the seventy year thing

by logic 24 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Jeffro

  There is no logic to your post because it does represent what the Bible teaches about the seventy years.

  Completely false. The bible is completely with secular history on the matter of the 70 years. Using only the pivotal date of 539, the bible alone can be used to indicate the full timing and purpose of the 70 years, proving the Watchtower's interpretation to be completely false.

  All of the 'seventy year'texts prove that at the same time there was a period of devastation of the land of Judah, exile of the Jews to Babylon, served therefore at Babylon from 607 BCE until 537 BCE.

  Incorrect. The 70 years is explicitly defined by Jeremiah as being a period of nations serving Babylon. All references to 70 years in the bible are completely compatible with this, and the Watchtower view directly contradicts it. Even the dishonest NWT translation of Jeremiah 29:10 is seen to be in violation of the context of the chapter.

  Apostates and higher critics have presented many different interpretations of the seventyh years but none of them are based on a collective view of the 'seventy year' texts.

  Having no facts to present, 'scholar' immediately resorts to an ad hominem attack on "apostates".

  The Society's view based on the Bible is the only model that works for all of the others are bunkum.

  There are many errors in the Society's viewpoint, which I have previously reported, and can present again on request to interested parties.
• 

  Jeffro

  There is no place for 'higher criticism' in the understanding of any book of the Bible and 'lower criticism is also suspect. The only methodology is one that upholds the Inspiration and Inerrancy of the Bible and this is the view of the 'celebrated WT schoilars'.

  Method. Please consult a dictionary with a 'usage' section re 'methodology'. Unless you're just trying to sound pretentious.
• 

  Jeffro

  Sweet Mary!

  Careful, 'scholar', that could be construed as a pun involving Mary worship, which would surely not be approved for a JW.

  Scholar ignores no such evidence because he has read everything published on the subject and has well proven the fact of 607 BCE.

  You have never presented any proof of 607 at all, and there is certainly no secular presentation of such, other than JW sources.

  The Bible completely agrees with our position as any reader can easily determine

  Completely untrue. Just one example recently dealt with is Jeremiah 29:10, which the context reveals to be completely unrelated to a period of exile starting from the fall of Jerusalem.

  besides it is well demonstrated by the facts of fulfilled prophecy culminating in that epochal year 1914.

  Also completely incorrect. The fact that a world war broke out in 1914 is not only not in support of the 607 doctrine, but actually contradicts it. The 'woe for the earth' was supposed to follow the end of the 2520 years, which were meant to end in October. No fulfilment occurred on time at all, so JWs weakly defer to the entire year, while quietly trying to hide 'October the elephant' behind the settee.
• 

  Jeffro

  logicsaid:

  Scholar, I usually read your post even though I never agree with anything you have to say. You express yourself well. I really do not believe you are who you say you are, I think you are a very experienced debater. A good debater has the ability to make things that are illogical to sound logical. If no one checks out the facts then it sounds reasonable. In my opinion I think you are a split personality possibly with identities on this site an others. You are too good at reversing the logic on both sides. What am I saying is I think you are two people on these sites and I consider you very good at it.

  You think 'scholar's' posts are logical? I think that whoever you imagine to be the 'other' person would be very offended at being accused of also presenting the limited standard of arguments (mostly speculation and JW-speak) that 'scholar' presents.

  Your weakness as scholar is your lack of logic, you say things that just does not make sense to me. I myself am a very critical reader and check all my facts before I open my mouth. I actually think you do this to get more information out that actually proves the 587 date . It is in my opinion very clever of you. That is the reason I have read almost of your postings. I wont mention who I think your alter ego is, but you writings styles are very close to each to each other.

  I've also had my suspicions at times that 'scholar' may be playing some kind of deranged 'devil's advocate' to solicit responses to see just how stupid 607 is. Whether that's really his modus operandi, or he genuinely believes the things he says, it still serves the purpose of helping readers understand that 607 is completely false.

  My point with my post was , what would have happened if the isrealites had obeyed god. He did tell them that if they obeyed they would be able to stay on their land. In other words , lets say that they obeyed god right up to one year before 539 bc but then rebelled and caused the destruction fo jerusalem, while all the time they were serving babylon. How long would that make the desolation. In my math that would only be one year. You have to remember that other nations were subservient to babylon but were not desvated because they did what they were told.

  There is a considerable flaw in this analysis. You are comparing 'nations obeying Babylon' with 'Jews obeying God'. Indeed, as far as obeying Babylon, the Jews 'did what they were told' when Jehoiakim paid tribute (including captives such as Daniel) to Nebuchadnezzar in 605BC. (2 Kings 24:1, Daniel 1:1-4)

  I alreay foresee your reply, and it will probably be a good one. By the way I very seldon get into discussions on the net, I just dont have the time or the talent for it. You and others do just fine.

  You really think replies from 'scholar' are good? Very disappointing.
• 

  wobble

  I realy enjoyed this thread,especially the Cloak and Dagger accusations,is "Scholar" devious or misled?

  Anyway,as has been pointed out before,if 607 had any credibility,which it dosn't, what in scripture would lead you to 1914?

  Jiggery-pokery with Daniel's seven years(times) ?

  What a joke! You cannot put the word exegesis and the WT's explanation for this in the same paragraph without laughing!

  Love

  Wobble