Posts by scholar

posted

129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
Already provided link to information that more than adequately shows 607 nonsense to be wrong.
--
Everything but a single line of evidence to disprove 607 BCE?
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
You keep rattling off that nonsense, but 607 has been thoroughly debunked from every angle. You aren’t making any sense. It’s like you’re objecting to the fact that there’s not just exactly one problem with i
--
Well if it has been so thoroughly debunked as you claim then you should have no pwoblem in providing one line of evidence that disproves 607 BCE. Stop the obfuscation and special pleading.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
It’s like he’s never actually read the Bible.
--
The difference between you and scholar is that scholar actually believes the Bible.
---
Notice how the apologist avoids quoting the relevant scriptures.
--
Scholar does quote scriptures where required and simply uses the same texts that you do.
--
Your website includes full quotes of supporting scriptures.
--
So does WT publications including the said scholar but it is the interpretation of those texts that is imp[ortant not the quoting of them.
Regarding your website about 607 BCE if it is a suitable resource then why not provide a single line of evidence that disproves 607 BCE?
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jefffro
Back in reality there isn’t a single scripture that even mentions 70 years of exile.
--
Correct,. Not that exact expression but the 70 years are discussed or mean an exile:
The Bible says 70 years was a period of all the nations serving Babylon which means an Exile.
that nations could avoid exile by serving Babylon willingly, that Babylon was called to account when 70 years ended which again describes an Exile.
that 70 years ended when Persia began to reign which marked the end of the Exile.
and that attention was given to the Jews’ return after the 70 years ended such ending refers to the end of the Exile.
scholar JW
43
Did Jesus Die On a Stake or a Cross?
by Sea Breeze in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
dominic enyart exposes watchtower deception regarding their demonization of the cross.

information packed.

interesting take on paganism as well.
scholar

PioneerSchmioner
The matter of whether Jesus died on a stake or cross can only be determined by the eyewitness testimony of those present at that time as recorded by the Gospel writers who all stated that it was a stauros which means a stake or pole. These facts are primary evidence and the use of some graffiti dated to the end of the First century proves nothing for there is simply no evidence that Jesus was hung on a two-pieces of timber placed at a right angle namely a cross.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

resolute Bandicoot
So you can't have 1914 without 607 and the second fulfilment of the 7 times was an anti typical fulfilment. Did the society not push antitypes under the old light carpet sometime back? In doing so how did they not dynamite the foundation of their own authority?
--
Correct, 1914 CE depends on 607 BCE and the second fulfilment of the 7 times is well supported by exegesis of Dan 4 and Luke 21:24. Such a viewpoint is not an antitype but a larger fulfilment of a prophecy and thus entirely justified based on the biblical evidence.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
I have not asserted any unique or novel claim about the correct date of the solstice.
--
Yes, and neither have you published a single line of evidence that disproves 607 BCE!!!
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
That is a lie you need to tell yourself but I actually understand the dating system very well.
---
Self-praise is no recommendation. If you are such an expert then please provide specific information on that solstice or other that you have published.
scholar JW
43
Did Jesus Die On a Stake or a Cross?
by Sea Breeze in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
dominic enyart exposes watchtower deception regarding their demonization of the cross.

information packed.

interesting take on paganism as well.
scholar

PioneerSchmioneer
I actually studied Samuelsson's thesis and sat in on what turned out to be an overblown reaction to his work that ended up being AP getting "egg on their face," so to speak.
---
I am somewhat surprised by this comment as one reviewer stated in a Book Review of Samuelsson's thesis "His work is not to be ignored, despite the criticisms I have made. It is a valuable contribution to the debate".
--
The work is a philosophical work not an etymological one (based on the science of language). It is not a critical theory nor does he claim it to be. He does suggest that religion and iconography more than language has more to do with what people know about the crucifixion, and this has shaped what people know about what the gospels say about the event.
--
I disagree that this thesis is 'a philosophical work not an etymological one'. Samuelsson clearly states in his methodology that his research is philological and its introductory section discusses the role of lexicography in its treatment of stauros and other related terms.
--
In making any review of published scholarship it is an academic practice to consider literature or book reviews published in academic journals and one such review by John Granger Cook among others is worthy of attention.
scholar JW
129
Is there “new light” on 1914?
by wallsofjericho in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
i’m hearing paraphrasing like “we just don’t know” .

is this regarding 1914?

or micheal the arch angel?.
scholar

Jeffro
No, doofus. Just because you don’t understand the dating systems, that doesn’t mean I don’t. Which is irrelevant anyway.
It is physically impossible for a solstice to have occurred on 9 July on the Julian calendar in the neo-Babylonian period.
--
No, boofhead. You do not understand the dating systems either so we are in the same boat learning together in appreciating that this is not an exact science.when it comes to Chronology..Your comment about the solstice and its NB context versus a modern calendation is your opinion.
scholar JW