You ought to just put that paragraph up on Youtube. Title it "Important Watchtower Quotation Regarding 1914." Leave it up for a couple of minutes, serious music in the background. Nothing else.
70 years = 607?
by allelsefails 421 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Hobo Ken
I have only just found this thread. It is first of all very impressive how you guys on here have demolished the falacious arguments (not reasonings) of the one known as scholar.
It seems from reading the all the posts that this has been done before.......
I cannot fail to be impressed also by Scholar's dogged determination to hold to what he believes to be true.
He of course has a vested interest in being a Watchtower apologist. He is defending his whole life course we are not.
He wrongly states several times that some dates give us a problem. Wrong again! These dates don't give us a problem because we already have figured that they are worthless along with much of what the WTS teaches their people...... That's why we left...
The dates the Watchtower uses to support it's unique take on neo Babylonian history are not supported by any evidence that I have encountered.
I have checked out the British museum and every library and book shop I am ever in. Books on world history, Jewish history, the history of the City of Jerusalem, the history of Babylon, .....you get the idea......and the one date I'm looking for is the date of 607 for the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by king Neb. I have yet to find it. They all say 586/7.
Do the Watchtower society and their apologists think that the whole world has formed a united conspiracy against them to rob them of their unique belief in the year 1914???
Aside from the Witnesses who else still believes that the 2520 year formula is a solid piece of Bible doctrine?
I know of no one.
Was it a witness teaching from the start?
No it was given to C.T. Russel by Nelson Barbour so it was not even "reaveled truth" from Jehovah through his "channel".
Still want to believe in it Scholar?
You are welcome to if you wish but in a cult you will defend anything you WANT OR NEED to believe in.
I noticed that Scholar admitted there was in fact some "wiggle room" because Chronology is not an exact science.....
How about these two quotes below? Do they allow for much room to "wiggle"? Or are they arrogant dogmatic statements which are sensational in their words but devoid of any proof or substance?
*** w72 12/15 p. 748 par. 5 The Time to Decide in the Name of Which God to Walk ***
By the end of the Gentile Times about October 4, 1914, eight nations and empires of Christendom, along with Japan, were fighting one another.
*** re chap. 18 p. 105 par. 5 Earthquakes in the Lord's Day ***
5 Thus, when C. T. Russell appeared for morning worship with the Brooklyn, New York, Bethel family on the morning of October 2, 1914, he made the dramatic announcement: "The Gentile Times have ended; their kings have had their day.
So the Watchtower have it down to a day of the week in the month of october 1914......that sure is impressive....all based on events 2520 years before......wow.....
Anyone else find it a bit disturbing when someone is talking about themselves in the 3rd person? e.g. "Scholar has defeated Alanf many times"
Wish I could have got on board with this one from the start.
Keep up the good work guys and girls.
Matt.
-
slimboyfat
Scholar's back!
-
Mary
Do the Watchtower society and their apologists think that the whole world has formed a united conspiracy against them to rob them of their unique belief in the year 1914???
Although there's never been anything "official" come down from Crooklyn on this subject, I've often heard the average Dub claim that Satan de Debbil somehow can screw with history itself in order to make it appear that "God's Channel" is being persecuted by being unique in a certain belief.
Anyone else find it a bit disturbing when someone is talking about themselves in the 3rd person? e.g. "Scholar has defeated Alanf many times"
Yep. Indications of a psychological disorder. Which, coming from this religion, is not a big surprise. He also seems to have a very difficult time with reality. Someone kicks his ass in a debate and he walks away believing he's won the argument.
-
shamus100
Jeez! I should have registered as what I do for a living - brain surgeon. (how do you spell surgeon again?.... oh, nevermind...)
-
scholar
Hobo Ken
Post 173
In your dreams for none of my postings have been demolished nor proved to be fallacious because such postings continue to attract the attention of our critics and apostates in their blind hatred of truth for they continue to love the lie.
Our dates have never given us a problem but simply prove that Jesus' true disciples have continued to heed the Master's admonition to 'Keep on the Watch', it is the dates of the apostates that are naive and empty for these deny the significance of prophecy and fail to produce faith. In short, our opposer's dates are dead and empty.
Yes, it is only the Bible that contains the relevant information pertinent to 607 BCED so you have foolishly wasted your time looking for support in secular sources for a biblical date so now you should get cracking and study the Bible as God's Word.
scholar JW
-
scholar
Mary
Post 10670
Hardly a narrow interpretation of Daniel 4 because the entire book of Daniel including this chapter resonates with God's Kingdom in fact it was the first and only book of the OT to do so. There is no need for a 'narrow' view but rather a honesty view of matters that compells one to recognize the theme of this chapter. Get your blinkers off and read the chapter carefully.
Proof of the obvious secondary fulfilment of Neb's discipline was the fact that 'seven times' was to pass and in the case of Neb who had to serve out seven literal years so now if only seven years was intended then why did Daniel use the word 'times' instead of 'years'. The fact is that the Aramaic word means a appointe time or time period is offered by the best Lexicons.
The experience of Nebuchadnezzer is more than just chastisement for a proud king but he was brought to the realization that all Gentile rulers, kings or kingdoms are subject to that greater sovereignty of God as His Kingdom and that is the theological lesson of this story.
Scholar twists nothing for there is nothing to twist but to simply state the obvious and that is that chapter 4 is about God's Kingdom along with the rest of Daniel and indeed of the entire Holy Bible.
The Gentile Times of Luke 21:24 refers to a past trampling continuing to the present of Jerusalem which typ;ified God's Kingdom. The use of the Greek word here as 'kairos' relates to the Aramaic word 'iddan' for times so there is not only a theological connection between the two but a linguistic one as well.
scholar JW
-
scholar
Mad Dawg
Post 181
Your question is too easy for starters if you want scriptural proof for 537 BCE for the Return then you only need to read the last few verses of 2 Chronicles and then proceed to read Ezra 1:1 until 3:1. This contains all of the esential historical and chronological data that you need. Enjoy the feast.
scholar JW
-
OUTLAW
Scholar..You get your ass kicked everytime you show up here..LOL!!........You may as well give up on Mary..How many times does she have to send you back to WatchTower World in an Ambulance?.................................LOL!!...OUTLAW
-
scholar
Bennyk
Post 428
The Gentile Times most certainly expired in 1914 CE as shown by modern and theocratic history. There were some expectations of those early Bible Students about 1914 that were not fulfilled nut equally there were some that were so in any event those Bible Students were farsighted in their prophesying and more importantly were not asleep or lazy as the rest of Christendom but were diligient in their watchfulness. Something apostates are not, that is being watchful and industrious with the Lord's interests.
Their careful attention to Bible chronology was also vindicated as they followed in the footsteps of those great scholars and chronologists who love d the Bible and desired to peer into its prophecies. So scholar acknowledges the great contribution to Bible scholarship made bythose courageous and wise Bible Students.
Your mischevious misuse of the quote from a 1913 WT does you no credit but at least simply proves that those early Bible Students acted with integrity and that is something lacking with apostates and a a quality that you would do well to imitate.
scholar JW