a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
punkofnice
Your listing of the reigns of the Babylonian Kings is falsified by the biblical seventy years which proves that there is a 20 year Gap between Neo-Babylonian Chronology and Bible Chronology. The fact is that the biblical evidence proves that 607 BCE is the only possible date for the Fall of Jerusalem for the dates of 586 or 587BCE are impossible regardless of how impressive Neo-Babylonian Chronology appears.
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Vanderhoven7
Are you saying that 1799, 1874, 1878, 1914, 1918, 1919, 1925, 1975, reflect outstanding scholarship?
Why not?
What non WTS affiliated scholars say that the NWT is the most accurate translation?
Try Jason de Buhn
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Finkelstein
For a so-called group of novice bible scholars who have turned Christendom's scholarship upside down and inside out by means of not only producing outstanding scholarship with Bible Chronology but have also produced the finest and most accurate Bible translation -New World Translation ever made. Pretty good, HUH!!!!!!!
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Vanderhoven7
This situation to hand reminds me of a famous saying by a US military general who said: 'If everyone is thinking the same, then Who is doing the thinking?" Thus, it would appear that in contrast with the 'celebrated' WT scholars', Bible scholars do not have the same regard of the Bible as the inspired Word of God.
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Vanderhoven7
I do not know one non-WT affiliated Bible scholar that accepts 607 BCE for the Fall.
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Finkelstein
o Scholar are you a practicing baptized Jehovah Witness ?
And perhaps how would you like to comment about the WTS's date setting of 1914 and their chronological calculation when Jesus himself said clearly that no one knows of the time not even he.
He also admonished is true faithful followers to not set a time upon god's own sacred time.
There is much condemnation and warning of false prophets in the bible as well such as 1 John 4:1 .------------
Proudly Yes
Have you not heard of the Gentile Times? Such a doctrine underscores 1914CE
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
johnamos
Frankly, the end of Assyria as a World power is of little consequence except that it paved the way for the emerging power of Babylon which later became the instrument in the fulfillment of the 70 years. Our publications discuss the end of Assyria either in terms of the Fall of Nineveh in 632 BCE corrected to 612 and with the death of King Josiah with Necho, King of Egypt in 629 BCE corrected to 609 BCE in order to placate the critics.So the fall of Assyria with whatever date is simply too fuzzy and cannot be used as the datum for the seventy years.
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Doug Mason
Your study already has canvassed the arguments and methodology used by WT in support of 537 BCE but you do not provide an alternative so unless you can argue for a better date your criticisms although interesting have little value.
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
LeeT
What particular events in 607 BCE do you think marked this transformation to World Power Status? Do you think conquering Judah, a fairly insignificant power in a strategically important region marked a tipping point whereas defeating Assyria didn't?
-------------
Absolutely because Jerusalem typically represented the Kingdom of God which is thematic to the book of Daniel so that would have to overwhelmingly significant. Confirmation of this is found on page 85 in Commentary on the Old Testament,Daniel, 1978, vol.IX by C.F.Keil and F. Delitzsch
scholar
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Doug Mason
If you cannot or will not provide an alternative date for the Return then on what basis can you be critical of other proposals for your criticism is simply vacuous and it is no issue for WT because we have proved its validity in our publications.
I have read your studies of this subject and found such to be of little merit but interesting contributing nothing to scholarship.
scholar
