So... I got the 607 defense articles sent to me...

by i_drank_the_wine 21 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  i_drank_the_wine

  ...by a family member who recalled that this is one of my major apostate beefs. The articles themselves are disgusting pieces of mis-information and require some serious mental gymnastics to actually believe. However, they're so damn long-winded and waste so much time on pointless stuff like the 2 pages on the JW's beliefs about the 70 year period, that I am debating on whether or not to write the loyal J-Dub family member back on it or not.

  It shows just how brainwashed that family member is in that they know that 607 is a problem date, yet happily forward the articles as soem sort of proof while never once reading anything on the topic with an iota of thinking.

  After years of having everything I've said on these topics ignored by everyone in my family that I've tried contacting over and over again, I really feel like taking the time to pick through their trash is going to be a big waste. That being said, it doesn't sit well with me to have any JW mail me something as a "gotcha" without getting an honest response on the matter.

  If I do write back, anyone have a good, easy to read/understand debunking of this trash?
• 

  wannabefree

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/218052/1/Onscreen-Critique-NOVEMBER-1-Watchtower-When-Was-Ancient-Jerusalem-Destroyed
• 

  cedars

  As has been suggested, just send a copy of the excellent critique on those articles straight back! I wish I could give you a brilliant synopsis of the critique in just a couple of sentences, but the trouble is, I can't muster much enthusiasm for this subject - unless it is with the goal of helping others. The reason for this is that I never personally believed that the "Nebuchadnezzar dream" had any grander fulfilment regarding the so-called "gentile times", so the whole chronology issue of 607/1914 is a moot point for me.

  Cedars
• 

  Phigment2

  One of my friends mailed one of the authors quoted on the bottom of the article...
  
  Originally Posted by John Steele Jw-net
  From: Steele, John [email address deleted]
  To: marjoriealley [email address deleted]
  Date: Fri, Sep 2, 2011 9:32 am
  
  Dear Ms Alley,
  
  Thank you for your email concerning the citation of my work in the
  
  recent Watchtower article. As you suggest the author of this piece is
  
  completely misrepresenting what I wrote, both in what they say about
  
  the lunar three measurement, and in what I say about the possibility
  
  of retrocalculation of eclipses (my comments on the latter were
  
  restricted to a distinct and small group of texts which are different
  
  to the Diary they are discussing). Just glancing through the
  
  Watchtower article I can see that they have also misrepresented the
  
  views of other scholars by selective quotation out of context.
  
  I've looked at the date of VAT 4956 on several occasions and see no
  
  possibility that it can be dated to anything other than the
  
  conventional date.
  
  Regards,
  
  John Steele"
• 

  Mickey mouse

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/217098/1/Critique-of-the-NOVEMBER-1-Watchtower-articleWhen-Was-Ancient-Jerusalem-Destroyed

  This is Carl Olof Jonsson's response to the articles http://kristenfrihet.se/vtsvar/vtsvar1.pdf
• 

  i_drank_the_wine

  Wow what a fast response! Thanks so much for pointing me in the right direction guys!
• 

  jonathan dough

  Print this out and bury them with it. Of course they'll throw it in the trash, which speaks for itself, but they'll know there are opposing views. Explain that those arguments have been thoroughly discredited, even before they were printed. And make it a point to read the JW articles as well.

  http://144000.110mb.com/607/index.html

  I also recommend Jonsson's recent critique of those articles:

  http://kristenfrihet.se/vtsvar/vtsvar1.pdf
• 

  Indian Larry
• 

  cedars

  Indian Larry - change your browser, or hit the "compatibility view" button in the address bar of your existing browser.
• 

  SixofNine

  Before you answer them on the specifics, ask them "did you actually read this and try to understand it before you sent it to me?". Most likely they didn't.