Posts by castthefirststone

100

Post 607: Reject 607 BC if You TRULY Trust the Bible!!!

by Londo111 in

therefore, if the 70 years period is for the destruction of jerusalem and exile at babylon:.

if zedekiah had not rebelled against babylon, had he surrendered during the final siege that lasted two and a half years, then the destruction of jerusalem and the deportation need not have happened.

then in the jubilee year, they were set free and their hereditary land was returned to them.

castthefirststone

scholar will show the circular reasoning involved in the 609 chronology

scholar will show how it makes little sense ftom even a biblical viewpoint

scholar will show that the seventy years conincided with the depopulation of Judah and thus could only end upon their return

scholar will even edify participants wih his doctorate level of understanding hebrew and greek.

So why don't you? Stop threatening and just do it, or better yet why don't you publish your 607 theories in a peer reviewed historical academic journal and see how far that gets you. I mean it's obvious that this forum is below your intellect and academic achievements, so why not settle the 607 problem once and for all by changing the academic opinion on it. I mean you now apparently have the credentials to do it.

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

castthefirststone

The connections are there, plain and obvious to all

I still don't get it. Where does it state in the Bible that it will take 70 years for the utensils to be restored?

But his false prophecy is interesting because it completely solidifies my argument.

How does a prophecy, that you are so desperate to prove false, "solidify" your argument? The prophecy stated that there will be two separate events, one where the king is dethroned and the other which occurs two years later where the utensils are returned. The event that is linked to the 70 years (the dethroning of the king) happens first and then two years thereafter the utensils are to be returned. How does that "solidify" your argument??? By the way if Hananiah's prophecy was false why did the events that Jeremiah ratified still occur?

Also AnnOMaly mentioned that the utensils were raided more than once even prior to Jerusalem being destroyed. This further debunks your theories.

All the scriptures that you listed mentions Babylon (or is associated with Babylon) and the lifting of that yoke. Once Babylon's yoke was removed the 70 years was over. It's plain and simple and is stated explicitly in the Bible. No links or mental gymnastics required. It's not open to interpretation, it's stated explicitly. Even in the New World Translation it's clear that the 70 years is linked to the ruling of the Babylon king. No bolding or underlining required, all you have to do is read your Bible.

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

castthefirststone

Ethos

You said:

Hmmm, nothing but insulting and blog peddling and a zealous, yet misguided 'rebuttal' to my points.

Please point me to something either insulting, blog peddling or a zealous, yet misguided rebuttal in my post below:

True but Jeremiah ratifies that prophecy in Jer 28:6 by saying Amen. After that statement by Jeremiah the prophecy was no longer false. Jeremiah does qualify which portion of the prophecy was ratified and the part of the utensils is ratified. So the issue with the 70 years ending with the utensils being returned persists.

Your main argument was that when the temple utensils were returned then the 70 years ended. I asked you where did you get this in the Bible as I can find any evidence in the Bible that the 70 years ends once the utensils are returned. You have yet to provide that scripture.

I even pointed you to a prophecy in Jeremiah that totally refutes your argument and that points out that the utensils will only be returned two years after the 70 years. You then told me that this prophecy was false because it was from Hananiah. I corrected you in your statement as Jeremiah ratified this prophecy therefore it was not false.

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

castthefirststone

Quick answer...Jeremiah 28:3 is a false prophecy by Hannaniah.

True but Jeremiah ratifies that prophecy in Jer 28:6 by saying Amen. After that statement by Jeremiah the prophecy was no longer false. Jeremiah does qualify which portion of the prophecy was ratified and the part of the utensils is ratified. So the issue with the 70 years ending with the utensils being returned persists.

I reread your post and you provide no proof that there's a link between the 70 years and the utensils being returned. The kingship of Babylon ends after 70 years but this is a separate event and the returning of the utensils only happens two years after that as was prophesied.

If you can provide me a scripture that shows explicitly that the 70 years ends with the utensils being returned I would be grateful as this will cause me to reinvestigate 607.

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

castthefirststone

Thanks for clarifying the premise statement, I can see what you are trying to say. You list the three scriptures that are used to support the conclusion that you have at the end of the three scriptures.

I still don't get the explanation of Jeremiah 25:12 though.

You said:

Jeremiah 25:11 mentions the servitude of 70 years. Verse 12 mentions that he will be called into account after the 70 years. Jeremiah 51 which is a continuation of what was described in verses 12-18, qualify that the calling into account involved the returning of the temple utensils. Simple enough?

You explanation is not "simple enough" and I still don't understand. Where in Jeremiah 51 does it equate the calling into account of the king to the returning of the temple utensils. Please show me the scripture that states that after 70 years is completed the utensils will be brought back to Jerusalem.

You stated in your response of premise 2 that vengence for the temple is the link. When was the vengence executed? When the king of Babylon was overthrown or when the utensils was returned? If it's when the utensils are returned the how do you explain Jeremiah 28:3?

Within two full years more I am bringing back to this place all the utensils of the house of Jehovah that Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon took from this place that he might bring them to Babylon.

It seems to me that this scripture states that the utensils will only be returned after an additional two years after the 70 years as verse 2 mentioned the yoke that the king of Babylon had being broken (this is when the 70 years ends according to Jer 25:12) and then it mentions an additional two years before the utensils will be returned.

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

castthefirststone

I don't understand your post Ethos. You list 3 scriptures that you call premises. A scripture is not a premise.

Your analysis of premise 1 starts off by stating the following:

The premise seems to insinuate that the servitude ended in 539 B.C.E.

I don't believe that is what the scripture insinuates. The scripture clearly states that a period of 70 years ends when the "king of Babylon" is called to an account. When was an account called against the King of Babylon, two years after the invasion of Babylon?

Your statement that is quoted states that this scripture insinuates that the servitude ended after this 70 years. Where in Jeremiah 25:12 does it talk about servitude?

66

Watchtower's Weirdest Photograph?

by Marvin Shilmer in

jw
friends

watchtower's weirdest photograph?.

you wont believe it when you see it.

and is available at: http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2012/10/watchtowers-weirdest-photograph.html.

castthefirststone

It also looks like two photos were joined. Either that or the third table from the front had Scarface and the Phantom of the Opera that joined them for dinner.

25

One Silly Little Comma = WT Idiocy

by Farkel in

one would think that the god of gods, the creator of everything who wanted to give we puny little humans a handbook for salvation(tm), would make sure that handbook remained authentic.. one who thinks that way would be wrong.. since punctuation is critical to convey exact meanings, i find it strange that the god of gods would pick a written language for his handbook that has no punctuation!

oh, wait!

he also picked another language for that book that had no written vowels!

castthefirststone

As has been pointed out the comma makes no difference. At some point the criminal would have joined Jesus in paradise. In order for that to happen the criminal had to go to heaven as the bible apparently teaches that Jesus won't come back to earth again.

For someone to go to heaven the new covenant had to be concluded and the "official teaching" is that that only happened in 33 CE. There was no anointed before the lighters were lit on the heads and they started to speak crazy talk. Therefore the criminal couldn't go to heaven because he died before the new covenant was concluded.

Therefore either Jesus lied or the WT is lying or they both lied.

114

The Bible-- Full of Errors And Inconsistencies?

by Recovery in

i noticed in the "magic" thread many former jw's no longer adhere to the bible as the unerring and accurate word of god.

if you feel this way, can you please list any specific reasons/arguments as to why not.

this thread isn't for debating purposes, but simply for listing.

castthefirststone

Matthew 27:49 states Jesus was speared before dying. That part is in double brackets in the NWT to show something is wrong. John 19:30,34 shows that Jesus was speared after dying.

The Watchtower even admits that the spear part in Mat 27:49 doesn't belong in the Bible and only the account in John can be trusted. I suppose the Holy Spirit was on holiday the day when that part was added to the Bible.

398

Jwfacts, Why Do You Equate Miracles With Magic?

by Recovery in

i have a question for the author of the website jwfacts.

as i was reading the sparlock article, i couldn't help but notice something seriously wrong:.

"the bible abounds in vivid fantasy, such as its many celestial descriptions, or the portrayal of warring kingdoms with imaginary beasts.. the sparlock message is confusing, as much for an adult as for a child, as the bible shows that god's followers practice magic, even if they are usually referred to as miracles.

castthefirststone

Recovery, please correct me if I'm wrong but your main argument is that the power to perform miracles is from Jehovah and the power to perform magic is from Satan. Is this correct?