ThirdWitness' Website: Thoroughly Ref...

ThirdWitness' Website: Thoroughly Refuted

Posted in the Jehovah's Witness Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Leolaia

Dearborn Heights, MI

#1 Jan 11, 2013
One of thirdwitness' main arguments on his pro-607 website ( www.thirdwitness.com ) is that the 40-year desolation of Egypt is proof that the commonplace chronological datum of 587/586 B.C. is incorrect, since it does not allow for a full period of utter devastation, deportation, and destruction of the Egyptian cities for a forty year intervial as per Ezekiel 29-32.

There are a number of logical fallacies in this argumentation, that, after more than eight year, thirdwitness adamantly refuses to address.

He has even resorted to proclaiming victory on his website when his arguments were thoroughly shown to be a): historically unsound b): fallaciously written with a priori assumptions and false dilemmas c): an outright refusal to allow any other interpretation to be considered, as though his own were the correct and only one d): even at times, contradictory to the Society's published doctrine (e.g. the 70 years Tyre)

I will now once again show why this website is nonsensical and fallacious in several aspects, and is NOT a reliable source for Biblical argumentation.

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#2 Jan 11, 2013
are you the leolaia?

beloved of the luvvies?

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#3 Jan 11, 2013
I'm da ninja...your worthy opponent

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#4 Jan 11, 2013
not with witness pish though
Leolaia

Dearborn Heights, MI

#5 Jan 11, 2013
Argument: "Ezekiel 29-32 prophecies that Egypt will be desolated for 40 years by Nebuchadnezzar and therefore the date 587 (as the chronological starting point) does not allow for a full forty years:

This predicates the interpretive process on a presumption of infallibility; it is thus presupposed outright RATHER THAN demonstrated on its own. I strongly disagree with this condition because it can lead the interpreter to adopt rather strained and improbable (if not impossible) interpretations in order to harmonize what is written with what science and history have to say.

Having said that, it is clear in this case that there is a problem with interpretation, specifically, the view that a prophetic oracle could be equated with a historical document of what happened, that whatever a prophet writes about his own future corresponds 1:1 with actual history. This is what the Society and thirdwitness presume. It is better to understand that prophets were giving WARNINGS about the future rather than prophecies that are strictly history-before-the-fact. The prophet Ezekiel himself shows between ch. 26 and 29 that he recognized that his warnings did not always come to pass as expected, and new oracles could be issued on account of what actually transpired. In the case of the Egypt oracle, it is an empirical fact that Amasis did not die in the 4th year of his reign on account of Nebuchadnezzar's campaign but continued on in Egypt for another forty years, without interruption. There are scores of documents and evidences to that effect, and nothing at all outside of Ezekiel to intimate that things happened entirely differently. What was written in Ezekiel about what would happen did not happen. One could adopt an interpretation that saves the prophecy by claiming he was talking about a larger Egypt or spiritual Egypt insead, but this violates the usual rules of exegesis (and such an ad hoc interpretation is motivated by non-textual concerns). Or one could simply recognize that these predictions did not come to pass, but the significance of this could be debated: e.g. whether Ezekiel meant them more as warnings or as 100% going-to-happen predictions of the future.

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#6 Jan 11, 2013
just someone who will strip your veneer

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#7 Jan 11, 2013
although...the leolaia comes from san fran that I know

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#8 Jan 11, 2013
not dearborn michigan
Leolaia

Dearborn Heights, MI

#9 Jan 11, 2013
Questionable Quotations in thirdwitness' article:

"The Encyclopœdia Britannica (1959, Vol. 8, p. 62) comments on Herodotus’ history of this period:“His statements prove not entirely reliable when they can be checked by the scanty native evidence.”

"Also, the Bible commentary of F. C. Cook notes that Herodotus “was indebted for his information on past history to the Egyptian priests, whose tales he adopted with blind credulity.... The whole story [by Herodotus] of Apries [Hophra] and Amasis is mixed with so much that is inconsistent and legendary that we may very well hesitate to adopt it as authentic history. It is by no means strange that the priests should endeavour to disguise the national dishonour of having been subjected to a foreign yoke."

While these statements may seem impressive and solid argumentation to onlookers discussion (indeed thirdwitness was making the same arguments about Herodotus), it is a total evasion. It presents a strawman by falsely making Herodotus the sole basis of knowledge about Amasis' reign. With the unreliable Herodotus knocked down, it can proceed with the claim that the 40-year depopulation and desolation of Egypt happened, as nothing else precludes it. The truth is that Herodotus is not needed at all to establish the fact that Amasis reigned continuously in Egypt long past the time of Nebuchadnezzar, with no depopulation of the land and destruction of the cities. That basic fact is proven by many documents from the reign of Amasis itself that establish over and over and over that no such event occurred in Amasis' reign. Discrediting Herodotus does nothing to impugn the factuality of these sources, most of which are not interested AT ALL in reporting history but are legal documents about what was the here-and-now.

The article's statement that "there is very little to no secular evidence during this time period" is a second evasion. Rather, the secular history of Egypt provides positive evidence of the prophecy's non-fulfillment. There is far more than the "scanty", "unreliable", "mixed with fiction" dismissed out of hand fallaciously evidence that attests to this. It just isn't the case that the evidence of Amasis' reign leaves room for a 40-year hiatus; there is overwhelming evidence again and again that no interruption happened. Why doesn't thirdwitness mention the existence of these first-rate sources? Why do they only mention Herodotus who wrote a century later? This website is a classic example of proceeding from a priori conclusions without examining or even representing the evidence impartially.

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#10 Jan 11, 2013
ready?

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#11 Jan 11, 2013
tell me what you know of barry jennings

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#12 Jan 11, 2013
never mind witness pish...lets go beyond...without your cheerleading crowd to help you

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#13 Jan 11, 2013
lets get uncomfortable

I love there

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#14 Jan 11, 2013
uncomfortable is where we really learn

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#15 Jan 11, 2013
really question ourselves

“the truth will set you free...”

Since: Nov 10

Houston, TX

#16 Jan 11, 2013
Capitalizing on select lines of archeology that conflict with the Biblical timetable outlined by the Watchtower Society is a logical fallacy. History as recorded by mortal men is tentative by nature. A historian could be mistaken or dishonest which is proven by the fact that the historical accounts of Berossus, Polyhistor, Josephus and Ptolemy conflict with each other. The very few conflicting archaeological excavations that document what allegedly took place 2,500 years ago hardly represents the final authority on anything.

In this specific instance, we're not even dealing with sources outside the Jewish nation failing to confirm Bible history. The baked-clay cylinder in the Akkadian language in cuneiform script written by Cyrus the Great confirms the Jewish exile discussed in the Bible books of Jeremiah and Daniel.

We're simply dealing with pinpointing specific dates with a margin of no more that forty years. The timetable outlined by Jehovah's Witnesses has a authentic basis in the scriptures and in secular records, excavations unearthed that now reside in museums. Like I said, the very few conflicting archaeological excavations that document what allegedly took place 2,500 years ago hardly represents the final authority on anything.

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#17 Jan 11, 2013
see folks...your great leader leolaia

is only ........human....nothing ...same as the rest of us....she didn't come down a golden vagina

she was shat out like the rest of us

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#18 Jan 11, 2013
insert outlaw muttley photo

“the truth will set you free...”

Since: Nov 10

Houston, TX

#19 Jan 11, 2013
This is why I don't comment on this forum anymore. All the spam and garbage.

You have to wonder where spam-bots like "da ninja" came from...

Did you have to blow your dad as a lad and now all of the sudden, you need to vent by spouting non-related gibberish on the internet?

People that are f-cked in the head should be banned from the internet.

Since: Dec 12

Glasgow, UK

#20 Jan 11, 2013
hey dreamweaver....why did you just comment ...to say you don't comment anymore?

now isn't that double minded....now what do they do with people who are double minded?

oh yes...put them in an asylum

I know what I say and I know what I mean....unlike you.....

why were you answering to a spam bot?....

and I believe all people should get the internet....I'm not a bigot

p.s

and I agree about your fuckd in the head comment

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why the NWT is the best ever! 13 min Jparkh81 775
What Happened To Newtonian? 14 min Nomi 2
Nomi's field service 15 min Nomi 21
Nomi, please remember this.......... (Apr '11) 17 min Nomi 115
Let's try this again, 144,000 ONLY? No jw has b... 37 min Jparkh81 986
Is August Eclipse a "sign" in the Bible? 1 hr Tony Price 77 14
Trinity...why does it matter?! 1 hr ihveit 984
Trump apologizes then reverts back to course. 3 hr GreatSouthbay4040 92
More from around the web