Posts by scholar

posted

129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
Says the deluded member of a minor denomination that asserts a rewrite of Neo-Babylonian history with no support from any historian.
--
Says someone who advocates a chronology that is based on a dubious historical record that fails to account for the missing 7 years of Neb's reign, the fact of a Jewish population residing in its capital city, Babylon for 70 years or whatever 50 years and the notorious gap of 20 years between NB Chronology and Bible Chronology.
Further, 'such a minor denomination' has produced the finest translation of the Bible, the NWT and the most accurate Bible Chronology in existence.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar
Jeffro
- The dates for the solstice are known and aren’t calculated by me. Your ad hominem is an irrelevant distraction.
  The dates are known in our modern calendar and that is one thing but constructing a chronology upon such dates is another matter entirely as one has to go back to an ancient calendar and its assumptions. That is why one has to be cautious in saying that a certain year cannot have begun in May. or thereabouts.
  scholar JW
  Link Dislike Like
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
Entirely wrong. The Bible explicitly says willingly serving Babylon was the way to avoid exile.
--
That was a warning only for the historical reality was that the Jewish nation was exiled to Babylon for 70 years. Are you trying to rewrite history? Your winging is simply historical revisionism at its best!!!
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
Poor ‘scholar’. His only defence against the solstice problem is pleading ignorance and more ad hominem.--
Nope! Scholar has already given you facts and a quoted conclusion where you give nothing just a whining and winging of a virgin on her wedding night.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
‘invisible thing that we have no way of demonstrating was totally for reals because coincidence at wrong time of year’. (And let’s keep pretending WWI broke out of nowhere rather than being a fairly predictable continuation of the Balkan wars.)
---
Hence the invisible has now become manifest as the visible by means of three things namely the Great War, the observed fulfilment of the 'Sign' and the birth of God's organization or 'new nation'.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
Already provided many times before, but even if I hadn’t, your blustering is a fallacious argument from ignorance. And the Bible still never even mentions 70 years of exile.
---
You are like the virgin on her wedding night who fails to deliver!
You have not and cannot provide one, single line of evidence that disproves 607 BCE relying on insults, tantrums and false reasoning.
The Bible most emphatically describes the Jewish/Babylonian Exile of 70 years which all WT critics have ignored proving their intellectual dishonesty. For example, COJ does not discuss the subject at all and one would be hard placed to find even the word 'exile' in his writings.
Please stay as scholar wants to play!
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
The fact that you don’t understand the dating systems isn’t my problem.
--
Says a person who is not an expert in such matters and I freely admit that I am not an expert in calendars both ancient or modern and neither are you.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
Bald faced lies! WWI started in July 1914, with some significant declarations in August. No historians say it started in October, and there is no basis for imaginary claims about Satan being ‘thrown out of heaven’ (an interpretation made up by Rutherford several years after Russell’s death, replacing Russell’s belief that the ‘dragon’ represented pagan rulers defeated by papal Rome).
--
The said scholar did not say that WW1 started in October for the Great War was by then already active but as the kingdom was established in October 1914 with the ousting of Satan then there was an unparalleled coincidence of events for both the heavenly and earthly scenes all in sync with the prophecy by John, the Apostle.
Of course, this is an interpretation using eisegesis but this is its beauty nicely by the purpose of this unique revelation to the true Church in modern times.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
607 for Beginners
OK This is just all smoke and mirrors for all of these facts can just as easily be construed to fit 607 BCE. Where is a single line of evidence?
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
Most amusing, his position requires a solstice on a date that is physically impossible. It’s just pathetic.
--
Not so. You are no expert on this subject and neither is the said scholar. I make this comment "If we consider the calendar as we understand it today, the argument that a year could start in May, 43 days after the equinox seems unreasonable. Once you understand that it has been retro-fitted in an attempt to tie multiple dating systems together, and that the 2nd May is more like the 25th April in todays terms, it sounds more reasonable".
Ancient and modern calendrical systems are problematic especially more so when it comes to the purpose of Chronology for there are too many assumptions that must be made so there is no room for dogmatism. Far better to rely on a historic, text-based approach to Bible Chronology namely the Bible.
scholar JW