Posts by scholar

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

The language of Jeremiah is not vague but quite specific and there is no reason to suggest that the seventy years was anything else but a definite historic period as supported by recent scholarship on this subject. The interpretation of the seventy years as a fixed period of servitude-desolation and exile from the Fall until the Return as promoted by the 'celebrated' ones is in agreement with Josephus' many references to this period.

There is no need for reound numbers here as this is simply an apostate gimmick aligned to that of the higher critic.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

isaacaustin

Post 1287

The context of Jeremiah 25 indicates that the desolation and servitude would beof a duration of seventy years. Plain and simple. Jeremiah describes the fact of the land being desolated, the domination of Judah by Babylon and the taking of Exiles, these events were fulfilled within the seventy years period as this is the only time reference that he describes. Josephus describes the situation in some detail and he agrees with this understanding of the seventy year period as traditionally presented by the 'celebrated WT scholars.

Your 609-539 BCE hypothesis does not work because the beginning date is too fuzzy and the end date finds the Jews still in Babylon as exiles serving the current king of Babylon. It does not work.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

isaacaustin

Post 1286

I disagree. The reference in Luke 21:24 to the Gentile Times by our Lord shows by means of the Greek Tense employed that the period was stillin progress and the the us eof kairos for 'times' is a Danielic reference to the 'seven times' which is further explained by the Revelation. Expositors agree that this period is eschatological running uo until the Parousia.,

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

isaacaustin

Post 1285

What Jeremiah clearly states and as agreed by Daniel, Zechariah and Ezra is that the seventy years was a period of desolation-servitude and exile from the Fall until the Return confirmed by Josephus.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

isaacaustin

Post 1284

You may not have read Jonsson but you have been deceived by his propaganda and you are quite mistaken because Jeremiah most certainly stated that the land of Judah would be without an inhabitant and this occcurred during the seventy years of Babylonish domination and desolation of Judah from the Fall until the Return confirmed by Josephus. Jer.25:12 does not state that the seventy years eande with the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE but that after the seventy years had ended then Babylon, its king and territory would be desolated. This clearly happened lomg after the Fall of Babylon. In short, this verse foretells not the Fall of Babylon but its destruction.

I care naught for your opinion of the 'celebrated' ones.

The one year error of 586 or 587 is of major concern to scholars as there are a number of published scholarly articles on this subject so this confusion is a big problem for you, further it is 586 that is the preferred option by serious scholars whereas 587 is the apostate option.

There is no agreement as to the date for the end of the Assyrian World Power so 609 is just a guess which demolished the Babylonish domination hypothesis from 609 -539 BCE. You have a big problem with this.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

allelsefails

Poat 45

The entire context of Daniel 4 revolves around the Kingdom of God which was yet in the future but its was typified by the Kingdom of Judah with its installed Monarchy and the intervention of Nebuchadnezzer who played an important role in relation to that typical kingdom. So, this chapter deals with a eschatalogical reality which is more described in the book of Revelation which describes the Escahatology in full detail.

The use of the Aramaic term 'times' has an equivalent with the Greek word 'kairos' meaning 'times' and these terms are eschatalogical formulae so this means that the very vocabulary used by Daniel and John are prophetic going far beyond history but being based on history which is the substance of prophecy.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

isaacaustin

Post 1293

Sounds like the cowards way out that when one finds oneself in a hole then blame the Bible. Celebrated WT scholars work with the same biblical data and they have no problem with deriving a precise date . This is why using a 'regnal based' chronology as opposed to an 'event based' chronology is superior because it is not hamstrung by different dating methods used by individual writers. This is one very good reason that the methodology used in deriving the precise date of 607 BCE is far superior than the secular chronology that cannot determione a precise date for the Fall. Such confussion proves that the current methodology has problems which is not the case with biblical chronology.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

allelsefails

Post 44

You need to read matters more carefully particularly Daniel 4. The entire chapter indicates a fulfillment beyond Nebuchadnezzer for example verse 3 indicates that the context is that of God's Kingdom and this further indicated by verse 25, 32 and 34. Also, the use of 'times' rather than years obviously as an eschatological application because if a literal sense was only to be conveyed then the text would read seven years rather than seven times. These are just a few comments but even a cursory reading of the entire chapter certainly demonstrates a application beyond Neb.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

isaacaustin

Post 2319

Firstly. your claim that the seventy years was only of domination is wrong and you are only being deluded by the Jonsson nonsense because Jeremiah empatically states that the land of Judahwould be desolated without an inhabitant. The seventy years could not have ended in 539 BCE with the Fall of Babylon because in that year they were still in Babylon and subject to her, the seventy years could only have ended with the return home of the Exiles and this is confirmed by Josephus.

Whether you think the celebrated WT scholars are 'pseudo' or not is of little consequence to scholar and he cares nothing for your insulting speech.

Sorry, the Bible in every which way confirms the 607 date as proven for the Fall of Jerusalem for you cannot prove any other candidate. Which date is it? 586 or 587? When apostates have got the matter sorted then and only then should you speak. Your calculation that from 539 and the 70 years one derives 609 is sound arithmetically but is unsound biblically for nothing happened in 609 BCE So your proposed beginning date was uneventful and this has always been a big problem for Jonsson and he has not yet been able to escape this dilemna.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

Tuesday

Post 1343

Thank you for your kind words. In order to interpret the seventy years accurately you would need to read all of those texts mentioning the seventy years such as the two in Jeremiah, one in Daniel, one in 2 Chronicles and the two in Zechariah. Then you would need to read Jeremiah as a book and see what was foretold to occur to Judah and Jerusalem also Josephus' several reference to that same period confirms the overall interpretation that the seventy years was a definite historical period with a precise beginning and ending with the Fall and the Return identified as a period of desolation-servitude and exile.

There is no other possible interpretation that accommodates all of the evidence and the biblical references. I have stuidied this subject closely and have read closely all that is published in the scholarly literature and of course the Jonsson nonsense and have concluded that what the celebrated WT scholars have said on the matter is sound biblically, historically and exegetically.

I disagree with your claim that Alan F has 'obliterated every argument' of scholar for the simple reason that scholar has responded to all of his criticisms over many years and in fact has helped him to understand his questions that he has asked of Bethel. Despite his atheism and disbelief in the Bible the foresaid scholar has tried to assist him to have a love for God's Word. His people and Organization of which he had some former attachment.

scholar JW