So, where DID the 1914 timeline go awry? (page 2)

breeze

If the Bible is the basis for your belief system...doesn't it say the time day nor hour was not to be known by man??

So the moment you start trying to figure it out, you become an adversary to God and his WORD???

Xander

murky secular history would not have been enough to wipe out 607 and 1914

Right - that's what I was getting at in this thread. I wasn't looking for secular history - I knew it existed and was in contradiction, I wanted scriptural evidence, basically.

Take a look at that site - near the end, you'll see what I mean.

He notes how very specific time references are made to a given year of a king's rain and specific durations from BEFORE that date, etc.

That something happened in 1914 is really not relevant. Something happened in 1939, 1941, 1945, etc. Two dates on a calender and some strange math taken out of context to support them is not enough to convince someone unless both dates can be 'proven'.

In this case, neither can. The world is demonstrably not any worse of after 1914 than before, so that date has no prophetic meaning; and nothing interesting at all happened in 607, apparently...with no evidence of any kind that it did.

Further (the steps I was looking for), that 607 could be calculated by any means has been proven false - they essentially just picked the date out of that air - and the duration from that date is also contrived.

(Kinda what I was looking for - a deconstruction of every single stage of that 'prophecy')

Edited by - Xander on 30 December 2002 17:28:6

iggy_the_fish

I thought they (in the past anyhow, I don't know what their present truth is at the moment) fudged 607BCE for the fall of Jerusalem by saying that;

a) the Jews returned from exile in 537BCE, and

b) the 70 years mentioned in various scriptures (can't remember the exact details, one of them's in Jeremiah though) refers to the length of time that the exile lasted, from the fall of Jerusalem.

Hey presto, -537-70 = -607. I thought that was the basis of their "biblical chronology". The two things wrong with that (again, as far as my imperfect memory recalls) are that the 70 years in Jeremiah (and elsewhere) more logically refers to the duration of Babylon's rule over the region rather than the exile of the Jews, and that there's no good reason to assume that the Jews returned to Jerusalem in 537BCE.

For goodness sake don't quote me on any of this! This is only how I remember it from chapter 7 (having a quick look in my copy) of "Gentile Times". Greatful though I am to COJ for writing it, that book has to be one of the most boring books on planet earth! I'm falling asleep just thinking about it.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

ig.

IslandWoman

Hello Iggy_the_fish,

Are you by any chance related to Iggy of H2O?

IW

Farkel

: So, where DID the 1914 timeline go awry?

Well, let's see here. In 1914 there was a war, so THAT is significant. Thousands of years before this there was this King guy named Nebuch..., er Naboochad...., I mean uh Nebucked.... Oh, nevermind! Anyway, there was this King guy who had a dream about a tree getting chopped down and being banded for 7 years. Since everyone knows that all dreams about trees getting chopped down indicates prophecy of universe-shattering significance, that "Neb-whatever" guy calls in this guy named "Danny." Danny was prophet. He was also a real nutball. You see Danny wrote about horns on beasts "eating" other horns, stars falling out of the heavens, disgusting "things" that cause desolation, and talking horns! Yep, he was a nutball, alright. He also said he walked right into a den of starving lions, and they let him PET them and licked his face. Yep. A genuine nutball that Danny was.

Anyway, Danny tells him that the dream is indeed significant because "Neb-whatever" was going to to crazy for "seven times." As soon as Neb tried to ask him about what "seven times" meant, he went stark-raving mad, left his beautiful wives, started eating grass and quit using toilet paper.

Now the reason Danny didn't want to explain to him what "seven times" meant was because "times" didn't mean "times," but meant years. But the "years" didn't mean "years", but "years of days." But the days didn't mean "days" but "days of years." As goofy as I he was, I can understand why Danny didn't want to explain this to Neb, because Neb would have had him beheaded for idiocy.

Anyway, we now have a time frame for this prophecy: start at 1914 and count back 2,520 years and you arrive at 606 BC. Preach that for a bunch of years until you finally realize that there is no zero year from BC to AD. Move 606 BC back to 607 BC, and you're ALMOST ready for a full-fledged prophecy. You next have to somehow connect Jesus statement made hundreds of years later about the "Gentile Times" to a prophecy about a King eating grass, but rather than trying to make that connection, you just STATE that it IS connected.

Finally, you have to find a whole bunch of people stupid enough to buy into that crap, and foolish enough to sell for you books that state all that crap and you're all set!

Therefore, NOTHING is wrong with this prophecy or those dates of 607 and 1914. On the contrary, it is all "Bible-Based(tm)!"

Hope that helps some.

Farkel

Edited by - Farkel on 1 January 2003 11:43:16

iggy_the_fish

Hi IW,

No, and you're not the first first person to ask me that either! When I signed up I didn't have the presence of mind to check I wasn't using a similar handle to anyone else. Had I have done so, I would have chosen "Boost". I'll put a "disclaimer" in my profile!

ig.

IslandWoman

Hi Iggy_the_fish,

LOL, thanks!

IW

Gig

Let's just remember that the WT uses "Bible Chronology". That has to be the standard here...but wait a sec, there are NO dates in the Bible. Including 1935 which compels JW's to happily tell me I can't go to heaven because it's full. Anyway, chronology has been accurately established by the reigns of kings spoken of in the Bible along with thousands of documents and records reflecting same. Secular historians establish Bible chronology, but doesn't it sound so much better that the WT uses the Bible? How great they aren't.

scholar

Xander

I do not believe that the Society's application of 1914 is incorrect or that the foundation date for the Gentile Times is unreliable or without solid evidence. The dates of 586/587 are based on secular/historical evidence but 607 is also reckoned on similar evidence. It all comes down to,hermeneutics. One must decide what methodology and biblical exgesis for that historical period is reasonable. For myself, the choice of 607 is a useful date as it provides a starting point for the prophetic period of the Gentile Times.

It seems that supporters for 586/587 have been seduced by the writings of Raymond Franz and the Jonsson hypothesis but it is far better to critically examine these writings before making claims about the validity of 607 and 1914.

scholar BA MA Studies in Religion

Gizmo

Farkel...you man are a riot...ROFLMAO

Thousands of years before this there was this King guy named Nebuch..., er Naboochad...., I mean uh Nebucked.... Oh, nevermind

So, where DID the 1914 timeline go awry?

Share this