Anna Marina
Again your point? Bul is the eighth lunar month of the sacred calendar of the Israelites corresponding to the second month of the secular calendar. 1 Kings 6:37-38
scholar JW
scholar
JoinedPosts by scholar
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
Anna Marina
Your point? Ziz is the name of the second lunar month od the sacred calendar, but the eighth of the secular calendar of the Israelites.
scholar JW
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
johnamos
WTS says Jehoiakim’s ruled starting in 628 so that means his 3rd year was 625 and they say Neb began ruling in 625. Daniel was taken in 625 in Jehoiakim’s 3rd year, so Daniel was in Babylon to interpret the dream during Neb’s 2nd year as king
--
You misunderstand. Jehoiakim's reign was from 628-618 BCE and he was taken captive by Neb along with Daniel and others in 617 BCE which was in the 8th Neb's reign. Thus Neb's 2nd year of kingship must relate to something else such when he became World Ruler in 607 BCE because Jehoiakim was in his 4th year of his reign then not yet a vassal to Neb according to Dan 1:which occurred in Jehoiakim's third year of his kingship- Dan 1:1
Simply put it is important to properly synchronize the reigns of Jehoiakim and Nebuchadnezzar in harmony with both the Biblical history and secular history.
scholar JW
scholar JW
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
Ann Maria
When discussing issues of calendation and the WT's use of it please remember that the Hebrew nation used two different calendars, one beginning in Spring for the sacred year and the other beginning in the Fall as the Secular year. Such can be challenging for the Chronologists as to what calendar was used for a specific event at a specific time.
scholar JW
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
Beth Sarim
''Do not Jehovah's Witnesses themselves date Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the metal image to 606/605 BCE?''
For them to support 607BCE, yes
---
Correct for this what the Bible indicates and nicely endorses 1914 as the end of the Gentile Times
As the said scholar has often said, Nice and easy as he demolishes apostate thinking.
scholar JW
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
johnamos
[Daniel 2:1 In the second year of his kingship, Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar had a number of dreams, and he* was so agitated+ that he could not sleep.]
[Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 2 p. 480 - In 624 B.C.E., in the first official year of his kingship, Nebuchadnezzar again led his forces through Hattu; he captured and sacked the Philistine city of Ashkelon.]
Notice that the Insight volume, p.480 uses the expression' the first official year of his kingship' so this specific expression refers to his initial reign as King beginning Aug/Sept 624 BCE
Further, Dan 2:1 cannot have referred to his regnal years beginning in either 624 or the accepted date of 605/604 BCE as Neb had not yet then brought the Jewish captives including Daniel who interpreted the dream recorded in Dan. ch.2 to Babylon later on with the first deportation in 617 BCE or the accepted date of 587 BCE some 5 years later.
scholar JW
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
Mr. Finkelstein
In fact you idiot it was for the first time the concept of 'Methodology' in the academic literature was introduced by Rodger Young for I was familiar with the concept because Methodology was a Unit of study as part of doing an Honours program of my Arts degree. Methodology is an essential tool, one masters when beginning a Research degree at least in all Australian Universities.
scholar JW
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
johnamos
Now notice what Dan 2:1 says:
[In the second year of his kingship, Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar had a number of dreams, and he* was so agitated+ that he could not sleep.]
Okay, even though the WTS claims Neb became king in 625 (which we know it was really 605) they say 624 was his 1st official year of his kingship. So with that being said and using that date (624) then based on Dan 2:1 then Neb’s 2nd year of kingship should be 622 (623 if we use 625), so we should expect that the WTS says Dan 2:1 occurs in 623/622…but NO instead they say Dan 2:1 occurred in 606/605.
They twist the Scripture to say that he became ‘world ruler' in 607 but the Scripture reads that it was in the 2nd year of his KINGSHIP
----
The accusation of twisting is nonsense and shows that you lack an understanding of the matter. Dan 2:1 is a good example of the need for exegesis. Have you done that? If you had done that then most likely you would have arrived at a different conclusion..
This text omits any specific month and reads according to the NWT: "In the second year of his KINGSHIP,(emphasis added) notice not his reign, This means that Neb's 'second year' must be viewed not in terms of his reign but from another perspective such as Babylon's becoming the new World power in 607 BCE in relation to God's people.
There is one at least well-respected Commentary on the OT which makes a similar point which came to my attention when we studied the Daniel book years ago at the Book study and I made a marginal note in my personal copy. I can expand further on this matter but this will do for the moment.
scholar JW
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
TD
How are Jehovah's Witnesses immune from the uncertainty inherent in the Bible itself, over the counting system in use vis-à-vis the reigns of kings?-
---
You ask a very good question and the answer is very simple. It comes down to a very important word in Chronology -METHODOLOGY. Scholar was the first person in the world of academia not just in this form but also in the academic literature pertaining to Chronology to introduce this was about 2000. A short time later 2004, Rodger Young in the Evangelical Theological Society Journal discussed this concept as a tool in settling the controversy about 586/587.
Chronologists in constructing a scheme of Bible Chronology use a regnal/calendrical approach with at least one Absolute Date. This approach has two disadvantages:1. It is complex beyond the comprehension of the average reader 2. lacks uniformity'
Celebrated WT scholars have a different approach which has none of the above but has the advantages of simplicity as it is event based and uses Absolute dates or at least one eg. 539 BCE for the Fall of Babylon
----
Do not Jehovah's Witnesses themselves date Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the metal image to 606/605 BCE?-- Correct, because the event lies midway between to fixed calendrical years lacking a specific month which would give a specific year.
scholar JW
-
168
Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!
by Beth Sarim ini don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
-
-
scholar
stavro
I think most people who attempt to interpret the scriptures start out using exegesis and end up with eisegesis. I may be wrong, but I’m not personally convinced there is one harmonious way of interpreting the scriptures, despite using rigorous exegesis. To my mind there seems to be too many places where the scriptures can be used to support more than one position. I find you end up using your own personal preferences in deciding upon which position you ultimately chose to side with.
A well informed and knowledgeable former brother by the name of Eric Wilson also advocates the importance of careful exegesis. Despite both yourself and Eric using the same methodology you guys still draw different conclusions on many important doctrines.
----
Students who enter the ministry at a theological seminary learn the art of exegesis in interpreting a text and this consists basically of :
OBSERVATION
INTERPRETATION
CORRELATION
APPLICATION
These are the basic methods that one uses when searching the scriptures. Unfortunately most Witnesses are not skilled in this art and use similar but a different method when studying the Bible for even the word 'exegesis' is not found in WT publications.
Eric Wilson, who I have some familiarity no doubt practices exegesis in his published critique of WT theology and this fair enough for not everyone is going to reach the same conclusion as to the meaning of a text so this gives to a Church imposed eisegesis- and imposed text interpretation. Exegesis is a personal approach to Scripture and that is why Bible Commentaries abound.
Scholar in studying the principal texts relating to 607 BCE debate consults with all of the leading published commentaries as part of his research methodology
scholar JW