Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan 174 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  KalebOutWest

  I've commented countless times how the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible) is viewed as a collection of religious texts, not historical ones. Religious truth and historical fact are very different things. One cannot expect to produce precise historical dates from religious narrative.

  The constant championing of the date of 607 BCE is merely a smokescreen to hide the repeated failures of Jehovah's Witnesses and the failures of their leaders "Jehovah God" uses. Either they cannot follow Jehovah very well or Jehovah cannot lead them with precision ...or perhaps Jehovah just doesn't exist at all.

  • 1874: the original year for the invisible return of Christ
  • 1878: the last of the anointed remnant to receive their reward
  • 1881: the new date for the anointed remnant to receive their reward
  • 1914: the updated date for the remnant to receive their reward/the end of all nations/begin of Thousand Years
  • 1915: new date for all events of 1914 when remnant found itself still on earth and earthly kingdoms not ended
  • 1918: new date for events of 1915
  • 1925: the earthly resurrection would begin starting with the rise of Old Testament patriarchs
  • 1975: end of 6000 years of mankind with 1000 year rule of Christ to begin in September
  • During the last half of the 20th century, the teaching was that the New World Order would come before the generation of 1914 passed away, defined to be about 14 to 12 years old around the year 1914.
  • And finally that before the year 2000, Armageddon would come, bringing kingdom rule to the earth.

  We are in the year 2025, so far away from 1874, and so miserable is the streak of prophetic predictions based on 606/607 BCE. This is why Scholar circles around it. Vultures circle around dead bodies that offer nothing but rot. If we move further away, we find nothing but more and more evidence of dead people who waited and waited for a kingdom that was promised by people who claimed to have true spiritual insight but never did anything more but spoon out spiritual poison.
• 

  Jeffro

  KalebOutWest:

  I've commented countless times how the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible) is viewed as a collection of religious texts, not historical ones. Religious truth and historical fact are very different things. One cannot expect to produce precise historical dates from religious narrative.

  The stories the Jews wrote about the Neo-Babylonian period were interpretations of events that actually happened, and there are corresponding verifiable historical events. So it makes sense that details about the sequence of events they sought to explain are present in the stories. Though their explanations for the events are steeped in superstition (e.g., exile as a 'punishment from God' or Cyrus' general policy of religious tolerance twisted into a 'decree just for the Jews'), the chronological data contained in the relevant stories are consistent with the actual chronology of the period found in other sources. In this regard, the Jewish stories about the Neo-Babylonian period are not better or worse than Babylonian records that present historical details among other details grounded in religious belief. (The same obviously does not apply to earlier stories based on oral traditions such as the 'patriarchs' or the 'exodus', or other adaptations from Babylonian mythology such as the 'garden of Eden' or 'the flood'.)

  However, in my analysis of 586 or 587?, I do nevertheless include the proviso:

  As there are no known secular records that provide a specific date for the [destruction of Jerusalem], information from the Bible must be used. Whilst one might question the reliability of the Bible, if the details therein are not considered reliable for determining the date of Jerusalem’s destruction by Nebuchadnezzar, then no specific year can otherwise be asserted with any certainty.

  JW superstitions about 607 BCE, of course, remain an utter failure whether the data in the Bible is reliable or not.
• 

  TonusOH

  "Actual scholars disagree on the minor specifics of certain data, therefore disproven WTS lunacy is legit" is about as dissonant as congnition can possibly get.
• 

  KalebOutWest

  Jeffro,

  We are in total agreement.

  The stories the Jews wrote about the Neo-Babylonian period were interpretations of events that actually happened, and there are corresponding verifiable historical events.

  This is correct.

  My comments were about the Tanakh were about the collection as a whole, being a liturgical library:

  ...the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible) is viewed as a collection of religious texts, not historical ones.

  This does not mean that there are no historical references therein. I was stating that its purpose (according to most Jewish traditions) was mainly liturgical in nature. Gone With the Wind has many accurate historical details that it notes therein, but like the Bible, it is not reporting history in the way the Watchtower religion is claiming. That was my point.
• 

  Jeffro

  KalebOutWest:

  We are in total agreement.

  Indeed. But I wanted to cover my bases for when ‘scholar’ inevitably claims again that non-JW interpretations are ‘fuzzy’. Which is of course a lie.

  This does not mean that there are no historical references therein.

  Just because Jack and Rose weren’t real, it doesn’t mean we don’t know when the Titanic sank.