Posts by scholar

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

There is no dilemma for me here (and this doesn't describe a dilemma anyway). The 'four assumptions' I listed are assumptions inherent in your position (and they still don't support JW chronology of the 'gentile times' when examined properly). I have established by analysis rather than assumption that:

The authors of Kings, Chronicles, Isaiah & Jeremiah use Tishri/non-accession dating for Judah
The authors of Kings & Chronicles use Nisan/non-accession dating for Israel
The authors of Kings and Jeremiah use Nisan/non-accession dating for Babylon (apart from the Babylonian interpolation at Jeremiah 52:28-30, which use Nisan/accession dating)
The author of Ezekiel uses Tishri-based years of exile
The authors of Chronicles, Haggai, Zechariah, Ezra, Nehemiah (apart from 1:1, which doesn't name a king and may be a copyist's error), Esther and Daniel use Nisan/accession dating for Persia
The author of Daniel uses Nisan/accession dating for Judah and for Babylon (except at 9:1-2 & 11:1 where 'Darius' can only be reconciled with a temporary governor before the arrival of Cyrus and has no accession period).

Where a book is not listed above for a particular combination, the author does not specify any years of reign for that kingdom. For example, Isaiah does not specify any years of reign for a king of Israel.

---

Such four assumptions are of your own manufacture not of WT scholars. Your so-called analysis is just your opinion and is not supported by other Chronologists who have written much on these matters. Your six points are simply bunkum and are simply assumptions that lead nowhere or creates a dead-end chronology.

--

Where a book is not listed above for a particular combination, the author does not specify any years of reign for that kingdom. For example, Isaiah does not specify any years of reign for a king of Israel.

--

That is a problem for you and not for me as our scheme of chronology works by filling out the contours of history and prophecy.

scholar JW

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jeffro

Zedekiah has nothing to do with the Gentile Times

--

False, Zedekiah as the last King of the Divided Monarchy plays a most pivotal role in the major fulfilment of Nebuchadnezzar's tree vision as this relates to God's Kingdom/Kingship as expressed through the rulers of the House of David sitting on the throne at the city of Jerusalem trampled on and removed by Nebuchadnezzer in 607 BCE covering a period of 'seven times' being fulfilled in 1914 CE.

---

Notice how the apologists do not understand how events are interrelated, largely owing to the fact that they learn their chronological beliefs by rote rather than by analysis. So if their version of the story about, for example, a particular king doesn't explicitly reference some other theme in their dogma, it is considered irrelevant (which protects their cognitive dissonance). In this case, it is particularly flawed because the calendation for Zedekiah directly influences the timing of their supposed start of the 'gentile times' (setting aside the fact that the 'appointed times of the nations' is identified as 42 months at Revelation 11:2 in reference to the Roman assault on Jerusalem).

--

Notice how WT critics fail to understand how events are interrelated, largely owing to the fact that they learn their chronological beliefs from higher critics, other sceptics and failing to carry out a proper analyssis ogf the biblical text. Notice how the apologists do not understand how events are interrelated, largely owing to the fact that they learn their chronological beliefs by rote rather than by analysis. So if their version of the story about, for example, a particular king doesn't explicitly reference some other theme in their dogma, it is considered irrelevant (which protects their cognitive dissonance) especially the case when dealing with the 'seventy years of Jeremiah' and the reigns of the kings at the beginning and end of that historic period.

The supposed calendation of Zedekiah is an assumption that leads to confusion especially in relation to the exact date of Jerusalems' destruction in Zedekiah's last year whereby such critics cannot agree as to whether it is 586 or 587 BCE for this is what calendrical theories lead to -confusion.

The appointed times of the nations has nothing to do with the 42 months of Rev.11:2 of as these are different time periods in Bible prophecy.

---

Of course the Watch Tower Society won't get specific about the calendar systems, because their position cannot be established when properly analysed. It is therefore in their interests to be vague. However, its flawed chronology of both the Neo-Babylonian period and the entire divided monarchy does assume Nisan calendation, with arbitrary switches between accession and non-accession dating (for example, Insight volume 1, pages 464-5: Asa's rule 'evidently' counts from following year, Jehoshaphat's rule 'evidently' counts from following year, Ahaziah's reign 'may count' from following year, 'it seems' Jehu's 'years of kingship' begin the following year, 'it seems' that Menahem's reign is counted from the following year).

---

Such a position is truly a wise position as issues of calendation are by no means uniform in current scholarship which uses a different Methodology. Our Methodology avoids such problems only using such data when necessary thus having a scheme of Chronology that is simple, accurate, faithful to the biblical text and its prophetic outlook. In short, WT Chronology succeeds whereas all other schemes are problematic and useless.

I put a challenge to you please provide a Chronology of the Divided Monarchy that is widely accepted by mainstream scholarship seeing that you are so smart!!

scholar JW

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jeffo

You really do seem to have significant difficulty comprehending that in my analysis of the placement of these events, I have considered all of the options rather than relying on one specific 'methodology and interpretation'. In doing so, I have found your view to be not only irrational but also plainly wrong.

---

If I do have difficulty in comprehending your chronological fabrication then you need to make it simple otherwise one can feel that what you are proposing is plain nonsense. The superiority of WT Chronology lies in its simplicity, easily understood by any reasonable person and that is your problem for you have been befuddled by higher critics.

You claim to have considered all of the options but you bring nothing new to the table and you show no evidence of researching current scholarship which means that your 'horizon of understanding is limited.

You must recognize that your scheme of chronology is based on the twin pillars of your own interpretation and methodology as is your entitlement.

scholar JW

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jeffro

The only way to reconcile a siege of 18 months leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem relies on the following assumptions:

Other verses in 2 Kings that establish the use of Tishri/non-accession dating for kings of Judah are unrelated to the dating used for Zedekiah
The author of 2 Kings used Nisan/accession dating for Zedekiah
The author of 2 Kings used Nisan/accession dating for Nebuchadnezzar
The author of 2 Kings starts Zedekiah's accession year from the year that began in Nisan of 597 ('617') BCE

----

The only to determine the length of Jerusael's siege is to pay heed to the description in 2 Ki. 25:1,2 for therein it gives the date stamps for the beginning and end of the siege which durations is clearly that of 18 months and not the preposterous 30 months. One does not need to get into the calendrical muddle as you recommend or insist. Your tabulation of four assumptions illustrates the dilemma that you have created for yourself.

---

No other combination of the dating systems can reconcile an 18-month siege with Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year and Ezekiel's stated years of exile (with or without accepting a handful of alternative manuscripts that say 11 instead of 12 at Ezekiel 33:21).

---

This is the very reason why one should adhere to the two date stamps in 2 Ki.25:1,2 as the primary basis for determining the length of the siege. Ezekiel 33:21 and the Neb's 19 th year in no way disprove the length of the siege as being of 18 months as Neb's regnal years are easily synchronized with the regnal years of King Zedekiah and the text of Ezekiel which counts from the beginning of Ezekiel's Exile in 617 BCE simply affirms that after a passage of time news of Jerusalem's destruction reached Ezekiel. It is all very simple!!!

----

However, if the JW teaching is accepted that Nebuchadnezzar's reign (accesion year) began in 625 BCE, those assumptions require that the siege began in January 607 BCE and ended in July 606 BCE. That conclusion is consistent with Russell's teaching that the 'gentile times' ran from 606 BCE until 1914 (because he didn't realise there is no 'year 0'), but destroys the JW interpretation (from 1943 onward). (Unfortunately for 'scholar', though the Watch Tower Society does insist of Nisan dating for Judah in 2 Kings, it also said - way back in 1964 but never changed - that Zedekiah's 1st regnal year began Nisan 617 BCE, so even trying to stretch everything in favour of poor 'scholar', this too is a failure.)

--

Nope, for it is accepted that Neb's first year began in 625 BCE thus it is easily computed that the timing of his 18 the regnal year synchronized to Zedekiah's 11 th regnal year is 607 BCE. ending the 18th-month siege. Your argument about the Russell and the zero year is inapplicable as the issue at hand does not cross over from the BC to CE era.

Nowhere does the WT Society insist on certain calendar systems are applicable for we have always recognized that for OT Chronology both a Tishri/ Nisan or Spring/Autumn calendars were used in ancient Palestine. There is no room for dogmatism in dealing with what calendar was used by Jeremiah in his composition of Kings.

---

'scholar' will now continue to prattle on about 'interpretation and methodology'.

---

Just so, as these two cardinal principles are the essence of Bible Chronology.

scholar JW

🤣

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jefro

Where assumptions were made in my previous post, they were concessions giving your position the best chance of success. Your position is logically impossible.

---

That is fine because assumptions are part and parcel of any scheme of Chronology.

scholar JW

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jeffro

In determining dating systems for the relevant period, one can choose from Nisan/accession, Nisan/non-accession, Tishri/accession or Tishri/non-accession dating-

--

Yes, one has that choice but that comes down to methodology and interpretation which can lead to different schemes of chronology--

--

When considering 2 Kings 25:1-8 (specifically, verses 1, 2 & 8), using Nisan/non-accession or Tishri/accession dating for kings of Judah cannot be reconciled with any of the dating systems for Nebuchadnezzar's reign.

---

Why is it necessary to synchronize a Jewish regnal date system with that of the NB Period at every point unless stated otherwise as that does in fact create chronological and historical issues?

---

It is evident from Ezekiel that the author uses Tishri-based dating for enumerating years of exile. However if Ezekiel 33:21 is considered in a vacuum and it is further assumed that most manuscripts and translations (including the NWT) are wrong and that Ezekiel 'really' learned of Jerusalem's fall in the 11th year of exile, this still cannot be reconciled with 2 Kings using Tishri/accession dating for kings of Judah or for using Nisan/accession or Tishri/accession dating for Babylon; further, unless it is assumed the author of Ezekiel counts years of exile from Nisan of 597, using Nisan/accession dating for Judah is also impossible.

--

That is not evident at all but simply assumed and such assumptions create issues that perplex current scholarship. All that we know for certain is that Ezekiel date stamps the events from the beginning of the Exile from that of King Jehoiakim in 617 BCE as stated in Ezek.1: 2 which leaves the matter of calendation subject to opinion.

---

Comparison of 2 Kings 24:12 with the Babylonian interpolation at Jeremiah 52:28 confirms that the author of 2 Kings uses Nisan/non-accession dating for Babylonian kings rather than Tishri/non-accession dating. The book of Jeremiah uses the same dating as in 2 Kings (e.g. compare 2 Kings 25:1 and Jeremiah 39:1), and Jeremiah 36:1 & 9 confirms that the author uses Tishri/non-accession dating for Judah rather than Nisan/accession dating (or the other systems already ruled out).

--

Nonsense, that is simply opinion for such could well be two different historical events.

---

Hence the only possible placement of the siege on Jerusalem resulting in its destruction is from early 589 BCE until mid 587 BCE (the duration also being unaffected if the events are moved backwards 20 years according to the Watch Tower Society's errant Neo-Babylonain chronology), giving a length of approximately 30 months.

--

False, only 18 months of the siege's duration are stated in 2 KI. 25: 1,2.as accepted by mainstream scholarship. Your period of 30 months is impossible!!

scholar JW

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jeffro

🤦‍♂️ and still wrong

---

Says you if your opinion counts for anything.

scholar JW

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jeffro

That took you a while. 😆 A few later copies have this difference (likely a result of trying to make the text fit without recognising the use of Tishri dating for Judah), most notably in translations such as the Syriac Peshitta (4th century CE). It isn’t representative of the original text or the majority of manuscripts

--

Not really for COJ addressed this issue and so have the WT scholars previously in 1971. Further, a similar textual issue occurs in Ezek.26:1 for some manuscripts read '12 th' rather than the '11th year' raising a chronological problem.

scholar JW

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jeffro

😂 wow! So… January 609 until mid 607 is… 18 months! 😂 might want to check your math there, ‘scholar’. Maybe 608 is being shunned. 😛

---

Corrected to January 608 BCE. Calendrical issues can be very tricky for all scholars and I thank you for pointing out my error. If 609 BCE is used then it would be Dec 26. of that year or early January of the following year

I have now fine-tuned my cognitive dissonance.

scholar JW

540

Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast in

wt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!

and the end times.

a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?

scholar

Jeffro

And no, there is no reason to conclude that it took someone 18 months to reach Ezekiel with the news of Jerusalem's destruction, by which time he would already have heard from people who were exiled to Babylon in 587 BCE. And the Watch Tower Society agrees that Ezekiel found out about 6 (not 18) months after Jerusalem's destruction anyway (The Watchtower, 1 August 2007, page 8):

--

False nitpicker! The simple fact is some manuscripts read '11 th year' rather than the '12 th year'so we have a period of either six months or 18 months however if we count the 12 th year from the Jewish New Year, Tishri 1 607 BCE six months after the destruction of Jerusalem then the two date stamp's are synchronized. Refer to Ezekiel 20-48, Leslie C. Allen, WBC, Vol.29, 1990, Worde Books, p.152.

scholar JW