When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed? Why It Matters - What the Evidence Shows

by wannabefree 224 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  AGuest

  the sheeple will ooh and aah about how informative and timely this information from the FDS is and NEVER EVEN OPEN their Bible to read Jeremiah chapters 24 and 25 in context.

  Good LORDY, that used to get to me, dear MS (the greatest of love and peace to you!). My husband and I were watching some show where one of the actors, in response to something just said that was totally ludicrous, wide-eyedly looked around to see if anyone else thought so, too! "See?!" I said... "THAT is what I would do at the meetings!"

  I mean, I could see how SOME things were, "Okay, maybe I didn't hear the speaker right." But SOME things were just... "Wait... it doesn't SAY that at all!" Utterly amazed me sometimes, the rote bobbing head consensus did.

  Dear practicing JWs, take a lesson: reading... is fundamental... and enlightening. It can also save your LIFE. So, okay, you don't want to commit "devotion" to "many books"... because that CAN be wearisome to the flesh, I'll give you that. BUT... shouldn't you at least read what others are pushing through THEIR "many books"... through YOU? Reallly... you should. Because you are a sharer... "in her sins". GET OUT OF HER!

  Peace to you all!

  A slave of Christ,

  SA
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  I noticed a glaring error in the very first paragraph:

  Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses say that it was 607 B.C.E.?

  Let me fix that for them...

  Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses and pyramidologists say that it was 607 B.C.E.?

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/175650/18/70-years-3d-607
  page 17 "scholar" gave this list... which are all 1914 pyramidologist wackos

  You ask for names of those non JW scholars who support 607 BCE:

  Jerry Leslie

  Julian T Gray

  Paul S Johnson

  Morton Edgar

  Charles f Redeker

  I hope this helps.

  Yeah, the list "helps" in the sense of helping us rip scholar a new one.
• 

  ZionsWatchTower

  Exactly Billy. Also , this chronology is purely Second- Adventist.

  The Witnesses only inherited the chronology of Nelson H. Barbour.
• 

  Listener

  They state in the summary -

  "Bilbe chronology strongly indicates that the destruction occurred in 607 BCE"

  Which means it's not an absolute.
• 

  Terry

  What goes UP must come DOWN.

  Armageddon and a visible return for nineteen fourteen DID NOT HAPPEN.

  The Watchtower temporized and double-talked.

  Armageddon was invisible in more ways than one.

  The churches weren't destroyed.

  See-through Jesus (invisible) has been idle for 97 years when he was supposed to BRING THE MILLENNIUM.

  Once you see through the argument you are better off.

  THE DATE ISN'T IMPORTANT---IT IS THE HUGE LIST OF FALE PREDICTIONS about the DATE.

  That is the consequence of propping up the 1914 chronology.

  Bible Chronology is double talk for ADVENTIST THINKING.

  William Miller was wrong twice. Ellen White was wrong. Russell was wrong. Rutherford was wrong. Fred Franz was wrong.

  ADVENTIST THINKING is phony baloney.
• 

  Pants of Righteousness

  Looking forward to some analysis on this article. Initial observations:

  - Willing to use clay tablet BM 33066 to support date of Cyrus' death, even though it contains 'some errors' and relies on astronomical positions. No mention of VAT 4956 that provides observations from Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year / 18th regnal year in 587/6 B.C.E, exactly in the same year as does Ptolemy's Canon.

  - No mention of Tyre's 70 years or why they are treated differently. " It must occur in that day that Tyre must be forgotten seventy years, the same as the days of one king.” (Isaiah 23:15a) According to the Isaiah book , "the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God."

  - Josephus is quoted as saying Amel-Marduk ruled for 18 years. This was the length he gave in Antiquties of the Jews. However, in his final book (Against Appion), he gave the length as 2 years, as per Berossus.

  Pants
• 

  Black Sheep

  “It has long been known that the Canon is astronomically reliable,” writes Leo Depuydt, one of Ptolemy’s most enthusiastic defenders, “but this does not automatically mean that it is historically dependable.” Regarding this list of kings, Professor Depuydt adds: “As regards the earlier rulers [who included the Neo-Babylonian kings], the Canon would need to be compared with the cuneiform record on a reign by reign basis.”6

  L. Depuydt: "More Valuable than all Gold": Ptolemy's Royal Canon and Babylonian Chronology PDF
• 

  garyneal

  Yep, keep the sheeple in line, don't want any of them questioning and doing real research.
• 

  Witness My Fury

  I'm wondering why it's in the public edition instead of the private WT. Surely it's for internal consumption and information control purposes?

  Or is it because that would look TOO obvious, ..hence it goes in the public edition to sugar coat it?
• 

  Black Sheep

  I wonder what Leo would have to say about the WT article?

  Leo Depuydt

  These are pages from the article the WT quoted.