so...607BCE is not a valid date for the destruction of Jerusalem- 586/7BCE is. However, thi is simply an academic issue of a date- it has no bearing on Jesus return, his directing his attention toward the earth, etc.
I want to know whether 607 is valid or not.
by XPeterX 157 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Titus
What?
You don't like italodance?
Come on, people. I really don't care for the WT and the GB. What I said was my IMHO only. And that's what I believe.
Some posters here probably know that I don't believe the "other sheep" doctrine.
First I believed that in John 10 are mentioned three sheep-folds. That's what the GB teaches.
But, when I read that chapter, I noticed that that there are only two sheep-fold mentioned.
And finally, Leolaia corrected me, and told me that there is only one sheep-fold.
I stayed corrected, and accepted that.
You see? I don't defend nor advocate WT or GB.
I really don't care what they teach.
Sometimes my and their beliefs match, sometimes not.
On 607/587 issue, we match.
Will anybody dance with me now?
You can suggest other song if you want...
-
JWoods
It really makes no difference to me whether they hold onto 1914 or not. The problem I have is how they use their 'authority' to control 7 million people in their flock, even to the point of their death via their blood doctrine.
But it would be a very tenuous control mechanism they would have over those 7 million if they did not claim to be the "faithful and discrete slave".
And that notion of really being the true FDS/Governing Body logically goes out the window if the key date of 1914 is lost - how could the "faithful and discrete slave" be wrong on something so fundamental and that has been held onto for so long?
-
Mad Sweeney
You'd think that ever the "great disappointment" that those groups and people connected to them, would have learned a valuable lesson.
The power of belief is that the more pain/effort that is put into it, and the more pain/dissonance that comes from its failure, the more intransigent it becomes in the mind. Humans have a need to justify themselves, especially when they've put a lot of their eggs into the one basket. I strongly recommend reading: "Mistakes Were Made (but not by me)" by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson. It makes the mind-boggling phenomenon of stubborn belief in the face of disconfirming evidence a lot less mind-boggling. Plus it's a fun and easy read (for non-fiction).
-
PSacramento
Sometimes my and their beliefs matches, sometimes not.
On 607/587 issue, we match.
So secular dating is incorrect on the fall of Jerusalem, the birth and reign of Nebachadrezer II ?
-
Titus
So secular dating is incorrect on the fall of Jerusalem, the birth and reign of Nebachadrezer II ?
I think you were answered. That question was answered strictly to your satisfaction. I'm not gonna repeat.
-
garyneal
And that notion of really being the true FDS/Governing Body logically goes out the window if the key date of 1914 is lost - how could the "faithful and discrete slave" be wrong on something so fundamental and that has been held onto for so long?
Hence the reason why they hang on to it even until this day. Without 1914, 1919 falls apart along with their authority.
-
Mad Sweeney
As research shows, people will continue to believe wrong things in the face of evidence. Knowing that is a fact, and wanting to believe in truth rather than falsehood, it behooves everyone to examine evidence related to our beliefs for belief without evidence has no foundation to stand on.