failed
Sorry
When Was Jerusalem Destroyed By The Babylonians?
by Smart 72 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
AnnOMaly
sloppyjoe: This is only going to end up badly for you.
Ditto. If you have nothing to lose, Smart, and are curious to see for yourself how this plays, then go for it.
The Org has known about the fundamental problems with its chronology since Russell's day. People from inside the Org and outside of it have repeatedly pointed out its errors year after year after year. Those within the Org at first get fobbed off or else shouted down (e.g. Rutherford's 1922 articles); if they persist they get warned; then if they still don't shut the hell up, they get disfellowshipped (e.g. Carl Jonsson and a host of others). Those outside of the Org get fobbed off and/or ignored. The Org will not budge. It can't or its doctrine about its divinely given authority evaporates and the leadership is left with being a small group of jumped-up nobodies.
-
Smart
Sloppyjoe it's okay I am not offended by you, my friend. I appreciate what you are telling me.
Ann, I understand.
I don't know what to do.
I have to be true to myself whatever happens.
All I can say to them if I do say anything is that I bought a history book on Babylon and reading it didn't add up with what the Watchtower says.
If they ask the loyalty question then I could say "yes I think the GB is correct, but can you help me to find the truth about this."
-
Stealth
I was turned in to the elders by my ex-wife when I started to question this doctrine.
I told the elders the only reason I questioned it was because I was reading one of my childrens home schooled history books and was shocked to see something other than what I thought was fact.
When they asked my the loyalty questions, I said the GB was probably correct, but if not, i'm sure Jah would provide new light.
That kept them from going any further with sanctions.
-
wannabefree
What do you want to accomplish Smart?
If you want to be marked, alienated, or even go as far as being disfellowshipped ... go for it.
The Organization won't change for you. Your local congregation won't accept your thoughts over the Organization's. Case closed.
The Org has heard it all, disfellowshipped those that brought it to their attention [http://kristenfrihet.se/english/epage.htm] and just entrenched themselved deeper into their lie.
-
Smart
I dunno I'm not that 'smart' really! At least I know for myself anyway that its not true what they claim. If or when I do leave then where am I going to turn to? Do you guys still go to a different church or synagoue or something?
-
Atlantis
When a person investigates into whether Russell had doubts about 606 and even 1914, it is clear that the Watchtower admits these calculations are neither scriptural or sound. Many of Russell followers did not accept these calculations.
.
The Bible Student was told to decide for himself whether Russell's opinions sounded reasonable or not. Later on, 606 became 607, and when you are not sure to begin with then you end up on shakey ground. Russell's 606 which later became 607 was all built on opinion, and many of Russell's followers questioned these assumptions.
.
This is what 606-607 and 1914 are based on:
.
1.Opinions
2.Theories
3.Not an Infallible date
4.We proceed to examine the evidence
5.We consider it an established truth
6.Nothing in these quotations declares infallibility
7.Our views
8.Theories we suggested
9.The author sums up his own views
10.What he considers to be the truth .
Those statements leave a lot of question marks when going up against real history and facts! If a Doctor said those words to you concerning an operation he was going to perform on you, would you go ahead with the operation? Jehovah's Witnesses have their lives hanging from a string based on "theories and opinions" from a man who showed that he was not totally convinced himself of his own calculations!
.
Please note the comments made concerning 606 and 1914 in the 1913 Watchtower, November 15, pp. 344-345, 5350, (See top of page in the scan) . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .
"Our statement in October 15th issue that we have never mentioned October, 1914, as an infallibly sure date, either for the ending of the "Times of the Gentiles" or for any particular occurrence, has been called in question by one of our readers. We are cited to the following words of STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. II.: "Now bear in mind the date already found for the beginning of these Gentile Times, viz., 606 B.C., while we proceed to examine the evidence proving their length to be 2520 years--ending A.D. 1914....In view of this strong Bible evidence concerning the Times of the Gentiles, we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God will be accomplished at the end of 1914."
We hold that nothing in these quotations declares the infallibility of the theories we suggested respecting 1914. In these statements, and in all of our statements, we have merely informed our readers respecting our views and the processes of our reasoning on the Scriptures which we have brought to their attention. Thus we have asked each reader to think and judge for himself, and to agree or disagree with us according to his own judgment of the facts.
.Notice that in the above quotations no dogmatic statement is made, but that the reader is requested to use his own intellect. For instance, note the words, "bear in mind"; again, "while we proceed to examine the evidence"; again the reference to "Bible evidence." In the last sentence the author sums up his own views, declaring what he considers to be the truth established by the evidences which he sets before his readers. . In this respect we believe that THE WATCH TOWER presentations differ considerably from others. We state with positiveness the opinions of the writerand the reasons therefor, but leave the final decision with each head and heart in all matters, without attempting more.
.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
.
. .
..
Atlantis!
-
BluesBrother
I find these long debates about 607/587 rather difficult too . My eyes glaze over at the mathematical calculations, but I have seen enough evidence on here to show that the WT's dogmatic insistance on 607 is just because they need the date. Be aware of the reasoning they will use, I am sure that they will refuse to discuss the intricasies of Ptolemy's Canon or other works of antiquity. This was the way they put it in the last discussion in the lit. There were two extensive articles plus a little comment later.
Wt 11 10/1 p31
To sum up: The Bible clearly states that there was an exile of 70 years. There is strong evidence—and most scholars agree—that the Jewish exiles were back in their homeland by 537 B.C.E. Counting back from that year would place Jerusalem’s destruction in 607 B.C.E. Though the classical historians and the canon of Ptolemy disagree with this date, valid questions can be raised about the accuracy of their writings. Really, those two lines of evidence hardly provide enough proof to overturn the Bible’s chronology.
............
Wt 11 11/1 p27
At present, the majority of secular historians believe that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 B.C.E. However, the Bible writers Jeremiah and Daniel clearly state that the Jews were in exile for 70 years, not 50 years. (Jeremiah 25:1, 2, 11; 29:10; Daniel 9:2) Those statements strongly indicate that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C.E. As the above evidence shows, that conclusion has some secular support.
Secular experts have repeatedly questioned the Bible’s accuracy. Yet, when more evidence is uncovered, the Bible record has time and again been vindicated. Those who trust the Bible have good reason to do so. They base their opinion on proof that the Bible is historically, scientifically, and prophetically accurate. That evidence leads them to believe the Bible’s claim that it is the inspired Word of God. (2 Timothy 3:16) Why not investigate the evidence for yourself? You may well come to the same conclusion.
WT 11 12/15 Do You Remember? p31
• How do we know when ancient Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians?
Classical historians give mixed, conflicting details about the Babylonian kings and their reigns. Yet, scholars agree that Cyrus II conquered Babylon in 539 B.C.E., a pivotal date. The Jews were released, and they arrived in their homeland by 537 B.C.E. The Bible says that their exile was 70 years long. So Jerusalem must have fallen in 607 B.C.ESo that was it really to them, archaology tells us one thing, The Bible appearsto tell us something else (I really mean that the WTS own calculations and interpretation say it) so "What do we believe? The Bible of course !" Obvious innit ....
-
wannabefree
One step at a time.
I felt the same way. Where now?
The answer is diffent for all. Find your path.
-
Smart
It's just unbelieve isn't it. It really is a very subtle deception.
.