Jump to content
The World News Media

Srecko Sostar

Member
  • Content Count

    2,928
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    41

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    OK. It's 2021 now, I will move on to the second part of your answer, which is even more incorrect.
    I asked:
    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?
    You answered:
    JSTOR gives me a couple of references that show you are wrong. The first is :
    Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. The End of Exile: The Reception of Jeremiah's Prediction of a Seventy-Year Exile Author(s): Steven M. Bryan Source: Journal of Biblical Literature , Vol. 137, No. 1 (Spring 2018), pp. 107-126
    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.
    Now to Rainer Albertz. Without looking, I have already come to trust that this was also just an empty claim.
    So, here it is. Not surprisingly, you failed at this one too. Here is his chronology from the book:
    Israel in Exile --The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. by Rainer Albertz · 2003

    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.
  2. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to AlanF in Creation-Evolution-Creative Days-Age of the Earth-Humanoid Fossils-Great Flood   
    True Tom Harley said:
    You should call up Fred Franz on the earth-heaven phone and instruct him that the dozens of books and magazines that discussed them at length should never have been published.
    The Publications Indexes contain dozens of references, such as "confirmation", which purport to use science to support the idea of an earthwide Flood. For example: w68 7/15 "Was There an Earthwide Flood?"
    For a thorough disproof of the Flood, and copious references to Watchtower material, see
    Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. By your 'logic', Watchtower writers were not Bible teachers until about 1980. 
     
  3. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to 4Jah2me in Neighbours becoming enemies   
    Out walking today I noticed how people are avoiding each other more then ever.  They look at each other as if they do not trust each other.  Of course the 'virus' may be the main problem but is it the only problem.  Naming it 'social distancing' did no help, but was that done deliberately.  It brought to mind the words from the scriptures 'like sheep without a shepherd'.  I often think it is my 'old age' that puts fear into me. When I was young I longed for 'excitement' but now I just want 'peace and security'.  It is impossible to separate happenings in this world from God's word..... 2021, a 'new year' but it will of course bring with it new problems.  I am in England but I care not about Brexit or politics, I care about people. Are any of you, in any country, noticing that neighbours are distancing more or becoming more suspicious of each other ?  Or is it just my frame of mind ? 
     
  4. Thanks
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Niles, himself gives an overview of many past scholars, and he is not confused at all by the scholarship. First, of course, here are the dates he accepts, as seen in Appendix C. This applies to the second question, of course, as he is also an "Exilic" scholar, too. He apparently understands exactly how the standard dates align with the Bible chronology.

    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.
    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:



    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.)
    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.
    Maybe next year, though. This should be my last post of 2020.
     
  5. Thanks
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Someone named RR(?) was selling a book on eBay while making a claim it came from Tom Cabeen, implying it might have been printed on WT materials. I thought it was nearly impossible, having been there from 76 to 82. I got Cabeen's number through contact with his son (who went to college with my son). Cabeen was sure he had never seen the book before.
    Anyway, I asked Cabeen if he knew how COJ was doing healthwise. Cabeen didn't know for sure, but told me how sad it was that COJ only tried to do the right thing when one of his Bible Study "RV's" asked him about why the WTS uses this special chronology. COJ was sure it could be defended and did his best, but, of course, discovered what anyone would discover if they were being honest and thorough. I told Cabeen that when I was tagging along with Brother Schroeder's "entourage" for an International Convention tour in 1978 that I had to stay in Athens for some extra time while Bert Schroeder went to Wiesbaden. When I was supposed to catch up with him in Wiesbaden, I was told he had alread gone to Hamburg/Copenhagen/Stockholm for some meetings (no conventions) and without any of his small entourage. The rumor was that this was about the COJ manuscript, although I couldn't know absolutely for sure. We caught up again when he came back to Hamburg then on back to London and Brooklyn. 
    I told Cabeen this, and he already knew about part of it. I understand Cabeen might be biased, but he said that Schroeder had already determined to get COJ disfellowshiped several months before that convention trip. So I can believe that something like this happened with Gerard Gertoux. Gertoux seemed willing to discuss anything except 587 BCE, which made him suddenly clam up. 
  6. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    CC, You keep dragging me (and @Arauna ) into this. Arauna is right. We should be able to explain complex things with simple words and simple sentences. So here goes:
    Ann O'maly commented on a paper written by Gerard Gertoux. In her comments, O'maly happened to make mention of a mistake that might have just been a typo. Gertoux's "typo" indicated that 360/12=15, instead of 360/12=30. No big deal. Chavez (CC) sarys Gertoux is right about 15 degrees, and O'maly must be stupid. For evidence CC posts content saying that 360/12=30 and that 360/24=15 and that 30/2=15. CC apparently doesn't realize that all CC has done is prove that O'maly was right. That's the whole story: CC has tried to prove O'maly wrong, but all his evidence directly shows she was right. His evidence blew up in his face. That's the whole story, except that Arauna has sided with the idea that 360/12=15, without even knowing, probably, that this was the entire argument. It's EXACTLY as if:
    O'maly said 2+2=4 CC told her she was stupid, because 2+2=5 CC "proves" it by loading up a lot of Googled sites that prove that 2+2=4 CC claims his superiority and O'maly's stupidity, by misreading his evidence that "proved" to him that 2+2=5 Arauna places her bets on the side of 2+2=5 and criticizes O'maly for believing that 2+2=4. But why go to so much trouble to defend a typo in the first place? Why the need to pretend O'maly is stupid and wrong and incompetent just because she caught a simple mistake? That was not even the point of O'maly's comments. 
    I think it only goes to prove a more general point we have seen on this thread. Hatred of people interferes with good judgment. And conversely, if people think someone else (like a Furuli, a Gertoux) is on the side of 1914, then it doesn't matter if they are making ludicrous claims. 99.9% of Witnesses apparently aren't really going to test them anyway. It's easier to just say they must be right, and Witnesses should defend them. For people who do not wish to look into the facts, it becomes an 'us versus them' proposition.
    But there's another way I can tell that it doesn't matter what the evidence shows, and this is only about assumptions, and not real study or research:
    It's because Gerard Gertoux has agreed with  the same date that Carl Olof Jonsson gives for the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. I have even communicated with Gerard Gertoux to find out why.
     

    Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
  7. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Witness in THE GREEK SCRIPTURES ARE FOR THE TRUE ANOINTED ONES.   
    Where does your loyalty stand, with the organization and a GB who are not inspired, or with God and Jesus Christ?  Where is the humility of men who cannot even consider their anointed brothers in Christ, but choose a vast army of unanointed "Gentiles" to do their bidding?  Are you as arrogant as they are? If God truly blessed the organization, he would make it possible for all of "Israel" to come together and lead it in truth.  Yet, instead, for rejecting lies, "Israel" can be condemned to "death" through disfellowshipping.  They are the victors against this Beast/organization.  (Rev 13:15; 15:2) In the end, only those who put their faith in God and Jesus, are saved.  This is why the road is narrow and cramped.  Don't you see?  Your leaders boast of how the organization is growing by leaps and bounds.  Growing!  That road is not narrow, it is broad leading to destruction.  Only those who listen to Christ, his pure teachings, will be on the road leading to life.  Every word proven to be a lie by these men will be their judge.
    Matt 12:37 -   For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
  8. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to AlanF in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Irrelevant scripture. Try Jer. 25:12, 27:7.
    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?
     
  9. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in Creation-Evolution-Creative Days-Age of the Earth-Humanoid Fossils-Great Flood   
    I'm making a catch-all place for the discussions on these topics that were currently under different topics/subjects. As I move old posts into this new topic, the oldest ones will appear to identify the starter/owner of this topic, even though that person didn't create this topic.
  10. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to 4Jah2me in Creation-Evolution-Creative Days-Age of the Earth-Humanoid Fossils-Great Flood   
    Yep, I'm 71 and and at age around 20 (50 year ago) the Org was teaching me about the 7,000 year creative days and about the 6,000 years of human life, then it would be / should have been, Armageddon / Jesus' 1,000 year reign.  That would have then been 49,000 years and then i think the Org was also mentioning a Millenium ??? 
    Now, that was a foundation teaching of the Watchtower back then.  A doctrine of importance to all JWs, and those W/t leaders were thought of as having God's Holy Spirit. 
     
  11. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to AlanF in Creation-Evolution-Creative Days-Age of the Earth-Humanoid Fossils-Great Flood   
    Arauna appears stuck in the pre-1980 Watchtower world, when the Society was promoting its version of Young-Earth Creationism (more properly, bits of normal YECism mixed with Russellism) and YEC Flood Geology. About 1980 the Writing Dept. abandoned much of this nonsense and mostly quit trying to justify Noah's Flood, and gradually began referring to the "creative days" as being "millennia long" rather than 7,000 years. Stuck-in-the-mud JWs like Arauna never noticed -- which was exactly why the Society never announced these changes. It would have been a bit too much for the old ones to give up on a century of Russell's nonsense.
    These topics are rarely discussed by JWs today, to the extent that ones under about 45 usually know nothing about the 7,000 years nonsense, much less Watchtowerish Flood Geology. Most of the younger JWs have no problem accepting normal geological dating, such as 66 million years ago for the Cretaceous Extinction of the dinosaurs. Only dinosaurs like Arauna have trouble with such dating.
  12. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to AlanF in Creation-Evolution-Creative Days-Age of the Earth-Humanoid Fossils-Great Flood   
    Arauna said:
    Rather, be ashamed of it.
    Recognizable humans have existed as such for more than 2 million years. Their ancestors have existed for about three times that. A great deal of evidence indicates that a variety of human species have existed just in Europe and Asia during the last 60 thousand years and more -- Neanderthals, Denisovans, probably one other similar to them, and others more distantly related like Homo floriensis and perhaps even Homo erectus. The DNA of the first three is found in all non-Africans today, in percentages ranging from 1% to 5%. All of this is impossible within the Watchtower's 6,000 year timeframe for humanity.
    Archaeological remains abound. Gobekli Tepi in Turkey is something like 12,000 years old and is obviously far older than 6,000 years, even to non-archaeologists. Some 74,000 years ago the giant volcano Toba in Sumatra erupted and killed perhaps all but a few thousand humans on earth due to drastic cooling of climate. Above the ash layers in India have been found human artifacts that indicate that another wave of migration out of Africa occurred within some 15,000 years of the eruption. On and on goes the evidence of humans living in Africa, Europe and Asia for tens of thousands of years, and in the Americas for at least 15,000 years.
    The Bible and the Watchtower Society are out of sync with reality.
  13. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from 4Jah2me in Creation-Evolution-Creative Days-Age of the Earth-Humanoid Fossils-Great Flood   
    Kind of ???? reasoning.  WTJWorg somehow holds on position how life on Earth begun before 6 Creative Days and that one (JW members) should not really believe that fossils (plant and animal) are millions of years old. 
    The word “day” as used in Genesis can refer to long periods of time. In fact, at Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. , the word “day” is used to describe all six days of creation.
    The Bible’s narrative allows for the possibility that some major events during each day, or creative period, occurred gradually rather than instantly, perhaps some of them even lasting into the following creative days.**Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  .... How long, then, were the creative days? The Bible does not say; however, the wording of Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved. -Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    But, at the same time WTJWorg scholars speaking how God's (Jesus') Kingdom is literally 1000 years long and as such is last part of 6th Creative day, which 6000  years ended in 1975 CE. By that they came to general conclusion how each Creative day last 7000 years. Or, if not every single day, but this final 6th Day have to be 7000 years long. :))) This is WTJWorg Chronology too!  
    *** another example of "overlapping" :)))
    Insight into/about WTJWorg doctrines leads us to conclusion how, TIMELINE or WTJWorg CHRONOLOGY about 1000 year Kingdom and about Creation Day are not synchronized. 
    And as i see, TTH and Arauna don't care nothing about that, but are very proud how their Organization standing in such impossible position.
    You making problem about 70 years, but have no problem about thousands or millions of years !!?? Dogmas and chronology about 607 BCE to 1914 CE and 1975 CE, as one part, in connection/relation to 1000 years of (future) Kingdom and Length of Creative Days, as second part, destroys your hopes and theology every single day, and you are not aware of that.
    You can't have both. Awake!
  14. Like
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from AlanF in Creation-Evolution-Creative Days-Age of the Earth-Humanoid Fossils-Great Flood   
    Kind of ???? reasoning.  WTJWorg somehow holds on position how life on Earth begun before 6 Creative Days and that one (JW members) should not really believe that fossils (plant and animal) are millions of years old. 
    The word “day” as used in Genesis can refer to long periods of time. In fact, at Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. , the word “day” is used to describe all six days of creation.
    The Bible’s narrative allows for the possibility that some major events during each day, or creative period, occurred gradually rather than instantly, perhaps some of them even lasting into the following creative days.**Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  .... How long, then, were the creative days? The Bible does not say; however, the wording of Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved. -Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    But, at the same time WTJWorg scholars speaking how God's (Jesus') Kingdom is literally 1000 years long and as such is last part of 6th Creative day, which 6000  years ended in 1975 CE. By that they came to general conclusion how each Creative day last 7000 years. Or, if not every single day, but this final 6th Day have to be 7000 years long. :))) This is WTJWorg Chronology too!  
    *** another example of "overlapping" :)))
    Insight into/about WTJWorg doctrines leads us to conclusion how, TIMELINE or WTJWorg CHRONOLOGY about 1000 year Kingdom and about Creation Day are not synchronized. 
    And as i see, TTH and Arauna don't care nothing about that, but are very proud how their Organization standing in such impossible position.
    You making problem about 70 years, but have no problem about thousands or millions of years !!?? Dogmas and chronology about 607 BCE to 1914 CE and 1975 CE, as one part, in connection/relation to 1000 years of (future) Kingdom and Length of Creative Days, as second part, destroys your hopes and theology every single day, and you are not aware of that.
    You can't have both. Awake!
  15. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Ann O'Maly in A "Conversation" about 1914 as it appeared in the Watchtower's "1914-2014 Anniversary Celebration" issues.   
    Jeremiah is the source of the 70-years prophecies, though. Later interpretations and references to them need to harmonize with what Jeremiah actually said. The root of WT's divergence from mainstream understandings of the 70 years is its insistence that the 70-year period relates to the length of time the land would be 'desolate, without an inhabitant.' However, Jeremiah nowhere says this. He talks about a '70 years servitude' to Babylon and a '70 years for Babylon' but not that the land would be uninhabited for 70 years. It is this (mis)understanding that locks Watchtower into its chronological scheme. 
    As far as I can see, WT nearly always ignores the problem of Jer. 25:12's sequence of events. One time it attempts to resolve it (w79 9/15 p. 23-24) by claiming the nations continued serving the king of Babylon after the city had been conquered and its king removed by Cyrus because Cyrus then became king of Babylon - the 70-year period was only up two years after the conquest and it was when Cyrus let the Jews go that the Babylonians were punished. Not only is this convoluted tripe not in keeping with the wording in Jer. 25:12, but it goes against Ezra's wording too at 2 Chron. 36:20:
    "He [Neb] carried off captive to Babylon those who escaped the sword, and they became servants to him and his sons until the kingdom of Persia began to reign"
    As for WT's solution to Jer. 29:10 - it doesn't offer one. It sticks with its translation 'at Babylon' and sidesteps the context by applying it to exiles taken 10 years later.
    But we still have the wording of the texts to get past. The 70 years are fulfilled, then the Babylonian king is punished / then God will turn his attention to the exiles. It's not the other way around.
  16. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from 4Jah2me in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Why all this is so similar to, and remind me on, "overlapping" solution?
    WTJWorg made Terminus Post Quem and  Terminus Ante Quem for "this generation will not pass" in "old lights insightful knowledge". Without going into the nuances they created about the interpretations of the term "generation", it was clear to everyone, at that time, and especially today, that "that generation" should have lasted from cca 1914 + 70-80 years according to JW scholars, with "happy conclusion" to the end of 20th century. :)) 
  17. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from Ann O'Maly in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Why all this is so similar to, and remind me on, "overlapping" solution?
    WTJWorg made Terminus Post Quem and  Terminus Ante Quem for "this generation will not pass" in "old lights insightful knowledge". Without going into the nuances they created about the interpretations of the term "generation", it was clear to everyone, at that time, and especially today, that "that generation" should have lasted from cca 1914 + 70-80 years according to JW scholars, with "happy conclusion" to the end of 20th century. :)) 
  18. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from JW Insider in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Why all this is so similar to, and remind me on, "overlapping" solution?
    WTJWorg made Terminus Post Quem and  Terminus Ante Quem for "this generation will not pass" in "old lights insightful knowledge". Without going into the nuances they created about the interpretations of the term "generation", it was clear to everyone, at that time, and especially today, that "that generation" should have lasted from cca 1914 + 70-80 years according to JW scholars, with "happy conclusion" to the end of 20th century. :)) 
  19. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Ann O'Maly in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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?
    Thank you for also confirming that Young did, in fact, resolve the 587/586 dilemma and that you initially told a whopping fib. 👍
  20. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to AlanF in A "Conversation" about 1914 as it appeared in the Watchtower's "1914-2014 Anniversary Celebration" issues.   
    Anna said:
    "Admit" is the wrong word. This is what proper scholars have been saying for decades. And of course, JW critics have said it at least a hundred times on this board.
    As I, Ann O'Maly and others have shown, the 70 years ended in 539 BCE when the king of Babylon was punished. Go back 70 years and you get 609 BCE. No problem.
    Also note that your argument assumes that "70" is an exact figure -- which is open to question.
    Nope. I've already explained the details of this many times.
    Neither the decree nor the conquest started the Return. The return occurred nearly a year after the conquest of October, 539, not later than about September, 538.
    Good!
    As Ann and I and others keep pointing out, the Bible and secular history are in excellent agreement about virtually all significant chronology. It is only the Watchtower's distortions that are out of sync. You have only to read the many sources that I and others have pointed you to.
    Precisely! Ann and I are in agreement on this.
    Nope. The Watchtower Society and its apologists are adamant that the 70 years were a precise period of time that cannot be moved even by one month. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
    There was no specific decree to rebuild the temple at a specific time. Cyrus' decree allowed the Jews and other captives to return to their homelands, where they could rebuild temples on their own timetables. Ezra is quite clear that this happened with the Jewish temple in the 2nd month of the 2nd year of the Return from exile, i.e., Iyyar of 537 BCE.
    You're going in circles now. It's entirely possible that "the 70 years" was an approximate period. This has been discussed by scholars for centuries.
    Perhaps for after-the-fact rationalization, but not as a foundational figure upon which to base the Society's claim that in 1919 Jehovah anointed Watchtower leaders to a special position of spiritual authority "over all Christ's earthly belongings".
    The only date one can be dogmatic on is 539 BCE, since a great deal of evidence supports it as the date of Babylon's fall and the end of Nebuchadnezzar's dynasty. And of course, no scriptures pinpoint 539 -- only secular data does that. And Jeremiah 25:12, 27:7 and 29:10 clearly show that the 70 years ended when that dynasty became no more.
    Yes, but that is exactly the ass-backwards thinking that has resulted in the Society lying about so much to do with its bogus chronology. What about intellectual honesty?
    And remember that the originators of the "606-607 chronology" (Christopher Bowen, E. B. Elliott, Nelson Barbour and C. T. Russell) were adamant that 606 BCE was the starting date for the 70 years. They certainly did no ass-backwards calculations. Rather, they began with secular data (i.e., 536 BCE for the fall of Babylon, (also wrong)) and applied their interpretations of certain Bible passages to arrive (wrongly) at 606 BCE + 2,520 years = 1914 CE. You want to work backwards from 1914. Why?
    Yes, but given your JW background, and the fact that you don't lie about these things, in contrast to many other JWs, you can be forgiven.
  21. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Ann O'Maly in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    🤣 at Cesar's Googling and lengthy, but irrelevant, copy-and-pastes in a vain attempt to hide his embarrassing blunder, and that further drive home the point that he had no clue what Gertoux or I were talking about.
     👋👋👋 Well done!
  22. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Ann O'Maly in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Date is disputed. Other non-WT models are out there that fit the 390 years with the conventional timeline.
    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.
    ... is another subject beyond the scope of this thread and it similarly involves an erroneous WT starting date.
    Again, WT interpretation of these periods is upended by sound exegesis and by WT following its own new approach regarding types and antitypes:
    Humans cannot know which Bible accounts are shadows of things to come and which are not. The clearest course is this: Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so. - w15 3/15 p. 18
    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."

    Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. "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."
    -
    Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
  23. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Since love doesn't keep account of the injury and covers a multitude of sins, I will not go back and show you what you have actually said. Besides, I've never wanted to make this into a contest of who is smart or not. I've never claimed to be smarter than you or anyone else here. This just happens to be one of my strong interests -- and of course it's an interest that is recommended in the Watchtower itself. It's easy to make mistakes in this area of study. I've made quite a few while learning and might still be making some. I'm hoping to be corrected where I am making mistakes. But it gets easier, and makes more sense every time I read another book and compare it with the evidence and the appropriate Bible passages.
    But I'm sure you'll agree that there's nothing wrong with taking an interest in this topic:
    *** w11 10/1 p. 26 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part One ***
    But why be interested in the actual date when Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II razed the city of Jerusalem? First, because the event marked an important turning point in the history of God’s people. . . .
    Second, because knowing the actual year when this “ultimate catastrophe” began and understanding how the restoration of true worship in Jerusalem fulfilled a precise Bible prophecy will build your confidence in the reliability of God’s Word. So why do Jehovah’s Witnesses hold to a date that differs from widely accepted chronology by 20 years? In short, because of evidence within the Bible itself.
    The problem, of course, is not just taking an interest, but discovering that the Watchtower's solution produces too many contradictions and cannot be supported without manipulation or rejection of the Biblical and archaeological evidence.
    Of course the only right thing to do when one discovers that the evidence leads to a different conclusion is to be quiet and wait on Jehovah. At least that's what I was told even by the persons who first showed me a few pieces of this evidence in 1977 and 1978. If you speak up, you could be disfellowshipped, I was warned. So I stayed pretty quiet about it for more than a third of a century (i.e., 33 years) but I have kept studying about these things off and on.
    But my conscience bothered me a bit, because Jehovah is the "God of Truth." (Psalm 31:5) If we see our brother take a false step we shouldn't just ignore it. When I asked about these things with responsible persons in the organization, who I respected, I realized that the only defense was "empty speeches." (Non-answers, avoidance, evasion, misquotes, and very weak or completely unrelated evidence.) Mostly you begin to see that no one really has looked at the evidence. Or, if they are like Furuli, they try to exploit a weakness in one or two tiny pieces of evidence, and won't even admit that their theory is already demolished by 1,000 other bits of independent evidence.
    So for me, I must follow my conscience.
    (2 Timothy 2:14-18) . . .. 15 Do your utmost to present yourself approved to God, a workman with nothing to be ashamed of, handling the word of the truth aright. 16 But reject empty speeches that violate what is holy, for they will lead to more and more ungodliness, 17 and their word will spread like gangrene. Hy·me·naeʹus and Phi·leʹtus are among them. 18 These men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred, and they are subverting the faith of some.
    Hmmmm. Thanks? Well, that should convince her!  I think she trusts your judgment pretty much the way she judges mine.
  24. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to AlanF in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    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.
    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!!!"
  25. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to AlanF in SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)   
    Again confusing Jehovah with the Watchtower Society.
    JW Insider, although we disagree about some things, happens to be about most honest JW I've ever come across. Coming from me, that's saying something!
    "Clear as daylight." LOL! LIke teaching that organ transplants are the same as eating organs? Like teaching that "the resurrection of the saints" in 1881 was a fact of history for half the Watchtower's history? Like teaching that Christ returned invisibly in 1874? Like teaching "Armageddon is right around the corner" for decades, despite Jesus' warning in Luke 21:8 not to do that?
    I could go on with such examples for a long time, but you get the idea: as claimed "speakers for Jehovah", Watchtower leaders speak with forked tongues: they are false prophets.
    In the end, assuming your God actually judges people for their actions, who do you think will fare better: Unthinking, willingly gullible drones? Or people who actually think about what they're taught and make decisions according to their consciences?
×
×
  • 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.