Posts by scholar

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

Ah yes, the JW (Adventist) doctrine of the ‘march of the World Powers’. Except, in their own doctrine, the World Power immediately before Babylon was… Assyria. And Babylon’s final conquest of Assyria was in… 609 BCE. This is completely consistent with all the nations serving Babylon for 70 years until it was conquered by Persia in 539 BCE. Even though this could be presented as some remarkable ‘fulfilment of Bible prophecy’ (though the texts were heavily edited after the events), this is not convenient for JW dogma. What a tangled web of fantasy indeed. 😂

---

So, it seems that you are arguing for 609 BCE? as the beginning of the 70 years with the Fall of Assyria. This is plain and utter nonsense because Jeremiah the prophet who prophesied about a future 70 years was uttered after the Fall of Assyria in fact it was in Jehoiakim, King of Judah in his 4th year and in Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon in his 1st year calculated as 625/624 BCE according to Bible Chronology. It was not until Neb invaded Judah and dethroned the reigning monarch, King Zedekiah, the last king of Judah with the Fall of Jerusalem causing the Exile that that prophecy began to be fulfilled in 607 BCE.

---

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

Notice how ‘scholar’ dismissively refers to ‘pretty charts’ and (in other posts) ambiguous complaints about ‘methodology’ but does not rebut any specific content. If he were confident in his position, or at least sincere, he could instead go through point by point, indicating specific problems.

---

Notice how Jeffro ignores 'scholars' requests for detail and proof when he makes assertions by means of pretty coloured charts and dismisses the role that methodology plays in Chronology maintaining a rather dogmatic position rather than weighing up other alternatives.

---

But at the crux of every debate with ‘scholar’, you’ll always end up at ‘that doesn’t account for the 70 years of exile [that isn’t mentioned anywhere]’.

--

This is plain and utter nonsense for one of the themes of the OT is the fact of the Exile. Has not Jeffro heard or read a Bible concordance that uses the word and lists its many locations throughout the OT, especially in the book Jeremiah.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

Poor ‘scholar’ seems oblivious to the fact that asserting BM 21946 supports 607 BCE (without any possibility of 606 or 608) only reinforces the fact that there is no ambiguity regarding the correct identification of 587 when the erroneous 20-year gap in JW chronology is removed. 😂

---

The military campaigns of Neb which are set out in BM 21946 do not support 587 BCE directly but simply provide a background for Neb's campaigns into Judah which are described in the Bible. Such synchronisms enable a Chronologist to construct a scheme of dates that reflects both historical narratives. Thus, by comparison, one can establish the fact of a 20-year difference between Bible Chronology and NB Chronology when fine-tuned results in 607 rather than 587 BCE.

----

Of course, on its own BM 21946 doesn’t say anything about Jerusalem’s destruction at all. But when the biblical chronology is considered in light of the dating of the first siege identified in BM 21946 (not to mention all the other contemporary records of the neo-Babylonian period), 587 BCE is confirmed as the correct year.

---

Correct! This is where you err in making invalid claims about Neb's first siege described in this tablet. For such a description supports 607 BCE rather than 587 BCE as a proper understanding of events described in the tablet itself proves.

---

When dealing with someone who thinks ‘all the nations serving Babylon for 70 years’ really means ‘70 years of Jewish exile’, there is no point trying to engage that person logically. But other readers can see the JW nonsense for what it is.

---

The fact that nations are brought into servitude to a foreign, invading power namely Babylon and conducts deportations of its citizenry to another land would mean Exile which is in fact what happened to the Judahites. Thus the term 'Jewish Exile' or 'Babylonian Exile' is a perfect descriptor of that event and period of history so we can properly label the 70 years as a period of servitude and Exile as described in Jer. 25:11.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

I don’t care what you ‘require’, nor about your tedious misrepresentation of what I said. Your nutty 607 doctrine is thoroughly wrong from every angle. You’re clearly beyond help, as recently demonstrated by your pitifully sad ‘interpretation’ of Babylon’s 70 years at Jeremiah 25:11. This isn’t some balanced difference of opinion open for ‘dialogue’. Your unfounded position is thoroughly wrong. You can go away until I feel like trouncing you at another juncture.

--

The only thing that I require from you is 'put up or shut up'. Your nutty repetition of the viewpoint of 587 BCE is biblically false. Your interpretation of Jer. 25:11 is simply that and does not accurately represent the context of the text, the other 70 year textual corpus and the fact of the Exile for starters. Your position conflicts with the Bible and is simply a repetition of COJ's thesis and that of 7th Day Adventist scholars from the fifties.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

😂 You claim to understand this subject but you need every little thing explained. 🤦‍♂️ Parroting the number of lines on the tablet is pointless when it is obvious that you don’t understand the content or how publication of the tablet aided with establishing the chronology of Nebuchadnezzar. I have sufficiently shown other readers the depth of your cognitive dissonance for now. You may go.

----

No . What I require from you is an explanation or the entering into a respectful dialogue. I have a copy of a translation into English of this clay tablet. You have made certain claims about this tablet that in some way supports 587 BCE and I have said that this document supports 607 BCE. So, we have a 'Mexican standoff' and that is fine with me. The document clearly identifies events and regnal years of Nebuchadnezzar but it is open to a historical reconstruction relating it to parallel events of the biblical record. Plain and simple. So the challenge is for you to provide clear instruction as to how this document supports 587 BCE. Can you or will you do this and help the said scholar?

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

🤦‍♂️ Given his ineptness, I’m not really surprised that ‘scholar’ is waiting for something that was never suggested and isn’t the purpose of BM 21946, while glossing over the fact that it contradicts JW chronology during the actual period that the tablet addresses. He probably doesn’t even understand what the contradiction is. Pathetic.

---

It was you not me that introduced BM 21946 into this discussion on the understanding that in some way this clay tablet contains information in support of 587 BCE. Conversely, I would argue on the basis of this tablet which by the way is one of the 17 lines of evidence used by COJ to disprove 607 BCE in favour of 587 BCE that the 23 lines on the front side and the 25 lines on its reverse side favour 607 BCE rather than 597 BCE. Yet you talk about me being pathetic, Go away and play with your pretty charts and lose yourself in a tangled web of fantasy.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

Wrong as usual. The tablet has Nebuchadnezzar staying in Babylon in his 5th year to build his army but JW chronology requires that he was on campaigns demanding tribute throughout Palestine during that period. 🤦‍♂️

--

It is nice to see Jeffro actually quoting from BM21946 regarding his position in his 5th year wherein he assembled his armies and the said scholar can't wait for his further commentary on Neb's invasion into the Hattu Land in support of the impossible date of 587 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem, an event not described in this tablet.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

😂 alone… concurrently… the fact that he doesn’t see a problem here really demonstrates an interesting pathology. 🤦‍♂️

---

No problem for its an explanation of the servitude of Judah principally for 70 years commensurate with other nations which at that time Babylon was the World Power inaugurated in 607 BCE.

Nice and simple!!

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

Wow. He also doesn’t know the distinction between ‘Adventist’ and ‘7th-day Adventist’. Maybe he needs a Venn diagram. 🤦‍♂️

---

I know the difference between Adventists and the 7th Day Adventists for the Adventists are a broad church. Still, when we speak of 'Adventists', we usually refer to the 7th Day Adventists who originally pioneered Chronology scholarship via Edwin Thiele.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

scholar

Jeffro

Yes, we’re painfully aware of your frequently repeated parroting of Adventist nonsense that distorts the clearly stated application of the Bible’s references to all the nations serving Babylon for 70 years until it was conquered by the Persians. 🤦‍♂️ 🙄

--

Adventists do not have this belief of the '70 years' but share an identical belief to that of COJ and yourself. Further, the text does not mean that the nations would serve Babylon for 70 years but Judah alone would serve Babylon for 70 years along with the other nations who would be in servitude to Babylon concurrently.

scholar JW