Posts by scholar

71

Quotes by Thiele concerning Watchtower Chronology

by VM44 in

does anyone know where is is documented that thiele made the following quotes?

as bible scholar e. r. thiele said about a watchtower article on chronology, "it reminds me of the way an unscrupulous lawyer would deal with facts in order to support a case he knows not to be sound.

http://www.geocities.com/athens/academy/6040/kc.htm

scholar

Alan F

You accuse WT scholars of misrepresentation in the use of a qoutation of Thiele's Note on Ptolemy's Canon. I have already presented the facts of the matter and any reader just needs to sight that Appendix to come to a conclusion. Thiele made a summation od Ptolemy's Canon by means of that notation and their was no immediate context for that opinion so any scholar is free to quote that opinion and use it accordingly. Obviously, Thiele was caught out on this matter and was highly embarrassed by that remark which has returned ro haunt him.

Why do you not post that page so that interested readers can judge for themselves whether misrepresentation has occurred? Your failure to do so would demonstrate the weakness of your criticism. The facts of the matter that what Thiele said about Ptolemy is demonstrably correct and those who blindly follow Ptolemy's Canon need the warning caveat emptor.

Interestingly, Edmund Gruss in revised Jehovah's Witnesses omits any reference to Thiele's whinings and I suspect that Thiele was not that upset about the proper use of his Note after all it is true and you know it

scholar emeritus

BA MA Studies in Religion

39

Study conductor claims the "WTS is not the FDS"...and other JW affirmations

by M.J. in

i am currently following the ongoing saga of a person who is studying to be a jw and her unbelieving husband's attempts to sway her in this endeavor.

he has gotten her to read cofc and she's halfway through it, but nonetheless, she remains bound to the jws and wants to continue her persuit.

he has tried to call into question that the wts could have been appointed by jesus as the "faithful, discreet slave", but the person she is studying with flat out told her that jws do not believe that jesus chose the wts as the fds and, that they don't believe that they are the one chosen religion/church.

scholar

MJ

There is no way that any other group other than those identified with the WT Society at the beginning of the last century could qualify as the faithful and discreet slave. It is only those anointed ones later identified as Jehovah's Witnesses who have been faithful and loyal to the Christ and God's Word. Proof for this is confirmed by studying the history of Christendom in the USA as all of the churches have been and are influenced by the previous Modern and Post- Modern ideas. Protestantism in America is a slave to Post Modernity and is rendered completely unsuitable for the Lord's work, in comparison the FDS continues to the only shining beacon in a world of spiritual darkness. Sobering is it not?

scholar emeritus

BA MA Studies in Religion

63

607? 587? What does it matter

by IP_SEC in

personally i believe that 607 is not the right date, but here is another point of view.. does 607 or 587 or 609 or 586 or 1914 really matter?

yes but only after you have a pivotal date.

5 starting from the pivotal date.

scholar

Leolaia

It seems that everything has to be explained in great detail because you are critical of everything I say to point of being ridiculous. Are you trying to defend the indefensible?

I disagree with your proposition that it is only astronomically fixed dates that matter. Such dates are not always suitable for historical purposes as chronology. For example, Edwin Thiele in his magnum opus lists nine astronomical fixed dates as eclipses in his Appendix H for the period of the OT. Yet, in outlining his methodology he determined from the array of Absolute Dates only two pivotal or absolute dates useful in constructing a harmonious chronology for the Divided Monarchy. These calcuable dates are 841 and 853 BCE.

Similarly, WT scholars have chosen a astronomically fixed date, the seventh year of Cambyses 523 as an absolute date, from this a pivotal date namely 539 for the fall of Babylon is calculated. This pivotal date alone is the most appropriate for establoshing a chronology for the OT for the following reasons:

1. Well attested event in biblical and historical sources

2. Theological and historical significance

3. Universally dated within scholarship

4. A derived date from astronomical evidence

Sadly, your proposed candidate namely 587 for the fall of Jerusalem does not meet these criteria because scholars have not yet determined which calender year for that momentous event. The current situation that scholars are divided between 586 or 587 and IMHO 586 has the majority vote. Recent biblical scholarship is now focussing on 588 for this event so the controversy rages.

Your proposal of a temple hypothesis for the seventy years is simplistic and simply beggars belief. Carl Jonsson a advocate of the temple hypothesis has not determined with any precision the terminus ad quem and terminus ad quo for the seventy years so his theory is kaput. He lists for the beginning of Zechariah's seventy years, 589, 588,587 and for the ending,520,519,518,517,516,515. Thus, one can easily imagine the number of permutations made possible by such a wide choice of data.

scholar emeritus

BA MA Studies in Religion

63

607? 587? What does it matter

by IP_SEC in

personally i believe that 607 is not the right date, but here is another point of view.. does 607 or 587 or 609 or 586 or 1914 really matter?

yes but only after you have a pivotal date.

5 starting from the pivotal date.

scholar

Leolaia

I fully agree with you. There is a fundamental difference between a pivotal date and a Absolute Date. The date 539 is derived from a Absolute date which is astronomically fixed. So, 539 technically speaking can only be a pivotal date derived from a fixed or absolute date. Howecer, 539 is the best pivotal date for the purposes of chronology because it is an event which is well based on the biblical and secular history. What more momentous event could there be then the Fall of a World Power and its impact on God's people. Your proposal of 587 as an absolute date is impossible because it is not astronomically fixed so at best it could only serve as a pivotal date dependent on that later astronomically fixed date of 568 BC.

It seems that you have mastered well the discussion of Absolutes Dates in the chapter Biblical and Secular Chronology in Jonsson's GTR, 1998, pp.72-88.

Personally, I prefer classifying 539 as a Absolute Date rather than as a pivotal date because of its theological significance and its relevance to OT chronolgy. But this is my personal opinion on the matter.

Your interpretation of the seventy years is problematic and renders the fulfillment of that prohecy sterile and meaningless. The seventy year was marked by exile, servitude and desolation powerfully presented by Jeremiah and that is why that the seventy yeras could only have begun with the dramatic fall of Jerusalem and their dramatic returm from exile.

scholar emeritus

BA MA Studies in Religion

71

Quotes by Thiele concerning Watchtower Chronology

by VM44 in

does anyone know where is is documented that thiele made the following quotes?

as bible scholar e. r. thiele said about a watchtower article on chronology, "it reminds me of the way an unscrupulous lawyer would deal with facts in order to support a case he knows not to be sound.

http://www.geocities.com/athens/academy/6040/kc.htm

scholar

VM44

Thiele's criticism of Watchtower chronology and the source of your posted quotation of Thiele is probably in an earlier article of Ministry which is a SDA journal sent to all pastors. I have several letters by Thiele written to prominent SDA pastors in Australia but I could source this particular quote.

However, Thiele was quite wrong in his criticism of the Aid book quoting him in regard to his summation of Ptolemy's Canon. The facts are quite clear in this matter and I am quite surprised that Alan F did not check this matter thoroughly before attacking the Society as shown in his treatment on WT chronology. Thiele made a isolated comment on Ptolemy's Canon on pages 216-7 in his Mysterious Numbers Of The Hebrew Kings, 1951, 1965, Paternoster Press, Exeter, Devon. The quotation in the Aid book is not out of context but is the first half of that sole paragraph under the heading Appendix G. The Appendix is titled The Rulers Of Babylon And Persia According To The Canon Of Ptolemy. Immediately below this heading is a chart of these rulers. Then underneath there is one paragraph containing ten lines. The rest of the page is blank which then preceeds the next Apendix H on pahe 218.

It is impossible to misquote Thiele on this point and if he made such a stupid statement then more fool him because that statement coming from such an eminent chronologist, Christendom's finest has and will haunt his memory forever. If my memory serves me correctly Thiele repeats himself identically in his last revision of his great work.

scholar

BA MA Studies in Religion

63

607? 587? What does it matter

by IP_SEC in

personally i believe that 607 is not the right date, but here is another point of view.. does 607 or 587 or 609 or 586 or 1914 really matter?

yes but only after you have a pivotal date.

5 starting from the pivotal date.

scholar

IP-SEC

Your question is rather naive and shows that you have not read carefully enough the Society's published material on this specific matter. Pivotal Dates or Absolute Dates are made necessary because we have a modern calender which means that in order to determine any date for a past event, a date that is clearly and well established can be used as a peg or marker in order for a chronology to be made. In OT times a chronology was based on the regnal years of kings which marked events but now we are removed from those times so a more modern method allows one to reach back into history.

A Pivotal Date is establihed both by secular history and the Bible. Most chronologists choose different Dates for this purpose but we believe that 539 is superior to all other proposed dates because it is calculated on secular evidence and the event itself is confirmed from archaeology. The evrnt itself, namely the Fall of Babylon is well described in the Bible and is one of the few outstanding events in Jewish history. So, if we look at the OT history as a whole , the Fall of Babylon is the best event for a Absolute Date.

In short, the Bible gives only a relative chronology and one needs to convert this into an absolute chronology otherwise such chronology hangs in the air without a peg as it were. The Monarchy in Israel ceased about 500 years before our Common Era so a date based on an event is required to connect the data of the kings with our modern period or calender..

scholar

BA MA Studies in Religion

54

How would a JW handle this? 587 proved correct date for fall of Jerusalem

by confusedjw in

so i put it out to you who believe the wtbts is the agent used by god's channel on earth based on the belief that in 1919 (3 1/2 years after the gentile times ended in 1914, per pastor russell) they were appointed the fds.. what if it was proved that not 607, but 587 was the date jerusalem was destroyed?

would that affect your faith?

would it matter that the teaching of 1919 turned out to be false?

scholar

undercover

The Society has published a chronology for the Old Testament period going right back to Adam and has a reconstruction of the Divided Monarchy. Such chronology highlights the historicity of the Old Testament period necessary in order to have faith in God's Word. A more superior chronology has not been achieved but one must acknowledge a debt of gratitude to the pioneering work of James Ussher. If the Society's chronology is not sufficient for you then find your own or ask devotees of the Jonsson cult for one or better still seek it in the heap of secular evidence.

I am not interested in your silly wager and neither is anyone else. Grow up and get a life!

scholar

BA MA Studies in Relugion

54

How would a JW handle this? 587 proved correct date for fall of Jerusalem

by confusedjw in

so i put it out to you who believe the wtbts is the agent used by god's channel on earth based on the belief that in 1919 (3 1/2 years after the gentile times ended in 1914, per pastor russell) they were appointed the fds.. what if it was proved that not 607, but 587 was the date jerusalem was destroyed?

would that affect your faith?

would it matter that the teaching of 1919 turned out to be false?

scholar

529 should be corrected to 539. A simple typo.

scholar

54

How would a JW handle this? 587 proved correct date for fall of Jerusalem

by confusedjw in

so i put it out to you who believe the wtbts is the agent used by god's channel on earth based on the belief that in 1919 (3 1/2 years after the gentile times ended in 1914, per pastor russell) they were appointed the fds.. what if it was proved that not 607, but 587 was the date jerusalem was destroyed?

would that affect your faith?

would it matter that the teaching of 1919 turned out to be false?

scholar

TO ALL POSTERS

When I post on matters pertaining to chronology it is always the case that I attract considerable attention and interest. It is not possible for me to respond to each and every post but I simply confine my attention to one or more or I reply to my long standing oppisites namely Hilary step or Alan F.

Let me make this one important point/ WT scholars have for many decades calculated 607 for the Fall of Jerusalem. Such a calculation is solidly based on secular and biblical evidence which is fully explained in the Society/s publications. It is based on a Absolute Date which is 529 followed by the relese of the Exiles under Cyrus in 537. These facts are indusputable, Further, a period of seventy years marked that of the Exiles in Babylon who served and remained in Babylon for that period of seventy years which also marked a period of desolation of the land. This means that the Bible clearly sets the beginning and end of the seventy years which concluded in 537 and began in 607. Now, the matter of the seventy years is a matter of interpretation of several key texts and there will be different views on this. WT scholars take the matter of the seventy yeras as serious business, reading the text directly and not trying to manipulate the matter in order to fit some pet hypothesis.

Clearly, the Jonsson hypothesis is confused about the seventy years as reflected by the fact that no fixed beginning is determined. Is it 609 or 605? The length of the seventy years is either literal or symbolic depending on the opinion that there are many seventy year periods offered up to the reader. The understanding of the seventy years by the FDS and WT scholars has not and cannot be disproved but the calcuable date of 607 results in the fulfillment of prophecy leading to 1914.

Al that apostates can do is present a criticism and an alternative viewpoint or interpretation and I have no problem with that but please in repect of 607 all should be honest with the facts and leave emotions aside.

venerable scholar

BA MA Studies in Religion

54

How would a JW handle this? 587 proved correct date for fall of Jerusalem

by confusedjw in

so i put it out to you who believe the wtbts is the agent used by god's channel on earth based on the belief that in 1919 (3 1/2 years after the gentile times ended in 1914, per pastor russell) they were appointed the fds.. what if it was proved that not 607, but 587 was the date jerusalem was destroyed?

would that affect your faith?

would it matter that the teaching of 1919 turned out to be false?

scholar

Alan F

I have had no involvement with the 587V607 as you incorrectly claim. I have not posted on that site but I am familiar with those letters on chronology. Also, you make false claims concerning both charts that feature in the Aid and Insight volumes which show that WT scholars have provided a coherent presentation of Divided Monarchy which accords well with the 390 year period as prophesied by Ezekiel.

In fact you cowardly avoid giving any chronology for this period because the Jonsson hypothesis cannot do this simple thing. Why is it that many scholars at least make an attempt but you and your Daddy Jonsson cannot?All that you can do is blindly follow a questionable date 587 without any chronology in support of it, at least WT scholars not only have a veriable date of 607 but have provide a consistent and accurate chronology for the Old and New Testament. What you need to do is to sit down with a glass of Jim Bean and do some work, work at providing at least an attempt of a king list for Judah and Israel. If this is too difficult for you then perhaps it will teach you to be a little more modest in matters of chronology.

scholar

BA MA Studies in Religion