Posts by scholar

116

The simplest explanation of 607 BCE

by Doug Mason in

if you are looking for the simplest picture that shows how the wts calculates that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, and if you want to understand basic problems with their method, this might be what you want.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/wts_false_reasoning_for_607_bce.pdf.

(make sure that your pdf reader displays the whole page.).

doug.

scholar

Doug Mason

Post 241

Your remarks about my academic experience diminishes you and shows how truly ignorant you are. When you go to University and study something then and only then will you learn something about how this world works.

scholar JW

116

The simplest explanation of 607 BCE

by Doug Mason in

if you are looking for the simplest picture that shows how the wts calculates that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, and if you want to understand basic problems with their method, this might be what you want.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/wts_false_reasoning_for_607_bce.pdf.

(make sure that your pdf reader displays the whole page.).

doug.

scholar

Alan F

Post 5125

Wrong as usual. Celebrated WT scholars did not for the first time as you allege that the application of the 390 years was featured in the Kingdom Is At Hand published in 1944 by means of a chart. This chart makes no mention of this application but simply provides a tabulated chronology. Further, it was in the November 15, 1937 Watchtower that such application was made with an adjoining major fulfillment upon Christendom. Get your facts right!

At last you get something right by your astute observation that it was first with the publication of Aid to Bible Understanding in 1969 that the 390 years of Ezekiel presented as the Divided Monarchy was also in agreement with Jewish tradition.

Yes, following your logic no one knows the precise year for the Fall of Jerusalem and yet apostates are foolishly dogmatic in asserting that 607 cannot be that year. When you have certainty on the matter then and only then can you dismiss the claim of the celebrated Wt scholars regarding the potency of 607 BCE.The very fact that the Bible gives different regnal years for the reign of Nebuchadnezzer in regards to the Fall is made a problem by the higher critic and apostates who have stumbled over their sloppy and foolish methodology. Wsely, the celebrated ones have because of using an 'event-based 'methodology have easily harmonized the data. No problem here but big problem for you.

So, whose chronology is correct Tjhiele's which you pretend to endorse or Jeffro's? What about Tadmor, Hyatt or Cogan's just to confuse matters further?

You state that chronology of the Divided Monarchy prior to the NB is irrelevant but that is a stupid statement to make. I have long stated that chronology is dependent on history and if cannot get the history right then the chronology is flawed. An accurate chronology of the Divided Monarchy is absolutely vital because it provides the historical context for the events of that late Judean period.

The chronologies of Thiele and apostates is flawed because it uses a sloppy methodology namely regnal -based and ignores the biblical 'seventy years' which negates such flawed chronologies. A simple event- based methodology is not handicapped by trying to harmonize all of the biblical data which at this stage of current scholarship is impossible because there is much of the past that is simply not known.

The understanding of Ezekiel's 390 years period of iniquity, Age of Wrath, Divided Monarchy presented by the 'celebrated WT scholars finds support in Jewish tradition and more recently, the Dead Sea Scrolls. You would like more information but you are a rude fellow so you do the research on the Scrolls or has scholar got to hold your hand for you as usual. As usual you accuse the Society of poor referencing or misleading references and yet you get your facts completely wrong.

scholar JW

72

The "Seventy Years" explained

by Doug Mason in

here is a picture-based explanation of the "seventy years" prophesied by jeremiah.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/70_years_of_servitude.pdf.

please note that there are several pages and that you should set your pdf reader to full page.. as i said before, i have a red-green color vision deficiency, but this time i have taken the plunge and used color.

please tell me where i need to make corrections with the colors.. as always, i appreciate your suggestions for improvements, corrections and additions.. doug.

scholar

Doug Mason

Post 237

Your hypothesis on the seventy years is not new to me as it is simply replication of Jonsson's view of matters and I have critically examined this matter over the last few years hence my emotive language due to my passion for this subject.

The expression 'precise historic period' is my phrase but nicely represents current scholarship and the manner in which Josephus treats the subject in his Antiquities. The collective 'seventy year' texts in the Bible prove this as I will demonstsrate. Your thesis is that the 'seventy years' pertains to servitude to Babylon and are Babylon's alone which is plainly impossible as Jeremiah shows. You must read the entire book of Jeremiah and also you need to ezegete Jeremiah 25:11 carefully and not distort that text. The comment by Josephus in Against Apion wherein he refers to a 'fifty year' period simply refers to the state of the Temple iwithin the overall context of the alreadycommencement of the destruction of Temple, City and Land of Judah.

You say garbage to the my statement that the seventy years could only have began at the time from or at which the land was devastated and depopulated but that is how Ezra presents the matter along with Jeremiah and Daniel. You defy common sense by trying to superimpose a mythical beginning for the seventy years by means of some abstract beginning. This is your biggest dilemna in trying to find the beginning point of that period: Was it the Fall of ASSYRIA in 609 BCE or Neb's reign from 605 BCE? Jonsson continues to grapple with this with no solution thus far.

My formula is akin to that of the 'celebrated ones' excepting my simple presentation of it. It alone is faithful to all thos Bible writers who wrote of the seventy years and is defensible, your model is simply impossible for it is based upon a single preposition which has many meanings. That is no place you want to be/ You say you have studied and explained the relevants texts, I say baloney to that, your research is biased, the exegesis is forced to a pre-conceived notion, shows no evidenc eof familiarity of commentaries or past and current scholarship even of Adventist scholars.

I am more than happy to walk through your thesis page by page offering my criticism/commendation as we walk through together hand in hand in the pursuit of truth.

I have every right to cite 537 BCE for the Return because in my view it is clearly established beyond all reasonable doubt. Granted I will be researching this matter more deeply and widely but I am confident that the date will remai unchanged.

My simply formula involves servitude to Babylon but foolishly does not ignore the other exile and desolation which Jeremiah and others clearly link with that period. The facts palinly state the matter.

Your comment that the 70 years could have passed without the destruction of the land and Temple is simply rubbish and is disproven by the Bible and Josephus. The seventy years was for Judah and Judah alone but nations round about were also servitude to Babylon but their judgements are not as specifically defined historically as was the cased were Judah. So, the consequence for Judah spilled over to those surrounding nations.

I am well aware of your interest in relation to Jonsson but your views are identical and Jonsson has researched the subject more deeply and widely than you or Hatton and has the greater influence outside Australia. So he is the major guru of chronology as far as apostates are concerned.

I am happy to discuss the principal texts of the seventy years and to supply the calendation of the period but I would ask you those same four questions/

scholar JW

72

The "Seventy Years" explained

by Doug Mason in

here is a picture-based explanation of the "seventy years" prophesied by jeremiah.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/70_years_of_servitude.pdf.

please note that there are several pages and that you should set your pdf reader to full page.. as i said before, i have a red-green color vision deficiency, but this time i have taken the plunge and used color.

please tell me where i need to make corrections with the colors.. as always, i appreciate your suggestions for improvements, corrections and additions.. doug.

scholar

jwfacts

Post 3275

The matter of the zero year adjustment is simply 'fine tuning' which is common to all good scholarship. Knowledge of any subject is never static unlike the apostate worldview, knowledge grows and progresses as new research comes to light. Simple as that for all scholars in Christendom fell into that same error but were enlightened by the research of the celebrated WT scholars in this matter of chronology. All credit must go to Holy Spirit and Jehovah's marvellous Organization or Church.

scholar JW

72

The "Seventy Years" explained

by Doug Mason in

here is a picture-based explanation of the "seventy years" prophesied by jeremiah.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/70_years_of_servitude.pdf.

please note that there are several pages and that you should set your pdf reader to full page.. as i said before, i have a red-green color vision deficiency, but this time i have taken the plunge and used color.

please tell me where i need to make corrections with the colors.. as always, i appreciate your suggestions for improvements, corrections and additions.. doug.

scholar

Hellrider

Post 2100

Mason's 'seventy years' now by his own admission corrected to a full 66 years is very much relevant in the pursuit of integrity and honesty to the Bible record. The Bible plainly states that the numeral is 70 and not some other or any such 'round number' hypothesis. Your specious pleading for a 'rounded' seventy years is forced upon you because you have no definitive beginning for this period. All that you propose is a mamby-pamby beginning of uncertain events surrounding 605 or 609 BCE, events that proceeded Jeremiah's prophesying the seventy years. Jeremiah spoke of those seventy years l after the end of Assyria and at the time of Nebuchadnezzer's assumption to the throne. This means that the seventy years had not then commenced even though there was at the latter time Jewish exiles were in Babylon and serving for Babylon. The seventy years could only commence whence the whole land was desolated and depopulated causing a complete exile in Babylon and servitude to or for Babylon.

Thus we have scholar's seventy year formula, to wit: DESOLATION + EXILE +SERVITUDE = 70 years from the FALL in 607 BCE until the RETURN in 537 BCE. Don't you like my formula? Boy, I do!

Jeremiah's seventy years has a partial or elemental reference to the domination of Babylon, it is not wholly Babylon's domination because Jeremiah addresses Jehovah's judgement against Judah by means of a forced period of seventy years of punishment. Babylon along with the other Nations were also to have judgement against them. So, the seventy years are for Judah and Judah alone, the surrounding nations during that period would also along with Judah be brought under servitude to Babylon.

Your argument or model which is the Jonsson hypothesis or apostate model is based upon a preposition in Jeremiah 29 :10 which semantically has many meanings such as 'at'. 'to' 'for' etc. It is sheer stupidity to base an entire argument on a speculative 'for Babylon'. Celebrated WT scholars are not troubled by the rendering of this phrase 'for Babylon' or 'at Babylon' because either meaning shows on the one hand 'servitude' to Babylon or on the other hand, an 'exile' in Babylon. I am more than happy to work with 'for' or 'at' because both meanings fal within the above formula.

Your explanation of matters is meaningless and rather repetitious for it violates 'common sense' which is typical of apostate propaganda

scholar JW

72

The "Seventy Years" explained

by Doug Mason in

here is a picture-based explanation of the "seventy years" prophesied by jeremiah.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/70_years_of_servitude.pdf.

please note that there are several pages and that you should set your pdf reader to full page.. as i said before, i have a red-green color vision deficiency, but this time i have taken the plunge and used color.

please tell me where i need to make corrections with the colors.. as always, i appreciate your suggestions for improvements, corrections and additions.. doug.

scholar

Augustin

Your comment is nonsense and demonstrates you know nothing about this subject. Celebrated WT scholars have always appled the seventy years to the Fall in 606/607 BCE until the Return in 536/537 BCE. I have read all of what scholars have said on this subject in the Journals and Bible commentaries published in English, soon my scope will extend to published articles in German. Have you read thus broadly? I think not because you are a Newbie to this forum. I t is correct to say that few scholars end the seventy years at the Return in 537 BCE, most scholars favour it ending in 539 BCE. However, the 'tricky bit' is the beginning of the period and therein lies the confusion because many scholars prefer 605 BCE rather than 609 BCE which does not give the allotted 'seventy' years.

The comment by Grabbe on Furuli's scholarship says more about Grabbe's stature than Furuli's. He does admit to Furuli's academic qualifications who by the way is not a amateur scholar but is a paid professional employed by a University. Furuli's in his Introduction alerts the reader of his book to his range of expertise a fact that Grabbe overlooks/

scholar JW

72

The "Seventy Years" explained

by Doug Mason in

here is a picture-based explanation of the "seventy years" prophesied by jeremiah.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/70_years_of_servitude.pdf.

please note that there are several pages and that you should set your pdf reader to full page.. as i said before, i have a red-green color vision deficiency, but this time i have taken the plunge and used color.

please tell me where i need to make corrections with the colors.. as always, i appreciate your suggestions for improvements, corrections and additions.. doug.

scholar

Doug Mason

Post 236

I have printed out a hard copy of your seven page charts and I commend you for this presentation. However, your model is simply the 'apostate model' as it supports the hypothesis of Carl Jonsson who devotes an entire chapter defending his absurd interpretation of the biblical 'seventy years'. I have much to be critical of your theory which frankly is false to the Bible.

For starters, you make two important claims:

1. That the seventy years was a period of servitude only.

2. That the seventy years began in 605 BCE ending in 539 BCE. When I was at school I learnt arithmetic and when I subtract 539 from 605 I get result of 66 and not 70 so you have a huge exegetical problem here.

Celebrated WT scholars have proved that the seventy years was a period of servitude, desolation and exile which all ran concurrently from the Fall in 607 BCE until the Return in 537 BCE which is in fact a precise historic period of 70 years. Voila! This understanding of matters is exactly how Josephus viewed the matter and is based upon the the testimony of Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezra and Zechariah.

So your petty theory is bankrupt and needs a a shakeup which is what scholar will do and he will tear your theory to shreds.

scholar JW

116

The simplest explanation of 607 BCE

by Doug Mason in

if you are looking for the simplest picture that shows how the wts calculates that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, and if you want to understand basic problems with their method, this might be what you want.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/wts_false_reasoning_for_607_bce.pdf.

(make sure that your pdf reader displays the whole page.).

doug.

scholar

Alan F

Post 5114

No the application of Ezekiel's '390 years' is not based on Jewish tradition at all but is in agreement with that tradition, The interpretation of that prophecy has always been explained in WT literature solely within a biblical context.

Thiele's presentation of the Divided Monarchy is not uniformly agreed within scholarship and I have presented the facts of the matter some years ago on this forum by means of comparing different chronologies by leading chronologists including Thiele which present different conclusions. For example, these scholars cannot agree as to which year the Monarchy ceased whether it was 586 BCE or 587 BCE. Apostates of course have no chronology for the period of the Divided monarchy so perhaps you shoul d 'put up' or 'shut up'.

Thiele deals with certain problems but others he cannot solve because he uses a 'regnal-based' methodologyand hence he falls into a 'pit of confusion'. Wisely, the 'celebrated WT cholars have chosen a different methodology- an event- based methodology which eliminates all of such perceived problems. Smart aren't they!

Yes, you would like the references to the Dead Sea Scrolls and I am able to prov ide this but this surely shows that you do not do enoughg research on matters before you criticize WT scholars. You should know these things if you are that smart and cocky. Has scholar once again, has to hold your hand and guide you and teach you?

You miss the point, I refer to the Dead Sea Scrolls in reference to support the traditional Jewish and current biblical interpretation that Ezekiel's'390 years' applies to the period of the Divided Monarchy.

scholar JW

116

The simplest explanation of 607 BCE

by Doug Mason in

if you are looking for the simplest picture that shows how the wts calculates that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, and if you want to understand basic problems with their method, this might be what you want.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/wts_false_reasoning_for_607_bce.pdf.

(make sure that your pdf reader displays the whole page.).

doug.

scholar

Alan F

Post 5093

Celebrated WT scholars do not need to pretend that they have produced a chronology of the Hebrew Kings because they have in fact published such a regnal tabulation for many decades which is something that I have challeged you and other 'wiley poztates' to produce. Thus far you have come empty handed. The most recent list is published in the Insight Volume and rather than speculation it is in fact based upon the biblical data. I have long taught you that chronology is made up of methodology and interpretation so any regnal list based upon certain data must also contain some interpretation. That is simply the 'way of it' and such interpretation is a major part of most if not all discipines of knowledge.

The 607 BCE date for the Fall is based solidly upon the fact of the Return and the interpretation of these facts proves that the only possible date is 537 BCE as agreed by most authorities.

The date of 997 BCE is based upon the acknowledgement and interpretation of Ezekiel's '390 years' culminating in the end of the Monarchy in 607 BCE which also is attested by Jewish tradition. By ignoring this prophecy, Christendom's scholars such as Thiele have failed to harmonize the regnal data of the Divided Monarchy producing variable dates, confusion thus abounds. Further, the Dead Sea Scrolls nicley confirm this exegesis produced by the 'celebrated ones'.

It is also interesting to see the futility of apostates and higher critics as they try to find the truth in these matters only to be further confused and deluded as they fail to acknowledge the FDS and its scholars. Such ones have nothing to show, no theology, mission or brotherhood.

scholar JW

116

The simplest explanation of 607 BCE

by Doug Mason in

if you are looking for the simplest picture that shows how the wts calculates that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, and if you want to understand basic problems with their method, this might be what you want.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/wts_false_reasoning_for_607_bce.pdf.

(make sure that your pdf reader displays the whole page.).

doug.

scholar

Doug Mason

Post 227

You ask concerning the structure of my graduate and post graduate studies in Religion. My undergraduate study consisted of a double major in Religious Studies and Philosophy at Deakin University, Faculty of Arts. The postgraduate program in Studies in Religion was at the University of Sydney.

Such qualifications would qualify one academically to work as a minister in a church but most churches have their own 'in house' theological training so such qualifications would certainly be a major step forward if one was so inclined. You ask for a scan or copy of my certificates which are in called 'tesatamurs' in academic parlance but as these are framed such copies of which are not practically made.

I enjoyed very much my university education which fulfilled a childhood ambition of having a university education. My wife and daughter also have gone to university graduating in nursing. My studies were spiritually upbuilding and I was able to critically examine everything including my Witness-Bible based beliefs and found that upon such critical examination that we alone possess the True Religion.

I frankly am not a 'spin doctor' but rather I am a WT apologist using my faith,experience and intellect to defend our Bible-based beliefs and the ministry of preaching the 'good news of the kingdom'. My apologia is in the best tradition of Irenaeus.