by AwSnap 95 Replies latest jw friends
garyneal
Post 483
Your two questions simply of biblical data essential in the construction of biblical chronology which in turn proves the validity of 607 BCE. These two biblical facts however are a big problem for those wordly scholars and apostates who try to prove 587 or 596 BCE.
scholar JW
For starters it is the 'seventy year' prophecy of Jeremiah which must be factored into any biblical chronology and is not treated seriously by wordly scholars and apostates.
scholar JW
So.....
607 BCE can be proved..
If you use "only" WBT$ approved information..
?????????????
Only "ScholarJW",could Out-Stupid himself..
........................... ...OUTLAW
Outlaw,
Yes, that is exactly what I see is going on when trying to determine which is correct. Only WBT$ approved publications are used by Jehovah's Witnesses to validate 607 BCE.
Now I am in the process of trying to understand this myself but there seems to be so much confusion over the topic. However, here are some simple things that seem to just make sense.
Scholar
Post 1838
The King's list only accounts for 66 years counting backwards from 539 BCE. If King Neb started his reign in 605 BCE and according to the Bible, Jerusalem was destroyed in his 18 regnal year (19 accounting for his accession year), how come the math does not work out to 607 BCE? How is it that the WT has somehow managed to insert 20 years into the calculations?
OUTLAW
Post 14431
The date 607 BCE is not proved by WT publications alone but is proved by what the Bible states as fact which is then expressed in those faithful WT publications.
scholar JW
garyneal
Post 484
You are sadly misinformed if you think that the validity of 607 BCE is based on what WT publications say. The fact of the matter is that the celebrated WT scholars have used numerous secular sources, both ancient and modern and past and recent scholarship in support of 607 BCE all in combination of the clear testimonny of God's Word. It does not get any better than that. The date 607 BCE for the Fall of Jerusalem is rock solid whichj cannot be said for the slippery dates of 687 or 586 BCE.
The only confusion about this matter rests with apostates and higher critics who have all stumbled over 607 BCE.The very fact that 607 BCE is championed by JW'S alone should give our critics pause to think that Jehovah God is truly confounding the wisdom of the world.
The accuracy of 607 BCE points to the accuracy of 1914 CE and modern history vindicates the factual fulfilment of prophecy but there is nothing out there that can be used to support 686/587 BCE for these are 'dead end' dates.
Your so-called two answers to the seventy year prophecy are bogus and find no scriptural support for these are two hopeless theories simply leading to 'dead-ends'.
scholar JW
garyneal
Post 485
The king list is inaccurate so the data is compromised so whatever list you use is useless. Nebuchadnezzer did not begin his reign in 605 BCE but rather according to Bible chronology and history he began to reign in 624 as his first accession year with the months of January-February. This means that the maths do add uo with his taking of Jerusalem in his 19th year as 607 BCE.
scholar JW
Scholar
Post 1842
If the king's list is inaccurate, what is the accurate list? Can you show me the Bible chronology that supports 624 as the accession year? I am still trying to figure out how the WTS accounts for the missing 20 years. You haven't provided me with any information to validate your assertions. Just because "The Watchtower Says So" is not good enough. If the WT is indeed correct, the facts would be available for anyone to check. Where are the facts?
Interesting, an hour has now passed and there is not one response from scholar concerning the facts needed to support 624 BCE and account for the missing twenty years needed to make 607 BCE correct.
Scholar hasn't come to realize when you feed off of ignorance, you become ignorant.
The WTS has for decades put forth the proclamation that they and only they are the true spokesmen for god
chosen by himself to dispel bible truths, through his holy spirit.
Was this just just a self supporting marketing strategy for the Publishing company and
an assertive act to self empower themselves.
The facts and evidence speak for themselves.
Commercialized religious charlatans rarely are associated with the truth.
