Posts by scholar

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

Alethia

No where in the bible is the exile and and the 70 years connected even if its used in the same sentence. Babylon was used by Jehovah for 70 years to over thrown the surrounding nations. The fact that the exile was less than 70 years is irrelevent and does not contradict the scriptures in any way.

---

What nonsense. Are you saying that the word exile ' does not occur in the Bible, particularly in the OT? And if the 70 years were not connected to an exile then what was it connected to? Jehovah used Babylon to punish Judah by means of an exile for a period of 70 years and you cannot rewrite history.

--

When you understand that the 70 years is "for Babylon" and not 'for Israel' you also understand the 70 years was finished when Babylon was overthrown in 539BCE. The 70 years began when Babylon conquered Assyria in 609BCE. Makes total sense and no need for vague ideas and 20 year gaps.

---

The 70 years were certainly for Babylon as they were brought into servitude to Babylon and were exiled at Babylon for 70 years. The 70 years had not ended with the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE because they were still in Babylon as an exiled people until their release from captivity-servitude-domination in 537 BCE event in Cyrus' 1st year fulfilled the 70 years.

The 70 years could not have begun in 609 BCE with the Fall of Assyria as the prophecy by Jeremiah was not given at that time but later with Neb's first year and Jehoiakim's 4th year- Jer. 25:1.

---

Also, the fact that the 70 years is "for Babylon" does not mean israel was to be punished for 70 years.

---

The fact is that Judah was in servitude to Babylon for a fixed period of 70 years during which they were at or in Babylon.

--

As others have said it really comes down to reading the scriptures accurately in order to avoid misinterpretation.

--

Absolutely. Plain reading of the text and understanding the text by means of exegesis.

scholar JW

---

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

DNCall

Scholar: Your arguments are affected by faith. Faith that the Bible is God's Word and faith that the Jehovah's Witnesses are God's chosen organization. The other side relies on the abundance of records preserved from the Neo-Babylonian period. You accept and reject data and evidence so as to agree with the position taken by Jehovah's Witnesses. So long as this is the case, your scholarship will be hampered and you will not be well informed.

---

Not at all. Our Bible Chronology is based on solid evidence from which I argue forthwith based on what the Bible says using all of the tools of exegesis and in consultation with the research of the academic literature and Bible Commentaries.

I have full knowledge of opposing arguments being well familiar with other leading Chronologists such as Jack Finegan and Edwin Thiele. Further, I have studied closely the research of Carl Olaf Jonsson a longtime critic of WT Chronology and the earlier critics from the fifties and sixties originating first in Australia by SDA's.

scholar JW

Link Dislike Like

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

Disillusioned JW

Regarding comments about servitude versus exile, which have been made in this topic forum, I ask where did the servitude of Jews to Babylon take place? Did it take place in Judah or did it take it place in Babylon, or did it take place in both locations, or did it take place elsewhere? I see no contradiction when people say the servitude of Jews to Babylon took place in Babylon. Likewise I see no contradiction when people say the servitude of Jews to Babylon took place in Judah. I think the servitude to Babylon took place in both locations. However, I have not done much reading about this in the Bible, and my memory of what I read about it is weak. I do know that the book of Daniel (whether historical or not) makes the claim of Daniel being in servitude to the king of Babylon while in Babylon. I also know that the King of Babylon appointed a Jew to be king in Jerusalem (before Jerusalem was destroyed) and thus that particular king in Jerusalem served the king of Babylon and thus was in servitude to Babylon. Note that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_captivity says the following.

--

There is much to unpack here and methinks you are overcomplicating the matter and thus getting mired down. Just apply the KISS principle until you understand the subject fully.

Servitude equates with Exile like two halves of the same coin in broad terms but under Neb Judah experience deportations which are identified, vassalage to Neb which can be identified and the Exile proper identified fully as the 70 years- a period of exile-serving Babylon fully leaving a vacant, desolated Land. It is just that simple identifiable key historical events which can be marked chronologically.

---

Note that a deportation to Babylon and exile in Babylon for some began in 597 BCE, and note that 597 BCE to 537 BCE is 60 years, and that 60 years is half way in length between 50 years (which many non-Jws claim is the length of the exile) and 70 years (which many JWs claim was the length of the exile). also note that were multiple deportations.

--

Wrong. The dates you select are of your own choosing. Our chronology shows that it was 617 BCE thus for some exiled Jews their exile was longer but the Bible only gives an exilic figure of 70 years thus the exile proper could only have begun in 607 BCE and ended 70 years later in 537 BCE.

---

Regarding the claim (made in this topic thread) that "... that the Land of Judah was desolate during the Exile of 70 years ..." the above mentioned Wikipedia article says the following. "Archaeological studies have revealed that, although the city of Jerusalem was utterly destroyed, other parts of Judah continued to be inhabited during the period of the exile." Note that modern science conclusively shows that parts of Judah were inhabited during the exile.

--

It is smarter and wiser to accept the Bible's account of matters as its authors were physically present, unlike the archaeologists who arrived with their spade some 2500 years after the event.

scholar JW

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

notsurewheretogo

Well anyone who relies on interpreting the bible and not actual evidence is the one misled. Most on here now follow the path of looking at the evidence without cognitive dissonance and then conclude.

--

WT Chronology right from its earliest beginnings in 1876 was always based on secular and biblical evidence in fact that early scholarship on Bible Chronology by Charles Russell made a critique of Ussher's Chronology by means of comparison and you cannot do that with evidence.

---

That conclusion is the bible is not a holy book and is wrong in many things thus relying on it to come up with dates is incredibly "un-scholar like".

--

Bible Chronology is based on the Bible and is the Word of God and if you cannot accept this fact then go away.

---

Thank you for admitting your whole point of view on 607 is based on a belief rather than evidence.

--

False. I said no such thing. The date 607 BCE is based on the Bible and accords with secular history- Josephus ancient astronomy- VAT 4956 and NB Chronology corr.

scholar JW

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

peacefulpete

Why does everyone seem to want to forget Gedaliah? He was a notable Jew who governed Judah and invited the people to live in security and plant crops? If there was a "starting point" for "empty land" it would have to be after his assassination........just saying.

--

The Bible is the source for Gedaliah and he is also well-discussed in WT Publications. The starting point has nothing to do with Gedaliah but the destruction of Jerusalem with the land becoming desolate which counted from the seventh month in 607 BCE. Jehovah God is the Great Timekeeper and it ended in the same month in 537 BCE- A fixed duration of precisely 70 years!!!

scholar JW

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

Splash

So I pointed out that using the Insight chronology (not really my methodology to be fair) of one king after another, using the Insight volume reign lengths, Jerusalem fell in 587BCE.

---

Therein lies your problem because you have chosen a specific methodology that has produced a widely different result. By constructing a scheme of Chronology based on the backward computation of the reigns of the N B Period you get 586/587 for the Fall of Jerusalem base dom material in the Insight volumes. I get that!.

However, if using the same methodology by means of counting back using the regnal data- reigns of the Hebrew Monarchy as published in that same volume then you get 607 BCE. Do you get it?

---

Where do these extra 70 years that you insist on come in, in the Insight books?
I went back and reread them and no kings were missing and there was no mention of dropping in an extra 70 years somewhere or other.

---

Are you now saying that there is no mention of the 70 years in the Insight volumes or in the Bible? The 70 years of desolation and exile are indeed associated with the reigns of Zedekiah, Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin in connection with what happened to Jerusalem, its Temple and Land of Judah. In fact, Jeremiah, when first introduces the '70 years as prophecy, was first revealed in King Jehoiakim's 4th year- Jer.25:1 In short, the factoring in of the 70 years as a historical event is the most significant factor when constructing a Chronology for this period of OT history and aits omission into any modern scheme of Chronology renders such a Chronology as false, inaccurate and misleading.

--

Are the Insight books wrong or missing something, because the simple sums from there lead me to 587BCE?

---

The Insight volumes omit nothing and are correct in being faithful to the Bible. What is missing is your thinking, just think about what you are reading.

scholar JW

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

Beth Sarim

Sometimes it's best for apologists to quit while they're ahead.

---

The said scholar is no quitter.

scholar JW

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

ozziepopst

How ya going mate!

Hope you are well and going strong

Talking about age I am approaching 76 years but keeping in reasonable health so far as posting on this forum keeps me mentally fit as I do battle with our critics.

Have a drink on me and Good Health to you

Cheers, scholar JW

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

joey jojo

Scholar , Im surprised that a man of your massive intellect, superior knowledge and boundless humility has the time to descend to the depths of us ordinary, simple humans and bestow your greatness upon us.

--

The said scholar just loves to help the little people.

scholar JW

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

scholar

Alethia

Not really. VAT4956 can be used to support 587 if you take into account planetary observations such as Saturn for instance.

--

The latest and most recent scholarship on VAT 4956 by means of Rolf Furuli show that this tablet can be interpreted in support of 607 BCE by correcting Neb's 37th year from the traditional 568 BCE to 588 BCE.

---

It seems your whole basis for 607 is your insistence that the bible mentions a 70 year exile?

---

Correct. In addition, the fact that the 70 years is also descriptive of a period of servitude to Babylon and that the Land of Judah was desolate during the Exile of 70 years.

scholar JW