Posts by scholar

50

Gentile Times reconsidered

by confused and lost in

i am half way through this book by carl o. jonsson and the more i read the more certain i become that the 607bce date for the destruction of jerusalem by babylon is nothing more than a fabrication designed to uphold 1914 and hence the "authority" of the watchtower leadership.it makes me sick to think of how they have duped millions of people with their phoney chronology.it makes sitting through studies that mention these dates irritating to say the least.especially when all the heads nod in unison at the mention of the "magic 607"

scholar

Doug Mason

Post 378

Firstly, I planned to respond to your 'fictitious dialogue' today but I will need to do that later. Now to your present post.

Celebrated WT scholars, FDS, Governing Body and humble 'scholar' have made no mistakewith the seventy years. We believe that despite the plethora of interpretations of this event from apostates, scholars and higher critics that our traditional understanding as published in the Society's publications including the scholarly journal The Watchtower is correct.

I have spent may decades of research on this subject and I have perused, examined critically all that is published in leading scholarly, academic journals and Bible commentaries of Cathollic, Protestant and Jewish leanings. Have you done this methodical, intellectual exercise? I think not!

The matter of the two Hebrew words used for desolation and destruction of the land appeared years ago in the Adventist Journal, Witness now defunct. It is certainly the case that the meaning of these Hebrew terms does not automatically mean total or absolute destruction by themselves as their linguistic range is rather broad and non-specific. However, the context of those terms used by Jeremiah and the accompanying language such as 'without an inhabitant' leads one to conclude that the desolation was total and absolute with no sense of vagueness or partiality. So, your argument is weak.

I urge you to engage in formal study on this matter of the interpretation of these Hebrew terms used not only in Jeremiah but the rest of the OT. You should use Lexicons, Theological Dictionaries such as TWOT, TDOT and NIDOTE and major technical commentaries such as Word, Anchor, ICC, Keil &Delitzsch and Hermeneia.

I look forward to your appraisal of these matters as you certainly excell in producing well -polished work

scholar JW

50

Gentile Times reconsidered

by confused and lost in

i am half way through this book by carl o. jonsson and the more i read the more certain i become that the 607bce date for the destruction of jerusalem by babylon is nothing more than a fabrication designed to uphold 1914 and hence the "authority" of the watchtower leadership.it makes me sick to think of how they have duped millions of people with their phoney chronology.it makes sitting through studies that mention these dates irritating to say the least.especially when all the heads nod in unison at the mention of the "magic 607"

scholar

stillajwexelder

Post 13270

You are misinformed because the Society is not or has no plans, needs to revise it Bible-based chronology, It is in the field of eschatology that the FDS has seen fit to have a another look at our understanding of the 'generation' in Mattnew 24:34. Such an endeavour proves that the FDS is indeed 'faithful and discreet' because this phrase is extremely challenging for all scholars and commentators. We were thrilled to learn that such an adjustment was to be made at the recent Annual Meeting of the Society in October and in keen anticipation of this soon to be published revision I have spent much time researching this problematic phrase at Moore Theological Library in Sydney in conjunction with my own personal theological library.

I now see how difficult this subject is and that it has caused numerous interpretations based upon the definition of genea which have been applied to the context of Jesus' Olivet discourse. My research has led me to focus on the Hebrew word dor which has theological or metaphorical meaning of 'assembly'. This seems to fit the new understanding of 'generation' as now applied to the Church or the anointed ones, Elect. etc.

scholar JW

50

Gentile Times reconsidered

by confused and lost in

i am half way through this book by carl o. jonsson and the more i read the more certain i become that the 607bce date for the destruction of jerusalem by babylon is nothing more than a fabrication designed to uphold 1914 and hence the "authority" of the watchtower leadership.it makes me sick to think of how they have duped millions of people with their phoney chronology.it makes sitting through studies that mention these dates irritating to say the least.especially when all the heads nod in unison at the mention of the "magic 607"

scholar

AnnOMaly

Post 525

The historical blunder made by Jonsson is repeated throughout the many editions of his book and concerns a dogmatic statement that John Aquila Brown in his Eventide...did not connect Luke 21:24 with the Gentile Times. Jonsson makes this allegation because the Society in the Proclaimers of God's Kingdom on page 134 says that he did connect the two.

I wrote to Jonsson, Franz and Penton who also repeated this falsehood in their respective editions. Jonsson refused to admit to the facts that I submitted which were obtained by letter from the Writing Dept concerning the matter. Franz was stubborn and rude in his response and Penton did not reply. The facts are that Jonsson was informed as to the exact page and reference whereby the connection is plainly stated and yet Jonnson was not intellectually honest to see that he was wrong. This case study plainly demonstrates that Jonsson cannot be trusted with interpreting modern history so then how can he be trusted with interpreting ancient history especially when he is not proficient with the Semitic languages. These facts were made known to Alan F on this very forum and even he was forced to concede that an error was made.

You claim that Furuli has made some errors in his published volumes then the correct and decent thing to do would be to write to Furuli and point such errors out. I would say that any such errors are simply typographical and due to poor proofreading. You make the claim then you should put up.

scholar JW

129

587/607 Question...

by deaconbluez in

if the exile wasn't to be 70 years, how is jeremiah 29:10 explained by pro-587 folks?.

10 "for this is what jehovah has said, in accord with the fulfilling of seventy years at babylon i shall turn my attention to you people, and i will establish toward you my good word in bringing you back to this place.. .

also, if it truly was a 70-year period of servitude, and not exile, when was this 70 years served by other nations?.

scholar

AnnOMaly

Post 523

I note your observation regarding the tables but if it is really a problem for you then you should write to Furuli as seek an explanation. Perhaps it is simply the case is that is where the data leads because on p.312, the table also shows that Nisan 1 on April 22 for 568.

scholar JW

50

Gentile Times reconsidered

by confused and lost in

i am half way through this book by carl o. jonsson and the more i read the more certain i become that the 607bce date for the destruction of jerusalem by babylon is nothing more than a fabrication designed to uphold 1914 and hence the "authority" of the watchtower leadership.it makes me sick to think of how they have duped millions of people with their phoney chronology.it makes sitting through studies that mention these dates irritating to say the least.especially when all the heads nod in unison at the mention of the "magic 607"

scholar

confused and lost

You certainly will be confused if you accept the Jonsson hypothesis published as Gentile Times Reconsidered for it contains at least major historical blunderin connection with modern history and is very fuzzy regarding the biblical ;seventy years'.

A scholarly rebuttal of Jonsson's research by Rolf Firuli is now available in two volumes dealing with secular chronologies of the ancient world and a linguistic analysis of the seventy years. Further, this recent scholarly research demonstrates the reality of a twenty-year gap between biblical chronology as endorsed by 'celebrated' WT scholars and the secular chronology proposed by Jonsson and higher critics.

scholar JW

129

587/607 Question...

by deaconbluez in

if the exile wasn't to be 70 years, how is jeremiah 29:10 explained by pro-587 folks?.

10 "for this is what jehovah has said, in accord with the fulfilling of seventy years at babylon i shall turn my attention to you people, and i will establish toward you my good word in bringing you back to this place.. .

also, if it truly was a 70-year period of servitude, and not exile, when was this 70 years served by other nations?.

scholar

AnnOMaly

Your reply is still rather vague as your claim does not appear to have any relevance to Furuli's methodology. Where is it the case that Furuli or critics of 586/587 BCE have dated the Babylonian year from May ? It appears that you have invented a 'red herring' in this case.

scholar JW

129

587/607 Question...

by deaconbluez in

if the exile wasn't to be 70 years, how is jeremiah 29:10 explained by pro-587 folks?.

10 "for this is what jehovah has said, in accord with the fulfilling of seventy years at babylon i shall turn my attention to you people, and i will establish toward you my good word in bringing you back to this place.. .

also, if it truly was a 70-year period of servitude, and not exile, when was this 70 years served by other nations?.

scholar

AnnOMaly

Would you give the reference or provide the source for your criticism of Furuli's methodology ?

scholar JW

129

587/607 Question...

by deaconbluez in

if the exile wasn't to be 70 years, how is jeremiah 29:10 explained by pro-587 folks?.

10 "for this is what jehovah has said, in accord with the fulfilling of seventy years at babylon i shall turn my attention to you people, and i will establish toward you my good word in bringing you back to this place.. .

also, if it truly was a 70-year period of servitude, and not exile, when was this 70 years served by other nations?.

scholar

Doug Mason

Post 369

I know you have a personal interpretation of the seventy years but I simply reject the nonsense as it is not in accord with the plain word of scripture but simply amounts to twisting the facts to suit your preconceived chronology.

The seventy years of Jeremiah was a full or definite historic period of Exile-Servitude-Desolation prescribed as punishment for Judah as proven by its reference to by Daniel, Ezra, Zechariah and Josephus. These writers made sufficient comment on Jeremiah's prophecy of the seventy years as to its explanation and timing, they were not confused about as many are today including scholars, higher critics and apostates all of which have abandoned the theology of the seventy years.

You 'muddy' the waters by your two-streams model which yokes the seventy years of Jeremiah to events during the reign of Manasseh, king of Judah (716-661 BCE) who lived in the period of Assyria as a World Power. Jeremiah with the remaining last kings of Judah were comtemporaneous with Babylon not Assyria so your historical connection is too far stretched. The book of Jeremiah deals with a precise historical period beginning with the Josiah's 13th year in 647 BCE until 580 BCE a period of no less than 67 years. This means there is no need to look beyond these date inot the past for some fuzzy application of the seventy years.

Your fuzzy beginning of the seventy years mirrors the somewhat vague beginning advance by Jonsson in his hypothesis who simply cannot be precise about a date for the beginning or an event for the beginning. Is it 609 BCE ? Or is it 605 BCE? Such confusion invalidates any proposed interpretation. Celebrated WT scholars have never been confused about the period as to its substance, theology and chronology.

Your bogus 'second stream' also has many difficulties. The claim that the seventy years ended with the Fall of Babylon is stupid reasoning because Daniel in 9:2 wriiting after the Fall of Babylon states that the seventy years had not then been fulfilled.

The further claim that the seventy years was of servitude only ignores the biblical facts of an exile and desolation which could only have comptemporaneous with each other. In short, exile produces servitude which in turn exile leaves a vacant land, depopulated hence desolate. Our critics hone in one verse which mentions serving the King of Babylon in Jeremiah 25:11 but they ignore the fact that Jeremiah in19:10 writes to the exiles in Babylon during the seventy year period. So these two verses proves that the seventy years at this point amounted to exile and servitude. Also. Jer. 25:11 refers to desolation of the land in connection with the seventy years so we have model of exile-servitude-desolation.

The nations along with Judah would also receive judgement similar to Judah but their respective dues are not prescribed chronologically as was the case with Judah. Tyre as foretold by Isaiah would be punished for seventy years and Egypt was punished for forty years but precise historical details for all of the foreign nations is not presented.

In conclusion, I wish to advise you that Rolf Furuli has published his second volume on Babylonian Chronology and I have my copy which in my view is a most compelling critique of the Jonsson madness. Both volumes 1 and 2 contain sound linguistic examination of the seventy year texts. The books are available form the publisher.

Regards

scholar JW

129

587/607 Question...

by deaconbluez in

if the exile wasn't to be 70 years, how is jeremiah 29:10 explained by pro-587 folks?.

10 "for this is what jehovah has said, in accord with the fulfilling of seventy years at babylon i shall turn my attention to you people, and i will establish toward you my good word in bringing you back to this place.. .

also, if it truly was a 70-year period of servitude, and not exile, when was this 70 years served by other nations?.

scholar

deaconbluez

The Jewish exile was prophesied to be a full period of seventy years according to the words of Jeremiah which was a period also of servitude to Babylon with their homeland desolate for that same period of seventy years. In short, the Bible iks quite emphatic that the seventy years was a period of servitude, exile and desolation from the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 until the Return in 537 BCE.

The prophecy of Jeremiah 29:10 applied to those Jewish exiles in Babylon and cannot be reconciled witth those proponents of the 587 BCE theory who would have you believe that the seventy years was a period of servitude alone reflecting Babvlonian domination beginning from a fuzzy starting point. The NWT correctly renders the phrase 'at Babylon' which is correct contextually rather than 'for Babylon' which is admissible on linguistic grounds but conflicts with the context.

The other nations were also brought into servitude to Babylon but their length is not stated as it it was for Judah which was a predetermined period of seventy years.

The 587 hypothesis endorsed by apostates and favoured by some scholars is falsified by the seventy years which creates a twenty year gap between the sacred and the secular records thus proving that the Bible alone should be the basis for chronology.

scholar JW

8

ATTENTION: 587/607 Buffs..

by deaconbluez in

jw
friends

how would you answer this:.

"it's simple: we know there was a 70-year exile, and that that the jews returned in 537bce.

so 537bce minus 70 years equals 607bce!

scholar

deaconbluez

Post 307

This simple calculation by the celebrated WT scholars cannot be refuted by either apostates who support the Jonsson hypothesis or higher critics. This simple calculation harmonizes all of the available biblical and secular data and highlights the simple fact that the seventy years of Judah were a period of servitude, exile and desolation of the land. We can be supremely confident on the basis of scripture and secular evidence that the Fall of Jerusalem beginning the seventy year period occurred in 607 BCE.

scholar JW