Celebrated WT scholars? :)

by Augustin 184 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  scholar

  yesidid

  Serious scholars do not accept 607 or 587 but accept 586.

  Celebrated WT scholars reject 586 and 587 as implausible dates based upon a faulty premise and accept the only possible date of 607.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  When did apostates have any interest in logic? For if they have then what then is their new 'true religion'? Or are they still stumbling in the dark?

  Advocates of 586 rather than 587 which is the apostate favourite date prove that their whole methodology of determining the date for the Fall is faulty so such confusion indicates that the approach is incorrect. Contrariwise, WT scholars have no confusion as the adopted methodology is firmly based upon the infallible Word of God.

  scholar JW
• 

  ackack

  I'll show you my premise if you show me yours. I wonder which one is more sensible?

  ackack
• 

  Leolaia

  Serious scholars do not accept 607 or 587 but accept 586.

  So Roger Young, Donald Wiseman, John Applegate, and Kenneth Kitchen are not serious scholars?
• 

  aniron

  If I ever want to remind myself of the stupidity of Watchtower teachings and the blindness of their followers.

  Scholar JW is the best.

  I've never come across a person who flounders around like a drowning man.

  He acts like he has been caught with his "hand in the till" and is trying to come up with a good excuse why.
• 

  scholar

  Leolaia

  Correct!

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  aniron

  Apostates typify more closely the image of a drowning man than I do but thanks for the compliment.

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  'scholar' said:

  When did [ad hominim-targeted pejoratively-termed individuals] have any interest in logic? For if they have then what then is their new 'true religion'? Or are they still stumbling in the dark?

  Of course those questions are irrelevant.

  'scholar' also dribbled:

  Advocates of 586 rather than 587 which is the apostate favourite date prove that their whole methodology of determining the date for the Fall is faulty so such confusion indicates that the approach is incorrect. Contrariwise, WT scholars have no confusion as the adopted methodology is firmly based upon the infallible Word of God.

  As usual, 'scholar's' 'reasoning' is completely flawed. It is analogous to the following faulty conclusion: "If 'Bill' was born in 1970, he may currently be either 35 or 36. Because there is ambiguity, then neither can be correct."

  Scholar then tries to suggest that he is simply trusting in the bible, though it has been demonstrated repeatedly that the bible can be completely reconciled with the fall within a year of 587.
• 

  MidwichCuckoo

  ooops - saw title and thought it was an 'oxymoron' thread, apologies.
• 

  Leolaia

  LOL, pseudo-scholar, last month you were saying that Applegate was a leading commentator whose scholarship was "wise", "thoughtful", "refreshing", who "vindicates" your views on the 70 years. Now he is not even a "serious scholar"!!!