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

Lady Liberty

Post 1983

You ask for facts but you are surrounded by them. They are found in our literature and I have dutifully repeated such on this forum over the last six year. They are contained in God's Word so read the Bible daily and that is the source of all necessary facts. Open your eyes and do not delude yourself by the cunning reasoning of apostates.

It is you who have manipulated matters regarding Grayson's material. The Society has simply quoted the source, given the appropriate reference and then inserted by means of brackets a date. This is not deceit as you allege but simply the employment of academic convention. If you have a problem with this then write to the Society about it for it is their business, their Style Manual or others that is used. I am not responsible for their writing style so if you have a pwoblem go to the source and not to me.

Again you make a mountain out of a molehill and you show a hatred of 607 because of pride. Jehovah reveals his truth to the humble ones not the proud and arrogant ones. Read God's Word daily and seek the truth!!

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

Jeffro

Post 1563

Our teachings are in fact Bible based as you well know and this is proved by reading our publications. If you insult our teachings then you insult the Bible and its Author, Jehovah God.

Our dates are derived from a properly constituted Bible chronology and stand on their own merits. Many of these dates relate to events enshrined both in Bible history and prophecy which further demonstrates their validity. As you are now forced to concede that 1914 as a prophetic date did see its fulfillment with the outbreak of the Great War from June right through to October.

The margin of error of twenty years located within NB chronology is proved by the presence of the 'seventy year' period which is the most important event in both NB history and Judean history. You ignore this event at your own peril. The so-called synchronization of Egyptian chronology with that of NB chronology also requires interpretation but such reconciliation raises many problems. This chronology and history also does not factor in the seventy years nor does ity factor in the foretold 'forty year' desolation under Nebuchadnezzer. No comfort here my boy!

The twenty year gap exists not because of any supposed flaws in our interpretation but simply a recognition of what the Bible actually says in the text, i.e. seventy years, a period of desolation-exile-servitude. You have a biiigg pwoblem.

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

Lady Liberty

Post 1982

No I have never made a chart in the manner that you prescribe and that I think is a good idea. I have thought in making a similar chart that compares the NB chronology with that of the 'celebrated ones' biblical chronology as presented in our publications. Such a tabulation would clearly show that differences between the two schemes amount to mere twenty years. As I have long argued on this forum that NB chronology as currently understood can serve to prove the validity of a corrected scheme with the Fall of Jerusalem being adjusted to 607 BCE instead of the error of 586/87 BCE.

In other words I can quite happily accommodate NB chronology as it stands and then by 'figuring in' the seventy years, an adjustment of twenty years can be made which pushes back the traditional dates. Or I can choose ignore the traditional chronology where appropriate and construct a chronology dependent on the Bible alone thus achieving the same result, validating 607 BCE. I can choose either road.

Regarding the matter of Archaeology there is in fact new research over the last five years dealing with the history of the Late Judean Period and this new material is certainly favourable to our position for awareness is now realized about the problem of the 'Babylonian Gap' and the desolation of Judah. So, this looks quite promising so the jury is still out in regard to these matters.

I do and have not ignored the 'so-called' evidence against 607 because I have made this a academic project for some thirty years. I have read all of the commentaries and journal articles on the subject and I repeat there is no evidence that disproves 607 BCE. This date is proven thus by the seventy year period and the fulfillment of 1914. So, if you like the date is proven up front and behind.

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

Lady Liberty

Post 1981

If I get a chance I will most certainly watch that awe-inspiring documentarywhich from your comments would appear to prove the accuracy of the Babylonian records form a human standpoint. However, there is a caution. Accurate astronomy does not mean accurate chronology for chronology is based upon methodology and interpretation.

In the Insight Vol.1, p.454 it addresses the matter you raise. After citing the claim made by Martin Noth, the writer notes the "correlation of astronomical data with human events in the past is subject to various factors and human interpretation allowing for error." A problem arises for those who foolishly insist on the infallibility of Neo-Babylonian chronology is that of reconciling the seventy years of Babyloian domination of Judah during which period the Jews were exiled to Babylon, forced in servitude to Babylon whilst their land was a desert for that definite historical period. A period absent totally from NB history but very much present in the biblical record.

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

Jeffro

Post 1564

I plead guilty. I am illiterate and plain stupid. So, why do you bother with me? I am aware of your protestations that you have acted independently in your research of chronology be that as it may because the simple fact is that your interpretation is identical to that of Jonsson and others. So, such a coincidence of so-called independent research is unbelievable so you have been influenced by other sources.

I have debated the flaws in your arguments numerous times but you choose to ignore my responses. For example, you completely ignore what Jeremiah 25:12 says directly and contextually. You have failed to examine commentaries and journal articles discussing this verse and more importantly you ignore the whole book of Jeremiah as well as the rest of the OT that deals with seventy years.

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

Lady Liberty

Post 1979

I am very serious about the integrity of those nominated dates and I am fully aware of our history and the matter of 'prophetic speculation' which is part and parcel of wonderful Christian heritage much to the chagrin of apostates.

Whatever the proclaimed hopes for 1914 were and the fact that such hopes did not materialize, that year marked the end of the Gentile Times and that was understood decades before the event. Many earnest Bible Students also saw the significance of 1914 which has become not only enshrined in eschatology but also in modern history.

I await with keen anticipation your majestic analysis of 607 BCE.

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

Lady Liberty

Post 1980

You ask me to prove the deceit of those who advocate secular chronologies based upon discredited NB chronology. For starters, such chronology does not account either in its history or tabulation of the regnal years for the Neo-Babylonian kings any evidenc eof the biblical 'seventy years'. Yet, I would propose that those seventy years are the most crucial event for the Neo-Babylonian period. Why the absence both in the chronology and the history? The Biblical record gives historical information of that period including those incursions by key rulers of the NB period.

The biblical 'seventy years' disproves so-called infallible NB chronology by the twenty year gap at least and if Josephus is given credence then the period is further drastically altered.

Your chart and the use of Grayson's material proves nothing because you have simply presented matters in accordance with your own interpretation. Celebrated WT scholars have used Grayson's research and will continue to do so in full knowledge that Grayson's approach may vary from the 'celebrated'. They have inserted data by means of parenthesis and they have alerted the reader to the reference source so that accords with academic convention.

I believe you are making a 'mountain out of a molehill'.

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 250

Thanks for the compliment. My comment on the recent criticism of WT chronology was not to be historical but rather to focus on the major or more recent criticism which has been spawned by Jonsson's material. I am aware that SDA's have been publishing material on chronology since the fifties based upon the research of Thiele and others. I acknowledge your research and that of Hatton who also began his criticism from the sixties.

I try to be objective but any scholar usually begins his or her methodology with a set of assumptions or influences, it is hardly the case that one would work from a vacuum but would have a set of preconceived ideas so as to approach the subject carefully. In any event an apologist or critic would have a set of assumptions or bias and that is simply human nature. In any event, being loyal to the Bible and the Bible alone is what really counts.

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

Jeffro

Post 1562

So, the 'good news' of the Bible is a crackpot idea and now drivel. Such a comment about fundamental Bible teachings says more about you and your beliefs. Of course, the Apostle Peter warned about those who would ridicule the truth and indeed such ridicule is a mere proof that what we believe and preach is the True Religion.

All of those dates are Bible-based and therefore are proven biblically and prophetically. The facts of ancient and modern history also proves their validity. The events of 1914 were indeed sudden because the Great War broke upon the world in the matter of a single gunshot, it does not get m,ore sudden than that.

All chronology has a margin of error including chronologies that are based upon radiometric methods. Neo-Babylonian chronology has an 'error' of at least twenty years and so our biblically chronology has needed to be 'fine-tuned' or adjusted over the many decades. This is simply the nature of the beast. When a chronology disagrees with the Bible such as the NB-Jonsson-apostate model then not onlly is it wrong but it is dumb.

Better it is to have a margin of error of one year and then correct it thus pioneering the way for all of Christendom's chronologists then to adhere to disproven and discredited margin of error of twenty years found in NB chronology.

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 249

My agenda is simply to defend our biblical chronology produced by the celebrated WT scholars. Our biblical chronology has been the subject of criticism forthe last few decades especially from the time of Jonsson publishing his Gentile Times Reconsidered.

My methodology is to present the facts based on the Bible and to compare those fact with interpretation from all sides of the debate/controversy from WTS, opposers and the scholarly community- Catholic-Protestant-Jewish.

I am flatterered that you put me at the 'extreme' end of the scholarly spectrum for it is rather lonely out there but scholar loves solitude as it revitalizes his intellectual juices and deepens his contemplative practice. Rather mystical is it not?

scholar JW