Jeffro
hahahahahahaha 😂😂😂😂😂😂 my sides... that's just too much... and I thought you weren't a good comedian.
---
The Joke is on you!!!!!
scholar JW
scholar
JoinedPosts by scholar
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
Jeffro
That's a flat out lie. The footnote in question (19) lists software, not any identification of the 'researchers'. The software used is not a source, it is just a tool. (Worse still is that one of the supposed 'sources' is a 'date converter' 🤣.) There isn't even any evidence that they even used the software correctly. And the footnote says the positions of the planets were ignored because of a lie about them being open to speculation, which contradicts Brown's statements (not included in the article) that the relevant terms used are not ambiguous.
---
The three sources used were the following:
1.The Sky 6 software
2.Cartes du Ciel/Sky Charts
3.US Naval Observatory data converter
There is no evidence that these tools and resources were not used competently and Furuli also used The Sky Fix 6 and Sky Map Lite 2005 astro programs as well as consultation with an astrophysics Professor, Kare Asknes.
Unlike Furuli who did discuss the planetary observations, the WT researchers decided to omit these observations for the reasons that such were open to speculation and interpretation which is their methodology despite what Brown has said on the matter.
scholar JW
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
Disillusioned JW
Regarding the 70 years of servitude/bondage or desolation a number of Bible commentators believe that the biblical prophet was in error to predicting 70 years of such instead of 50 years. Some others though accepting the 70 years use a start date (for the count) that is 20 years earlier to thus be compatible with the archaeologically supported 587/586 B.C.E. date.
----
The Bible writers used 70 years and not 50 years so such Bible commentators have simply substituted the 50 for 70 in order to conform to a flawed scheme of Chronology which amounts to deception or a lack of honesty. The only start date for the beginning of the Exile of 70 years is during the reign of Zedekiah- 2 Chron 36:11-13 and not earlier with the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 BCE.
scholar JW
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
MeanMrMustrad
There is no requirement from Jer 25 for the seventy years to equate to that of exile and desolation; actually quite the opposite, as it's applied explicitly to many nations, and applied to the time of Jer 25 before the last exile. 2 Chron doesn't require it, nor does Daniel.
This has been covered ad nauseum - a plain grammatical reading of the scriptures fits perfectly fine with secular history. The WT's version of events is another story..
---
False. Jeremiah was all about the Exile(s) for it occurs 30 times as listed in the NWT so one can readily see that 'the Exile' was thematic in Jeremiah's prophesying. The ch.25 clearly describes the Exile and its consequences of exiles or deportees having to leave a desolated or ravaged landscape and being bonded or made to serve the conquering power, Babylon as other nations also were made to do. This means that Jeremiah, Ezra, Daniel all described the 70 year period of Exile as also a period of a desolated land, servitude to Babylon during the exile in Babylon.
Further, the WT version of history as you put it is confirmed by the historian Josephus.
scholar JW
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
Jeffro
"fact"? Nothing about the claim in the article indicates a "fact" about the "researchers". The 'researchers' could be Furuli (who may have had an assistant) or could just be some lads at 'Bethel' who were tasked with fudging some results to fit the Watch Tower Society's narrative
---
Nonsense boofhead. The facts are that the researchers (plural) as explained in footnote 19. p.28 of the article used three computer programs examining the lunar positions only and excluding the planetary observations because these were open to interpretation and speculation.
---
hahaha... 😂 the only citation anywhere near the claim about the anonymous 'researchers' is the name of a software program, with no identification of the 'researchers', their credentials (or even evidence of basic competency), or their affiliation with Watch Tower, nor is any evidence provided that supports the findings asserted... but okay then, since you say they followed the "appropriate methodology", this must mean I missed where they cited their sources identifying the researchers... feel free to enlighten us all as to the identity of these 'researchers'... 🤣 Worst of all, the article does provide some citations (some of whom are misrepresented, including Brown, Sack and Steele), so it's not that they weren't trying to give the appearance of the "appropriate methodology". So their failure to properly cite the identity of the key "researchers" for their claims is particularly suspect.
---
Incorrect boofhead. Three sources and not one as you wrongly assert were used as described in the footnote. Further, the researchers are not identified but if that troubles you then you can always write a letter seeking the information that you require. The articles provide a list of references which all have been correctly quoted in support of the article's viewpoint adhering to normal academic conventions recognizing that the sources have differing views on the matter.
The simple fact is that you do not like this research because it clearly provides solid proof for 607 BCE causing wt critics much angst.
scholar JW
.
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
Jeffro
No, doofus. I only indicated that it is highly likely, which is an entirely accurate assessment based on the fact that Furuli is the only known source for the claim. Of course, if the Watch Tower Society weren’t so dishonest, they would properly credit their alleged source.
--
No, boofhead. Your comment is mere speculation without any facts to hand. The very fact that there were researchers- plural indicates that there are others competent to make an assessment in this matter. The WT has noted this fact with the appropriate methodology employed by these other experts so no dishonesty to hand.
scholar JW
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
Rocketman123
The bible has long list of events which coincides with archeological findings such as the times when Nebuchadnezzar placed as king of Jerusalem .
All of what the JWS have done is make up a selective time table to suit their 607 BCE which to them verifies their dating of 1914, there is no intellectual honesty to been seen.
The siege of Jerusalem was a military campaign carried out by Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon, in 597 BC. In 605 BC, he defeated Pharaoh Necho at the Battle of Carchemish, and subsequently invaded Judah. According to the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle, King Jehoiakim of Judah rebelled against Babylonian rule, but Nebuchadnezzar captured the city and installed Zedekiah as ruler.
Contents
Siege[edit]
To avoid the destruction of Jerusalem, King Jehoiakim of Judah, in his third year, changed his allegiance from Egypt to Babylon. He paid tribute from the treasury in Jerusalem, some temple artifacts and some of the royal family and nobility as hostages.[1] In 601 BC, during the fourth year of his reign, Nebuchadnezzar unsuccessfully attempted to invade Egypt and was repulsed with heavy losses. The failure led to numerous rebellions among the states of the Levant which owed allegiance to Babylon, including Judah, where King Jehoiakim stopped paying tribute to Nebuchadnezzar[2] and took a pro-Egyptian position.
Nebuchadnezzar soon dealt with these rebellions. According to the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle,[3] he laid siege to Jerusalem, which eventually fell in 597 BC. The Chronicle states:
In the seventh year [of Nebuchadnezzar, 598 BC] in the month Chislev [November/December] the king of Babylon assembled his army, and after he had invaded the land of Hatti (Syria/Palestine) he laid siege to the city of Judah. On the second day of the month of Adar [16 March] he conquered the city and took the king [Jeconiah] prisoner. He installed in his place a king [Zedekiah] of his own choice, and after he had received rich tribute, he sent forth to Babylon.[4]
Jehoiakim died during the siege, possibly on December 10, 598 BC,[5] or during the months of Kislev,[6] or Tevet.[7] Nebuchadnezzar pillaged the city and its Temple, and the new king Jeconiah, who was either 8 or 18, and his court and other prominent citizens and craftsmen, were deported to Babylon.[8] The deportation occurred prior to Nisan of 597 BC, and dates in the Book of Ezekiel are counted from that event.[9]
Nebuchadnezzar installed Jeconiah's uncle, Zedekiah as puppet-king of Judah, and Jeconiah was compelled to remain in Babylon.[10] The start of Zedekiah's reign has been variously dated within a few weeks before,[11] or after [12][13] the start of Nisan 597 BC.
Chronological note[edit]
The Babylonian Chronicles, which were published by Donald Wiseman in 1956, establish that Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem the first time on March 16, 597 BC.[14] Before Wiseman's publication, E. R. Thiele had determined from the biblical texts that Nebuchadnezzar's initial capture of Jerusalem occurred in the spring of 597 BC,[15] but other scholars, including William F. Albright, more frequently dated the event to 598 BC.[16]
Biblical account[edit]
The siege is described in 2 Kings 24:10–16 in the Old Testament. The deportation was the start of the exile and of the Jewish Diaspora.
----
What you post is falsified by the 70 years which your information omits any mention thus must be read as pure bunkum. Try again but a little harder.
scholar JW
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
MeanMrMustrad
70 years of servitude, of many nations, as vassals. You're still wrong.
--
You only have one-third of the story for you have forgotten the 70 years of Exile and the land desolate for the Exilic period.
scholar JW
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
Jeffro
No writing credit is given in the Watchtower article, and there is no evidence that Furili wrote the article, but it is highly likely that the unnamed ‘researchers’ in the article alludes to Furuli.
---
This is mere speculation on your part. LOL!
scholar JW
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
scholar
Rocketman123
Then he must be tritely stupid for there is a overwhelming amount of information from various sources to support the year 586 BCE.
----
The only overwhelming evidence is found in the Bible and because of the 70 years it is proved that Neb's 37 th year was 588 BCE leading to the correct biblical date of 607 BCE and not 586 BCE for the Fall.
scholar