scholar JW

JW Insider

15 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I find your words to be dishonest and manipulative. You pretend that there are "respective chronologies" represented here. There is only one chronology represented here. All the referenced sources, dozens of them, give mostly consistent opinions about a single chronology. It's a single chronology that all of them consider definitive enough to pinpoint the various deportation, destruction, and construction events. They understand the meaning of a "definitive" or "Absolute NB Chronology" or else there would be no structure for all of them to agree upon the dates of those events, within a year or two.

Opinions about which of those fixed dates should be interpreted as important to the 70 years prophecy doesn't change the archaeological evidence for a fixed chronology, that all of them accept.

There is not one Chronology but several Chronologies for the Israelite period of the OT. There is for the Neo-Babylonian period, one Chronology.

15 hours ago, JW Insider said:

If after all these years, you do not yet understand why scholars might consider either or both of these two dates, then you are being dishonest in associating yourself with the word scholar. I note that several persons have explained it to you over the years, but you still claim to be vexed and troubled over why this 12 month difference is possible. And it's such a simple explanation, too. The scholars who state a preference for either 586 or 587 are not confused, why are you?

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.

15 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Making such a ludicrous statement is just evidence that you are hoping to play to a stupid audience. Is there a margin of error in the archaeological evidence over which year was Nebuchadnezzar's 18th regnal year? You are trying to fool people. Personally, I couldn't care less if the NB Chronology is "absolute" or not, but you still need to go back to your books if you still don't know what the term "absolute" means with respect to a chronological timeline. I'm sure that the reason you will never give the historian's definition or archaeologist's definition is because you know that the term can be used to manipulate prejudice among those who won't look it up for themselves. But this has already been looked up for you in this very topic, and the last time you brought it up under a different topic, and another time before that. So it's hard for me to believe that this is merely incompetence. What else could it be, but another example of dishonesty and manipulation?

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. 

15 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Again, you are playing to the prejudices of people you must think are too stupid to look up information for themselves. You admit the 20 year gap between the archaeological evidence and an interpretation, and call that twenty year gap "no 'margin of error.'" Yet the Watchtower admits this gap in evidence and claims that such evidence might still show up someday in the future.

*** kc p. 187 Appendix to Chapter 14 ***
Or, even if the discovered evidence is accurate, it might be misinterpreted by modern scholars or be incomplete so that yet undiscovered material could drastically alter the chronology of the period.

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.

15 hours ago, JW Insider said:

here was a common thread among those last 8, the ones who differed from the usual 609/605 start and a 539 end. It was a rejection of the authority of the Bible. They often interpreted the 70 years as a prophecy that might not have even come from Jeremiah or the Chronicler, but which was supposedly imposed on the text from a much later date. Funny how those few exceptions you count on the most to promote uncertainty and doubt, actually got to those interpretations by rejecting the originality and authority of the Biblical text.

Well I simply look at the information and note that the 70 years is subject of mush interpretation and controversy.

scholar JW

JW Insider

12 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I think you meant "True" not false, since you are agreeing with me that Bryan would say that the 70 years had already ended with the return from Babylon (even though Bryan recognizes that some scholars start it in 587/6 with the "2nd [major] deportation," and end it around 516 BCE. Wright, he says, effectively doesn't end the 70 years at all (p.108), and Michael Fishbane is an example of one who supports 587/6 to 516/5 (p.112):

Some have suggested that, unlike the Chronicler, Zechariah regarded the seventy years as complete with the reconstruction of the temple in 516/515. Thus, Michael Fishbane dates the oracle of 1:12 to 520/519 and thinks it “conceivable that the anticipated fulfilment of a seventy-year oracle believed to have been effective from the second Judaean exile (in 587/6) may have actually fuelled national energies towards the restoration of the Temple.”¹³

I meant 'false'. Bryan consistently throughout his article views the Exile has having ended with the Return of the Jews under Cyrus.

13 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Bryan does not think the 70 years is that period of time from the destruction of Jerusalem to the return to Babylon, if that's what you think he is implying. Note how he treats Jeremiah's prophecy about it (p.110-111)

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.

13 hours ago, JW Insider said:

So even if Bryan doesn't fully accept this interpretation, he realizes that if one were to count from the destruction of Jerusalem to the edict of Cyrus, this would only be about 49 years, and would in fact match the first 49 year period of the 10.

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.

13 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Curious. When I think of a clown I think of those dressed up at a rodeo or circus who create diversions so that the audience doesn't realize the seriousness of a blunder or potential disaster. I have noticed that most of your posts are clownish in this sense of trying to create a diversion. But they are also laughably immature and unscholarly, which I guess would also qualify as clownish.

Well I am dealing with clowns.

13 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I asked you very clearly. I asked if you could find any Exilic scholar who supports the WTS chronology, even within 2 years of it. And, I also asked if you could find any Exilic scholar who deviates from the standard archaeological evidence, even by as much as two years.:

Outside of the Watchtower publications, JWs or Adventists who defend an inherited chronology, can you give me a reference for any "Exilic scholar" who thinks it was more than 50 years between Jerusalem's destruction and Babylon's downfall by Cyrus? Can you show any "exilic scholar" who thinks that Jerusalem was destroyed within 2 years of 607? Can you show any "exilic scholar" who thinks that Jerusalem was NOT destroyed within 2 years of 587?

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

Alan de Fool

4 hours ago, AlanF said:

Let's see if you can manage a simple test.

Suppose a Bethelite tells you: "When my 4 years at Warwick are completed, I will return home."

Question: Which event occurs first? The completion of his 4 years at Warwick? Or his return home?

My prediction: You will either ignore this altogether, or disgorge a mass of gibberish that only braindead JW apologists could agree with

My answer would be: The completion of his 4 years at Warwick.

Did the said scholar pass?

scholar JW

Alan de Fool

23 hours ago, AlanF said:

es, we're well aware that you think the Bible is nonsense. That's why you can't make sense of it.

You are the self-declared atheist so any view of the Bible rates zero credibility. Go and plat with your crystal set.

scholar JW

Alan de Fool

23 hours ago, AlanF said:

ndeed: FIRST the 70 years ends, THEN Babylon falls. In practice, the two were virtually simultaneous. Read Daniel 5.

You have it arse about as usual. Babylon Falls-seventy years are fulfilled then Babylon is 'called to account' with its eventual desolation.

23 hours ago, AlanF said:

Desolation was its ultimate fate, irrespective of whether the 70 years ended in 539 or 538 or 537, you idiot

Desolation is the 'calling to account' after the 70 years had been fulfilled.

scholar JW

JW Insider

19 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I quote from page 108, where Bryan shows no problem with the following date for the destruction of Jerusalem:

". . . the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/86" (p.108)

He is also aware that some scholars have made a point about the 70 year period from the (second exile and) destruction of the temple by Babylon (587/6) to the reconstruction in 516/515 since this also is a 70-year period (which he does not accept as the period referenced by Jeremiah, which he says had already been recognized as fulfilled.) [Note that C.F.Whitley, another example from Niles' "Appendix C" is a proponent of 586 BCE to 516 BCE, with full knowledge that 586 BCE refers to the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and 516 to the reconstruction under Haggai/Zerubbabel.]

So your reference to Steven M Bryan is a failure.

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).

19 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Note: "conquest of Jerusalem, 2d deportation (July / August 587)." He sees that the Bible chronology fits the standard archaeological foundation for the chronology. These dates are also 20 years off from the ones promoted by the Watchtower publications.

Of course, I'm sure you already knew both of these attempts were failures before you even provided them.

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

JW Insider

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Now you mentioned Appendix A, where Nles gives an idea of the broad range of views from scholars and Bible commentators, past and present. I don't see any of them confused about the chronology of those 70 years of Babylonian domination between about 609 to 539 (plus or minus a couple of years). Most of them chose that very chronology as the interpretation of Jeremiah's 70 years. Apparently every single one of them understood that chronology to be able to place the destruction of Jerusalem in 587-586 BCE, or the larger exile (e.g. Ezekiel, et al) from 598-597 BCE. Everyone has a right to their set of Biblical interpretations for the varying uses of the term "70 years" whether literal, close, symbolic, an approximation, or even believing (as Niles himself does) that various Bible writers may have used it to refer to multiple periods. But this does not imply any confusion about the chronology.

Nevertheless, a broad range of opinion is presented so these respective chronologies cannot be considered to be 'definitive' in order to preserve the claim of an Absolute NB Chronology.

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Every one of them understood the chronology of the time of Babylonian domination, or they could not have all consistently put dates like the ones pictured above, on all the Judean events. I will repeat again: Apparently 100% of them used the date 587 or 586 for the destruction of Jerusalem. No confusion about the chronology, just different interpretations of which start and end dates to use within that fixed chronology. For those who don't know, I'll reproduce the columns from the first 3 pages:

Nevertheless, these may believe in the concept of Babylonian domination which is also held by WT scholars with our Chronology but how this related to Jeremiah's 70 years is open to much dispute as shown in Niles' Thesis. The very fact that no definitive date of either 586 or 587 BCE for the fall is deeply troubling and remains a much vexed issue.

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Did I mention this? Every one of the above accepts a chronology within a couple years of the standard chronology, and every one of the above accepts a chronology that is about 20 years different from the "special chronology" that the WTS promotes.

(I add that last part about the 20-years difference, because there are people who think that 605 BCE, above, is only 2 years different from the WTS chronology of 607. It's actually 18 years different. Because the WTS publications present the above 605 date as 625 BCE.)

Well a couple of years is a 'margin of error' and does not fit well with claims that NB Chronology is 'absolute'. The twenty year difference or gap between WT Chronology and secular chronologies is because of an interpretation of the 70 years which has no 'margin of error' being part of that strong cable of WT Chronology.

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The last 8 listed scholars from the final two pages (not included above) discuss variations of Biblical interpretation about the 70 years, but they are not at all confused about the chronology of the period of Babylonian years of domination in the region. I'll just pick any one of them to see what they say about the period of Babylonian domination:

The first one, Anneli Aejmelaeus, we don't have to look up, because Niles already tells us she understands the significance of 587 BCE (Jeremiah 25) and 597 BCE.

So I'll pick another and then look up whether Bryan and Albertz fit the criteria of dating the destruction of Jerusalem more than two years different than 587 BCE.

These last 8 different scholars highlights the problem of interpretation of the 70 years and that was really goes to the heart of Niles' thesis about the necessity of recognizing those three concepts.

Niles' thesis proves one thing that it is vital that only a correct interpretation of the those 70 years makes for a truly accurate Chronology of the OT which is what those celebrated WT scholars have done.

scholar JW

Alan de Fool

24 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Indeed: FIRST the 70 years ends, THEN Babylon falls. In practice, the two were virtually simultaneous. Read Daniel 5.

Really!! You have matters arse about. The 70 years ends then Babylon, its Kingship, Nation and Land proceeds into oblivion

26 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Desolation was its ultimate fate, irrespective of whether the 70 years ended in 539 or 538 or 537, you idiot.

Desolation is what Jer.25:12 is all about you idiot!

scholar JW

Alan F

19 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Yes, we're well aware that you think the Bible is nonsense. That's why you can't make sense of it.

Well at least unlike you I believe the Bible is God's inspired Word.

scholar JW

Alan de Fool

8 hours ago, AlanF said:

Irrelevant scripture. Try Jer. 25:12, 27:7.

Agreed!

8 hours ago, AlanF said:

You'll never get the point if you can't manage to read the proper scriptures. So I'll help you. Jer. 25:12:

<< But when 70 years have been fulfilled, I will call to account the king of Babylon and that nation for their error,’ declares Jehovah, ‘and I will make the land of the Chal·deʹans a desolate wasteland for all time. >>

According to ScholarJW Pretendus, the beginning of this "desolation" began when the Jews returned to Judah in 537 BCE -- a completely nonsensical idea. My point is that there was no such desolation for another ~1,200 years.

Note that the scripture says nothing about either the city of Babylon or about the Babylonian empire, but about "the land of the Chaldeans". The "land" comprises more than the empire; the empire is a political entity, but the land is a physical entity. The political entity ceased to exist in 539 BCE. In the course of time, the physical entity fell into ruins and became "a desolate wasteland". Capiche?

Nonsense. The Bible does not give a specific event or timing for the desolation of Babylon as described in Jer.25:12  but according to Jeremiah and as quoted by the Chronicler the focus of Babylon's judgement occurred only after the Return.The judgement involved the Kingship, the Nation and the land which would all become desolate, extinguished.

scholar JW 

Alan de Fool

11 hours ago, AlanF said:

The answer has been given repeatedly, by me, Ann, JW Insider, and perhaps others in this and other threads. Assuming you're not as stupid as ScholarJW Pretendus and know how to search for text in your browser (Control-F in Windows), search for Jeremiah 25:12 and see if you can figure it out.

Here, I'll give you a little more on that: the passage does not just say that Babylon will be punished, but that the king of Babylon will be punished. That was Nabonidus the main king who was deposed, and Belshazzar his viceroy, who was killed. Read Daniel 5 about "mene, mene . . .". Also Jer. 27:7 and 2 Chron. 36:20-21.

As for Babylon itself, it continued as a working city until roughly 700 CE, depending on how you measure "working". That's another 1,200 years.

Jer. 25:12 is quite explicit as to its meaning and timing so just read the entire verse and not that desolation was its fate not just a mere eclipsing by another World power.

scholar JW

Ann O'Maly

14 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Yes! The king was certainly punished then.

Indeed. But worse was to follow for not just the kingship , but the nation and the Land would become desolate.

15 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Why start the judgment in 537? Which king was punished in 537? Why not start the judgment in the 4th century CE when Babylon was a pile of rubble and the nation's punishment was complete? It doesn't work, Neil.

Anyway, contextually, Jer. 51:37 is talking about the desolation and depopulation of Babylon at the hands of the Medians and its allies (v. 27f.). When did that happen? It also talks about God's people having to flee for their lives during this same bloody battle resulting in the slaughter of the Babylonian army (v. 1-6, 45). When did that happen?

(Yeah, I guess we're straying into the nature of prophecy, how literally we're supposed to take it, and which cherry-picked parts are historically true. Another can of worms, lol.)

One starts at 537 BCE for it is the established date for the return with the issuing of the Decree in Cyrus; first year as sted by the Ezra the historian and confirmed by Josephus the historian.

Jer. 51:37 was certainly fulfilled by the time of the 4th century CE as noted by Jerome. The entire chapter, 51 contains the prophecy of judgement against Babylon which is of various stages of fulfillment which included the Fall in 539 BCE continuing throughout its turbulent history concluding desolation right up to our day. Just read the entire chapter as there is no need to 'cherry pick'.

scholar JW

Alan de Fool

21 hours ago, AlanF said:

Another example of JWish ass-backwards thinking.

Jer. 25:12 is quite clear: When the 70 years are complete, or Upon the completion of 70 years, the king of Babylon will be punished. In other words, FIRST the 70 years are completed or fulfilled, and THEN the king is punished.

JW apologists have been so thoroughly schooled in ass-backwards thinking that they don't notice such things.

That's why they start with 1914 and work backwards to get to 607

Jer. 25:12 is quite clear that this is the judgement on Babylon that came into effect only after the 70 years had expired according to the Chronicler  was not at Babylon's Fall in 539 BCE but after the Return with the 'first year of Cyrus' and was characterized not by the overthrow of a city but the entire nation and land would become desolated.

Chronology, you ignoramus is about counting backwards.and as long as you have two key events in place one can go back or forward depending on one's pleasure.

scholar JW

JW Insider

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I don't believe any true scholars are confused about the 70 years of Babylonian domination. The evidence is too clear and overwhelming to leave any room for such confusion by any true scholar. You apparently think they are confused but that's a reflection on you, not them. You make haughty claims without evidence, but you haven't been able to honestly deal with any of the evidence so far.

You are sadly mistaken for you only have to read what is stated in the leading Bible commentaries on the Bible books that deal with the 70 years and the published studies on the subject  in leading Journals from the first major study in 1954. Nile's Thesis gives a broad but in depth view of the range of views heretofore presented. In proof of this refer to the Appendix A, pp.68-72 in the above thesis.

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Outside of the Watchtower publications, JWs or Adventists who defend an inherited chronology, can you give me a reference for any "Exilic scholar" who thinks it was more than 50 years between Jerusalem's destruction and Babylon's downfall by Cyrus? Can you show any "exilic scholar" who thinks that Jerusalem was destroyed within 2 years of 607? Can you show any "exilic scholar" who thinks that Jerusalem was NOT destroyed within 2 years of 587?

I will give you two scholars: Steven M Bryan and Rainer Albertz who nicely address the Exile as the period from the Fall to the Return. 

scholar JW

Ann O'Maly

41 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Thank you for also confirming that Young did, in fact, resolve the 587/586 dilemma and that you initially told a whopping fib. 👍

Young simply proposed a solution to the 586/7BCE debacle resolved in his own mind and not necessarily of his peers.

scholar JW

Ann O'Maly

12 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

You're asking us to believe that the King of Babylon was called to account two years after he was forcibly deposed and his city conquered. Riiight.

When did Babylon become a desolated wasteland, by the way?

Exactly! The rules of exegesis mast be applied to a correct understanding of this verse- vs.12: The text begins "But when 70 years have been fulfilled'. so one must determine when these words apply. Was it at the time of Babylon's Fall in 539 BCE or after that time? Ezra, the historian wrote that after quoting the same words of Jeremiah as quoted refers to the 1st year of Cyrus which was after the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE but to events subsequent to that event to events of the publishing of his Decree which released the Exiles in 537 BCE.

In short, vs 12 commences a new prophecy having dealt with the 70 years of Judah a new oracle against the Nations begins a new context from the preceding verses 1-11 as recognized by at least one major commentary on Jeremiah. Next, again applying the rules of exegesis the verse 12 describes to whom and what the judgement would apply-King of Babylon, the Nation and the Land of Chaldea all together as a single entity meriting judgement. Clearly, Babylon was not desolated in 539 BCE. Finally, the verse describes the nature of the divine judgement -a desolate wasteland for all time'.

Jehovah's judgement against Babylon was not a momentary or singular event in time but would be one of desolation which as a process occurred over periods of time  even up to the present day.

A careful exegesis of Jer. 25:12 shows that this verse cannot be used as a terminus ad quem for the 70 years of Jeremiah as this verse introduces the OAN- Oracles Against the Nations beginning with Babylon. You should convey this 'new truth' to Alan F and COJ for their education.

The answer to your second question would be as reported by Jerome about the 4th century CE- Jer. 51:37

scholar JW

JW Insider

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

This is completely false.

Non-WT models accept the 70 years. They fit the Biblical view that the 70 years was given to Babylon as the length of time that Babylon would dominate these nations all around. The Bible says this period would be 70 years, and THOUSANDS of stone tablets support the Bible's view that this was 70 years.

The Watchtower has turned this 70 year period into a 90 year period, completely unsupported in the Bible. Not only that but the Bible gives some evidence AGAINST this being a 90 year period.

The simple fact of the matter is that scholarship has always been confused over the 70 years and some scholars have because of their chronology compressed it to '50 years' if you read the literature on this subject. Broadly speaking, most scholars favour the 70 year Babylonish domination hypothesis but Exilic scholars support the Exilic theory rather than the Domination hypothesis. 

The Bible clearly defines the 70 years as a period of Servitude-Exile-Desolation only and your argument about a 90 year period is simply mischief making for 90 years is not stated in WT  publications applicable to the Jeremiah.

scholar JW

Ann O'Maly

8 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

You've just confirmed what I've said! The 70 years end and Babylon is judged. When was Babylon, its King and the land of the Chaldeans judged, Neil, you dipstick? (Hint: it wasn't 537!)

NO. Read the entire verse 12 because it refers to the fact that the King, is nation and the land would be become ' a desolated wasteland for all time'-NWT Such a process was not just a one off but would come into effect after the 70 years had expired which was 537 BCE  so exegesis cannot permit that such a prophecy was fulfilled with the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE. This interpretation of these words of Jeremiah were fulfilled with the Return in the 'first year of Cyrus' according to the Chronicler which was after 539 BCE in 537 BCE.

18 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

So no apology for telling your big, fat, porky pie about Young and his conclusion about the year of Jerusalem's destruction.

Unnecessary because Young simply employed a methodology to resolve the 586/7 BCE dilemma and his opinion favoured 587 BCE. Nothing to see here!!

scholar JW

Ann O' Maly

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Date is disputed. Other non-WT models are out there that fit the 390 years with the conventional timeline.

Correct. There are other models but which one is correct?

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

As has been shown ad infinitum, Jer. 25:12 falsifies your claim that the 70 year period of the nations' servitude to Babylon ended with the repatriation of the Jews.

No. it does not. Jer. 25:12 clearly proves that after the 70 years had ended then Judgement against Babylon, its King and the land of the Chaldeans would come into affect. The 70 years of Jewish Exile ended with the return in 537 BCE as confirmed by Exilic scholars such as Steven M Bryan in his paper 'The Reception of Jeremiah's Prediction of a Seventy -Year Exile'- JBL, vol. 137, No.1, 2018, pp.107-126.

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

. is another subject beyond the scope of this thread and it similarly involves an erroneous WT starting date

Just another confirmation of the strength and integrity of that strong cable of WT Chronology

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Again, WT interpretation of these periods is upended by sound exegesis and by WT following its own new approach regarding types and antitypes:

In fact, sound biblical exegesis supports WT interpretation of the Gentile Times and has nothing to do with typology of your mischief but firmly grounded in the historical realities of Daniel's day.

10 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Neil, whatever WT fantasies you have swirling around in that stubborn skull of yours, you know what you've just said above isn't true. You know Young's articles well enough and are familiar with his conclusions. Doesn't your conscience prick you when you lie like that, especially when you can be caught out so easily? Have you no shame? Smh. 😦

"In this paper, the method is applied to all Scriptures in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 2 Kings, and 2 Chronicles relating to the date of Jerusalem's fall to Nebuchadnezzar. It is shown that all texts involved are in harmony with themselves and with each other, and the only year possible for Jerusalem's fall is 587 BC."

- http://www.rcyoung.org/papers.html

"The conclusions from the analysis are as follows.

"(1) Jerusalem fell in the fourth month (Tammuz) of 587 bc. All sources which bear on the question—Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 2 Kings—are consistent in dating the event in that year."

- Young, R.C., 'When Did Jerusalem Fall?', JETS 47/1 (March 2004) 21–3.

In fact it is your conscience  Ann that should prick you that something is wrong with current methodology even the latest proposed by Young has not yet been endorsed by current scholarship wherein 586 rather than 587 is highly  championed.

scholar JW

Alan de Fool

6 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Yes, please do continue with your lies, as all intelligent readers will become better educated in how not to be scholastically honest.

The said scholar stands for integrity and truth, qualities that are not of your character!!!

scholar JW

Alan de Fool

5 hours ago, AlanF said:

ScholarJW Pretendus continues making the same mistake that most JW apologists do with chronology as well as many other beliefs: they're ass-backwards in their thinking. Since 1914 is all-important, they must perform all sorts of mental gyrations to justify it. Such as claiming that the 70 years is of fundamental importance to both Bible and secular chronology. But the period ONLY has importance to the 1914 chronology and the huge house-of-cards belief structure that rests on it.

Nope for our Chronology is in harmony with secular chronology albeit a little 'fine tuning' of a corrective of some twenty years. The 70 years is a major piece of Jewish history and those that choose to ignore it do so at expense of sound scholarship.

5 hours ago, AlanF said:

And of course, ScholarJW Mendacicus continues lying about "the 586/7 BCE dilemma" when he knows quite well that Rodger Young put that issue to bed back in 2004. He knows this because he's completely unable to refute Young's paper; all he can manage is his usual limp but loudly proclaimed refrain, "It's wrong cuz the 70 years!!!"

The 586/7 dilemma continues to haunt modern scholarship from the days of Edwin Thiele which was heightened as real conundrum of secular chronology by Rodger Young who has not yet solved the problem and has not yet been solved. Young  of course , ignores the 70 years as does Edwin Thiele and others.

scholar JW

Ann O'Maly

My explanation of the parallelisms is as follows:

1.  The Divided Monarchy is the period of time that the kings of Judah and Israel reigned for a duration of 390 years based on the prophecy of Ezekiel in Ezek.4: 1-13. The period began in 997 BCE  with the splitting of the kingdom of Israel - 1 Ki. 11:43; 12:19,20 and ending in 607 BCE with the removal of King Zedekiah from his throne in the 11th year of his reign and in the 18th year of King Nebuchadnezzar who destroyed Jerusalem in that year- 2 Ki. 25: 8-10; Jer. 52: 12-14. Refer Appendix A6 'Chart: Prophets and Kings of Judah and Israel'. NWT, 2013.

2. The 70 years of Jeremiah the prophet is the period of time beginning with the end of the Judean Monarchy, the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple, the Exile of all of its population in Servitude to the now dominant World Power, Babylon leaving a totally Desolated Land of Judah in 607 BCE. - Jer. 25: 8-11; 29:10; Da. 9:2; 2 Chron.36: 17-21; Zec.1:12; 7:5. The foretold definite historic period of '70 years' ended with the Return of the Jews under the Decree of King Cyrus of Persia in 537 BCE. Jer. 25:12; 2 Chron.36: 22-23; Ezr.1: 1-4; 3:1.

3. The 70 weeks of years of Daniel the prophet is the period of time beginning with the 'issuing of the word to restore and rebuild Jerusalem' which was in the '20 the year of King Artaxerxes of Persia in 455 BCE. - Da.. 9:25; Neh. 2:1; 5-8 with a duration of 490 years culminating with the appearance of 'the Messiah the Leader' in 29 CE and ending in 36 CE with the admission of Gentiles into the Christian Congregation-spiritual Israel.- Da 9: 25-27; Acts ch10. cf. Da 9: 3-23. Refer, App. 'How Daniel's Prophecy Foretells the Messiah's Arrival' in What Does the Bible Really Teach, 2014, pp. 197-199.

4. The Gentile Times or the appointed times of the nations of Daniel the prophet is a period of time beginning with the overthrow of the Judean Monarchy under King Zedekiah with the destruction of Jerusalem by King Nebuchadnezzar in 607 BCE with a duration of 2520 years or 'seven times'. Da. 4: 10-17; 20-25  and ended with the installation of Jesus Christ, King of God's Kingdom in 1914 CE. Da. 4: 17; 25-26, 32, 34; Lu 21:24; Da. 7:13-14; Rev. 12:5-12. Refer App.'1914-A Significant Year in Bible Prophecy' in What Does the Bible Really Teach, 2014, pp.215-217.

The above referred WT article list four parallelisms but only two are applicable now and it is readily seen that the four parallelisms discussed as above fit the criteria in the WT article. One can easily see the relationships that connect and overlay each of these four major Bible prophecies and that is why all these together as prophecies prove that Jehovah is the Great Timekeeper and that the prophetic Word is made sure. Such four prophecies as many witnesses validate the date of 607 BCE in our wondrous Bible Chronology all based on that theme in God's Word- Kingdom of God binding each of these prophecies together to form that unbreakable 'strong cable of Bible Chronology'.

This is a description of the four parallelisms or the four prophetic witnesses that comprise that strong cable of WT Bible Chronology so this is not fantasy as you claim.

scholar JW

Ann O'Maly

24 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

It's Watchtower chronology that skews the biblical and secular dates for that period. Otherwise, the Bible and history fit very well. 

Nonsense. WT Chronology unlike secular NB Chronology is a strong cable of Bible Chronology whereas the latter is simply a chain of events- a string of beads. WT Chronology falsifies secular chronology by means of the 70 years. Further, it shows a twenty year gap between the two chronologies and highlights Neb's missing 'seven years' for starters and shows that the methodology for secular chronology is flawed because of the 586/7 BCE dilemma. Not a pretty picture!!!!!

scholar JW

Alan de Fool

The said scholar is a devotee to Mommy Watchtower just as you are a devotee to COJ!!!

scholar Jw

Alan de Fool

6 hours ago, AlanF said:

END OF QUOTATIIONS FROM EARLIER POSTS

So, Anna, it should be obvious by now that ScholarJW posed simple questions as a simple-minded trap of some sort, that all of us participants -- including he himself -- knew that all the others knew the answers to. That's why we refused, for awhile, to play his stupid game.

Now that JW Insider has given an extensive answer to ScholarJW's challenge ( https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/88343-secular-evidence-and-neo-babylonian-chronology-nebuchadnezzar-cyrus-etc/page/42/?tab=comments#comment-152809 ), and ScholarJW has replied in such a way as to 'spring' his laughable trap, surely you can see how stupid his entire game has been. His comments about Darius are common knowledge among everyone qualified to comment on the material of this thread.

JW Insider again gave an insightful set of comments along these lines: https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/88343-secular-evidence-and-neo-babylonian-chronology-nebuchadnezzar-cyrus-etc/page/42/?tab=comments#comment-152808

 

Boy, isn't scholar a naughty boy for making Alan so angry. It is interesting that it was not Alan F that finally provided the answer to my little test but JW Insider and it is only WT scholars that have provided such information using P & D as a source of reference.

scholar JW