by ithinkisee 129 Replies latest watchtower bible
Scholar, I must admit I'm a bit dissapointed that you won't share with us at least some opinion on the times of the reigns of the neo-babylonian kings. You're obviously someone who's has an interest in historical matters, so I would have thought you'd have given the matter some thought. I bet you've sat down with a pen and a piece of paper in a quiet moment and doodled some names and dates down. So, what's your opinion? Who were the kings and when did they rule?
ig.
ithinkiseeIt is impossible for 607 to be a bogus date for you may as well say that 589, 588,587 and 586 are also bogus dates for the Fall of Jerusalem. The calender date 607 is a date calculated from secular, historical and biblical evidence as shown in the WT publications. The date of 607 is far more attested than the other dates for it begins the prophecy of the Gentile Times fulfilled in that momentous year of 1914.
The other useless dates of 587 and 586 have no significance for Christians today as such dates lack prophetic significance, these dates are 'dead-end dates, are of interest to apostates, unbelieving secular scholars and those who are jealous of the spiritual paradise enjoyed by the Witnesses.
scholar JW
Okay ... now I KNOW you can't really be a JW. You;re just messing with us. Funny stuff man. -ithinkisee
Scholar,
You must enjoy taking the piss, or is it you still languish in the self pity of the New World Order.
Since 1914 we have been enjoying one of the most abundant and peaceful of all time. Individuals suffer as a whole less than any other time in history. The average life span is double what it was only 100 years ago in many countries. Did you know there were periods in the history of London when the life span was 19 years. Maybe you would prefer to have lived in the dark ages, a period of time of unrelenting war, pestilence, with more deaths from earthquakes in the 1200's then in the 1900's.
What i found loathful about being a witness was being forced to believe how bad everything was, being forced to lived in some self induced suffering to prove that the new system has to come soon or all is doomed? Pitiful.
Leolaia
Sometimes you do really surprise me for you seem to rather intelligent in presenting criticisms and reearch on biblical topics and yet on other occasions your postings are rather juvenile. This is one such occasion. I am rather critical of Raymond Franz as I do believe that he is as honest and humble as many of his admirers claim. His overall sincerity is clearly not manifested in his Crisis of Conscience for it is simple a one-sided whitewashing of his experience at Bethel. I his writings he makes many claims about his activiies as a member of the Bethel family and of the Governing Body. One such claim is that he was involved in the Aid book project and wrote the superb article on chronology, but the reader of these claims has no means to verify Franz' claims for it is simply his word on the matter.
The article on chronology was a superb article and does exhibit any of the doubts or misgivings that seem to have troubled Franz for he went to great lengths to find support in reconciling WT chronology with secular chronology. If he was so informed about the subject then he should have known that for decades there has always been a gulf between the chronologies ever since the days of Russell. So, I cannnot reconcile the alleged author. Franz with the unknown scholar reponsible for the artivcle on Chronology. It seems from Franz's comments that the impasse arose when Jonsson submitted his treatise of chronology which subsequently hoodwinked Franz and others.
scholar JW
Scholar/tool: If he was so informed about the subject then he should have known that for decades there has always been a gulf between the chronologies ever since the days of Russell.
Newsflash .... I personally know people in the writing department .... many of these people even have no idea there is a gulf between chronologies.
Those who know will never admit it for fear of being "Ed Dunlop'd" out of Bethel.
Those that might have an "inkling" there is a gulf merely chalks it up to "reliable bible chronology" vs. those half-wit archeologists and historians.
-ithinkisee
ithinkisee
What utter rubbish. The gulf between WT chronology and secular chronology has always been well known as it is presented in the Aid book and in the Babylon the Great book published in 1963. In fact, such a disparity between the chronologies is a source of pride to Witnesses as it clearly demonstrates that far greater gulf between the sacred and the profane or Jehovah's organization and the Devil's world.
scholar JW
iggy_the_fish
Yes, I have doodled about the matter but any such list would be based on those comments on the reigns of the Babylonian monarchs which have appeared in WT publications. My greater concern would be with the reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah rather than the Babylonians. So, if you want a list then you must devise it for I have in fact submitted such a list in a previous posting on this board sometime in the past.
scholar JW
All these "celebrated Watchtower scholars"...And whom might they be, so that their credentials can be verified? Somehow "anonymous" does not for "celebrated" make!
Scholar,
I'd like to know why you are so defensive of the year 607. The Witnesses are clearly way out with the majority of their prophecies so this one does not matter, overall the JWs are wrong regardless.
In regards to the seven times, it is a huge stretch of the imagination to think it has anything to do with a prophecy of the end of the gentile times.
Also look at all the other 'crazy' Witness prophetical interpretations. There is a total lack of consistency in how Revelation and Daniel prophecies are interpreted. There is also huge differences between how Russell interpreted them and how Rutherford reinterpreted them. The Daniel prophecies on the 1290, 1355 and 2520 days refer to irrelevant events and the day for a day formula used does not even match up with the district conventions using either a solar or lunar calendar.
Likewise, there have been 4 Revelation books with 4 vastly different understandings of Revelation, each book apparantly making "clear every part of Revelation" by the interpretation as given by God. What honest person would try to say that God led the Org to write a wrong interpretation of a prophecy?
Scholar,
I and others have repeatedly trounced every point you have ever raised in defense of the 'Society hypothesis'. When people state the most significant problems of 607, you simply ignore the facts and parrot the same old stuff about the 'eminent' WT scholars who supposedly rely on the bible, although chronology that fits the bible and is superior to the demonstrably flawed Watchtower chronology has been given.
