Posts by scholar

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

Jeffro

1073

Your tabulation is shonky because it is easily seen that the Tishri, the seventh month = September/October could not have fallen in 538 but only occurs in 537 BCE for the first year of Cyrus from Nisan, 538 to Nisan 537 BCE. For that crucial year to have fallen in 538 then you have in the accession year of Cyrus not his first year.

Your silly and stupid tabulation does not work because you 538, 537 and 536 beginning from January instead of March-April as the beginning of the year so you have replicated an error of three months.

You should sit down and do the tabulation again and do not drink any XXXX whilst attempting this simple task.

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

Alan F and Jeffro

I have just now looked at your crazy nonsense trying to prove 538 BCE for the Return. Your methodology is plain dumb and simply wrong. My analysis proves quite of subject that the Jews returned home by Tishri of 537 in the first year of Cyrus. The second year of Cyrus saw the laying of the Temple foundation in the second month of 536 in harmony with Josephus.

The year 538 is simply impossible as the Jews returned home by the seventh month, Tishri of 537 and not 538 because Tishri in the first year of Cyrus from Nisan 538-Nisan 537 proves that the seventh month Tishri falls not in 538 but 537BCE. Apostates in their desperation to undermine the integrity of 607 need to resort to desperate means which is plainly shown by your clumsy use of calendation.

My tabulation employs six lines of data based upon the accepted fact that the 1st year of Cyrus ran from Nisan of 538 until Nisan 537 BCE therefore such a framework proves conclusively that the seventh month falls not in 538 but in 537 BCE.

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

stevenyc

1703

Sorry mate but the party is still on. The ancient Phoenecian city of Tyre no longer exists, it has not been rebuilt. All that has happened that over time other cities have been built on or near the site and such cities have been identified as Tyre or as Sur for the moderns. That ancient city was an island and its remains submerged under the water. Perhaps you shiould read current archaeological reports about that ancient city.

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

Alan F

4535

I enjoyed the pretty pictures of the modern day city of Tyre known as Sur in Lebanon but you failed to provide the geographical co-ordinates for the ancient Phoenecian city of Tyre. Ezekiel prophesied in 26:14 that "city will never be rebuilt" but apostates claim that this prophecy is false and that it has been rebuilt.

Certainly, the area in which the ancient island city of Tyre has been rebuilt over the centuries and exists today but I did not see any evidence of that ancient city of Ezekiel's era in that lovely photo from Earth Google. In the future, I may visit Tyre and with my hand-held GPS unit I can feed in those precise coordinates and find that ancient city or the city that has been rebuilt on the precise site of that ancient city

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

ozziepost

12874

To the contrary for I have stated on this board many times my academic and Witness status. I am a current regular publisher and have just this weekend attended as a delegate to the Deliverance At Hand District Convention. You have not been up-front with your status being rather mealy-mouthed about the matter. True Aussies are up-front and do not beat around the bush, Are you disfellowshipped or not? Yes or No? Simple is it not?

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

12873

ozziepost

I do have some front and I call that front 'courage' and it takes much courage to appear on this board to defend the truth against those who oppose and ridicule God's loyal Witnesses. If you feel and believe that I should not be here then you have the authority or influence in removing me from this site. Is that your intent?

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

toreador

You ask about the Bible Canon. There are many fine books published on this subject and there excellent articles written on this subject in WT publications for I cannot be bothered writing on a subject when you can easily find the answers yourself. If you have some really significant problem then I will deal with it and not before, My advice is for you to get this knowledge yourself and perhaps later I will help.

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

elderwho

Right, I cannot do anything about the twenty year gap and neither can you. Besides I do not wish to remove the gap for I love the gap - missing 20 years. That gap builds up my faith in our accurate Bible chronology because it comes just twenty years short of the biblically corrected date of 607 BCE . This means that one can utilize current Neo-Babylonian chronology, factor in the seventy years into the schema and with such fine tuning. Eureka!!! The date for the Fall of Jerusaelm is now proved to be 607 and not the inadequate 587 and other pretenders.

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

toreador

You do not have to believe in anything do you? You do not have to believe in the 'celebrated' ones and I care nought for your belief or disbelief.

We derive the biblically established date 1914 from sacred biblical testimony and not from pagan or secular sources. The importance of which was revealed by God in seeing to it that a accurate Bible chronology exists, based upon the prophetic word and the historic 'seventy years'.

My logic is not flawed and cannot be so because the evidence is there, the calculation is simple, not ambiguous as that of secular and profane chronologies. In short, it works whereas the other fails.

scholar JW

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

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

scholar

KW13

Guilt is something you must know a lot about. Scholar posts on this board but you do not like scholar posting on this board/ Is it because my postings disturb you, irritate you, make you feel ashamed, guilty, sad all because scholar pricks your conscience by defending the sacred things that you once held sacred. You are not really concerned about my welfare because my presence here causes you anguish. To bad.. Too bad.

scholar JW