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

[Foreigner]

20 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

f you will look back at the conversation you will see their was no deceit, just an attempt to give and get honest answers, and no deflection on my part. If you want real dialogue perhaps you can be clearer about where you thought there was deflection. I am guessing that this accusation wasn't based on anything, as is usually the case, and it's just a need to blame-shift and project back onto me what probably "hit a nerve" when I pointed out that I am accepting some words of Jesus that you appear to be rejecting or denying. This has become such a predictable form of deflection that it was already anticipated. It's exactly how several other persons have already avoided honest dialogue on this topic.

It’s beneath you to twist words. But, since you’re back on track with 2520 and the 7 times of Daniel. What part confuses you, that Jesus only meant 1260? If that were the case, you are suggesting Jesus dismissed ancient prophecy that would have been part of John’s vision. So, how is this not placing ideologies that aren’t referenced in scripture? (I.e. only 1260) Once again, stick to the question of why you don't believe scripture by giving a false claim, that Jesus Said, ONLY 1260?

[AlanF]

allensmith28 wrote:

Quote

 

:: That's progress! I can see 586 as a strong possibility too. . .

This is how FALSE YOUR STATEMENT IS, FOR SECULAR DATING.

 

Launches into another bout of near-total incoherence:

Quote

Until people like Carl Olof Jonsson can explain the contradiction in secular history that DEMAND, there were only,  2 instances, in the exile of the Jewish people in, Babylonian time? It’s futile to argue against any skeptic, since 2015, recent Babylonian tablets, found, indicate 3 exiles NOT 2, meaning 3 points of interest. So, those 3 years I keep referring to, remain WITHIN the same archeological EVIDENCE, which COJ and Raymond Franz FAILED to take into account. So, once again, COJ’s book is a contradiction unto itself and a FAILURE.

You seem to blathering that COJ and Franz failed to mention 3 instances of Jews being taken captive, but only mentioned 2. Let me disabuse you of that false notion.

On page 207 of "The Gentile Times Reconsidered" (4th edition) COJ wrote:

<< Berossus gives support to Daniel's statement that Jewish captives were brought to Babylon in the year of Nebuchadnezzar's accession. >>

Which of course is 605/604 BCE. COJ has a lot more to say about the taking of captives in 605/604.

On pages 293-294 of GTR4, COJ quotes two scholars on the capture of Jerusalem and taking of captives:

<< ... the 597 date is one of the very few secure dates in our whole chronological repertoire. >>

<< ... the capture of Jerusalem in 597 (that date is now fixed exactly). >>

COJ elsewhere mentions 597 BCE many times as the date of Jerusalem's capture and the taking of many captives.

On page 149 of GTR4, COJ states that Nebuchadnezzar's:

<< ... eighteenth year was 587/86, during which Jerusalem was destroyed. >>

And of course, COJ speaks in many other places about the Jewish captives that were taken in 587.

Franz has virtually nothing to say about this, so once again you're talking out of your nether regions.

Quote

 

O’Maly and JWinsider should be aware of these new finds of Filip Vukosavovic 2015, at the British Museum.

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/exhibits-events/tablets-of-jewish-exiles/

 

Yes, anyone who knows anything about Neo-Babylonian chronology already knows about the dates given:

<< The exhibit is accompanied by a beautiful catalog, By the Rivers of Babylon,1 which describes the Al-Yahudu Archive and addresses the three waves of exile—in 604, 597 and 587 B.C.E. >>

Quote

Then, they have to explain, what those tablets mean by 1 exile in 587BC and the destruction of Jerusalem in 586BC,

The destruction of Jerusalem occurred in the summer of 587 BCE, followed a few months later in 587 by the deportation of captives. What are you blathering about?

Quote

when secular chronology indicates the siege of Jerusalem, started in 589BC with a siege wall to prevent the Jews from escaping.

Yes, the siege began in 589, lasted about 2 1/2 years, and ended in 587. Has your brain seized up?

AlanF

[AlanF]

21 minutes ago, Foreigner said:

So, how is this not placing ideologies that aren’t referenced in scripture? (I.e. only 1260) Once again, stick to the question of why you don't believe scripture by giving a false claim, that Jesus Said, ONLY 1260?

Completely incoherent, as usual.

More to the point: where did Jesus say anthing about 2,520?

AlanF

[JW Insider]

25 minutes ago, Foreigner said:

What part confuses you, that Jesus only meant 1260?

It's not confusing at all that Jesus said only 1260. If you are saying that Jesus meant something else, just go ahead and clear up why Jesus would only mention 1,260 when he meant something else. This is what I said from the very start of bringing this up. That if we wish to contradict Jesus, we should at least be able to explain why.

28 minutes ago, Foreigner said:

So, how is this not placing ideologies that aren’t referenced in scripture?

This is how people "twist" the scriptures, by claiming that just because Jesus only mentioned 1260 in connection with the Gentile Times, that he meant to say something more than what was mentioned in Scripture. All one has to do is add something to the scroll that isn't there. But is this something you really want to do?

• (Revelation 22:18, 19) 18 “I am bearing witness to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll; 19 and if anyone takes anything away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take his portion away from the trees of life and out of the holy city, things that are written about in this scroll.

35 minutes ago, Foreigner said:

Once again, stick to the question of why you don't believe scripture by giving a false claim, that Jesus Said, ONLY 1260?

Jesus spoke of the nations trampling the holy city, Jerusalem, for "appointed times." How long were those appointed times? Jesus connected 1,260 with these appointed times for the trampling of the nations. Jesus didn't mention another length of time. But your argument is that Jesus didn't say ONLY 1260, so that we should conceivably add another length, or lengths of time that we find in other prophecies. Is there some scripture you have in mind that gives you permission to change times and seasons like this? Should you add lengths of time you find in all other prophecies, or only the ones in Daniel?

Since Jesus said ONLY 1260, I suppose by your logic you could add, 1,260 + 1,290 + 1,335 + 2,300 + 2,520. Of course, you really only mean that we should subtract the 1,260 from what Jesus said and add just one of those time periods, to replace it with.

No matter how you wish to manipulate what Jesus said, it's still true that Jesus ONLY connected one time period to the Gentile Times. It would be false to claim otherwise.

[AlanF]

10 minutes ago, allensmith28 said:

LOL! That’s what I thought. CanÂ’t answer unless you add stupid, in the mix. Keep trying junior. You, almost have your friends in AD1914, convinced, how incoherent you really are. So, keep giving, permission to have your 607BC ideology posted there JWinsider.

Every time you post, you display worse and worse ignorance.

Hmm, let's see now: you think the Jews were deported before they were captured.

Yeah, makes complete sense.

AlanF

[Foreigner]

To be fair. It’s true, English is not my first language. Unfortunately, Grammarly doesn’t know how to correct, English the way racist white people think English should be used or understood by the rest of the World. Especially by those that say they are Jehovah’s Witnesses and have the same attitude toward others.

There’s no correction in Grammarly to fit your individual, and personal writing style, ALANF, There is no BOT button to copy your writing style verbatim, sorry!! But in my native language, there is a word for people like you. It starts with a “P” middle “nd” and ends with “jo”. It brings it, more to the point.

I feel sorry for the owner to have allowed this forum stoop so low? Instead of intellectual conversations, it has [be]come a cesspool, with vices of ignorance, by, one sad little person, shame!!!  

Especially when racism by language barriers is being introduced without the consideration of the own[er].

[JW Insider]

4 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

O’Maly and JWinsider should be aware of these new finds of Filip Vukosavovic 2015, at the British Museum.

4 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

It’s futile to argue against any skeptic, since 2015, recent Babylonian tablets, found, indicate 3 exiles NOT 2, meaning 3 points of interest. . . .

Yes. There have already been quotes and links in this topic to discussions of these 200 or so Babylonian tablets "since 2015" that shed more light on the Jewish exiles in Babylon. The primary exhibit is still at the BLMJ ( blmj.org ). It's in Jerusalem with only a few artifacts that overlap with the British Museum.

4 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

So, those 3 years I keep referring to, remain WITHIN the same archeological EVIDENCE, which COJ and Raymond Franz FAILED to take into account. So, once again, COJ’s book is a contradiction unto itself and a FAILURE.

But you are "flailing wildly" with these false accusations again. How many times have you done this now? Every time you have brought up COJ it's to make some wild claim about what he failed to do in his book. Every time you have been shown to have made a false claim. Worse than that, every time, you have never acknowledged that you made a false claim. And even worse than that, you usually go out of your way to use words that make it seem like it was others were wrong and you were right all along.

I can understand a person who misunderstands what they read, or makes a claim they are pretty sure about based on something they read or heard from a trusted source. But "chronology" has always seemed to be to be one of the worst topics to attract people who just hope to bluster and pretend and distract. I hate to say it but I think it's because the pretender is pretty sure that his or her words will be liked and defended if they at least appear to support the Watchtower's view. Beyond that it seems like the blusterers just hope that others haven't studied the issues very well yet.

4 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

So, those 3 years I keep referring to, remain WITHIN the same archeological EVIDENCE, which COJ and Raymond Franz FAILED to take into account. So, once again, COJ’s book is a contradiction unto itself and a FAILURE.

Those three different exile years mentioned with reference to these tablets are the same ones I have mentioned, and so has Ann and AlanF. And of course we all know that COJ has discussed and accounted for them. (I sometimes mention a fourth round-up of exiles in Nebuchadnezzar's 24th year.) But what's even more interesting, is that the Watchtower rejects the earliest one of these exiles in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar. So it's as if it's the WTS that you are really considering to be your biggest skeptic.

I really can't understand why you (and others) have continued to make this same type of mistake with respect to COJ. It must be some kind of reflex. Let's just hope it's NOT supposed to be explained in the way you have projected onto others:

4 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

when people can’t compete honestly, they resort to vices of deceit and pretend it never happened by changing the subject to distance themselves from such an absurd attempt.

Anyway, I enjoy the banter, but the bickering gets old in a hurry. In a discussion as important as this one (according to the Watchtower), however, this type of error needs to be pointed out in fairness to any who are really interested in truth, and not opposed to it.

[AlanF]

Foreigner wrote:

Quote

To be fair. It’s true, English is not my first language. Unfortunately, Grammarly doesn’t know how to correct, English the way racist white people think English should be used or understood by the rest of the World.

Ah, now pulling the race card.

Racist? Not only do people on this board, like JW Insider and me, not know if you're white, brown, black, green, blue or purple -- we don't care.

Let me clue you in: a language is supposed to be used in the way that the great majority of its native speakers use it. That is the definition of proper use. If you, as a non-native speaker, choose not to speak the way natives speak, or have not learned how to speak the way they do, that's your lookout.

Quote

There’s no correction in Grammarly to fit your individual, and personal writing style, ALANF,

I already told you that on page 23 of this thread.

Quote

There is no BOT button to copy your writing style verbatim, sorry!! But in my native language, there is a word for people like you. It starts with a “P” middle “nd” and ends with “jo”. It brings it, more to the point.

Probably the equivalent of "dick" in English.

Quote

 

I feel sorry for the owner to have allowed this forum stoop so low? Instead of intellectual conversations, it has come a cesspool, with vices of ignorance, by, one sad little person, shame!!!  

Especially when racism by language barriers is being introduced without the consideration of the own[er].

 

You really take the cake as a hypocrite. It is YOU who started this little tiff about language. On page 23 of this thread, you castigated whoever you quoted (apparently Jeffro):

<< ... Daniel and others given as part of tribute along with some temple treasures.* (Grammarly indicates error in given to ARE given)
 
... Nebuchadnezzar takes exiles including Ezekiel, temple treasures, and temple utensils. Jehoiachin placed on throne.
 
(Grammarly indicates error in throne to THE throne)
 
Those who insult writings skills are ONLY fooling themselves!!!! >>

You even emphasized your comments by putting them in red.

Then on page 24 I tried to educate you a little about the various ways in which English is used, and commented that Grammarly deals only with one formal style.

Given your obviously limited English (which is no sin, but arrogance about things you're ignorant of assuredly is) I commented:

<< LOL! Sez he who uses four exclamation points, and says "writings skills". Forgot to use Grammarly on this, eh? >>

You've also made false statements about my postings and those of JW Insider, who has taken great pains to treat your false claims kindly. On pages 26 and 28 you said:

<< There’s too much ignorance thrown in the mix by AlanF, with his attempts to look smart instead of the biggest fool.

When you act like a child, you will be treated as a child. Go play with your rattle, dear!!!!! >>

You even accused JW insider of twisting words.

As the 1950s Warner Brothers cartoon character Yosemite Sam said, "Hey, them's fighin' words!"

Now you're whining and whinging about being taken to task for saying false, unpleasant and quite stupid things about other posters, and having your own words turned back on you.

What are you, 12 years old?

AlanF

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

WHOA !!:

....just checked my blood pressure ... it's HIGH! 

It's not from listening to the bickering and Snowflake whining, and cross-eyed drooling indignation, OH NO!

..... Its from eating too much salted popcorn and laughing as I "watch the show"

Carry on Troops!

This is GOOD STUFF!

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

2 hours ago, Foreigner said:

But in my native language, there is a word for people like you. It starts with a “P” middle “nd” and ends with “jo”. It brings it, more to the point.

Klingon?

[Foreigner]

10 hours ago, AlanF said:

Then on page 24 I tried to educate you a little about the various ways in which English is used, and commented that Grammarly deals only with one formal style.

Given your obviously limited English (which is no sin, but arrogance about things you're ignorant of assuredly is) I commented:

Wrong! for white trash, it spells PENDEJO!

[TrueTomHarley]

5 hours ago, Foreigner said:

Wrong! for white trash, it spells PENDEJO!

I had never heard this word. I looked it up, of course, because I will not tolerate any disrespect for AlanF. It is not our place to talk back to him. It is his place to tell us, and all we can do is just hope he can keep the insults under reasonable control.

It is a Spanish word. It means - well, you know. But I did not see that it specifically has connotations of race. Any background might produce one.

10 hours ago, AlanF said:

Ah, now pulling the race card. Racist? Not only do people on this board, like JW Insider and me, not know if you're white, brown, black, green, blue or purple -- we don't care.

Within reason, one should not be put down for playing "the race card." Lord knows, they have had it played on them often enough. Except, from just a quick scan, I don't see where race and pendejo have anything to do with each other. Is it white trash? It seems that it could just as well be brown trash.

Oh - and the word reminds me of the joke I told Megan - who always likes such things - after I heard it from someone else. 

"Megan, I've got a good one for you!" I said when I spotted her. But at that moment, her 15 year old son, walked out of the rest room (we were cleaning the Kingdom Hall) and I hesitated.

"Oh, he's heard far worse!" she said, having no idea what I was going to say.

Q: What do you call a person who begs who for advice, and then goes off and does the exact opposite?

A: An askhole.