Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE? (page 22)

AlanF

Aniron, scholar pretendus doesn't have an MA. He flunked out.

AlanF

toreador

Precisely! Like Jenni would let himself be swayed and change what his answer would be if he knew he was talking to a JW or not.

Tor

DanTheMan

The only thing Scholar has "Mastered" is exasperating people with unblinking stupidity

Actually, nothing in my query at all implied that this matter had anything to do with JWs. All I said that the issue was being discussed on an internet message board. For all he knew, it could've been a biblical criticism or biblical Hebrew message board.

It was scholar who introduced JWs as somehow relevant to the query, by referring to the "brilliant" (his value judgement) New World Translation.

AlanF

Scholar pretendus' most prominent quality, after gross stupidity, is hypocrisy. No wonder he can't see that his own remarks to Jenni do exactly what he (falsely) takes Leolaia to task for.

Because Jenni's answer wasn't what scholar pretendus wanted, he'll now pretend that Jenni's answer is invalid. Of course, if Jenni's answer were in line with bogus Watchtower opinion, he'd pretend that Jenni's answer is valid. A better example of a braindead cult member supporting the cult come hell or high water is hard to find.

AlanF

stevenyc

This subject has been a fasination for me over the last few months. While I've been touring Israel I had to find out from someone who would , in my opionion, know. I went to the museum of the first temple in Jerusalem. And, guess what the answer is. I'm not talking about guess work and supposition, I'm talking about seeing the real documents and dated plates giving a real timeline, physical and crossreferenced.

Well, it's not 607.

steve.

Narkissos

referring to the "brilliant" (his value judgement) New World Translation

Ironically, scholar has not yet understood that by making such an assertion while admitting he doesn't know Biblical Hebrew he could only "make an ass of himself," to borrow Rutherford's expression.

This appeal to authority is funny per se. The best scholarship in the world would not convince scholar, but a single anonymous line in a WT publication would. Instantaneously.

scholar

stevenyc

If it was not 607 then What is it then?

scholar JW

scholar

hilary_step

Definitely not shaken but most definitely stirred.

scholar JW

scholar

Leolaia, Narkissos and Alan F

I am not the smartest fellow around and you characters in comparison to me are geniuses. However, let me warn you of this sobering fact that I am very stubborn, open minded and persistent as a dog with a bone. The matter of this Hebrew proposition in Jer 29:10 is of singular importance to me and has the potential of fatally destroying the Jonsson hypothesis.

My scholarship whatever its status and my gut instincts tells me that the NWT is brilliantly correct in this example. My learned friend and fellow Winess, unlettered as he is but was tutored in Hebrew by a most prominent Orthodox Hasidic Jewish family in Australia. The husband had a deep respect for the NWT and was a Dean of Mathematics and Statistics at a major University. This family enjoyed many hours of biblical discussion on the sabbath and valued highly the WT publications. I must seek his opinion on this verse and that of my learned brother.

Predictably, I have found something of significance in the NWT in the verse that is mentioned by Jenni and confirmed by Lundbom in his commentary and I am surpised that the apostate troika has not picked it up. I am in the process of spinning it out and see where it goes. The expression 'the elephant in the living room' is applicable here.

So, you with the brilliant minds read and compare the NWT rendering of this verse and pick up the semantic unit that must be of relevance according to Jenni. This is a little intellectual exercise for you three.

By the way, I will be studying the Jenni's article on Jeremiah 3:17 even if I have to arrange for a English translation to be made because I believe it is seminal to this discussion. Apostates have not bothered to pursue this matter carefully simply arriving at Jenni's statement and citations in his research. That is not scholarship. If you are going to cite Jenni then use Jenni.

scholar JW

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

Share this