the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

by pleaseresearch 82 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  wizzstick

  Apparently it expires in 2017...

  
  

  Fisherman 9 months ago

  GT was expected 70 years after 1914 (when you overlap 2 lifes times it is about 100 years) -ok give it 123 years; 2017 expires.

  The purpose of Jesus sign was so that his disciple would see it and be ready when he came. In the first century all the apostles were presumed dead except for John or so when 70 CE came but nevertheless the other christians experienced the GT and were ready to flee Jerusalem.

  The first batch of 1914 GB generation.are dead. Why would God have those anointed wait for 100 years without some realization?

  Anything after 2017 does not add up to me. A generation that dies does not need the sign. Since generation includes 2 overlapping parts, neither part should pass away away and the GT should come within a time frame experienced by both parts not just the second part because generation means both overlappers. THis generation means both parts not just the second overlappers. My guess.
  
• 

  wizzstick

  So Fisherman.

  Jan 1st 2018.

  Will you post on this forum and be man enough to admit the the JW 1914 doctrine was a crap?
  
• 

  Ultimate Axiom

  It's worth bearing in mind that this debate over 606 v 587 is not new. In the October 1st Watchtower 1904 page 296 (RP 3436) Russell published a letter, which said (in part);

  "Dear Sir, … You count the seventy years Babylonian captivity of the Jews as beginning with the overthrow of Zedekiah, Judah's last king, but I notice that "Bishop Usher's Chronology," … based on "Ptolemy's Canon," begins that seventy-year period nineteen years earlier … this in turn would make those times end nineteen years later than you have reckoned – in October, A. D. 1933, instead of October, 1914. "

  Russell's reply was,

  "We know of no reason for changing a figure: to do so would spoil the harmonies and parallels so conspicuous between the Jewish and Gospel ages. "

  He then goes on to explain the damage it would do the their other years 1874, 1876 as well as 1914 and concludes with the statement,

  "All this confusion would result from an abandonment of the Bible narrative in favor of Ptolemy's Canon"

  So Russell did not chose 606 because of any empirical evidence, he chose it to support his pre-conceived ideas of parallel dispensations in his "Divine Plan of The Ages". And that's how it's been ever since.
• 

  punkofnice

  I see the questroll is not answering!!

  Be gone you troll!
• 

  Fisherman

  @wzstick "just guessing" means what it says.

  How about you? What do you think you know? However, GTR does not prove 587.

  In another thread, "scholar" debated 587, but I see you dont like it and you get very upset when people don't agree with you, and express what they think.

  POI, relax, have a cup of tea, the world ain't coming to an end -or is it?
• 

  wizzstick

  GTR does not prove 587

  No - the copious amounts of evidence from the Neo Babylonian era does.

  And you stated:

  2016, time is up............................

  So - answer my question.

  Jan 1st 2018.

  Will you post on this forum and be man enough to admit the the JW 1914 doctrine was crap?
• 

  Fisherman

  the copious amounts of evidence from the Neo Babylonian era does.

  That's what you and others think. Cofty already posted that 587 is agreed upon. But, WT interpretation of the Bible does not. And WT views on 607 have not been disproven.
  

  
  
  
• 

  Fisherman

  So - answer my question.Jan 1st 2018.Will you post on this forum and be man enough to admit the the JW 1914 doctrine was crap?

  This thread aint about generation. That is another topic. But I already told you that I was posting guesses and my guesses are not wt doctrines. If you don like it, too bad.

  If nothing happens in 2017 and my guesses turn out to be wrong; so what? But it would not invalidate WT 's 1914 or Wt's generation or WT's interpretation of 607.
• 

  wizzstick

  That's what you and others think.

  No - that's what the evidence proves. It's that same evidence that provides 539. It's a huge body of physical evidence I'm talking about. The tax receipts, the Egibi Archive. If you're happy to accept 539 then you have to accept 587. Doubt 587 and then you have to doubt 539.

  But, WT interpretation of the Bible does not. And WT views on 607 have not been disproven.

  Yes they have. Repeatedly.
  

  Previously you said:

  WT overlapping doctrine only adds 20 years. 2016, time is up.............................

  and you said:

  Anything after 2017 does not add up to me.

  So - I say yet again:

  Jan 1st 2018.
  

  Will you post on this forum and be man enough to admit the the JW 1914 doctrine was crap.
  
• 

  Finkelstein

  And WT views on 607 have not been disproven.

  The WTS states that Jerusalem was attacked and destroyed including the Temple in 607 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar didn't take over Babylon from his father until 605 BCE and the bible does state that he made the final attack in his 19th year of rein, which again correlates to archeological findings on Cuneiform tablets of it happening in 586 BCE.

  What did happen is that Jerusalem came under siege by Nebuchadnezzar when he took to his throne in 605 and started to take slaves captive and controlled who was to be king in Jerusalem until he made the final attack in 586 BCE