607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?

[scholar JW]

Ann O Maly

You are free to believe in error but that is not scholarship. I can assure you with utmost certainty that page 208 does exist and you will have to try harder to find it perhaps you can write to Bethel and they will provide a copy. According to the table of Contents for Brown's Eventide , vol 2 covers 416 pages. Methinks some apostate conspiracy is at work in order to hide the truth from the little sheep.

scholar JW

[scholar JW]

Anna

1 hour ago, Anna said:

I can't say anything about what was said under another heading, but I do know that the question that arose a number of times was if WT accepts 537, then why does it not accept 587, if both dates are verifiable by the same astronomical/historical l sources

The simple answer is that 539 and 537 BCE are not controversial as there is no contradictory evidence against these two dates whereas 587 is very controversial within scholarship for the following reasons:

1. Does not account for the biblical 'seventy years' creating a gap of 20 years in the NB Period

2. Rolf Furuli's research based on VAT 4956 that the Fall of Jerusalem can be adjusted to 607 and not 586/7BCE

3. Scholars cannot precisely determine whether Jerusalem fell in 587 or 586 BCE

4. WT scholars as with all other Chronologists use different Methodologies in order to construct a scheme of Chronology so that means that WT scholars looking at all of the available evidence can exercise academic discretion exercising priority/interpretation to the data.

5. I stand corrected but it is  my opinion that it was Christine Tetley, a NZ scholar who did her Ph.D on the Divided Monarchy or as she terms it the Divided Kingdom-DK, made good use of Methodology in her thesis perhaps the first scholar to introduce such a term into Chronology. I had introduced the term before her or about the same time on a online forum soon after Rodger Young used the term as well. Tetley's thesis is titled The Reconstructed Chronology of the Divided Kingdom, 2005, Eisenbraums.

So in very simple terms the answer in one good word essential in all academic work: METHODOLOGY

scholar JW

[Arauna]

7 hours ago, Anna said:

The fact is he WAS a witness at one time but as you say, his present status is uncertain.

When people start to develop egos and leave the truth one cannot trust them any more.  TRUST is an important aspect in all facets of life - even in business when working with opposition companies or negotiating.  I have worked in business in America and believe me TRUST is the most important thing - if your work involves working with opposition companies.

If I am working with a person in a team and they are always criticizing management severely and they are only looking out for themselves - ego - it breaks team morale.  We are social animals after all - Jehovah created us this way - that we need to trust each other. 

When someone has left the truth and they are pursuing a scholarly career then ego and politics at the university enters into it.  At present I would NOT like to be working at any  university - have you noticed what is going on?   Would I completely trust such a person and their integrity to just go after truth?  Or is it more important to them to get noticed and pose a new theory? 

 

[Arauna]

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

because I am concerned about Ann's postings on this subject and her appa

My experience exactly in the few years that I have come back to this forum - she is always ready for a fight - and does not care for real scholarship - even if she professes it. 

A person's search for truth also involves a reasonableness to look at all aspects of a subject. Even if good arguments are given - she does not consider it and goes back to her old arguments.    

[Arauna]

5 hours ago, Anna said:

but there have been many signs before that, that actually turned out NOT to be the sign

This is dangerous thinking because there are too many signs on the ground now which started in 1914 and is culminating into a very dangerous world-wide situation - it is putting the future of mankind's very EXISTENCE in jeopardy.  These issues will definitely all be coming to a crisis within the next few years - quicker than expected.

Those saying : where is the end?   It is panting to its 'disastrous apex' and most people are not giving attention or think they have ample time - just as the scriptures warned us. All aspects of our 'survival as a species' will come to head quite soon. 

I made sure for myself years ago that I accept 1914 and acknowledge completely that I now tend to look more at world events for the signs on ground zero - all the politics and trends happening in the world right now regarding ecology, deforestation, water pollution, weapon arsenals, and philosophy - to name only a few facets.   It helps me in the field because most people accept 1914 and the invisible rule (rev 12: 6 onwards) when they can see what has been happening since 1914 in real life. Even atheists evaluate their stance on the world when one can logically present what is going on and ask the question: how 'science' will solve this.....

I have been criticized for being here on this forum and not offering academic contributions.... However, I do have an interest to follow the newest contributions from other contributors to see if there is anything new that I had not thought about before when I looked into it years ago. 

I do sometimes make comments to add some interesting tidbit, when I see that someone is unreasonable, or when someone has sneaked in some other 'related subject'  which is not in line with bible thought - which comes from the idea that they do not accept 607 - 1914. 

When they do not accept 1914 they tend to deviate into all other kinds of theories which are not based on accurate thinking from the scriptures .... such as the idea that the 144000 will be living in flesh amongst us after Armageddon......and Christ will have to appear in flesh so the world will know what is going on.  (The Muslims have a place where they say the Mahdi will come and I often wonder if they will have world-television there so everyone will see him - fleshly reasoning not based on truth)

It is nice to follow the academic discussion - but again - it only benefits those here and those who have the stamina to quickly read through it when they come home from daily activities and offer a comment. 

The slave have done their homework and do not set out to cover up or deceive as some on this forum imply - the Amaharets are better off tending to their children and get on with the business of family worship and field service. Academic arguments is not going to bring more people closer to Jehovah. And since this is supposed to be a religious forum and not an academic forum at a university - I can make this statement. 

[Ann O'Maly]

8 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Ann O Maly

You are free to believe in error but that is not scholarship. I can assure you with utmost certainty that page 208 does exist and you will have to try harder to find it perhaps you can write to Bethel and they will provide a copy. According to the table of Contents for Brown's Eventide , vol 2 covers 416 pages. Methinks some apostate conspiracy is at work in order to hide the truth from the little sheep.

scholar JW

Why bother Bethel? You have the page, a computer, and yet you won't share - even to help @Anna. This just makes you look plain mean, Neil ... or scared that it will reveal you've been the one trying to hide the truth. Ah well.

[scholar JW]

Ann

You have known about this matter for many years as I had a lengthy discussion about this on the JWD forum and yet during all that time you never bothered to obtain that particular page so I am wondering Why this is so?

Anna like any Witness can write to Bethel for a copy of the page or obtain a copy through an appropriate library in the country in which she lives. However,t is always preferable to read the entire book in order to get a complete picture and this where COJ got unstuck for he simply confined his reading to selected portions of the book and made a serious historical blunder.

scholar JW

[Ann O'Maly]

In all your nearly 20 years of possessing it, you've never 'been disposed' to sharing it.

Again I ask, Neil: Why should anyone bother Bethel about it? Don't they have enough to do? YOU have the page. YOU are here now. YOU can easily post it ... unless the page's contents contradict your claim which, given your long posting history on the internet, is entirely probable. 

But if you're not going to do it, you're not going to do it, so let's move on. 

[TrueTomHarley]

52 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Again I ask, Neil: Why should anyone bother Bethel about it?

I do not know who Neil is. In responding to a post of mine before, you seem to assume that I do. (I have not followed this thread closely)

[TrueTomHarley]

Gasp!!!!!! Neil is not allensmith28, is he? (the first one to react)

And 27, and 26, and 25, and so on all the way down to allensmith?

And - no, it cannot be! - even Allen_Smith? the one who once sported the most glorious stache I have ever seen but has since shaved it off?

(more than once I have had the impression that everyone on this forum knows one another except for me)

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Gasp!!!!!! Neil is not allensmith28, is he? (the first one to react)

apologies in advance that a few keys on my keyboard are not working, including the shift and caps lock along with a few key letters. workarounds take a long time, so although i will repair a few of the problems created, some of this post might be hard to read.

On 1/1/2018 at 10:02 PM, scholar JW said:

 In fact, amongst the entire worldwide brotherhood there are possibly only two brothers who have publicly demonstrated competence in Chronology and these brothers are Rolf Furuli in Norway and Neil Mc Fadzen from Australia.

scholar JW

 

Neil Mc Fadzen has self-identified as 'scholar' on another forum and as @scholar JW here. what he is saying above is that he might be only one of two brothers in the entire world who have demonstrated competence in chronology. you admit that you have not followed the thread that closely, but perhaps you might wish to follow it more closely on this basis alone. you are evidently privileged to be in the presence of a very rare level of competence.

since this topic has veered from its original course, and it was started by me, i'm happy to create a new version of it that deals only with the more serious issues about watchtower chronology vs. bible chronology vs. secular chronology. evidently i still have the ability to move posts from one thread to another, to keep topics organised. if i still have some of these moderator functions available to me, i can always move irrelevant and irreverent posts back over to this thread.

if i do decide to start a new thread, i will probably not be moving any posts from here, but will likely try to summarise by quoting from posts made here. this might have to wait until i add a wireless keyboard to this laptop, or perhaps i'll start using my Macbook more often, which slows down my typing by about 50wpm until i get used to it. that would likely cut down the length of my posts by more than 50 percent --and who wants that?

[John Houston]

Not I!