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.
The discrepancy is in fact one whole year of 12 months so it shows that traditional chronology is simply not accurate so better stick to the definite year of 607 BCE.
Terrible argument.
607 faces way more roadblocks and discrepancies than 586/87, both historically and biblically.
Beyond this, as discussed for the past ten pages, WT chronology regarding 1914 collapses completely at the attempt to connect Dan 4 to Luke 21
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.
Scholar wrote: Luke 21:24 is an expression of the Gentile Times as elucidated by the prophet Daniel recorded in his ch.4 with the tree dream because it is centered on Jerusalem being trampled on as an expression of God's Kingdom so get the facts right.
Nope. The tree dream is centered around King Neb and his humiliation resulting in him glorifying God's sovereignty. Jerusalem is never mentioned once in Dan 4, not even alluded to.
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.
Scholar: Finally, you have sen the light for any reader can see for himself/herself that Dan 4 must have both a literal and figurative fulfilment because of the literary structure of the tree dream, context within the book of Daniel and the terms used in Dan 4.
Nope, this is just your opinion, as is thankfully obvious to most. It is in plain sight that Daniel 4 has no figurative fulfillment unless you apply an eisegetical analysis.You can't prove otherwise, as hard as you keep trying.
Scholar :his humiliation must have occurred after his 18th year when he destroyed Jerusalem in 607 BCE.
Even with your own flawed chronology you still manage to contradict your original statement that the "seven times" and "seventy years" share 607 in common. They don't.
Scholar: The point of the dream was Kingship and as we are encouraged to discern the 'times' in the course of history accompanied with such prophetic formulae then such calculations are proper as part of Salvation History which includes and reveals the doctrine of the Gentile Times-Like 21:24.
Nope. Now you've just included, from your own bias, an extra-biblical interpretation. Perhaps you should consider the words of Proverbs 30:6: "Do not add to his words, he will rebuke you and prove you a liar."
Your original statement from previous comments was correct. The purpose of the dream was to humiliate the King "until you know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he grants it to whomever he wants" (Dan 4:32), which occured at the end of the seven times, when he "looked up to the heavens" and had his understanding return to him. (Dan 4:34)
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.
Scholar: The tree represented both Neb's world rulership and the universal sovereignty of Jehovah God as expressed by the Kingdom of God as recognized by Bible commentators, expositors and the celebrated WT scholars.
..indeed. You have to turn to these extra-biblical eisegetical analysis in order to come to such a conclusion, since the Bible itself suggest no such thing. Anyone interested in the matter can easily open up to Dan 4 and see for themselves how foolish it would be to claim the dream has more than one interpretation
Scholar: that chapter is explicit in the fact that both events began at the same time in 607 BCE.
King Nebuchadnezzar didn't even begin to reign until 605 BCE and thus the dream's fulfillment where the the king was "given vegetation to eat just like bulls" could't have occurred in 607, as you claim.
Scholar: The point of the dream was to show Neb that he was subjected to a far greater rulership of the Heavens, God's Kingdom or sovereignty.
Agreed. This was the point of the dream. It was NOT, however, for creating a math formula to establish the date of Christ's "invisible" return some millennia in its future, as adherents to Watchtower theology claim.
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.
Scholar: You cannot separate the kingdom of God in Dan 4 from Neb's humiliation for that was then the point of the dream for to do so shows that you lack exegetical skills.
I haven't separated the kingdom from Dan 4, so I'm not sure what you are talking about. I'm just pointing out your false claim that there is a second meaning for the dream. The Tree does not represent said Kingdom, as you and Watchtower claim, and there's no way you can prove otherwise.
Scholar: There is such an explicit connection, just do the exegesis of Dan.4.
Nope, this is a lie. There is no such "explicit" connection between the "seven weeks" and the "seventy years". This is just a product of your eisegetical analysis, as provided by your religious leaders..
Scholar: Neb's humiliation for that was then the point of the dream
Exactly. I'm glad we finally agree. That was the point of the dream. It was not to establish some funny math formula to determine when Jesus would invisibly return.
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.
Scholar wrote: The mention of Gid's Kingdom/rulership is thematic in not only ch.4 but the entire book of Daniel so it plays a major role in the interpretation of the tree dream.
The role God's Kingdom or rulership plays in the dream is already outlined within the chapter by Daniel himself. No second interpretation needed. Nowhere does the chapter describe the dream's Tree as representing the Kingdom, as Watchtower's followers claim. The tree only represents King Neb. Anyone can open up their Bibles and see this for themselves.
Scholar wrote: No , the connection between both period is grounded within the test such as the OG translation of Dan.4 which makes the connection explicit
There is no such "explicit" connection.
Scholar wrote: The prestigious commentary by Collins makes the point quite clear but as you do not do exegesis i understand why you fail to understand the matter,
Your eisegetical analysis and preferred commentary do nothing to prove a connection between the 70 years of Jeremiah, which applied to "these nations" and Daniel 4's "seven times" which applied to King Neb. You can't prove a connection exegetically, because there is none.
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.
No! In Dan.4:16 ' iddanin' in Aramaic means appointed(definite) times or time periods
It can also mean years
Scholar wrote: There are numerous occasions in Dan 4 where God's Kingdom or its equivalent is mentioned [...] Thus it is quite clear that the language and terms used by Daniel give the tree dream a major or secondary fulfilment
The mentioning of God's Kingdom or rulership in no way make it "quite clear" that the dream had a second fulfillment.
Scholar wrote: The connection between the seventy years of Jeremiah is well connected to the seven times of Daniel because both periods share the same beginning and theme over the Kingship of Jerusalem and God's Kingdom
This connection is only in your mind. The seventy years applied to the nations serving Babylon (Jer 25:11), the seven times applied to King Neb going mental (Dan 4:25)
Scholar: There is a clear connection of the tree dream with the seven times and the seventy years w beginning with the destruction of Jerusalem by Neb as explained in the Commentary on Daniel
There really isn't.
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.
Scholar said: "The very fact that Daniel used the expression 'times' rather than 'years' proves exegetically that the tree vision lies beyond the days of Neb"
No, it does not "prove" such a thing whatsoever. The term used in Daniel 4 for "times" in Aramaic is "iddan" which simply translates to "years" when used in a definite amount.
This does not excuse, in the least bit, giving the dream a second interpretation.
Scholar said: "Further, the many references to God's Kingdom or kingship also demonstrates that fact."
This does not prove your argument in any way, shape or form. Again, for the 100x, nowhere in Dan 4 is the expression God's Kingdom used to suggest that the dream has a secondary interpretation, nor does the chapter connect the big tree from the dream with God's Kingdom as you and Watchtower claim.
God could have easily made it clear that the dream was to have a second interpretation for the "end times", as he had Daniel do elsewhere in his writings, but he didn't, because the dream has only one meaning, the one Daniel gave himself.
Scholar said: "The journey of Bible Chronology leading to 1914CE validates the fulfilment of Bible prophecy known in theological terms as Eschatology."
As a previous poster said, this is just word salad.
Scholar said: "The connection between the seventy years of Jeremiah and the seven times of Daniel are connected by the legal formula in Dan 4:17, 32"
Those verses are in no way whatsoever exegetically connected to Jeremiah's seventy years.
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.
Scholar wrote: "My argument is indeed sound because it is based on a very careful and methodical exegesis of Daniel 4 which uses at least two key terms that takes the reader on a journey beyond the events of the 6th century right up to our day."
You're argument is nether sound, nor exegetical. You bring your own definition for the terms "Kingdom" and "Days" (eisegesis). You also apply your own bias into the chapter by injecting your own interpretations of the dream's elements, an act that completely disregards the scripture at Genesis 40:8 which states that "interpretations belong to God".
If God truly wanted us to
believe that the dream found in the 4th chapter of Daniel applied to
more than just the Babylonian King himself, and that it was to have a
second application during some supposed future time that we just happen
to be living in, he could have inspired Daniel to mention that the dream
had a fulfillment at the "end of days" or "last days" or "end times",
as Daniel included in other parts of his writings. But he did no such
thing in the 4th chapter.
Scholar wrote: "What a marvellous journey which is not a flight of fancy but one of discovery seeing the broad tapestry of salvation history understood by most theologian"
No, it is not "marvelous" to go down a rabbit hole of lies, deceit, and of failed 19th century adventist biblical math formulas, such as 1914 chronology as preached by Watchtower and its followers.
Scholar wrote: "The reason for its lack of historicity gets down to the reliability of those court recorders or others who would have us depend on their NB Chronology which does not agree with proper Bible Chronology as understood by the celebrated WT scholars"
I think you got caught
in your own trap. You questioned my assertion that the 7 times were
literal years a few pages back and now you find yourself having to
defend the idea once you realized your religious leaders teach the same
thing.
Scholar wrote: "There are good reasons to connect the seven times with the seventy years as both time periods shared a common beginning namely 607 BCE with the Fall of Jerusalem which represented Jehovah's kingship for that is the tie that binds."
No there are not. You've failed to
prove such an idea, and you won't ever be successful, because the Bible
teaches no such thing.
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.
Scholar wrote: "The dream centred around Neb's experience to make the point as part of a prophetic drama so he was banished from his throne for seven literal years, a fact that you do not accept anyway."
As usual, your argument makes no sense. I don't accept that Neb's experience is a prophetic drama for a secondary interpretation on the dream regarding 1914 since the Bible never suggests such nonsense, but I do indeed accept that the King was vanished for 7 literal years. Mine is the strictly exegetical analysis of the chapter.
Scholar wrote: "Regarding your last question it is for you to make an account of this as it is you that insists that it has only a literal application so put up or shut up!!!"
It seems to me you were attempting to prove that the "seven times" couldn't have possibly been literal since we can't account for the King's time off using historical records, but then realized this was a harmful argument to your cause, since your leaders at Watchtower also say that the King went missing for 7 literal years.
Scholar wrote: "The interpretation of those seven times is done in harmony with sound exegesis drawing upon not only the book of Daniel but the OT and the NT."
You obviously have no idea what "exegesis" means, and I'm not gonna bother trying to explain it to you again. I've already shown many times over how your secondary interpretation of the dream is completely made up. I've already shown time and time again how there is absolutely no reason to claim that Daniel 4 is connected to Luke 21. I've already shown time and time again how there is no reason to connect the dream of Dan 4 with Jeremiah's 70 years. I've already shown time and time again how there is one interpretation to the dream in Dan 4, and Daniel himself gives it to us, without any suggestion to a second "greater" meaning as you and your leaders suggest.
Again, anyone is able to realize this fact by opening their bibles and seeing so for themselves.
