Posts by scholar

153

When JW.org drops 607BCE...

by Nathan Natas in

probably everyone else thought of this long ago, but i, being an "independent thunker" thunk of it just a coupla weeks ago.. we all know that since the year zero (on the fredfranzian calendar) the wtb&ts has defied archaeology and insisted that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, even though the physical evidence shows that 587 bce is a more likely date.

in fact, the book "the gentile times reconsidered: have jehovah's witnesses been wrong all along about 607 bce?

" by carl olof jonsson and rud persson made this conversation public.. it is a difference of 20 years.

scholar

Jeffro

Ws were saying 606 BCE until 1943 when the finally realised there was no year zero. They refused to change 1914, so they ‘changed’ history instead.

--

Chronology as with all science is not static but is ever evolving so no surprises here!

--

t really will be funny seeing how ‘scholar’ behaves if they do drop 1914.

---

The evidence for 1914 as with 607 is incontrovertible. Both dates have well withstood the tests of time as strands of that strong cable of Bible Chronology. Scholar is at peace!!!

---

And the correct year consistent with all of the evidence is definitely 587 BCE. Publication of Babylonian records confirmed the correct year decades ago, but various sources continue to simply repeat Thiele’s outdated chronology. No analysis of the records has pointed to 586 BCE in the last half a century.

--

I admire your confidence but you yourself on your Blog regarding this controversy admit that we cannot know the precise date of the Fall whether it is 587 or 586 BCE so you have a biggy, big pwoblem here. (mispelling). Thiele remains the go-to source for biblical chronology as shown by its use in the current scholarly literature and academic journals.

scholar JW

153

When JW.org drops 607BCE...

by Nathan Natas in

probably everyone else thought of this long ago, but i, being an "independent thunker" thunk of it just a coupla weeks ago.. we all know that since the year zero (on the fredfranzian calendar) the wtb&ts has defied archaeology and insisted that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, even though the physical evidence shows that 587 bce is a more likely date.

in fact, the book "the gentile times reconsidered: have jehovah's witnesses been wrong all along about 607 bce?

" by carl olof jonsson and rud persson made this conversation public.. it is a difference of 20 years.

scholar

Phizzy

Not just Archaeology, but a study of the Babylonian Astronomical Tablets establish without doubt that 587 BCE, (or possibly 586 but that is doubtful) IS the date that King Neb. destroyed Jerusalem.

The Stars do not lie ! Confirmed by NASA too.

----

Utter rubbish. Scholars do not know the precise date for the fall of Jerusalem whether it is 586, 587 or 588 BCE. JW's do know and it is 607 BCE which is incontrovertible. The Babylonian astronomical tablets are hopeless as Rolf Furuli has demonstrated in his research so it is far better to rely on the ancient inspired historical record of the Holy Bible which has its inherent chronology which establishes 607 BCE for the Fall and 1914 as the end of the Gentile Times.

scholar JW

153

When JW.org drops 607BCE...

by Nathan Natas in

probably everyone else thought of this long ago, but i, being an "independent thunker" thunk of it just a coupla weeks ago.. we all know that since the year zero (on the fredfranzian calendar) the wtb&ts has defied archaeology and insisted that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, even though the physical evidence shows that 587 bce is a more likely date.

in fact, the book "the gentile times reconsidered: have jehovah's witnesses been wrong all along about 607 bce?

" by carl olof jonsson and rud persson made this conversation public.. it is a difference of 20 years.

scholar

JW GoneBad

Be honest you're a WT Apologist...the name suits you!🤣

No way are you a Scholar!

--

The said scholar is both. A scholar and a WT Apologist to boot!

scholar JW

BA MA BA (Hons. inc) Religious Studies/Philosophy, Philosophy, Studies in Religion, Deakin, University of Sydney

153

When JW.org drops 607BCE...

by Nathan Natas in

probably everyone else thought of this long ago, but i, being an "independent thunker" thunk of it just a coupla weeks ago.. we all know that since the year zero (on the fredfranzian calendar) the wtb&ts has defied archaeology and insisted that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, even though the physical evidence shows that 587 bce is a more likely date.

in fact, the book "the gentile times reconsidered: have jehovah's witnesses been wrong all along about 607 bce?

" by carl olof jonsson and rud persson made this conversation public.. it is a difference of 20 years.

scholar

Further to this is a fact that when the WTS published Babylon the Great God's Kingdom Rules in 1963 the fire was lit for the ongoing controversy surrounding 607 BCE and the twenty difference between Bible Chronology and NB Chronology which is strongly advocated by Christendoms scholars. It was common practice from the sixties that SDA opponents of the Witness would have a well-marked Babylon book of its pages pertinent to discussions of Bible Chronology especially of the reign of King Jehoiakim. one prominent SDA theologian who was taught by the prominent SDA scholar, Siegfried Horn went on lecture tours in Australia with charts in attempt to disprove WT Bible Chronology and 607 BCE.

As a side note, this same scholar rescued and saved the lives of a Witness family either en route or otherwise to a Convention off a deserted island in Fiji which was reported in the Readers Digest. Life has its ironies.

scholar JW

153

When JW.org drops 607BCE...

by Nathan Natas in

probably everyone else thought of this long ago, but i, being an "independent thunker" thunk of it just a coupla weeks ago.. we all know that since the year zero (on the fredfranzian calendar) the wtb&ts has defied archaeology and insisted that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, even though the physical evidence shows that 587 bce is a more likely date.

in fact, the book "the gentile times reconsidered: have jehovah's witnesses been wrong all along about 607 bce?

" by carl olof jonsson and rud persson made this conversation public.. it is a difference of 20 years.

scholar

Nathan Natas

We all know that since the year zero (on the FredFranzian calendar) the WTB&TS has defied archaeology and insisted that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE, even though the physical evidence shows that 587 BCE is a more likely date. In fact, the book "The Gentile Times Reconsidered: Have Jehovah's Witnesses Been Wrong All Along About 607 BCE?" by Carl Olof Jonsson and Rud Persson made this conversation public

-----

Celebrated WT scholars have long championed the date 607 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem since 1944 whereas previous to that time it was 606 BCE based on sound Biblical Chronology. Scholars especially from the time of Edwin Thiele in 1944 published research that purports to prove that 586 BCE was the date for the Fall (of Jerusalem) late some scholars proposed 587 BCE as an alternative based on the consideration as to the use of Neb's 18th or 19 the year based on the words of Jeremiah the Prophet which debate remains to this day a point of major scholarly contention.

Thus, it can be positively stated that scholars to date and including Carl Jonsson and his devotees do not know the precise date for the Fall of Jerusalem whereas JW 's do know the precise date being proved to be 607 BCE based on the secular and biblical evidence centred around the Exilic period of 70 years again based on the words of Jeremiah the Prophet.

Carl Olof Jonsson in GTR with its many editions claims to prove using' seventeen different lines of evidence' the length of the Neo-Babylonian period which would falsify WT Bible Chronology and its date of 607 BCE (GTR, 2004, 4th edn. p.88; GTR, 2021, 4th edn. p.88). This research which began in the late sixties and concluded in the mid seventies was simply a rehash of scholarship from the fifties from SDA researchers in Australia so there were no surprises here!!!

Such SDA scholars including Jonsson have as with all of the scholars of Christendom stumbled over an interpretation of Jeremiah's seventy years failing to provide a consistent interpretation of not only its chronology but its very nature which remains a source of vexation to this very day.

So, the joke is not on WT scholars and the Witnesses who have publicly proclaimed the validity of 1914 CE but is on worldly scholarship which has demonstrated its contempt for Bible prophecy its loyal Witnesses and God's inspired Word. They should hang their heads in shame.

scholar JW

40

Was it Designed?

by Jeffro in

the jw website is currently featuring a piece: the shell of the diabolical ironclad beetle—was it designed?

it is part of their regular tedious 'was it designed?

' series that purports that very very specific animal species must have been specifically designed because of some seemingly amazing feature.. but they seem completely unaware that this directly contradicts their notion that only very broad 'kinds' were required on the mythical 'ark'.

scholar

Jeffro

But they seem completely unaware that this directly contradicts their notion that only very broad 'kinds' were required on the mythical 'ark'. Does anyone ever point this out to them?

---

Unnecessary, for WT writers do accurately represent God's Word, the Holy Bible and evidence from the natural world as shown in the splendid video about that 'creeping animal of the ground', the Diabolical Ironclad Beetle. Refer Gen. 1: 24, 25, 26.

Regarding the animals admitted by Noah into the Ark, the account simply states that 'creeping animals of the ground' were sought, brought into the Ark and survived- Gen. 6:20; 7:14; 8:17, 19. These representatives of the Biota were described as kinds as a proper zoological classification whereupon in time speciation of these kinds utilizing the DNA mechanism and other environmental factors led to the wondrous appearance of the diabolical ironclad beetle - a creeping thing of the ground. an insect which in fact gives the said scholar 'the creeps' as does your nonsensical ravings.

scholar JW

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

scholar

Jeffro

‘scholar’s’ ability to understand things apparently doesn’t extend beyond ‘liking pretty colours’. You have to read the words too.

--

The 'words' that you should heed are those contained in God's Word not that of NB Chronology which conflicts with God's Word and that of WT sacred Bible Chronology.

scholar JW

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

scholar

KalebOutWest

Why should I, a Jew, whose third language is English, translate a paper from years and years ago out of the language it was primarily written?

Can't you read Hebrew? I can speak English. And several other languages as well as sign in two different forms of sign language.

If you are a scholar, why do you need anything translated for you?

-

All that is asked of you is to simply post an Abstract for that should not be to difficult unless your thesis is nonsense?

scholar JW

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

scholar

Jeffro

As usual, comments from ‘scholar’ (just parroting Watch Tower Society chronology) can simply be ignored.

--

As usual comments by Jeffro just parroting his own amateurish research can simply be ignored with the exception of his pretty coloured charts which the said scholar enjoys.

scholar JW

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

scholar

joey jojo

There is a reason the WT over-complicates this subject. Read the 2 part article they wrote about the fall of jerusalem and you will see what I mean. It is designed to make the average person feel that it is a subject that is difficult to understand and its better just to trust that the org has done its research and 607 is right, therefore 1914 is right.

---

I disagree. The WT articles make this complex subject accessible to the average reader for anyone can understand the fact of the Jewish Exile of 70 years with the Return of the Jews in 537 BCE beginning their Exile in 607 BCE with the Fall of Jerusalem.

--

Forget about lunar eclipses, retrograde motions of planets, full moons in slightly wrong positions. It is all white noise to distract from the obvious. The planet Saturn was in a particular part of the sky in a certain year. It doesnt even matter if it was a little bit in front- or behind. That wont make a difference for the purpose of dating the year. That only happens once every 29.4 years. Its a basic concept and its freely available for anyone to observe. All you have to do is go outside at night and look up. (Except for right now because Saturn is behind the Sun :smile: )

The rest of the planetary observations, which are all accurate, are just extra nails in the coffin of the 607 date. The reason its great that Saturn was visible that year is that it is the best planet to use for dating a certain year because of its slow movement through the zodiac.

--

Not so for the planetary observations are subject to interpretation and translation and according to Furuli's research on the planetary observations "is absolutely clear that most of them do not fit the year 588/587, if the readings of N/W and S/H are correct. But N/W and S/H will have us believe that the positions fit perfectly the year 568/67 with one or two exceptions (Refer p.308) In his conclusion of his massive study he states "Because so many of the planetary positions are approximately correct, but not completely correct, there are good reasons to believe that they represent backward calculations by an astrologer who believed that 568/67 was the year 37 of NebuchadnezerII. Thus the lunar positions seem to be original observations from 588/587, and the planetary positions are backward calculations for the positions of the planets in 568/567 (Refer pp. 324-325)".

---

As for the website vat4956.com, it agrees with the software I am using. Saturn is in the same positon, slightly behind the swallow (Pisces). When it first became visible, in the morning, earlier in the year it was lined up with Pisces. Here is vat4956.com:

--

Excellent but Jeffro is not happy with this website.

scholar JW