just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
ozziepost
12869
Meeting up in person with a person expelled from the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses is a No-No and once again you refuse to admit your status for you very well know what that is. So do not beat around the bush. My refusal to meet you in person is based upon the Scriptures in 2John verse 10.
scholar JW
just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
Jeffro
1057
I agree with your sentiments because that is exactly how I felt when I read the second edition, supplement, the third edition, and the latest fourth edition of Carl Jonsson's Gentile Times Reconsidered. I thought at that time that this hypothesis was just a rehash of SDA chronology easily debunked because it fails to account for the biblical 'seventy years'. Consequently I have demolished such pathetic nonsense on this board over many years.
scholar JW
a quote from this site - http://www.2001translation.com/jerusalem's%20destruction%20587%20or%20607.htm says that 'most historians agree that 539-b.c.e.
is the date of the overthrow of babylon, for there is much evidence pointing to this.
so, it is called an absolute date.
Jeffro
1051
I agree therefore it could only be 537 and not 538 BCE
scholar JW
just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
Alan F
4531
Apostates do not do biblical exegesis very well because they lack a love of God's Word and have a lack of Holy Spirit and lack any Organization or community of united believers and worshippers of the only true God, Jehovah. Such a pathetic response to the 'mind blowing' defense by third witness shows the desperation of apostates who try to undermine the truth of the Bible. This is clearly evident in your approach to the matter of Tyre and the fulfillment of Ezekiel's prophecy in 26:14 wherein the prophet stated plainly that Tyre "never...be rebuilt" (NWT). That prophecy plainly refers to that maritime city of Tyre that existed as an island city up until the conquest by Alexander the Great in 332 BCE and is further proved by the remainder verses in that chapter from 15-21.
In short, although a modern land city of Tyre exists today this fact does not contravene the prophecy of Ezekiel that Tyre which existed back then as an 'island city; remains thus today a devastated place. Prophecy is fulfilled just as God's Word plainly states. Compare Ezekiel 26:4 with verse 14. Nice and easy!
scholar JW
just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
ozziepost
12864
You are quite mistaken about any such rendevous for you have not answered my question: Have you been disfellowshipped from the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses? If your answer is in the affirmative then such an appointment is impossible but if your answer is negative then such an appointment can be arranged.
scholar JW
just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
ozziepost
just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
thirdwitness
Congratulations. You have made an excellent and brilliant defence of our illustrious and brilliant Bible chronology and the apostates with the foolish and deceptive claims made by Carl Jonsson have been shown as pandering to higher critics who doubt the truth of the Bible, Such deceitful men would rather believe the lie over the clear and historic fact of the seventy years wisely and carefully noticed by the celebrated WT scholars over many centuries.
I enjoyed the use of the charts explaining in a simple and clear manner why WT biblical chronoilogy is far more accurate and faithful to Jehovah's inspired Word than the secular based Neo-Babylonian chronology. I do not know whether Brother Rolf Furuli is aware of your website and its presentation as I have just recently informed him of Jonsson's website in which he presents a critique of Furuli's recent book.
It is nice to see that you have demolished the arguments of Alan F regarding Tyre and it is nice to have support from other people who are well qualified in matters of chronology. Keep us the good work as we defend Jehovah's teachings on 607, the seven times and its ending in 1914.
scholar JW
a quote from this site - http://www.2001translation.com/jerusalem's%20destruction%20587%20or%20607.htm says that 'most historians agree that 539-b.c.e.
is the date of the overthrow of babylon, for there is much evidence pointing to this.
so, it is called an absolute date.
Leolaia
I am fully aware of textual criticism and I appreciate what tou are trying to argue but the simple fact is that my edition of Josephus by Whiston has the numbers as they are and not what you would wish them to be. Granted I have not bothered to read other editions of Josephus such as the Loeb Library series but that time will come. Also, there is a commentary on Josephus in the process of publication with the first two volumes published by E.J.Brill.
The fact of the matter is that Josephus in English has the data as I have presented, the numbers are contradictory therefore the evidence is mixed and uncertain and of course disagrees with the Bible history. So whether Josephus is right or wrong it does not matter for the Bible is our basis.
All the so-called cumulative evidence as currently understood and interpreted goes against the Bible but that is just a ploy of the Devil who seeks to mislead people by being blinded to the truth of Christ's presence. The fact is that the biblical seventy years stands alone and that historic period is absolutely vital for any chronology.
It is scholar and scholar alone who first originated by means of this board the relationship between methodology and interpretation and soon after Robert Young followed suit with his reappraisal of Thiel's chronology. Scholar was first past the post and he is a winner.
Jeffro will only read that article if you send it to him but I would then be surprised if he actually 'reads it' as he limits his reading experience.
scholar JW
a quote from this site - http://www.2001translation.com/jerusalem's%20destruction%20587%20or%20607.htm says that 'most historians agree that 539-b.c.e.
is the date of the overthrow of babylon, for there is much evidence pointing to this.
so, it is called an absolute date.
ozziepost
That is fine to meet up at Moores but you have not answered my question: Have you been disfellowshipped from the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses?
scholar JW
a quote from this site - http://www.2001translation.com/jerusalem's%20destruction%20587%20or%20607.htm says that 'most historians agree that 539-b.c.e.
is the date of the overthrow of babylon, for there is much evidence pointing to this.
so, it is called an absolute date.
ozziepost
