Jump to content
The World News Media

scholar JW

Member
  • Posts

    418
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Arauna in I like this guy a lot, expecially the way he takes the time to think about these things   
    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. Like
    scholar JW got a reaction from xero in I like this guy a lot, expecially the way he takes the time to think about these things   
    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
  3. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Thinking in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
  4. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Thinking in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
  5. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Thinking in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
  6. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Thinking in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
  7. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Arauna in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
  8. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Arauna in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
  9. Downvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from AlanF in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
  10. Confused
    scholar JW got a reaction from Ann O'Maly in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
  11. Haha
    scholar JW got a reaction from Ann O'Maly in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Ann O'Maly
    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.
    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
  12. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Arauna in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Alan de Fool
    The said scholar stands for integrity and truth, qualities that are not of your character!!!
    scholar JW
  13. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Arauna in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Alan de Fool
    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.
    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
     
  14. Downvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Ann O'Maly in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Alan de Fool
    The said scholar stands for integrity and truth, qualities that are not of your character!!!
    scholar JW
  15. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Thinking in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Ann O'Maly
    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
  16. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Arauna in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    JW Insider
    The difference is because of interpretation for there is a clear distinction made in the Jer. 25 where Judah is first addressed from vs. 1-11 then later the Oracle to the nations commences from verse 12-26 specifically.
    No, broadly speaking but here is a chronology based on Ezek.29:12, 17-18;30:10. Neb. attacks Egypt in his 37 th year-588 BCE and Ezekiel makes his final prophecy against Egypt in his 27th year of his exile in 590 BCE.
    No. No historical information available which is more of a problem for you than for WT scholars. No evasion just a working with what the Bible tells us in the absence of secular history.
    scholar JW
     
  17. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Arauna in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    JW Insider
    Too easy. The simple fact is that in 607 BCE, Babylon became the new World Power as foretold by Daniel the Prophet and it exercised complete domination over all those nations from that time forward. During Neb's reign he subjugated Tyre shortly after the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 BCE- Ezek.26:1.
    Yes this is the problem as to how to  translate the passage from Hebrew into English and how to interpret the passage . Rolf Furuli discusses the linguistic issues with this verse and I recommend that you consult leading Bible commentaries on this passage including the LXX. The said scholar unlike most Witnesses loves Bible commentaries and has the leading or major  commentaries of Jeremiah to hand and i would be happy to supply a reading list of such for you.
    scholar JW
  18. Downvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from AlanF in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    JW Insider
    The fact of the Great War along with after signs proved that the gentile times had ended and that the Kingdom was born and modern history a long with prominent members of clergy in 1917 attested to this fact.
    scholar JW
  19. Downvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from AlanF in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    JW Insider
    Nope. it works therefore it is that strong cable as it led to the ending of the Gentile Times in 1914 CE a reality proved by the outbreak of the Great War with the birth of God's Heavenly Kingdom . You need not only to properly understand History and Chronology but Biblical Theology namely Salvation History.
    scholar JW
  20. Upvote
    scholar JW got a reaction from Arauna in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    JW Insider
    The fact of the Great War along with after signs proved that the gentile times had ended and that the Kingdom was born and modern history a long with prominent members of clergy in 1917 attested to this fact.
    scholar JW
  21. Haha
    scholar JW got a reaction from Patiently waiting for Truth in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    JW Insider
    The fact of the Great War along with after signs proved that the gentile times had ended and that the Kingdom was born and modern history a long with prominent members of clergy in 1917 attested to this fact.
    scholar JW
  22. Haha
    scholar JW got a reaction from Patiently waiting for Truth in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    JW Insider
    Nope. it works therefore it is that strong cable as it led to the ending of the Gentile Times in 1914 CE a reality proved by the outbreak of the Great War with the birth of God's Heavenly Kingdom . You need not only to properly understand History and Chronology but Biblical Theology namely Salvation History.
    scholar JW
  23. Haha
    scholar JW got a reaction from Patiently waiting for Truth in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    JW Insider
    WT Chronology is 'strong' because it works, it alone is functional allowing the honest-hearted to understand where one lays in the stream of time, seeing modern day fulfillment of Bible prophecy. Chronology is simply a mode of interpretation, it is not an absolute but simply relative relying on the history presented albeit not perfect. 'Likely' is good enough for me for if it works then that is all that I require for it is far superior to 'dead-end' NB Chronology which also is imperfect and contains many 'gaps' despite the preponderance of astronomical data also subject to interpretation.
    Chronology is always going to be problematic in some areas and that is why Jehovah God has given to his people four prophetic witnesses even at the hands of an Angel, a strong Cable of sacred Bible Chronology corevealed in his Word.
    scholar JW
  24. Like
    scholar JW got a reaction from César Chávez in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Ann O' Maly
    Just what I expected. You can't be bothered because you cannot perform such a simple task therefore how can anyone take you seriously when you post on subjects that you lack any expertise especially any criticisms of Furuli's scholarship. Furuli  has done WT chronology a great service in proving that NB Chronology is unreliable for at least three reasons:
    1. Missing 20 years- 568/588 BCE dilemma
    2. Missing 7 years regnal vacancy of Neb's Kingship
    3. Failure to provide any historicity for the 70 years of Jeremiah
    5. Missing 1 Year/s of Darius ' reign prior or commensurate with the 1st year of Cyrus
    NB Chronology i as with all other secular chronologies are likened to simply a chain or a string of beads, each date being a link or unit in a whole. Whereas, WT Bible Chronology is likened to a cable of interwoven strands of four  events each of which lay between two key events in biblical and modern history providing irrefutable proof/ evidence for this scheme of Chronology.
    scholar JW
  25. Like
    scholar JW got a reaction from César Chávez in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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
×
×
  • 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.