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, Anna Marina, Beth Sarim and others

  Please be aware that I have debated subjects such as 607, Gentile Times, 1914 on this forum for many years and unlike other JW apologists I consult and use not just WT publications but leading Bible Commentaries and as an Alumni have free access to leading academic institutions all over the world which means I have access to theses, dissertations, and more important scholarly journals.

  Further, the matter of 607 was first argued against in Australia and not Sweden where C.O. Jonsson resides and such debates first originated with SDA apologists here in Australia going back to the fifties and I acknowledge the work of my acquaintance Doug Mason who has kindly provided access to some of these resources.

  Also, a couple of years ago I completed and obtained a Certificate of completion for the online course 'The Rise and Fall of Jerusalem' by Tel Aviv University so such a course based on the textbook by Obed Lipschits gave me insights into the history and archaeology of that late Judean period.

  Enjoy!!

  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

  The debate is about what year did Jerusalem fall or was destroyed the WTS says 607 BCE, the facts and accumulative evidence say 586 BCE.

  Nebuchadnezzar's annexation over Judea lasted approximately 68 years close to 70

  ----

  What facts? The only relevant facts are contained in the Biblical record and the facts do not support 586 or 587 but only 607 BCE for the Fall because this date is the only one that fully accounts for the biblically, factual period of 70 years.

  If Neb's annexation was as you say 68 years then that is not 70 years so clearly you have a BIG problem so you should alter your viewpoint.

  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

  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?

  --

  Why don't you buy it?

  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

  "Nice intellectually dishonest assertion there Scholar but we already heard that from the notably lying and corrupt men of the WTS/JWorg

  ----

  Please explain.

  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

  You make a good point. But myself, and others like Finklestein cannot buy it.

  ---

  Why can't you buy it?

  Are you not intellectually honest?

  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

  Johnamos

  When did Jehovah say he was going to call Babylon to account?

  This statement is Jeremiah 25:12 and according to vs.1 of that chapter Jeremiah was given the word from Jehovah in the 4th year of Jehoiakim which in our calendar is 625 BCE according to accurate Bible Chronology'

  What year did Jehovah call Babylon to account?

  No year is specified in that prophecy in Jer. 25:12 only a time factor or event is specified and it was the opening clause :"But when 70 years have been fulfilled,". Most scholars and commentators suggest that these words were fulfilled in 539 BCE when Babylon fell under the Medo-Persian Empire. Sadly, this is mistaken for even though Babylon received a judgement from Jehovah in that year of 539 BCE as prophesied this specific prophecy could only have been fulfilled after the fall of Babylon with the end of the 70 years with the Return of the Exiles in 537 BCE ending the Exile as prophesied in Jer. 25:11; 29:10.

  This prophecy in vs. 12 clearly presents a details of the 'calling into account' which are 1. King Of Babylon 2. that nation 3. Land of Chaldeans. The judgement oracle centres around the 'land'-vs.13 and it enlarges the scope of this prophecy by referring to other nations , Next, in vs. 14 The prophecy states that nation of Babylon would become slaves of other nations. This means that the judgement oracle of 'calling into account would be fulfilled in the straits of times covering a long period of time as ancient history attest.

  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

  Watch out for Ezekiel 40:1 as at least one prominent chronologist regards this text as 'corrective' for the purposes of Chronology in defining the precise date of Jerusalem's Fall whether it was 586 or 587 BCE. WT scholars welcome the data that verse provides applicable only to either Nisan 10 593 BCE or Tishri 10 593 BCE. which confirms 607 BCE for the Fall.

  Indeed, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel were the prophets so we should listen to them and do the math which proves not only 607 BCE but 1914 CE.

  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

  Let us talk not about money but facts: The simple fact is that the Jews were in Exile and that Exile ended in 537 BCE by means of Cyrus' Decree and the Exile lasted for 70 years so if we count back 70 years from 537 BCE then we arrive at the beginning of that Exile in 607 BCE which was made possible by Neb's conquest of Jerusalem in 607 BCE. Nice and easy and further such a history was confirmed by the historian Josephus and not by the scribes who recorded Neo-Babylonian Chronology.

  Further, NB Chronology does not account for Neb's vacancy off the throne as described by Daniel who lived at that time in the 4th chapter of his book. Such facts provide support for the 1914 CE as the end of the Gentile Times taught by expositors before Russell and such events in our modern history confirm the validity of those prophecies which in turn also validate 607 BCE. Magnifico!!!!! You gotta love prophecy and the Lord's people.

  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

  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