Has anyone on here ever come across the tiniest shred of evidence supporting this date for the fall of Jerusalem. I understand Rolf Furuli is about to but something out on this subject (see elihubooks.com), however even a table of contents has been a long time in coming from this site. If no evidence exists what can he possibly be writing about?
Validity of 607 BCE date
by stevieb1 119 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
sf
You can ask him directly here, where he posts:
-
scholar
stevieb1
There is an abundant ecidence for 607 as the biblical date for the Fall of Jerusalem. The Society has published how the date is calculated using ancient and biblical history. Likewise there is evidence for other dates such as 587 or 586. All of these dates have some basis for their calculation, these dates are not some conjecture or something that has been imagined. Such dates are sustained by careful scholarship with biblical interpretation. The difference is the methodology of the chronologist and his choice of historical narrative.
In short you have a choice of which date that you believe is correct, if prophecy is important then go for the 607 date. This date succeeds because it establishes the Gentile Times concluding in 1914. The other dates of 587/586 are useless in that these are dead ends, going nowhere. However, the value of these dates lies in their approximation of some twenty years which brings us to the biblically reckoned date of 607. You have a choice. The Society has over many decades has demonstrated that their chronology is scholarly, consistent with ancient astronomy and history. This is well demonstrated in their chronology of our Lord Jesus.
scholar
-
StifflersErSlayersBrother
Blah Blah Blah, Blah Blahblah, Blah Blah
yawwwn, back to bed for me... -
biblexaminer
This is to Mr "Scholar"...
You, sir, are full of hot air!
There is absolutely NO evidence in the Bible or secular chronology for the 607 date. The fact that you post this under the name "Scholar" is utter gainsay.
If you really want to be a scholar, then read the book "The Gentile Times Reconsidered" by Carl Olof Johnason. ONce you have read this book, then come back and post again with this name "scholar"...
Till then, bunky, you should use the name "fool".
-
StifflersErSlayersBrother
so much love in the air today isnt there folks?
-
scholar
bible examiner
Your hysteria amuses me. Insults are the manifestation of intellectual weakness and ignorance. I have the book Gentile Times Reconsidered and am well familiar with its contents. The book in no way invalidates 607 as you might claim. Jonsson's hypothesis has its weaknesses as shown in his interpretation of the 70 years, and his inability to determine whether 587 0r 586 is correct. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine.
scholar
-
peterstride
Ray Franz himself, who was behind most of the Aid book discussed his thoughts on 607 in one of his books. As he said, he found it very hard himself to believe that the fall of Jerusalem happenned in 607, because all the evidence, and most importantly, the bible itself, pointed to another date.
That's my opinion on the matter,
Peter Stride
Toronto, Canada -
rem
Scholar,
In short you have a choice of which date that you believe is correct, if prophecy is important then go for the 607 date. This date succeeds because it establishes the Gentile Times concluding in 1914
You don't see the logical fallacy of circular reasoning here? And you call yourself Scholar?Bwhahahahahahhaaaa
rem
"Most people would rather die than think; in fact, they do so."
..........Bertrand Russell -
Cygnus
Scholar,
The Society's basic argument is that we should trust the Biblical record over secular 'evidence.' Why? Because the Bible is always found to be trustworthy, and Christians would trust the Bible over profane astronomical and business records that are fallible.
So, then, how do we know that the Bible is so trustworthy in the first place?