Jump to content
The World News Media

scholar JW

Member
  • Posts

    418
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by scholar JW

  1. A masterful refutation of the 586/587 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem calling it out as a lie, a distraction from the correct date of 607 BCE championed by Jehovah's Witnesses. A recognition of the simple facts that there was the Exile and that it was of 70 years all based on a simple direct reading of key biblical texts. This young guy shows critical thinking at its best on this most contentious issue. scholar JW emeritus
  2. JW Insider/Outsider As long as you understand the difference between these two disciplines. You have just started so finish reading the entire book. I know what it is as I have studied it at University as one of the post-graduate Units. COJ's treatise is not historiography as it simply a criticism of WT Chronology and the Gentile Times. COJ is not a scholar and has not undertaken academic work at a University therefor his treatise must be judged on its own merit and has not committed to any proper exegeis of the 70 year textual corpus. I can see this by your lack of faith and belief in our Chronology preferring the views of modern critics and apostates. You show a failure of what Chronology is as a discipline being ignorant of its principles and its methodology. You have not got a clue about Chronology whatever its source or form. The date 607 is well established as part of Biblical Theology and History and it works being calcuable to 1914 which is the poster boy for us living in the last days. Unlike 586 or 587 which are simply 'dead ends' we have a date that is rock solid giving faith in our Heavenly Father who knows the times and the seasons and reveals such matters alone to His servants. scholar JW
  3. JW Insider/Outsider Furuli showed otherwise and has provided the explanation that you seek. That strong cable of WT Chronology based on 4 prophetic witnesses is not reliant on such ancient artifacts susceptible to interpretation and fail to properly account for Neb's missing 7 years of regnal vacancy and the notorious 20 year gap and Jeremiah's 70 years. Yes, you need imagination when trying to interpret the so-called 17 lines of secular evidence and trying to harmonize secular chronology with that strong cable of WT Chronology. The gap is an historical reality when trying to sort out the muddle of NB Chronology and is well supported by the biblical evidence of 70 years along with the other three witnesses unlike the muddle of secular chronology. Finally, some honesty appears on the horizon so you better stick to the Bible and not to COJ's deception- the Devil's work. scholar JW
  4. JW Insider My suggestion, plain and simple is just read Albertz and form your own opinion of his historiography just as i have done!!! Really i could not less about what you think. No, it is not . Historical writing of history is not the same thing as historiography I have done a post graduate course in Historiography and COJ does not present any such historiography in his tratise, GTR. I do not care if you mistrust me for you have deviated from the true faith by your endorsement of NB Chronology, a mere string of beads over that strong cable of WT Bible Chronology.. scholar JW
  5. JW Insider You simply 'cherry pick' statements from Albertz's book without taking the time to read it as you probably have not got a copy of his book so i would read it then you can be critical of my comments on his book for that would be the honest thing for you to do. The simple fact is that for Albertz there was only ONE Exile proper or exilic era and that it can be dated from the Fall of Jerusalem from 587/586 BCE until the return of the Exiles under Cyrus in his first year-538 BCE according to the primary sources (Refer pp. 2, 121) I would recommend that you also read the article under CAPTIVITY in Insight and you will notice the more extensive discussion of the Exile proper or the Babylonian Exile which began in 607 BCE until 537 BCE which harmonizes well with Albertz's historiography on the subject of the Exile. I have COJ'S many editions of his GTR and let me assure you it is not historiography and he does not use the term in any definitive way and this a serious failure of his treatise because what undergirds any competent Chronology is Historiography, a sound writing of the History of the period or era. I am not interested in lies or deceit but simply a defence of our wondrous, strong cable of WT Bible Chronology and if this does not meet with your approval then so be it. I am simply educating you that scholarship is a 'work in progress' and I have submitted recent scholars who have written about the 70 years in recent years and how this research supports to some degree our interpretation and chronology of the 70 years You have much more to read some 390 pages to go-rather prophetic, so as with any reading you must form your own understanding of matters. Best Wishes. scholar JW
  6. Alan de Fool I never claimed that Rainer Albertz supports WT Chronology and Chronology is not the subject of his Historiography. Deportations by definition do not constitute an exile but are indeed a consituent part of an exile so there were deportaions in Israelite history but in terms of OT Historiography and the Biblical record there was only one exile and that is thematic of Albertz's book which of course you have not read right through as scholar has done. If there were 4 exiles proper then the title of Albertz's book is misleading for the author continuously refers to that exilic era as a descriptor for that one jewish exile of the 6th century BCE. Scholar is quite happy for you to interpret the book as you wish and if you believe there was more than one exile then scholar is not perturbed for the 70 years equates with the Jewish exile beginning with the Fall and ending with the return under Cyrus as observed by Albertz. scholar JW
  7. Ann O'Maly Thanks but i will stick to those 4 lines of evidence in support of that strong cable of WT Bible Chronology. scholar JW
  8. Ann O'Maly Well said OK. Exilic era-exilic period. Same thing with the common factor of the singular, ONE Read that paragraph again but carefully and spot the difference between the northern kingdom and the southern kingdom. File Case No: #607539537 scholar JW
  9. Alan de Fool Best not to us Wikipedia as a reliable or trustworthy source and I do commend you for consulting Literature Review. Please not that WT does not use Wikepedia as a matter of course. scholar JW
  10. Read the book, the entire book and do not 'cherry pick', leave the 'cherries' for scholar to eat. Notice the 'singular expression 'exile' and the 'exilic period'. There were many deportations but only ONE Exile. One period of exile means ONE EXILE. You dope!! I repeat, Albertz lists deportations but only ONE EXILE. The said scholar rests his exilic case NO. 607539537 scholar JW
  11. Such folly sort reminds one of the words of the wise contained in Proverbs 18:13 "When anyone replies to a matter before he hears the facts, It is foolish and humiliating". scholar JW
  12. Alan de Fool Indeed. It was the WT scholars who used Albertz's expression of 'catastrophe in the Introduction to those recent WT articles on Chronology as noted by my friend Doug Mason. Such a catastrophe aptly describes the ONE Exile beginning with the Fall and ending with the return lasting 70 years. You are still hung up on WT referencing and the sourcing of such references and this is because you have not studied the Humanities!! scholar JW
  13. JW Insider No this is the case with Exilic scholars. I rest my case because it is well established on the facts of the case and on OT Historiography , a term not found in COJ' s hypothesis nor found in other critics of WT chronology. You are the one being deceived by apostate propaganda!! scholar JW
  14. Ann O'Maly Well done for posting this page from Albertz's book. You will notice that this scholar throughout this book that there was only ONE Exile-the Babylonian Exile, "the end of Israel's history" according to the books of Kings. For this and many other reasons Exilic scholars when writing up the Historiography of the OT divide the History of Israel into three periods: 'preexilic. exilic and post exilic periods (Refer p.1) and Albertz titled his book not as the 'Exiles of Israel' but the singular-'ISRAEL IN EXILE'. I rest my case. scholar JW
  15. JW Insider That is your opinion of my postings but you are so wrong but that is a matter for you. Rainer Albertz wrote some 460 pages but makes the position perfectly clear that there was only one Exile which he termed as a' catastrophe'. I rest my case. Honest-hearted ones can easily see through your deception as you clearly reject our sacred Bible Chronology well presented in WT publications but again this is a matter for you. scholar JW
  16. Alan de Fool Just remember how much the said scholar has taught and instructed you over many matters of Chronology over these last 20 years and the contributions that the said scholar has made to the scholarship of Chronology and to the simple fact of referring you to the latest information from scholarship on this subject. You feed and are nourished by the teat of scholar. scholar JW
  17. JW Insider There is not one Chronology but several Chronologies for the Israelite period of the OT. There is for the Neo-Babylonian period, one Chronology. No. For it is you like most other scholars regard the NB Chronology as Absolute, making it appear as infallible unable to be challenged by another competitor which of course has been the traditional Bible Chronology. So, if we assess matters by this standard then it is demanded that solid evidence be provided for solid claims and that is why for such a significant event in OT history such as the fall of Jerusalem a precise or definitive date must be known and Christendom's scholars and apostates cannot give a definite solution to this problem. I do not need manipulation because WT Chronology is simple, based on simple dramatic historical events so it is easily understood especially when as a strong cable it is affixed to the fulfillment of Bible prophecies and that is its strength not the reliance on fictional interpretations of the regnal data. True, we live in a world where knowledge of many things is incomplete and yet with the bible we can construct a reliable and authentic scheme of Chronology which is falsifiable but at the moment there remains a 20 year gap or difference and that fact must be fully apprehended. Well I simply look at the information and note that the 70 years is subject of mush interpretation and controversy. scholar JW
  18. JW Insider I meant 'false'. Bryan consistently throughout his article views the Exile has having ended with the Return of the Jews under Cyrus. Caution needs to be exercised her for Bryan's focus in his article is not the beginning of the 70 years but its ending which is not considered in his article , the Fall of Babylon but the Return under Cyrus. That may well be the case for Bryan does not provide definitive chronology for the 70 years but simply refers to various authorities but the major view is that there was 70 year Exile proper and that it ended with the return under Cyrus and not the Fall of Babylon. Well I am dealing with clowns. Your question is nonsensical. I have simply informed you of the simple fact that Exilic scholars such as the two scholars referred to state two fundamentals: 1. There was only one Jewish Exile 2. That Exile was of a duration of 70 years ending with the return under Cyrus. These two basic historical facts undergird or support that strong cable of WT Chronology. scholar JW
  19. Alan de Fool You are the self-declared atheist so any view of the Bible rates zero credibility. Go and plat with your crystal set. scholar JW
  20. Alan de Fool You have it arse about as usual. Babylon Falls-seventy years are fulfilled then Babylon is 'called to account' with its eventual desolation. Desolation is the 'calling to account' after the 70 years had been fulfilled. scholar JW
  21. JW Insider False, the following paragraph:"Jewish literature handled the prophet Jeremiah's prediction that the exile to Babylon would last for seventy years is evidence for the belief that the exile had ended with the return from Babylon". (p.108). You really are a clown. i never stated that Exilic scholars support WT Chronology but supported the our view that the Exile began with the destruction of Jerusalem until not the Fall of Babylon but the Return under Cyrus which is also how Josephus placed the Exile along with WT scholars. scholar JW
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.