Jorden
Ok, with that noted tell me when these 42-months that occur during the 6th trumpet/2nd woe, tell me when they take place???-
--
Tishri15 or October 4/5 1914 through to Nisan 14 or March 26/27, 1918
scholar JW
scholar
JoinedPosts by scholar
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Jeffro
Relative to known events in Nebuchadnezzar’s reign such as the battle of Carchemish, the Bible actually falsifies 586 BCE and confirms 587BCE.
--
Utter nonsense. Scholars today currently endorse 586 BCE rather than 587 BCE
--
Entirely false. Even the Watch Tower Society’s poor 2001 attempt admitted that the business documents are entirely consistent with the established chronology. Their footnote says: “Business tablets exist for all the years traditionally attributed to the Neo-Babylonian kings. When the years that these kings ruled are totaled and a calculation is made back from the last Neo-Babylonian king, Nabonidus, the date reached for the destruction of Jerusalem is 587 B.C.E.”
--
Such business documents necessitate the converting of any regnal data into a modern-day calendar and are subject to a 'fine tuning' in order o accommodate a 'twenty-year gap in the NB Period.
---
VAT 4956 contains planetary observations that categorically cannot be reconciled with 588 BCE (even if you pretend the names of the planets are ambiguous), hence it has no relevance to the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BCE.
--
Rolf Furuli has researched this subject and proved that both the planetary observations along with the lunar observations are a better fit for 588 BCE rather than 568 BCE. Furuli is the only scholar to date that has researched and examined VAT 4956 since Neugebauer and Weidner, 1915.
scholar JW
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Vidqun
An interesting article, attempting to harmonize the Bible with the Babylonian Chronicles is A. R. Green (1982). “The Chronology of the Last Days of Judah: Two Apparent Discrepancies.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 101, pp. 71, 72.
--
The said scholar has this article in his theological library.
scholar 7W
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Jeffro
The Bible falsifies 607
Neo-Babylonian cuneiform business records falsify 607
The planetary positions in VAT 4956 falsify 607
---
The Bible clearly and most definitively falsifies 586 and 587 BCE
Neo Babylonian cuneiform business documents falsify 586 and 587 BCE
The planetary positions and the lunar positions in VAT 4956 falsify 586 and 587 BCE
scholar JW
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Jorden
Yes, Scholar that is true and if you spent half the time you do on concerning yourself with the dates, then you would actually have some knowledge to what the Scripture's state and you would realize that it does not matter 607/587 because the appointment times of the nations are not from 607 to 1914...they are the last 42-months of Satan's world that the 8th king will rule over God's people. When those 42-months/appointed times end, Jesus will come with God's kingdom and put and end to Satan's world/kingdom. That is when the 7th trumpet will sound and God's kingdom will begin to rule with Jesus and his chosen that will at that time be gathered to him to rule for the 1,000 years.
--
What utter nonsense for the 'appointed times of the nations' or the Gentile Times is the time period from the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 BCE until the 1914 CE -enthronement of God's Kingdom and Christ's Parousia as recognized by Bible expositors and in harmony with Biblical Theology.
scholar JW
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Jeffro
Yeah, don’t bother poor ‘scholar’ with what the Bible actually says. That’s not the JW way.
--
Yeah, don't bother with poor Jeffro with what the Bible says because he does not believe in the Bible.
scholar JW
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Jorden
Boy, you quote lotta scripture!!!
scholar JW
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Anony Mous
Before you say the scientific evidence is arguable, there are over 2000 documents from the time that set the dates for the first and second siege of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, including the destruction of the temple in the second siege. It sets this from both contemporary dating methods as well as astronomical evidence. One thing the Babylonians were good at was keeping track of things, basically a bunch of bureaucrats. If you follow the WTBTS calculations, the sieges and mobilizations of troops from Babylon would’ve had to start before Nebuchadnezzar even started ruling.
--
However, not one of those 2000 tablets mentions or refers to the biblical 70 years.
scholar JW
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Jeffro
This word salad in response to a ‘yes or no’ question is reminiscent of the dishonest answer given by Geoffrey Jackson at the Australian royal commissio
--
Which of the two 'word salads' is the better? The said scholar' or Geoffreys'?
scholar JW
-
207
Scholar and Fisherman
by Jorden inscholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
-
-
scholar
Anony Mous
Well, then, here is an argument from the WTBTS own publications:
Babylon fell "Babylon fell in 539 B.C." Babylon the Great Has Fallen - God's Kingdom Rules p.184 539 B.C. Plus Nabonidus "On the basis of cuneiform texts he is believed to have ruled some seventeen years(556-539 B.C.E.)." Aid to Bible Understanding - Nabonidus p.1195 17 years Plus Labashi-Marduk "Labashi-Marduk ... was a vicious boy, and within nine months he had his throat cut by an assassin." Babylon the Great Has Fallen - God's Kingdom Rules p.184 1 year Plus Neriglissar Neriglissar ... reigned four years Babylon the Great Has Fallen - God's Kingdom Rules p.184 4 years Plus Evil-Merodach "After reigning but two years King Evil-Merodach was murdered" Babylon the Great Has Fallen - God's Kingdom Rules p.184 2 years PlusNebuchadnezzar "Nebuchadnezzar ruled as king for 43 years" Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 2 p.480 43 years Equals start of Nebuchadnezzar's reign Calculated by adding above figures 606 B.C. MinusNebuchadnezzar's 19th year 2 Kings 25:8-9 "And in the ... nineteenth year of King Neb·u·chad·nez´zar ... the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah" 19th year Date for Destruction
---
The above list is all very well and good but what about the 70 years historic event that occurred during the NB Period?
scholar JW
Therefore calculated as: 587BCE