@Jonathan Dough wrote:
But it is the exact same period, and because Moses promised that paying off the Sabbaths would end while the Jews were in captivity, in Babylon, and therefore not upon their return to the Promised Land, the Society's 70-year Return Theory is proven utterly and completely false.
@djeggnog wrote:
I don't know a thing about any "70-year Return Theory," but maybe you could start at the beginning and explain it to me.
@Jonathan Dough wrote:
The JWs' Return Theory stands for the false proposition that the 70 years ended when the Jews returned to the Promised Land and were repatriated, not before. But as scripture makes abundantly clear....
Again, I don't know a thing about any "70-year Return Theory" -- You coined this phrase for use in the arguments you posit, but I'm a total stranger to this concept that you yourself invented, and no there is no scripture that you could mention to me that would make anything "abundantly clear" other than the fact that you do not know the Scriptures at all.
BTW, I didn't say this in my previous message, but Moses died in 1473 BC, which means that when Jeremiah wrote what he did -- I believe he was at least 18 when he became a prophet of God, if not younger -- that he had to have been a prophet from about 647 BC until 580 BC since this is the year when the book bearing his name was completed. This means that when he began to prophesy, Moses had been dead 826 years, so this nonsense about Leviticus that you were going on about in your previous post makes no sense at all, unless you're suggesting that Jeremiah was a prophet for Moses, too.
I address this contention and the JWs' Return Theory in great detail.... You said you read it, but you obviously have not.
If I told you I read your piece -- and this is what I said and I did read your piece -- and if you now choose to believe that I didn't read it because I said that "I don't know a thing about any '70-year Return Theory,'" then I suppose I'm here exchanging messages with a fool that would rather spit than spar and defend your interesting scriptural viewpoints. This is what I told you:
I took the time to read your piece regarding what you indicated was going to be a scriptural consideration of this topic to which a link embedded in your message took me, but what I read turned out to be a refutation by you of some article called "Setting the Record Straight" that was written by someone else whose comments I do not associate myself since Setting the Record Straight doesn't accurately reflect what the Bible says as to the desolation of Judah as to the meaning of Jeremiah's words at 2 Chronicles 36:21 regarding the land of Judah's being made to lay desolate "until the land had paid off its sabbaths ... to fulfill seventy years," or as to the meaning of Jeremiah words at Jeremiah 25:11.
Your comment suggests that you recall my saying something in a previous post about having read your refutation of someone else's article, but I repost it here for your convenience since you didn't seem to understand that what I am saying to you is that this concept of yours about a "70-year Return Theory" is utter nonsense and is rejected by me as such, ok? You want to call me a liar? Go ahead; my skin in thick enough to take what I dish out. In fact, let me concede this point to you now so that you feel even better about yourself than you do already. But, again, I don't know a thing about any "70-year Return Theory." As you have explained it to me, this idea of yours sounds rather stupid to me; "70-year Return Theory" idea of yours is certainly not a scriptural concept.
@Jonathan Dough wrote:
And, to further help us understand the Society's position, exactly what month, in layman's terms so others can understand, did the 70 years begin? June? July? August? September? How about October as the Society teaches?
@djeggnog wrote:
I cannot give you the Society's position; the Society is not a person. As I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I can tell you what I believe with regard to this question you ask as to when it was the 70-year period of desolation began. It was in the month of Tishri on the Hebrew calendar, just before the festival of ingathering was to be celebrated on Tishri 15-21, 3155 AM, October 11-17, 607 BC, Julian, October 4-10, 607 BC, Gregorian, but it couldn't be observed there in Jerusalem because Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed Solomon's temple in Jerusalem before the festival of booths could commence.
Why do you ask?
@Jonathan Dough wrote:
October, then, just as they taught you.
Like who taught me? You are clearly referring to the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society by the word "they," but here's my question to you, @Jonathan Dough: What kind of a fool are you? Do you really believe that the only folks that can know what things the Bible teaches are those Jehovah's Witnesses that staff the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society? Really??
Do you not know that there are many folks that are not Jehovah's Witnesses that know that the destruction of Jerusalem occurred during the seventh month before the festival of ingathering? Do you know how they know this? Do you know how I know this? Because I'm one of Jehovah's Witnesses, right? Would this be your conclusion, @Jonathan Dough? Tell me this: Do you not know that Jehovah's Witnesses have Bible, too? Do you not know that there are actually some of us that actually know how to read the Bible?
What does Jeremiah 41:1 say as to when it was Gedaliah was assassinated by Ishmael and the ten men with him? What month does this verse say?
After Gedaliah's assassination, the remnant of Jews that had returned to Judah, including Jeremiah and his secretary, Baruch, were forced by Johanan to leave Jerusalem to go with his miliary forces to Egypt, (Jeremiah 43:4-7) Oh, yeah, we learn at Jeremiah 44:2, that is, if you can believe the Bible, what Jehovah says to Jeremiah: "'You yourselves have seen all the calamity that I have brought in upon Jerusalem and upon all the cities of Judah, and here they are a devastated place this day, and in them there is no inhabitant.'"
Ezra 1:1 indicates that it was "in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia," which was in the year 539 BC, "that Jehovah's word from the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished," and what "word" had Jeremiah spoken? See Jeremiah 25:12 ("when seventy years have been fulfilled") and Jeremiah 29:14 ("I will gather your body of captives and ... bring you back to the place from which I caused you to go into exile") for the answer.
Ezra 3:1 indicates that the Jews were in their cities when "the seventh month arrived," and this "seventh month" was Tishri, the same month in which Jerusalem and Solomon's temple was destroyed -- Tishri -- in which the land of Judah began suffered desolation with no inhabitant living in any of the cities of Judah, which was two months following Gedaliah's assassination during the "fifth month" -- Ab. (2 Kings 25:8)
"In the twelfth year, in the tenth month, on the fifth day of the month of our exile," an escaped one came from Jerusalem and reported to Ezekiel that "The city has been struck down!" (Ezekiel 33:21) The tenth month would be Tebeth (Tebet), so assuming you have a Hebrew calendar, this would mean that this "escaped one" arrived on Tebeth 5, 3155 AM, which would be December 30, 607 BC, Julian, December 23, 607 BC, Gregorian., some six months after the Babylonian siege on Jerusalem. Notice that there is nothing in Scripture to indicate that the festival of ingathering that was to be celebrated on Tishri 15-21, 3155 AM, October 11-17, 607 BC, Julian, October 4-10, 607 BC, Gregorian, was ever celebrated. So, then, the 70 years ran from Tishri in 607 BC when the land of Judah began to lay desolate until Tishri in 537 BC when the land of Judah were then inhabited by the repatriated Jews.
If you know how to read the Bible, then it should be clear to you and without your being one of Jehovah's Witnesses that is was during the month of October (Tishri) before the festival of ingathering when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Solomon's temple in Jerusalem, your patronizing remark -- "just as they taught you" -- aside. And, btw, contrary to what you evidently believe, the 70 years are not a period of servitude. These 70 years represent the prescribed period of time that God had ordained the land of Judah would lie desolate "until the land had paid off its sabbaths." (2 Chronicles 36:21)
I ask because, again, it disproves the JWs' false teaching, and yours, that the 70 years ended when the Jews arrived back in Judah, in October of 537.
Ok.
I understand why you persist on distancing yourself from the Society, because it protects the Society from your flawed and false teachings. This way, they can disavow you and it protects you as well. Furthermore, it diverts the reader here from [examining] the false teachings they [propagate].
I don't distance myself from the Society; I agree 100% with what things the Society teaches. You might think of me as being the Society, if you wish, but I do not disavow my association with the Society at all any more than I disavow my associated with Jehovah's Witnesses. You are one of the readers of my posts, and are you telling me that you are being 'diverted' in some way? I don't think so.
The lurkers here that have been reading the flurry of posts between you and I are aware, I'm sure, that I've been beating you up here with the truth, and with questions that you cannot answer as to what things the Bible says as to when it was the Jews returned to the land of Judah and for how long the Bible says the land of Judah lie desolate. You cannot run away from these facts. All you can do is evade my questions as if they don't matter, but they do matter. Frankly, I don't care that you believe something different as to when the Jews returned to Judah; you have a right to believe what you wish to believe.
But the battle really is with them. They are the ones killing innocent children, destroying innocent lives, wrecking families and all of the other horrible things countless thousands have attested to.
What "battle" is this? Do you think that by bloviating your knowledge of things about which you know nothing that you are battling with the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society? How would something like that work exactly? You just make up in your mind that if you are exchanging posts with someone like me, who is one of Jehovah's Witnesses, and arguing various points of view as to what Jehovah's Witnesses believe that you are in a battle with the Society? Really? You actually imagine that when you're exchanging posts with me that you are battling the Society by proxy? How delusional are you? If you are in a "battle" with someone, it is in a battle of wits, and that "battle" would be with me, and not anyone else. You can't be seriously saying to me that you believe you are battling the Society, when the Society is not a person, can you? You are accusing the Society of killing innocent children, of destroying innocent lives, or wrecking families, and of doing other horrible things to thousands of folks because of the things we believe and teach?
If anyone doesn't wish to believe what things we teach, no one is forced to believe us. Did you know this or not? If someone should become convinced that the Bible is God's word and that we are teaching what things the Bible says, it is the individual that makes a decision to believe these things. We are not forcing them to believe what things we teach. They have the choice to associate with us and to not associate with us, but if week after week and month after month they continue association with us, are we responsible for the choice that they have made or are they not responsible for their own choices?
Look, @Jonathan Dough: I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses. Am I responsible for the exercising of your right to not to believe what things I say? Or am I only responsible for the choice you make only if I manage to persuade you to believe the things I say here? Tell me this: When are you responsible for the choices that you yourself make?
If books like Let Your Kingdom Come are false teachings as you claim, where specifically is this 21st century material that refutes that information?
This is a pretty lousy paraphrase of what I said about the Let God Be True book, considering that what I actually did say was this:
I am not going to respond to statements that might have been published in older publications produced by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. As I stated in a previous message, this book you mention here was first published back in 1946 and then it was revised in 1952, and Jehovah's Witnesses do not recognize this book as containing information in it as reliable as the information found in our 21st century publications.
The Let Your Kingdom Come book was published in 1981, but what I said about the Let God Be True book applies equally. Notice that nowhere in what I actually did state did I say that either of these books were "false teachings." Do you see that or not? We retire books when adjustments are made in how we may have formerly understood the Bible topics covered in them in order that we might all "speak in agreement." (1 Corinthians 1:10) That is why we no longer publish anything in any publication released since August 23, 2006, where we make reference to Pluto as if it were a planet. You see, we even make adjustment about non-Biblical topics, too.
And why do they keep selling/handing out those outdated books and tracts if they are false?
We don't hand out outdated books and tracts; we retire them. Morever, there is nothing contained in our publications that is false.
@djeggnog
...OUTLAW