Posts by scholar

178

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

scholar

Jeffro

In the poor addled mind of 'scholar' (and other JW cronies), the Jews arrived in Judea, marking the end of 70 years. But the problem (actually one of a great number of problems), is that directly contradicts Jeremiah 29:10. They make a big deal about their faulty translation saying "at Babylon" in the first half of the verse, but quietly ignore the second part of the same verse. In the JW interpretation, the Jews arrive in Judea, and then attention is given to their return. Once they're already there. It's as dumb as it sounds.

--

You are the dumb one. The latter part of the verse clearly indicates that at their return home, Jehovah would indeed give attention to them as well described in the next verse 11. where he promised to give His people hope and a future and the events post 537 BCE are well described in the remaining books of the OT .

Nice try but please read the text more carefully and do not get sidetracked by pretty coloured charts.

scholar JW

178

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

scholar

Vidqun

Scholar, no matter how you shake or shout, 607 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem is an impossibility, a Watchtower 'pie in the sky.' Only Daniel (and Josephus) would confirm such a period, which turns out to be a scribal error. The following is how history would unfold during said period, i.e., according to the Scriptures:

--

Nope. The date 607 BCE is the only possibility- a historical, . theological and chronological fact. Such a date is confirmed by both Daniel the prophet, Ezra the Jewish scribe and Josephus the Jewish historian.

---

Seventy years of servitude which includes five deportations:

---

There was only one Exile proper which ran from Neb's 18th year- 607 BCE until Cyrus 1st year'-537 BCE which included only three deportations according to Jeremiah.

---

scholar JW

178

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

scholar

Duran

Above it shows 3 exiles that took place in Neb's 7, 18 and 23 year.

--

False. Jer. 52: 28-30 lists only three deportations into exile or one common exile.

---

According to WTS Neb ruled as king for 43 years

---

Correct. This is based on secular chronology by means of Ptolemy's Canon, but the Bible does not provide any information on this. Thus, based on sound biblical scholarship, we can determine that Neb's reign was 624 -581 BCE.

---

Were they a world power 68 years? (607-539)

--

The said scholar likes this one!!!!

---

You ask a lot of questions so here are two from the said scholar:

1. Was Jerusalem destroyed in 586 or 587 BCE?

2. Why have you and Ptolemy omitted any reference to the missing 7 years of Neb's regnal vacancy?

scholar JW

178

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

scholar

Duran

Do you disagree that Egypt and Assyria were each world powers prior to Babylon?

--

No I do not. The Apostle John discusses the world powers different to that of Daniel.

--

Yes! Very good scholar, you are making progress with such statement.

--

The said scholar is now very happy.

---

The answer is after Assiya was overthrown. Assiya was the world power before Babylon and all nations were under subjection to Assiya, including Babylon. Then with the overthrow of Assiya, Babylon became the world power, and ALL nations were in subjection to Babylon until it was overthrown by Medo-Persian in 539.

- True from the viewpoint of secular history, But from Daniel's viewpoint, Babylon was the first world power with its overthrow of Jerusalem in 607 BCE. From this time nations were now subject to Babylon in accordance with Jer. 25:11.now having served Babylon for 70 years along with Judah.

scholar JW

---

--

178

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

scholar

Duran

What about according to John and your beloved WTS...

[w85 10/1 - In Bible history, five major empires flourished, oppressed God’s people, and then fell before John’s day: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. When John was alive, the Roman empire was in power. Centuries after John’s death, the Roman empire passed from the scene as the dominant world power and was eventually replaced by the British empire. Soon this empire’s western colonies gained independence and came to act closely with Britain to form the Anglo-American world power. This is the “king” that had “not yet arrived” in John’s day. What was the relationship between the beast that John saw and the seven empires represented by its heads? “It is also itself an eighth king, but springs from the seven.” Revelation 17:9-11]

1 Egypt, 2 Assyria, 3 Babylon, 4 Medo-Persia, 5 Greece, 6 Rome, 7 Anglo-American, 8 UN

--

As I previously stated the First World Power according to Dan. 2 was Babylon.

--

Regardless, Babylon's time as a world power ended in 539 when it was defeated by Medo-Persia. That being the case and sense it was said that the nations had to serve Babylon 70 years, then the 70th year ended in 539 and thereby started in 609.

---

False. Babylon's time as a World Power ended with its overthrow in 539 BCE by the Medo-Persian Empire. However, the 70 years of Jewish Exile and servitude to Babylon did not end until 537 BCE when Cyrus released the Jewish captives.

---

[12 “‘But when 70 years have been fulfilled, I will call to account the king of Babylon and that nation for their error,’ declares Jehovah,]

Here is what your beloved WTS says:

[w81 8/1 -The idol-worshiping Babylonians now were in line for God’s judgment to be executed upon them. That happened in 539 B.C.E. when Babylon was overthrown by the Medes and the Persians.]

-

You only quote the first part of verse 12 and omit the rest of the verse which shows that this prophecy against Babylon referred to the city-king-land which all took place after the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE as such events began after 70 years fulfilled in 537 BCE with the release of the Exiles.

---

The 70 years had to be fulfilled first in order for Jehovah to call to account/execute judgment on Babylon. The WTS state that judgment/calling to account happened in 539, therefore the 70 years did not end in 537, otherwise Jehovah would have been calling Babylon to account/executing judgment on them in the 68th year of those 70 years. He would be jumping ahead by 2 years of his own appointed time to act when those 70 years had been fulfilled.

--

Correct. Simply put Babylon had to fall - 539 BCE before the 70 years ended in 537 BCE. The 70 years represented three things- servitude to Babylon, exile in Babylon and the land of Judah was desolate. The 70 years pertained to Judah, its people, city and temple as foretold by the prophets. Thus can only be interpreted as a historic period beginning in 607 BCE through to 537 BCE.

--

Do you believe your GB in their saying that Jehovah executed judgment/called to account Babylon in 539 by them being conquered by Medo-Persia?

Do you believe Jehovah through Jeremiah that 70 years had to be fulfilled first before he would call Babylon to account?

Do you think Jehovah called Babylon to account in the 68th year of those 70 years?

--

Yes Yes yes

scholar JW

178

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

scholar

Duran

How absurd can you be

--

The said scholar has no need of absurdity especially when confronted with your specious reasoning.

--

Well, there is a big difference between Jeremiah's judgement against Babylon and that of Habakkuk. You need to read that WT 81 more carefully.

--

They said that Jehovah executed judgment on Babylon in 539. Verse 12 says that this would occur when 70 years have been fulfilled. That makes 539 the 70th year, making 609 the 1st of those 70 years.

---

This is simply an interpretation. Jeremiah's prophecy of Jeremiah 25: 1-11 was directed against Judah as a judgment. The judgement against Babylon begins from vs.12 as recognized by leading commentators. The text clearly states that this judgement began after the fulfilment of the 70 years which could have only ended in 537 BCE with the end of the Exile thus 539 BCE is impossible.

---

Babylon was the 3rd world power during that 70-year period and then in 539 the Medes and Persians became the 4th world power.

---

Incorrect for according to Daniel the first World Power was Babylon followed by Medo-Persia.

---

You can say all you want about that 81WT talking about Hab, but that does not change the context and timing of the 70 years ending in 539 and that that was when the nations served Babylon while it was the 3rd world power, which it ceased being when Medo-Persia conquered it.

--

The context in harmony with proper exegesis proves that Babylon fell in 539 BCE but the 70 years for Judah ended after the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE which was 537 BCE. You cannot change history!!!!

---

[Life - History records that Babylon took the Jews into captivity. Yet, about 40 years before this happened Jeremiah foretold it. Isaiah predicted it some 150 years before it happened. He also foretold that the Jews would return from captivity. So did Jeremiah, saying that they would be restored to their land after 70 years.—Isaiah 39:6, 7; 44:26; Jeremiah 25:8-12; 29:10 This return was made possible by the overthrow of Babylon by the Medes and Persians in 539 B.C.E....While Babylon was still a world power the Bible foretold its conquest by a symbolic two-horned ram, representing “the kings of Media and Persia.” (Daniel 8:20) As foretold, Medo-Persia became the next world power when it conquered Babylon in 539 B.C.E.]

Agreed

scholar JW

.

178

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

scholar

Duran

I didn't misconstrue anything.

----

Indeed you have. You have misconstrued the WT 1981, August 1, p.27, par.8.in applying Jehovah's judgement against Babylon in 539 BCE with Jer. 25:11-12. This WT article is based on the prophecy of Habakkuk and the paragraph cited by you has in its context not Jer. 25:11-12 but Hab.1:14-17; 2:8;2:18-19 under the heading 'Judgement against Babylon'. Previously under the heading ' Judgement against Judah' the words of Habakkuk were applied.

---

The LIE that the GB teach, is claiming that the 70 years stated in verse 11 and 12, took place 607-537.

--

False. Such a teaching is simply an interpretation of Jer. 25:11, 12 and as with any commentator the GB or individual can so do.

---

hose verses show 2 things that would occur.

1. The 'nations' would serve Babylon 70 years.

2. At the end of those 70 years, Babylon would come to its end/be called to account

----

Correct, JW's understand that this prophecy was fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem and Judah under Babylon's domination along with other nations- serving Babylon whilst in Exile, leaving a desolated land until their Return from Exile, in 537 BCE after Babylon's fall in 539 BCE.

Jeremiah further showed that Babylon, its King and land would eventually be subject to judgment and this was fulfilled long after its Fall in 539 BCE.

The 70 years was applicable to Judah alone as shown by the context of ch. 25 as Babylon was merely the cause or instrument that Jehovah used to fulfil his prophecy against Judah by means of Jeremiah the prophet.

The 70 years was a period of Exile which could only have begun in 6ot BCE with the destruction of Jerusalem and the deportation to Babylon under Nebuchadnezzer and ended with a new King at Babylon under Cyrus the Persian who by means of a Decree released the Exiles in 537 BCE.

Thus, in terms of history, chronology, theology and prophecy the 70 years can only have begun in 607 BCE and ended in 537 BCE.

scholar JW

---

178

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

scholar

Duran

Above they LIE about the timing of those 70 years but below they tell the truth.

---

There is no lie. You have misconstrued Je. 25:11, 12 as solely a period of Babylonish domination which also represented the Jewish Exile and the Land of Judah left desolate of a fixed period of 70 years with the claim that the 70 years only represented a period of servitude or domination of Babylon.

WT critics and scholars only focus on one aspect of the 70 years as solely a period of domination by Babylon omitting the historical reality of the Jewish Exile which left the land desolate from the period beginning in 607 BCE until 537 BCE

scholar JW

9

Jolene Chu and Ollimatti Peltonen publication

by careful in

just published in cambridge university press's elements in new religious movements series, a short book or oversized pamphlet is now available by two witnesses, jolene chu from warwick and ollimatti peltonen from the selters branch.

https://www.amazon.com/jehovahs-witnesses-elements-religious-movements/dp/1009509764.

it's small, just 84 pages, including the bibliography.

scholar

careful

Thanks for the news of this update on modern scholarship on Jehovah's Witnesses. At this time of year, when we celebrate the Bbrth of our Saviour, Jesus Christ, this excellent academic work is surely 'Good News'.

scholar JW

167

How did JWs arrive at a clearer understanding of what the Bible teaches than other Christian denominations?

by slimboyfat in

for jws who believe that jehovah had a hand in reviving the truth in the nineteenth century this is enough explanation for how jws managed to achieve a closer approximation to early christian beliefs and practices than other groups.

but is there an explanation for this phenomenon that doesn’t rely on supernatural intervention?

new testament scholar james dunn explains the difficulty of interpreting the biblical texts in this way:.

scholar

aqwsed12345

I have read your last, repetitive response to my post and my response is a summary only, Enjoy!

The simple fact is that the APN theos is indefinite and qualitative and is best rendered as ' a god' or 'divine' and 'what God was the Word was also' or similar wording. Many Greek scholars and even JW critics agree that according to Greek grammar, 'a god' is a legitimate rendering of the APN in John 1: 1c.

I have read Wallace's comments on the NWT's view that the theos is indefinite and I'm afraid I have to disagree with his reasons which are in his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 1996, pp.266-267. Catholic scholars such as Maximillan Zerwick SJ render theos in this instance as 'divine' and similarly Francis J Moloney S.D.B as mentioned previously in the Sacra Pagina commentary series renders it as 'what God was the Word also was'.

In short, in John 1:1 c, theos is an anarthrous predicate nominative—indefinite because it omits the article and qualitative because it is a predicate noun and is before the verb. The reason why the NWT has rendered this theos was originally explained in the Appendix article in the NWT, 1950, pp.3587-3589, wherein quotes from eight other Bible translations, a classical source, and three Greek grammar textbooks are used. Further, in 1984 The NWT with References which is a scholarly edition and in its Appendix 6A, more updated scholarship is used namely based on the article ' Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns:Mark 15:39 and John 1:1' by Philip B .Harner .

I reject your assertion that 'a god' is somehow polytheistic for the mention of One God - the Father and a 'lesser god' - the Word because only two gods are mentioned. The word ' polytheism' means many gods which is hardly applicable with only two beings but more applicable with a triad of gods in a Trinity that would be polytheism.

The NWT's 'a god' attests to the fact the Word as the Son was subordinate and in relation to God the Father as shown in John 1:1b- "the Word was with God" and vs. 14 -' only begotten son from a father' and in vs.18 -"the only begotten god who is at the Father's side". This relationship between the Word and God has been further emphasized by "This one was in the beginning with God-vs. 2. The Apostle John nowhere in this Prologue uses such theological/philosophical terms as 'substance', 'essence' or other such Nicean terminology.

I have no objection that the qualitative force of the APN theos refers to the Wor's deity or divinity for such is compatible with the rendering 'a god.' Murray Harris whom I met personally at Macquarie University as a Visiting Scholar not long after he published his Jesus as God, 1992 in which he admits that based on grammar alone the theos in John 1:1 could be rendered as 'a god' (Refer page 60, a.(1).

The NWT's rendering of 'a god' in John 1:1 has proved to be most accurate in terms of Greek grammar and is theologically correct as shown in the way that the Apostle John discusses the 'Word' throughout his Gospel, Epistles and Revelation. See The Word Who is he? According to John, 1962, published by the Watchtower Society and as a booklet distributed to clergy throughout the world in a special campaign by the Witnesses. Also, the NWT's traditional rendering has no doubt spawned considerable theses, journal articles, books and other theological research into the subject of the translation of John 1:1.

You admit to a functional subordination of the Son to the Father but do not admit to an ontological distinction between the Son and the Father as clearly shown in John 1:1,2 and the rest of the NT the reason being of a muddied or soiled Christology intermixed with polytheism, neo-platonic concepts and paganism along with the omission of God's personal identity with His name Jehovah.

The Trinity is a triad and triads are a common feature of both pagan ancient religions and the modern which fact underscores the pagan roots of the Trinity. The essentials may differ but the core elements remain intact and as a scholar of Religion both at an Undergraduate and Postgraduate level I know what I am talking about and I do not need to rely on Hislop's earlier research which has been more thoroughly scoped.

The Council of Nicea was disgraceful presided by a non-Christian Emperor who only sought political expedience, only one-third (318?) of the Bishops attended, and it was held in Greek not Latin with only two representatives of the Latin/Western Church. The proceeding did not show the Holy Spirit but rather 'the works of the flesh' as shown by the manner in which Arius, a Bishop was treated. and it is has left a divisive and corrupting legacy on Christendom ever since right up to the present day.

The doctrine of the Trinity has a false Christology which misrepresents God, the Word who later became the man, Jesus Christ. Its roots are of pagan origin as a triad hence polytheistic. It is not taught in both the OT and the NT and contains concepts adopted from Neo-Platonism and other Hellenistic ideas current in the ancient world of the first three centuries including that of Mysticism

scholar JW

BA - Religious Studies and Philosophy Deakin

BA Hons- Philosophy inc.Deakin

MA - Studies in Religion Sydney