scholar JW
-
Posts
519 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
World Wiki
Events
Everything posted by scholar JW
-
Alan F Well answer the question. Show the postings scholar JW
-
JW Insider Now you will be able to check Furuli's use of the data for the years 588/587 and 568/567. Further, Furuli used the The Sky 6 and Sky Map Lite 2005 so Why not check those programs? scholar JW
-
Alan F You cannot answer this question or you refuse to answer the question! scholar JW
-
Alan F Seeing that you have boasted how smart you are and have written a contrived paper on the 538/537 BCE debate could you answer the following question: Would you give the precise date for the beginning and ending of Cyrus' first full regnal year expressed in terms of the Babylonian/Jewish Calendar and in both the Julian, Gregorian calendars? scholar JW
-
Alan F But you have no training in Semitic languages, or being able to translate the Akkadian language of the cuneiform clay tablets. Further, with all of your brilliance you have been unable to debunk or refute WT chronology and nome of the material posted on such websites fails to properly account for the 70 years. Is it so sad that the said scholar is such a dummy yet for the last 20 years or so you have continued to dialoque with me which perhaps proves that scholar is a burr in your saddle. scholar JW
-
Alan F scholar JW
-
Alan F the evidence is there but it is in the interpretation of that evidence and the fact of the 70 years disproves your nonsense. scholar JW
-
Alan F So you say. And I will keep repeating it. Yes it is and if it was not so problematic then why is it that Rodger Young has written so much about it? Why not try it out and examine the evidence for yourself? At least I can appreciate the pretty colours. So are you saying that NB Chronology can't be falsified? True, but when one compares the two schemes alongside each other then a gap of 20 years is manifest so something is wrong. Terribly wrong!!! Supremacy equals servitude equals Exile as on definite historical period of 70 years. That is just a cop out to minimize such and important event in Jewish,OT history namely the Exile. scholar JW
-
Alan F No I am not wrong, There were a number of deportations but only ONE Exile as recognized by historians and scholars such as Rainer Albertz who described the Exile as a 'catastrophe' and this was the Exile that began with Neb's destruction of Jerusalem in 607 BCE. The two accounts that you quoted nicely from 2 Kings 24 and 25 have at least one major difference and that is that the events of ch. 25 had a much longer seige, total destruction and the removal of the sacred items from the Temple. thus. the latter event with the last deportation of Jewry had a far greater effect on not just the Monarchy but also Worship, City, Temple and the Land. No, for there were no four exiles but deportations culminating with the Exile that ended with the Return in 537 BCE
-
JW Insider Absolute rubbish and complete nonsense. Talk about circular reasoning for you maintain that there are five witnesses and thousands upon thousands to prove your timeline but how do these facts account for the insertion of the biblical 70 years and the missing seven years of Neb's kingship for starters notwithstanding the problematic 586/587 BCE debate? When one examine each and every one of these so-called 'lines of evidence' such easily fall over as each one of these witnesses proves unreliable, lacking precise chronological data. This scheme that you have presented nicely coloured is similar to Alan F's contrivance on the 538/537 BCE debate which amounts to gibberish. The simple fact of the matter is this, that the 70 years falsifies NB Chronology no matter how well it is presented and how pretty you make it. Historically, the NB Period has nothing to say about its domination over Judah which lasted for 70 years which by all accounts is a significant period of the history of the ANE. scholar JW
-
Alan F Cyrus’ Decree for the Return of the Exiles. By his decreeing the end of the Jewish exile, Cyrus fulfilled his commission as Jehovah’s ‘anointed shepherd’ for Israel. (2Ch 36:22, 23; Ezr 1:1-4) The proclamation was made “in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia,” meaning his first year as ruler toward conquered Babylon. The Bible record at Daniel 9:1 refers to “the first year of Darius,” and this may have intervened between the fall of Babylon and “the first year of Cyrus” over Babylon. If it did, this would mean that the writer was perhaps viewing Cyrus’ first year as having begun late in the year 538 B.C.E. However, if Darius’ rule over Babylon were to be viewed as that of a viceroy, so that his reign ran concurrent with that of Cyrus, Babylonian custom would place Cyrus’ first regnal year as running from Nisan of 538 to Nisan of 537 B.C.E. In view of the Bible record, Cyrus’ decree freeing the Jews to return to Jerusalem likely was made late in the year 538 or early in 537 B.C.E. This would allow time for the Jewish exiles to prepare to move out of Babylon and make the long trek to Judah and Jerusalem (a trip that could take about four months according to Ezr 7:9) and yet be settled “in their cities” in Judah by “the seventh month” (Tishri) of the year 537 B.C.E. (Ezr 3:1, 6) This marked the end of the prophesied 70 years of Judah’s desolation that began in the same month, Tishri, of 607 B.C.E.—2Ki 25:22-26; 2Ch 36:20, 2 In view of your paper on this subject what then is wrong with the content, facts and reasoning of this information? scholar JW
-
Alan F What about interpreting the data? There is with Furuli's research Where did he say that? I think you are misquoting him for did not claim to be a'professional archaeo-astronomer'. i think you will find it is more than two centimetre of distance involved. But Furuli consulted with such scholars as part of his research so read his Bibliography. true Do not need to for i can read his books I call it intellectual honesty Says the one majoring in bias and prejudice scholar JW
-
Alan F Watchtower is not in the science business and neither are you. I doubt that On what basis can you say that it is the wrong methodology and interpretation? Again you talk nonsense. You said it so just remember it!! I already have two programs installed on my computer so in coming years i might be able to make some sense of it. Your opinion There is no such thing as a simple astro program but the problem is in the interpretation of the data Agreed scholar JW
-
Alan F like your 5 page nonsense
-
Alan F Your thesis has too short of a timeframe for the events under the Decree of Cyrus by not accounting for the reign of Darius. The dating of the beginning of Cyrus' first year is problematic because it could be counted either according to Babylonian custom from Nisan 538 to Nisan 537 BCE or beginning late in 538 BCE. Those things are given scant attention in your paper and that is the problem, too short for all that needed to happen within a period of 12 months or less. makes no sense at all. it is relevant to the matter as an adequate time of resettlement is essential Good to see some recognition that our theory has some validity. All that you have presented is a contrivance with no attention to the history and circumstances of the Decree. Utter nonsense for Josephus simply states that in the second year of Cyrus the foundations were laid which also can be used in our chronology of the period for this occurred in the following year of 536 BCE scholar JW
-
Alan F You have not established 605 BCE Correct Thanks Matter of opinion Science proves that but not the case with NB Chronology falsified by the 70 years That is why i do not get into those astro programs Nile's thesis is a good example. Which all WT critics choose to ignore. COJ did no such thing and neither has any other scholar for it is only for the first time that these three concepts have been related to the 70 years. Neither do you or COJ have the facility to properly examine Furuli's research. Bully for you!! scholar JW
-
Alan F What about the reign of Darius during this period and what about the proclamation of the Decree and the preparations of the journey and the its length of at least four months. Your timeframe is too short and impossible for it also does not allow time of resettlement prior to the seventh of altar celebrations. Our time frame easily accomodates the above requisites which invalidates your short, impossible time frame as confirmed by Josephus that it was in the second year of Cyrus' reign that the foundations of the Temple were laid. scholar JW Nonsense scholar JW
-
Alan F The point is that Ezra used a different calender for dating the first year of Cyrus and the dating of the month/year of the Return. Or the first month of the sacred calender which marked the beginning of a new or following year. scholar JW
-
Alan F Agreed but let us not confuse the exile/deportation of the few with the EXILE of the greater number in order to be historically correct. No it is not and i checked a number of reference works which state similarly. But speaking of dictionarys, the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary defines 'exilic'-"to that of the Jews in Babylon'. So if the population was so small or minimal in number why did Neb bother? And was not king Zedekiah present in the city at that time? Only ONE Exile in the OT and recognized by historian for that it is why it is described as catastrohe and Jeremiah wrote the book of Lamentations as a consequence thereof. scholar JW scholar JW
- 679 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- neo-babylonian
- chronology
- (and 9 more)
-
Alan F 539 BCE is well established but 605 BCE is not so prove it. So, the date 605 BCE is a calculated date not an Absolute date therefore not well established. True. I have the books to hand I applaud COJ for his research as an independent thinker not a scholar but one must view his research in the light of current scholarship, WT Chronology and the Bible and then make one's own analysis and opinion. You say that Furuli's research is debunked but this is only by those with bias to NB Chronology whom regard it as a sacred cow.- not to be critical of it. It is a nonsense to say that WT interpretations are demonstrably wrong when one only has to compare such interpretations with Bible commentaries and published journals and these show otherwise or at least some tangents of agreement as I have pointed out over the years. the most recent example is Nile's thesis that the 70 years related to three major elements ignored by COJ and most if not all other scholars/critics. Only in your own mind. You are correct. I will have to work on that and install the app but I am a computer dummy so must give this some priority and thank you for the correction. scholar JW
-
Alan F cont'd the more precise term would be 'history of science' or 'philosophy of science' Scholar loves real science. True science relies on the principle of Falsification so how do you falsify NB Chronology or is it a sacred cow? Do not forget from where you first learnt this principle- the said scholar! So are you saying that WT Chronology is without methodology and interpretation? It is now a good thing that you are competent but are you fully competent? So why is it the case that you so-called experts use different programs? Why not use the same programs as Furuli does/ YES. But the devil is in the interpretation. Well you have nicely identified a problem so how does the layman proceed with this ? Furuli is not a dishonest person and is not a liar. All scholars have bias that is why one must test the evidence himself. Agreed I rely on God's Word the Bible and its 70 years scholar JW
-
Alan F Viewing is one thing, Understanding the thing viewed is another. True. Is it really necessary when it is the subject of much technical controversy? Well Ann O Maly has repeatedly refused to identify her academic credentials when asked by me and Furuli has publicly identified his academic credentials. So what for that is simply their opinion. Then how is it that it is so complicated with many offering different views. So you say. Opinion not fact. Insults indicate that you have lost the argument. Scholarship cannot be devoid of bias and it is the same with translation of the Bible whereupon Theology of the translator is always present. bias+scholarship=
-
JW Insider Just for the record it was I who arranged for the first translation into English of that original paper in German. Leonard Tolhurst(who was taught by Siegfried H. Horn) of the SDA Seminary at Cooranbong, NSW assisted me with half of the cost of translation done by the Senior Lecturer in German at the University of Sydney some decades ago. scholar JW
-
Alan F The venerable said scholar is of the opinion that Ezra counted the 'first year of Cyrus'- Ezra 1:1-4 as part of the official Decree using the official/secular calender beginning in Nisan and used the sacred/ religious calender beginning in Tishri from the time of resettlement of the Jews as from Ezra.1:68-3:1 and onwards. scholar JW
-
Alan F Wrong. the Jews were in their cities by the 7th month this means that it would have been impossible for this to be the case if you postulate such a short time frame so the seventh month could only have been in the following year of 537 BCE or if in his Cyrus' first year- 538-537 BCE would have been counted from the Fall rather than Nisan. scholar JW
