29). This fixes the end of Nabunaid's reign and the beginning of the reign of Cyrus."
Please note that in this Watchtower article, nowhere is the above quotation presented as a contrary opinion to the one held by the publishers:
- Unless there is a disclaimer included somewhere in that WT article, one that I can't see!
From that data, count back from 539 BC 17 years for Nabonidus' reign, several months for Labashi-Marduk, 4 years for Neriglissar, 2 years for Evil Merodach, and 43 years for Nebuchadnezzar, and you arrive at 605 BC as the start of Nebuchadnezzar's reign - making the 18th year of his reign 586 BC - not 607 BC. (This by simply counting backwards, using data presented as fact in various WTS publications).
Of couse, you and I both know this to be the case:
- there are others, of a more fanatical frame of mind, who have a mental block when it comes to considering these facts!
Bill.
-
55
Saturday Morning Musings ...
by snowbird inone hot, hot thursday, in july of 1987, i worked a half day, drove from wilcox county to mobile county to pick up a sister, then hit i-10 for new orleans to attend the convention which began the next day.. the evening traffic was unbelievable; when i finally arrived and pulled into our hotel parking lot, i was shaking like a leaf in the wind.
we checked in, and after showering, i fell into bed and slept like a drunk person.. the next morning, friday, was a complete blur as we made our way to the superdome.
i don't remember anything that was discussed that day, just the searing heat as we returned to the hotel.. after a long shower, i again fell into a deep slumber.
-
-
Bungi Bill
The first DC that I attended in 1971 was a bit of a novelty for me, so I had little trouble in kidding myself that it was "good."
Likewise for the "Divine Victory" International Assembly in 1973 - very memorable for me, as it was there that I fell in love for the first time!
After that, though, I became very much like Sizmik, and could never understand all the pre-assembly hype. I always particularly felt for the small children of JW families, and thought that the assemblies were just one more piece of evidence that Jehovahs Witnesses are not a family friendly religion.
Bill.
-
492
607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)
by Witness My Fury inif this has been covered before i apologise in advance.
using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.
do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?
-
-
Bungi Bill
Beware of those who are "fanatical about their beliefs" (whether self confessed or not):
- there is something clearly not quite right about them!
Bill.
-
492
607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)
by Witness My Fury inif this has been covered before i apologise in advance.
using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.
do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?
-
-
Bungi Bill
Ann,
Excellent point:
- this fellow is at variance with the WTS in his claim about the length of Nabonidus' reign.
Without any qualification whatsoever, Insight on the Scriptures Vol.2 p. 457 gives the length of his reign as being 17 years. Nowhere does Insight on the Scriptures state that it was in fact 35 years in length - and that 17 years is an inaccurate period, arrived at by "secular" means.
In fact, nowhere at all does any WTS publication state that Nabonidus ruled for 35 years, as certain people insist he did.
From the length of each Babylonian king's reign, as stated in the WTS literature, it is possible - as you put it, by using "simple math" - to determine that 607 BC is not the date of Jerusalem's destruction. (In fact, nowhere even close!)
Bill
-
492
607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)
by Witness My Fury inif this has been covered before i apologise in advance.
using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.
do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?
-
-
Bungi Bill
Inreferring to the Babylonian King lists, Insight to the Scriptures and Babylon the Great has fallen, God's Kingdom Rules offer that information on the various reignal years without qualification:
- i.e. nowhere does either publication put a disclaimer on that reignal data, to the effect of "these are the views of some researchers, but are not subscribed to by Jehovahs Witnesses." Rather, such data is presented as being accepted by the publishers of both books (The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society).
Most of what has been said on this thread in support of 607 BC tells us much more about the individual poster than it does about the subject under discussion. From following this thread, it does not take much to realize that religious fanaticism is as prevalent among the Jehovahs Witnesses as it is amongst any other religious group:
- and that there are some very disturbed individuals amongst them!
Bill.
PS: I identify 100% with Witness My Fury's feelings on discovering that "being a JW is based on lies / false chronology and mis interpretation of scripture." It "sucks" all-right; and that is putting matters lightly!