Ann O'Maly

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.

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.

56 pages and you still squabble like children in a playground.    

That was the flood - not 50 millions of years.  That is where the marine fossils come from all over the earth - on all the highest mountains. 

You're right. From here on I won't respond to Arauna's ignorant off-topic rants.

Arauna said:
They're not relevant to the Toba eruption of 74,000 years ago.
I already explained this to you. Is your ancient wizened memory that bad? Look up "plate tectonics" and how the tectonic collision of India with Asia over the last 50 million years raised the Himalayas and uplifted the marine floor.
I already debunked that nonsense. There is no ONE Cambrian layer -- there are many. Do a little research on the Grand Canyon and you'll see.
But as I've said many times, Arauna: you're "research" consists solely of reading Young-Earth Creationist propaganda, supplemented from time to time with Watchtower propaganda. And you don't understand enough to realize that even the ignorant Watchtower writers know enough to reject Young-Earth Creationism.

1. It's off topic,
2. Do some reading on Earth history, plate tectonics, and geological time. 🙄
@AlanF, may I suggest that, rather than have Anna's thread go off track, a new one might be started on human existence/development, etc.?

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.

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.

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.

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.

Yes! The king was certainly punished then.
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.)

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.

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. :)) 

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.

Another knee-jerk clueless defense.

Completely clueless.

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.

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. 👍

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

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.
I have come to believe that this was why you have so far completely avoided the Bible questions I asked.

Let me try to lay this out for you (although this is more for any interested readers' benefit than for yours). The stars, planets, and Moon are components in a giant sky-clock that keeps perfect time. The 'fixed' stars are like the numbers spaced out on the clock's face. The planets and Moon are like the hands on the clock. Through their cyclical alignments with each other and against the 'fixed' starry backdrop, we can tell the time - the year, the month, the day.
Now, to be a 'competent' astrologer in ancient times, you had to be a competent astronomer. You had to interpret what you saw rather than what you wished you had seen. A bad astrologer would lose his job (or his life) if he faked his observations and his report to the court. It was a serious business involving years of rigorous training from childhood (remember Daniel?).
Not only that, but the Babylonians depended on genuinely dated observations over centuries to develop their mathematical astronomy/'science' that was eventually passed on to the Greeks and built upon by others. How were those observations dated? They used their calendar, i.e. the name and regnal year of the current ruler, the month, the day, even the time of night the observation took place. Any astrological interpretations coming from those observations have no bearing on the veracity of the celestial phenomena they witnessed.
So, when there is a dated astronomical text, we can check those observations, pin them to a BCE date, and hey presto! we can know in modern calendar terms when a king ruled. Thus, the 'stars' are reliable tools for dating kings' reigns.

Yes - but non-WT models accept the 50 years and not 70 years.  WT chronology fits all the biblical events and the number of years the bible talks about.  We put biblical chronology above secular chronology ..... because we accept the bible as word of God. 
Many false Christian religions do not care if things match up.  They believe in a trinity, immortality of the soul, Jesus did not really die because he was immortal - he did not receive immortality as a reward for faithfulness to God etc. etc. ....So if these fundamental teachings are not important to them how can one expect them to challenge a few wrong years in the secular chronology? 

Maybe you are the one with no insight - because he may be correcting you and you are too obtuse to see it.
The fact that you cannot see the connection between the gods and the stars indicates that you have no clue of Babylonian culture.  They did not have science - religion was their 'everything' - superstition spells and all.

It's. Simple. Math!
360 / 12 = 30
F'goodness' sake!