How many here have actually received a response from the WTS, either by phone or letter, regarding the 607/587 B.C.E. discrepancy?

by Crisis of Conscience 16 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Crisis of Conscience

  I recently called the service department about this. First off, what I read in another post is correct. The person you talk with WILL NOT give you their name.

  I asked the question and the brother responds by saying that yes, they get that question ALL the time.

  Then he proceeds to tell me that I need to write in to the society with my question and they will give me plenty of information to back up their standing on it.

  I told him that I searched the WL CDROM and found nothing, not even under questions from readers. Now if the question comes up so much, why hasn't it ever been addressed to the masses through perhaps the Watchtower (that's one word, LOL) magazine? (I know the answer. Keep the blinders on.)

  What has been the experience of others here?

  CoC
• 

  AnnOMaly

  The WTS has been repeatedly challenged about this issue ad nauseum, from within and without the Org, for the best part of a century. They tend to use the same old arguments they always use that have already been refuted over and over. My advice: don't bother unless you have nothing to lose and you're prepared to pursue this to the end as a personal exercise (it aint going to change their minds one jot).

  If you want a taster of what you might be in for, see HERE.

  Doug Mason also wrote the WTS but I can't recall where you can see his exchange with them.

  And there are others ...
• 

  Soldier77

  Then he proceeds to tell me that I need to write in to the society with my question and they will give me plenty of information to back up their standing on it.

  I'd write and ask for it. Get the "official" response to it, see what they use, compare it to what is already in print, then go to town in disecting it. We all know (or most know?) that it will be disproved by secular history, but getting another up to date response on it is always a good thing. Use their own information as ammo.
• 

  Titus

  Ask them where in the hell did they explain why the "other sheep" are not gentile Christians! Debator told me that there is a lot of literature about that. Debator! There isn't ANY article about that!

  Yes! Did you know that? Can you believe that? THERE IS NO ANY ARTICLE ABOUT THAT!

  If somebody uses WTL you can check it. They never answered that question.

  WHY DO JWs CLAIM THAT THE "OTHER SHEEP" ARE NOT GENTILE CHRISTIANS?

  Debator, Alice, BANE, scholar - I expect your answers!
• 

  miseryloveselders

  This might sound crazy, but I'm wondering if there are people on the Writing Department who see the lack of validity in 607. The reason I say that is, the new Jeremiah Book, has some pages, and questions that focus heavily on 607. One question goes, "Describe the Events of 607 B.C.E." On the pages in question, they have a chart that highlights 607. It's almost as if they're taunting their readers. For a while now, publications haven't mentioned 607 and I was under the impression that they'll just stop mentioning it and let it die. With this new book, that doesn't seem to be the case, unless...... and this might sound crazy, right up there with the goverment's black helicopters and men in white coats. But, I believe there are those on the writing department who purposely highlighted 607 in this fashion to stimulate research and conversation about 607 vs 587/586. Most Witnesses don't do proper research. Most will not pick up a history book, or an encyclopedia. Most nonWitnesses don't concern themselves about what happened between Jerusalem and Babylon. So for the most part, the average Witness will never come across anything that challenges 607. Even if they did read something in an encyclopedia that says at one point Babylon sacked Jerusalem in 586, the average Witness won't catch it. It would get missed like fine print on a credit card offer. I don't know when this new book will be considered for the Congregation Book Study, it might be a couple years. When it does happen, it may be an oppurtunity for the conscious class to expose this false teaching.
• 

  Stealth

  This issue has been questioned by phone & letter for decades. The Governing Body knows full well that many in watchtower land have left the organization over this issue and they fail to address it in the QFR is very telling. They would rather let good hearted christains stumble again and again over this issue rather then address it or admit they were wrong.

  Matt: 18:6 But whoever stumbles one of these little ones who put faith in me it is more beneficial for him to have hung around his neck a millstone...and to be sunk in the wide open sea.

  Proof that the power is more important then the people for the governing body of Jehovah's witness.
• 

  cantleave

  I always just accepted it. If something is stated as fact in an authorative manner, and for the whole of your life by people you are told deserve your respect, why wouldn't you believe it?

  Thank You Ray Franz for enlightening me.
• 

  St George of England

  And there are others ...

  I thought the following quite an interesting exchange of letters on this topic.....

  http://www.607v587.com/

  WHY DO JWs CLAIM THAT THE "OTHER SHEEP" ARE NOT GENTILE CHRISTIANS?

  Because J F Rutherford said so!

  George
• 

  Soldier77

  WHY DO JWs CLAIM THAT THE "OTHER SHEEP" ARE NOT GENTILE CHRISTIANS?

  Good question Titus. I'd like to see bible proof to this as well. Not WTS literature, just the bible.
• 

  Titus

  77, I know that Bible REALLY doesn't teach that!

  But I think that it is more interesting that - the Watchtower Publications also DO NOT teach that!

  You will not find any article that answers WHY THE "OTHER SHEEP" ARE NOT GENTILE CHRISTIANS?!