PSacremento
Post 1854
You cannot the debate online so you need to sunscribe to the journal for access.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
PSacremento
Post 1854
You cannot the debate online so you need to sunscribe to the journal for access.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
isaacaustin
Post 4219
Nevertheless his conduct was public and this showed his lack of wisdom making his posts and object of foolishness and stupidity.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
isaacaustin
Post 4218
The Bible does not support the fanciful interpretation that the seventy years was only of Babylonian dominion from 609 BCE to 539 BCE for the simple reason that nothing of importance happened in 609 BCE.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
isaacaustin
Post 4217
Perhaps he got bored or tired but one thing Alan F had and that was a lack of self-control which according to James shows that he lacked wisdom in connection with an accurate knowledge of Jesus Christ.-James 1:5-8.
You then must decide where your loyalty lies is it with the believers or the unbelievers such as Alan F and his devotees.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
isaacaustin
Post 4213
All that you really need is the Bible
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
PSacremento
Post 4212
If you believe that I have been defeated by the likes of Leolaia, Alan F and others of their ilk then where are they now? If they truly were lovers of truth then why are they now so silent when people need them? Scholar debated with them over many years on nearly every point raised but it is for others to make their own judgements as to any victor for scholar he is just happy to be around to say something for he cares nothing about whether he has convinced certain people for that is not his business.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
PSacremento
Post 1848
Yes he has and such can be viewed at the Catastrophism Review website.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
pSacremento
Post 1851
Well is not chronology about people? So, it is most appropriate to quote or refer to people when dealing with such matters. I corressponded with Jonsson by letter and later by e-mail many years ago.
Besides I have responded already with one major argument or basic fact proving 607 BCE if you have been reading my posts carefully. That fact is that of the seventy years accompanied with my challenge to all.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
Greenland
Post 4884
It does in mine in fact in all of my many translations. Perhaps you should begin with Genesis and read a portion daily.
scholar JW
i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
isaacaustin
Post 4211
The KISS method assumes much but proves little. Put it to the test. Provide one proof that proves 586 or 587 BCE and disproves 607 BCE. Celebrated WT scholars have never provided a regnal list of the Neo-Nabylonian period that can be used as chronology for all that they have done is simply given the regnal years for certain rulers of the period that are accepted by scholarship.
This is the fact of the matter because it is impossible to construct an exact chronology for the entire Neo-Babylonian period that is consistent with all of the available evidence even Carl Jonsson who would argue otherwise has not succeeded in this crucial matter.
scholar JW