THE WEAKEST LINK---fatal flaws in Watchtower Chronology

by Terry 61 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  scholar

  Terry

  Your assumptions about my character are incorrect. You began this subject that there werefatal flaws in WT chronology but all you have done is provided a overall criticism. There is no single fatal flaw in the data used, the biblical and secular evidence etc. I have provided a simple presentation of the scheme leading to 607 based on three incontrovertible steps, which of these is false? If you do not like my argument then that is your problem. My posting on this subject is not to convince, convert or prove WT chronology but simply to provide an apology as I see fit. If you believe that secular chronology is superior or better than the Lord's chronology then that is fine with me.

  scholar

  BA MA Studies in Religion
• 

  Farkel

  Folks,
  
  If you haven't already figured it out, "scholar" is a troll. The only reason I challenged him was to show newbies that he IS a troll. He refuses to debate with me on this subject, and this is the ONLY subject he posts about.
  
  Trolls like him are not the least bit interested in learning anything or seriously debating anything. They are LOSERS who LOVE to get attention by stirring the pot and then ducking the incoming fire by disappearing, only to reappear again and do the same thing.
  
  The key word here is LOSER. "scholar" is a lost little LOSER and his only claim to fame is the attention he can force upon himself on this board. If he had any huevos, he would post his name, and provide either his university transcript or a link to see it. Anyone can sign their name on an anonymous discussion board and append it with any "degrees" they want.
  
  Farkel
  BA, MA, Phd, ScD, MD, DO, DVM, JD, from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Dartmouth, UC Berkely, UCLA, USCD, William and Marys, Julliard, Cambridge, and Hooked on Phonics.
  
  See how EASY that is!
• 

  gumby

  It does amaze me how someone can be a Watchtower apologist when ALL they have to cling to is one date they feel the WTBTS has nailed. Truelly pathetic!

  Gumby
• 

  DaCheech

  Can somebody out there tell me when a day=day

  when a day=1 year

  when a day = 1000 years

  and the diffrence of when a day = 7000 years?

  What prophet can come up to the plate to guarantee when each one should be interpreted as such?
• 

  toreador

  Nicely said Cheech. Puts it all in perspective doesnt it. God must love riddles and confusing his followers.
• 

  Mysterious

  Of course his "true followers" would just know how to interpret it. Barf. Their bottom line is "because we say so" on their chronology.
• 

  jwsons

  Scholar, B.A. M.A. Researcher of Univ. of Theocratic Ministry School. Maybe never have the first discourse ("Talk") in a "District Convention" Auditorium like some of us over here.

  Any statement he made, almost never have references from Books, pages, from Authors, etc..Typical brainwashed Scholar (among many "scholars" from Kingdumb Hall University)

  jwsons
• 

  ellderwho

  Scholiar,

  Yawn, You have nothing, no kings list that streeeeeeeeetches WT years of kings rule. Until you do, do not try to eat at this table.

  E.
• 

  JT

  One JW poster signs his threads with:

  Scholar

  BA MA Studies in Religion

  Now I am just a little high school graduate from NC. But when I saw this I just started to laugh, for I could not help but think , when the Translation committte of the NWT is asked to provide their college education, they proclaim it is not important, they are humble men who want no glory, instead to let their written material stand on its own merits

  Then we come here and a follower of the same GB fails to show his humilty unlike the bro of Christ do when it comes to bragging about ones educational training

  You got to love jw

  ? Why does the New World Translation not show, in its preface, the names and scholastic standing of its translators?
  
  : ?The one request of the translation committee was that its members remain anonymous even after their death.? We have kept our agreement and respected their wishes.
  
  But why was this stipulation made? These translators were not seeking prominence; they did not desire to draw attention to themselves.
  
  In the spirit of ?doing all things for God?s glory,? they wanted the reader to base his faith on God?s Word, not on their worldly ?qualifications.? (1 Cor. 10:31)

  Similarly, we note that they say little about their personal qualifications or educational background.
  
  In translating God?s Word, the New World Bible Translation Committee has felt that the particulars of their university or other educational training are not the important thing, though the translation itself testifies to their qualifications.

  So we see the wt says the GB are humble and don?t want to blow their horn, so we have to conclude that this poster is the opposite then-

  You got to love it
• 

  jwsons

  Two thumbs up,JT, and bttt.

  jwsons