scholar

Joined

• started 4 topics
• posted 3,055 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by scholar

• 
  277

  Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

  these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

  (1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Sanchy

  Exegetically it has two meanings or applications as shown by the WBE referenced for your information.

  Your exegesis by means solely of a literal reading of Dan 4 is flawed eg. where the word 'times' occurs it does not a 'year'' but 'years' therefor the expression 'seven times' cannot mean seven years literally but seven periods of time. This chapter further takes the reader beyond the humiliation of Nebuchadnezzar by means of God's rulership or Kingdom which is always given a futuristic aspect.

  Many other scholars agree with scholar and Bobcat as shown by examining many Bible commentaries on Daniel.for such a major fulfilment is based not on any eisegesis but solid exegesis.

  scholar
• 
  277

  Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

  these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

  (1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Sanchy

  Whether you call it two fulfillments or two applications, matters not for it is obvious that the tree dream has a dula purpose of function.

  It is not eisegesis that is your problem but it is the simple fact that you refuse to commit to exegesis as I have asked you repeatedly to do so get cracking!!!

  Methinks you are wrong because you refuse to read and study the text of Dan 4 for at least Bobcat and I have read the text line by line , word by word, paragraph by paragraph.

  scholar
• 
  277

  Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

  these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

  (1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Sanchy

  No need to make a pathetic claim just to honestly recognize the terms and words used in the narrative of Dan 4. If you had done exegesis instead of eisegesis you would have come to see that the tree dream has two fulfillments as the WBC on Daniel, p.87 explains "Chap.4 is centrally concerned with the kingship of Nebuchadnezzer and the kingship or rule of the Most High God or of the King, Lord of Heaven".

  Also you look to a good theological dictionary of the NT on the use and meaning of times in the NT which is part of doing exegesis and not eisegesis. So get cracking!!!!

  scholar
• 
  277

  Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

  these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

  (1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Bobcat

  A good summary and I agree with the observation that there are key differences between the angelic proclamation and Daniel's interpretation addressed to Nebuchadnezzer just as there are differences between the MT and the OG of Daniel 4.

  scholar
• 
  49

  A deeper examination of The New World Translation

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  shorturl.at/ouakr.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Diogeneister

  Regarding the translation whether 'by the grace of God' or 'aside from God', it is the fact that the former has the strongest textual support whereas the latter rendering is simply based on patristic evidence. An excellent discussion of this subject is found in Hebrews 1-8, WBC, 1991, vol.47A, by William F Lane,p.43,n.8

  scholar
• 
  49

  A deeper examination of The New World Translation

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  shorturl.at/ouakr.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  fulltimestudent

  No that person referred to by Chris Forbes was not me and I do not know to who he was referring.Yes I heard of Farleigh James who write articles for Awake and I did meet him at a District Assembly but I believe his knowledge of Greek would be minimal. I understand he lived in Canberra not Sydney.

  scholar
• 
  277

  Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

  these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

  (1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Finkelstein

  And I say to you: 'Good riddance'!!!

  scholar
• 
  277

  Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

  these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

  (1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Sanchy

  What the one year difference between 586 and 587 proves that the traditional chronology is deeply flawed as it cannot account properly for the 70years thus faces major roadblocks and confusion as to Methodology which takes us right back to the purpose of Rodger Young's article in the first place.

  Dan 4. is well connected to Luke 21 because of the expression 'times' and references to God's Kingdom so do not do eisegesis but exegesis as the said scholar does.

  scholar
• 
  277

  Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

  these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

  (1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Finkelstein

  The discrepancy is in fact one whole year of 12 months so it shows that traditional chronology is simply not accurate so better stick to the definite year of 607 BCE.

  scholar
• 
  277

  Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i came across this article written in 2004 by an evangelical.. “when did jerusalem fall?”, rodger young, journal of the evangelical society [jets], 47/1 (march 2004), 21-38.. http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/jerusalem.pdf .

  these are the conclusions of the 18-page analysis.

  (1) jerusalem fell in the fourth month (tammuz) of 587 bc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Finkelstein

  If scholars are so sure about their facts then Why do some including apostates prefer 587 rather than 586?

  Big Pwoblem!!!!!

  scholar