scholar

Joined

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

Posts by scholar

• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Mr Finkelstein

  When a person resorts to abuse then such a person has lost the argument.

  The supporting fact is Nebuchadnezzar started his annexation over Judea in 605 BCE, the actions that followed are also well documented in the bible and secular acquired findings, so 607 BCE is ridiculously not supported.

  ----

  This is a false claim because WT scholars have carefully determined that Neb began his reign twenty years earlier than 605 BCE as the 70 years creates a historical or Babylonian Gap which must be factored into any scheme of Chronology. From such evidence, one can clearly see that 607 BCE is well supported as the only possible date for the Fall of Jerusalem. No other date is possible!!!!!!!

  scholar JW emeritus
  
  
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Mr Finkelstein

  Your foul language is unnecessary. Just stick to the facts and such facts indicate that the dates 586/587 are impossible for the Fall of Jerusalem.

  scholar JW emeritus
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Beth Sarim

  It's just such a wonder why, most Historians and the Babylonian records/receipts adhere to the 587/586 chronology. Babylonians were excellent record keepers

  ----

  If the Babylonians were such excellent record keepers then why is there no mention of Babylonian domination over Judah, a conquered territory for the period of 70 years?

  scholar JW
  
  
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Beth Sarim

  Jerusalem could not have fallen in either 586 or 587 BCE for such dates do not agree with the Bible and secular history. The date 607 BCE is the only date that fully accounts for the 70 years of Jeremiah as fully ex[plained over many decades by the celebrated WT scholars.

  Carl Olaf Jonsson who wrote Gentile Times Reconsidered, the latest is the 4th edn., 2004 and fails to address fully the problem of the 70 years as a period of Exile-Servitude and Desolation and not just Babylonian supremacy or rulership and his date of 587 BCE conflicts with serious scholars who advocate 586 BCE.

  scholar JW emeritus
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Anna Marina

  Where is the unity Scholar? All except the Watchtower agree that Jerusalem fell in the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar.There's even a high level of agreement that this was also the 11th year of Zedekiah

  ==

  Unity is not the problem with the regnal data in the OT for we know what years the reigns began and ended and we know the lengths of those reigns for both the kingdom of Judah and Israel. The data for both Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin and Zedekiah are clearly stated and we have synchronisms for the reign of Nebuchadnezzer so it easy to construct a Chronology for that period of Jewish history and a united approach to Chronology is seen in WT publications going back to the forties when the celebrated WT scholars began their research into Bible Chronology at greater depth. One such important synchronism is found in the events at Carchemish with the beginning of Neb's reign.

  -----

  JW's are experts in Bible Chronology and as Bible Students have been doing Chronology since the time of Pastor Russell and have solved problems for other scholars such as Edwin Thiele who struggled to harmonize the data for the Divided Monarchy still a source of many problems even up today.

  scholar JW emeritus
  
  
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Finkelstein

  You have presented an impressive historical summary of events describing the latter days of the Judean monarchy now the problem you have is with all this precise chronological data can you define precisely what years Jerusalem fell? Was it 586 BE the date preferred by scholars or was it 587 BCE the date preferred by Carl Olaf Jonsson?

  scholar JW emeritus
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Anna Marina

  The silver bullet for the apostates and other WT critics is along with the 70 textual corpus texts is Ezekiel 40:1.

  LOL

  scholar JW
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Anna Marina

  Oh shame about Dan 1:1 being 618BCE. Never mind

  -----------

  Thus , it was in 618 BCE, or during the third year of the kingship of Jehoiakim as a vassal of Babylon, than King Nebuchadnezzer came to Jerusalem, a second time to punish the rebellious Jehoiakim...In 618 BCE his 18 year old son Jehoiachin, succeeded him as king. But Jehoiachin's rule lasted only three months and ten days and he surrended to Nebuchadnezzar in 617 BCE- 2 Kings 24:10-15. refer Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy p.32,par5.

  ----------

  He ruled for 3-11 years from 628 to 618 BCE you know. That's 10 years. They call it about 11.

  -------

  Jehoiakim reigned for about 11 years from 628-618 BCE. End of story no disunity here

  --------

  Have you heard this talk on spiritual unity?

  -------

  Many times. But where is the unity amongst the apostates and other scholars when they cannot agree as to whether Jerusalem fell in 586 or 587 BCE?

  scholar JW
  
  
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Anna Marina

  (2 Kings 24:12) . . .At length Je‧hoi′a‧chin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he with his mother and his servants and his princes and his court officials; and the king of Babylon got to take him in the eighth year of his being king. . .
  

  Watchtower knows how. They make out 2 Kings 24:12 is talking about the 8th year of Jehoiachin, who only ruled for 3 months and 10 days.

  No, the 8th year herein referred to is to Neb's reign as in his 8th year which events as described in 2Ki. 24:12-16 are the same as those described in Daniel 1:1-3 with all of the princes taken as captives in that year of 617BCE

  scholar JW
• 
  168

  Awesome Video on debunking 1914!!!!! Follow it carefully to the end!!

  by Beth Sarim in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.

  omg!!!

  just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Finkelstein

  Yes the Bible contains a detailed history of documented events and that is why WT chronology is so accurate as it alone fully accounts for the biblical 70 years of Jeremiah which began with the Fall of Jerusalem beginning the Exile and ending the Exile in 537 BCE. Neo-Babylonian Chronology does not account or document these 70 years which in turn falsifies the dates of 586 0r 587 BCE

  scholar JW