Discussion with my dad about 607 in a week,,,,help?

by stillstuckcruz 25 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  stillstuckcruz

  So to make a long story short, my family found out about my "apostacy"(I couldn't take it anymore) and now everything is all in shambles. They still feel there is "hope" for me. (HA!). I wrote a 10 page letter to my dad basically outlining the majority of issues. It still only covered a marginal amount of information that I wanted to put it. But the simpler the better I guess. One of the sections was about 607. In short what I put in there about 607 was not was not some deep doctrinal analysis but mainly what methods have been used by the Society to support it(misrepresentation and misquotations). I also placed in how it related to the historical evidence regarding 537BCE and why the same evidence that is used there are discarded or discredited for 607, etc.

  Anyway, in a week,maybe less, he wants to discuss that date and why I don't support it. Keep in mind that my dad is an elder(one of the more reasonable ones) and is also a math wiz. So is there anything I can use that will show him that it can't be correct? I want to keep it simple as too much info will help no one. lol. His defense was the typical JW responce...that JW's rely only on the bible and not worldly historians, who don't have a love of the scriptures bla bla bla. He also said that non-JW sources rely on the Gregorian calender while JW's rely on the lunar calendar or some other nonsense.

  But anyways, any help you can provide will be GREATLY appreciated. I'll be posting my situation in another thread at some point in time.
• 

  truth_b_known

  Just a couple of pointers:

  1) Lay some ground rules. No Watch Tower publications may be used as proof. Watch Tower publications refernce other writings. Tell him to use those writings.

  2) Show him that the whole concept of 1914 came from William Miller whom Charles Russell followed and believed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Miller_(preacher)

  3) Show him that Charles Taze Russell, a Freemason, got the 1914 date from his measurements of the Great Pyramid of Egypt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taze_Russell
• 

  mP

  There are youtube videos that show from WTS publications starting from the return to Jerusalem and then subtracting the years of reign for each king of Babylon gives the year of destructionat 587/6.
• 

  Magi

  Have him prove to you how the watchtower society has arrived with the 607 BCE date, not you prove to him. That way he can figure out for himself if the date is conclusive or not. And you can point him in the right direction of how you came to your understanding. I believe, though, its important how you deal with the situation more than what can be proven or not. People cannot see something right in front of them unless they are willing to see it. Just give it careful thought and how you want to approach the whole matter with your dad and that you don't lose your cool. I myself am guilty for doing that with my family when I left, and wish that I was more experienced in how to handle the whole thing. Wish you luck on your meeting with your dad. Keep us posted.
• 

  truth_b_known

  http://ed5015.tripod.com/Jw1260Days107.htm
• 

  jwfacts

  Before you start the conversation, the very first thing to settle is how important is 607 to your father. What if he does unbiased research and finds out Jerusalem fell in 587? What then? Would he admit the organisation is not the truth? If not, then there is no really point getting into a heated debate that will achieve nothing in the long run. You know where he stands, and he knows where you stand. I cannot emphasis that point enough.

  He also said that non-JW sources rely on the Gregorian calender while JW's rely on the lunar calendar or some other nonsense.

  That certainly is rubbish. They cannot arive at 607 without using the same calendar and research that everyone else uses to get to 587. Ask him why he trusts historians with their figure for 539, which is the basis for 607, but then cannot trust them that it was only 50 years and not 70 years earlier that Jerusalem was destroyed? And it he doesn't trust them, how does he know 539 is correct? He is not trusting Bible chronology, but predominantly Secular Chronology.

  I think the key things are

  1. why does he think Dan 4 has two fulfillments, when nothing else in Daniel has two fulfillments.
  2. Jerusalem did not have to be desolate for 70 years. (http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/607-70-years.php) Jer 25 and 29 both refer to the 70 years being for Babylon and the nations rather than Jerusalem. As the Isaiah's Prophecy book shows, 70 years does not have to be literal, as it was not a literal period for Tyre.
  3. As above, very detailed historical chronology proves 539 and 587. If he cannot trust historians, he cannot trust 539 is correct, and therefore has no basis to believe 607 is correct either.

  The entire topic is summarised at http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/607-7-times.php
• 

  Dutch-scientist

  Hi,

  Simply ask your dad which year the last year was when a Babylonian king was a live?

  Then ask him count back and write it down every year which king ruled Babylon.

  Then mark the 18th rule year of nebukadnessar.

  This as start. You can make it as complicated as you want.

  I dont know which kind of material you want to use?

  There are many topics based on this and speciall after the Oktober and November publication.

  DS
• 

  panhandlegirl

  Do you have the book "The Gentile Times Reconsidered" by Carl Olof Jonsson an xjw now? He has presented indisputable evidence against this date and the wbts teaching. COJ presented this evidence to the GD and R.Franz tried to get the GD to consider the evidence but they refused. Excellent book.
• 

  jwfacts

  Here is Carls discussion of the latest magazines and the way they lie about the sources quoted.

  http://www.jwfacts.com/pdf/carl-olof-jonsson-when-jerusalem-destroyed.pdf
• 

  AnnOMaly

  Lessons learned from people like Alleymom and Black Sheep.

  Keep it very, very simple. Don't go off on this or that tangent until you get an answer on your original question. It's so easy to become swamped with confusing details.

  I suggest you only use the WT publications. Ask your dad if he believes the WTS publications print the truth about ancient history. He'll say, 'yes.' Then apply the method (Alleymom's) as demonstrated in this video:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrCleOXkYu0

  As your dad is a math-head, he'll see the 20 year discrepancy straight away. Ask him to explain why this discrepancy exists. If he is unsure, let him go away and research it. If he says there must be missing kings, get him to provide proof. Do not deviate onto anything else until he provides an explanation.

  He does all the work. You don't have to prove anything.