by slimboyfat 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Scholar: "I am sorry too that from your careful reading of Daniel 4 you did not discern its dual fulfilment."
Indeed, you should be. You were wrong. You said "one only needs to read the chapter to discern its dual fulfillment". Turns out that was fake news on your end.
We should do an experiment where we ask others, preferably non-jw, to read Dan 4 and tell us if they discern two fulfillments. I bet that would not bode well for you either Scholar.
Sanchy
We should do an experiment where we ask others, preferably non-jw, to read Dan 4 and tell us if they discern two fulfillments. I bet that would not bode well for you either Scholar.
--
The said scholar is always up for a challenge so I say 'Bring it on'. Now for your experiment, I invite the participants to focus on the following texts:
Da.4: 3, 17, 25, 26, 32, 34, 37
Now the question to be asked for all of these texts that are well distributed throughout chapter 4
is, What is the common factor for all of these verses?
Enjoy!
scholar JW
Jeffro
Huh? That doesn't even make sense! Since there was no 7-year vacancy, why would anyone expect it to be shown in Babylonian chronicles? But feel free to suggest where during Nebuchadnezzar's reign the vacancy occurred. 🤦♂️
--
Huh! It makes perfect sense if the 'seven times' of Daniel has a literal application of seven years and if it pertained to Neb's regency or kingship then it is expected that if it was a historic fact then one should find confirmation in the alleged trustworthiness of the NB Chronicles.
I would suggest that the vacancy must have occurred SOON after 607 BCE which was Neb's 18th regnal year.
scholar JW
Jeffro
It is not necessary to hold any particular superstitious belief in order to assess the relevant texts, nor is it necessary to present some alternative superstitious belief in order to demonstrate that yours is unfounded. But I have provided substantial relevant information about the subject.
--
Delusional nonsense. Such a person as you describe would lack not only integrity but credibility which is a good description of a fool..
scholar JW
‘scholar’:
Delusional nonsense. Such a person as you describe would lack not only integrity but credibility which is a good description of a fool..
It’s very telling when someone claims that not holding superstitions is delusional. 🤦♂️
‘scholar’:
I would suggest that the vacancy must have occurred SOON after 607 BCE which was Neb's 18th regnal year.
Nope, that’s when Nebuchadnezzar was directing the blockade against Tyre. (And no, not the mainland city as falsely claimed by JWs, which was Ushu.)
‘scholar’:
Now for your experiment, I invite the participants to focus on the following texts
Despite the attempt at cherry picking, none of those verses suggest a ‘secondary fulfilment’. Of course, it’s misdirection anyway because the ‘primary fulfilment’ of the story never actually happened, and the whole story is an analogy, but still nothing to do with the JW idiocy.
Now the question to be asked for all of these texts that are well distributed throughout chapter 4 is, What is the common factor for all of these verses?
The common themes of the verses is things that are specifically depicted as affecting Nebuchadnezzar, though it is obviously not historical as it is entirely incompatible with Nebuchadnezzar’s character or religious beliefs.
‘scholar’:
🦗 🦗 🦗
Yeah, best not draw further attention to your attempted misrepresentation of Stern. 😂
Remove the turban, and take off the crown. This will not remain the same. Raise up the low one, and bring low the high one
the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he gives it to whomever he wants, and he sets up over it even the lowliest of men.”
and seven times will pass over you, until you know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he grants it to whomever he wants
Jeffro
See how the apologist needs to get vague about referring to the exile to try to associate it with the 70 years, because the fact is that the Bible never refers to 70 years of exile. Most of the Jews were exiled (early 597BCE) about 11 years prior to Jerusalem's destruction, and Jeremiah wrote to them (594BCE) about Babylon's 70 years several years before Jerusalem was destroyed (587BCE). It would be entirely meaningless to tell those people that the exile would end 70 years after some unstated future starting point. 'scholar' can't get around that fact, so he will continue to flounder, jeer and misdirect.
--
The said scholar has no need of being vague for the Exile is not only a blatant biblical fact but is a historic fact in terms of Neb's invasion of Judah and its aftermath as a conquering World Power The Exile is a perfect descriptor of the 70 years just as it is of servitude to Babylon for both terms are mutually inclusive. Jews were exiled to Babylon prior to Jerusalem's Fall and were also exiled at the time of its Fall so two deportations are subsumed as one Jewish or Babylonian Exile as treated by most historians.
There are no meaningless, vagueness or fuzzy bits associated with the Exile for its nature and chronology are clearly defined as to when it began with the Fal of Jerusalem in 607 BCE and with the Return from Exile of the Jews in 537 BCE. For example, Daniel was able to discern the near completion of the 70 years as recorded in Dan. 9:1-2.
---
Complete nonsense. Jeremiah 29:10 is very clear that Babylon's 70 years would end, and then attention would be given to the Jews' return from Babylon after that. The authors of 2 Chronicles and of Daniel understood that the 'calling to account' of Babylon's king quite definitely referred to the Persian conquest of Babylon in 539BCE. No 'judgement' befell either Babylon or Cyrus in 537BCE.
--
Not at all. Jer. 29:10 simply addresses the fact of their imminent release from Babylon having been exiled for 70 years thus in anticipation of their Return- release from Exile. Ezra and Daniel discuss the 70 years and understood that Jeremiah's judgement against Babylon would only occur after the 70 years had ended or been fulfilled which can only mean that the descriptors or elements of the 70 years -servitude, desolation and exile would be fulfilled and that could only occur at the Return in 537 BCE. Jeremiah described the 'judgement' in terms of the king, city and land of Chaldea and this did not happen synchronistically in 539BCE
Further, if it argued that the 70 years ended in 539 BCE with the Fall of Babylon then that would mean that the beginning was in 609 BCE wherein nothing of consequence marked that year and that is why COJ in his 'masterful deception' -GTR considered an alternative date of 605 BCE.
---
Stern's article supports the fact that much of Judea was desolate during the Neo-Babylonian period. Specifically, Stern's article refers to the period from Nebuchadnezzar’s first regnal year (604BCE) until Cyrus’ first regnal year in Babylon (538BCE), which is not 70 years. But even if he had said it matched a period of 70 years exactly, it would hardly matter, because it would remain the fact that Babylon's 70 years was not a period of exile. Additionally, Stern actually says "not a single town destroyed by the Babylonians was resettled", indicating that the towns that were destroyed remained desolate until the Persian period, which is quite different to the JW claim that all the towns of Judea were uninhabited.
--
Stern's article had some facts right but relied on an inaccurate Chronology so no surprises there. Stern's description of the state of the cities in unoccupied Judah matches perfectly Jeremeiah's prophecy. and agrees perfectly with our interpretation of the 70 years of desolation.
scholar JW
