A non-Witnes who accepts 607 BC?

careful

An eyebrow raiser to be sure. I can understand the clergyman being so Baptist that he'd still use the name Jehovah since it was popular in English and German churches for a long time during and after the Reformation, but 607?

See ¶ 6 under the heading "The historicity of the Book of Daniel". It's about half way down the page:

http://www.idahobaptist.com/daniel/dan-043.htm

Maybe he's been reading CT Russell or some source Russell used? He has no interest in the Gentile Times, day-year stuff, or 1914.

DATA-DOG

That’s not too far-fetched. This week I met adults who believe that:

1) The USA needs a wall to keep “Brown people” out.

2) Eastern meditation lets demons in your mind.

3) Some guy in the USA has finally figured out the book of Revelation.

4) The one true religion is actually a branch of the Pentecostal faith that a white guy started in the Mid-West, USA.

5) Donald Trump is a good Christian.

There’s no shortage of stupidity and ignorance on this planet.

DD

Finkelstein

There’s no shortage of stupidity and ignorance on this planet.

Well said DD and isn't it interesting that religious beliefs are associated with that ignorance.

Humanity suffers through its inherent ignorance and always has through people or organizations that proliferate that ignorance such as religious institutions. ie. JWS

redvip2000

There’s no shortage of stupidity and ignorance on this planet.

Incredibly, the most powerful country in the world, is well represented.

Listener

William Miller taught that Jerusalem fell in 606 because and the teaching was picked up as new religions developed which included the JWs and Seventh day Adventists.

Londo111

Needless to say this person has no credibility.

scratchme1010

DATA-DOG, I'm with you.

The JWs don't own exclusive rights to bullshit.

LeeT

There are also Jews who take Seder Olem seriously and so think the temple was destroyed in 422 BCE

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2836156/jewish/The-Discrepancy-Between-the-Rabbinic-and-Secular-Dates.htm

Facts can be just inconvenient truths that need suppressing in case they get in the way of real faith.

jwfacts

607 is likely taken from Watchtower publications, as it is so intrinsically tied to 1914, and neither history or the Bible. 607 works back from 537, which is a Watchtower date, made up when Watchtower realized 1914 was wrong due to their being no year 0. Instead of change to 1915, they moved 606 to 607, and then 536 to 537.

607 doesn't naturally flow from the end of 70 years, as Watchtower states, since Babylon was destroyed in 539 and Jeremiah 25:12. shows the 70 years end with the fall of Babylon.

Phizzy

Of course vs 11 of Jeremiah 25 shows that the "70 years" applies to the nations serving the King of Babylon, not the Jewish Exile. It is worth noting that throughout the O.T periods of round numbers like 400 years, 40 years, and of course 70 years, are used by writers and are not to be taken literally, they are a literary device.

The preacher quoted in the O.P is a joke intellectually.

A non-Witnes who accepts 607 BC?

Share this