i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
The assignment of 586 BCE is based on Thiele from the 1940s. 586 is still frequently parroted, but modern scholarship, particularly after the publication of BM21946, favours 587 BCE.
---
Prove it. I have a copy of BM 21946 so list the reasons for your stupid claim and I will argue that this tablet proves 607 BCE rather than 587 BCE
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
The correct year is definitively 587 BCE based on the Bible and extant contemporary documentation. You like to muddy the waters by saying nonsense like ‘587/586 or 588’ but the reality is that 607 is definitely wrong and that fact wouldn’t be altered even if the correct year were not exactly known.
--
How can 587 BCE be definitively the correct year when there is no consensus within current scholarship as 586/587 or 588 BCE presented by leading Chronologists?
The simple fact is that 607 BCE is proved correct because of the historical fact of the Jewish Exile which is unaccounted in secular chronologies.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
🤦♂️ fallacy: argument from popular opinion, also a straw man argument
--
Bogus. hardly popular opinion but views of current scholars past and present.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
Aggregated data doesn’t actually make AI results magical. The reasons for various sources saying 586 is more traditional than factual, ultimately based on outdated (pre-1950s) assumptions about the years of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. 587 is definitely the correct year--
---
I am fully aware of that for it has only been in the last week or so that the media have given much attention to Chat GTP so I thought it for fun to see how this search engine treated this subject as it uses the latest research and 586 was the winner rather than 587. Thus current scholarship as shown by many reference works that 586 BCE remains the best candidate.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
The destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar II, the king of Babylon, occurred in 586 BCE. According to the biblical account in the book of II Kings, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to the city and, after a long and difficult battle, succeeded in conquering it. The Temple in Jerusalem, which was considered the center of Jewish worship and religion, was destroyed, and many of the residents of the city, including the Jewish elites and skilled craftsmen, were taken into captivity in Babylon. The Babylonian captivity lasted for 70 years, after which many Jews returned to Jerusalem and began the process of rebuilding the city and its Temple. The destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar is considered a major turning point in Jewish history and is still remembered and studied by Jews and Christians today.
--
According to Open AI the date 586 triumphs over 587 and notice the fact that the destruction of Jerusalem was a major turning point in Jewish history- hence the Exile of 70 years.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
Poor ‘scholar’. Always on the back foot and spouting unsupported drivel.
---
Ditto!!!
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
Irrelevant misdirection. Though Young’s method is sound, BM21946 definitively identifies the placement of the first siege relative to Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. Jeremiah 52:28-29 definitively identifies the placement of the final siege relative to the first siege.
---
Nonsense. Jer.52: 28 refers to the first deportation and not the 2nd deportation of Jews in Neb's 7th year in agreement with BM 21946.
Jer. 52:29 refers to a later deportation of Jews or second deportation of Jews in Neb's 18th year which formed part of Neb's final siege of Jerusalem ending in 607 BCE
This means rather than there being three deportations of Jews taken into Exile according to COJ there were only two deportations of Jews into Exile according to the Biblical record of 2 Ki.24.
scholar JW
Refer: Gentile Times Reconsidered, Carl Olaj Jonsson, 4th edn, pp.254;341-43
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
Well, yeah. It is only ‘based on the Bible’ in the most superficial sense. In reality, their ‘reasoning’ is a jumbled mess of unrelated passages without regard to the actual context of any of them.
---
Nah. Only solid biblical exegesis will do with a nice tight fitting of stated facts nicely woven into a rock-solid doctrine or teaching that has stood up to much criticism since the 1870's.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Beth Sarim
1914 is a date the JWBorg has to stick to in order for it's nonsensical history to hold-up
As the new GB member tried to lay-out 'imagine it was 608 BCE'', just before the fall to the Babyllonians,,,they yet double-down on their foolhardiness of such unfounded dates to rev-up their dogma.
--
1914 and its subsequent history explains the rise of the modern-day eschatological Church known as 'Jehovah's Witnesses proclaiming God's Kingdom and fulfilment of Bible Prophecy.
---
Clearly,,,no one but the Borg will substantiate that 607BCE fall but them and they have to become more unreasonable with that date.
Because no other Historian Scholar will support it. It's ridiculous.
- the celebrated WT scholars and the said scholar champion 607 BCE as the only date- the only possible date for the Fall of Jerusalem based on the historical reality of the Exile of 70 years.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Phizzy
"the convoluted selection of ‘2520 years’ doesn’t even have any direct biblical basis." I would suggest it doesn't have any indirect basis either.
--
False for it is based on both direct and indirect evidence.
----
The Book of Daniel is agreed by a consensus of Scholars to be a thinly veiled political/religious tract against Antiochus Epiphanes 1V, no way was the seven times/years envisaged by the writer to be any longer than what the Chapter says, seven years of madness for the King. "Daniels" prophecies were supposed to happen very soon, apart from the vague apocalyptic stuff.
----
Nonsense for scholars are divided as to the time of writing or composition of the book of Daniel.
Scholars are inconsistent with their treatment of the Neb's literal 7 years vacancy from the throne which falsifies secular NB Chronology.
----
To extrapolate 2520 years from "Daniel" is a twisting and misuse of Scripture, and you have to be deranged to accept it.
--
No for it comes down to exegesis of the biblical text which clearly shows the equivalence of the Danielic 'seven times' interpreted by the dating formulas contained in the book of Revelation which contain the keys for unlocking sacred mysteries.
scholar JW
