i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Poor ‘scholar’, addled by years of the Watch Tower Society misrepresenting the Bible, can’t understand what ‘all the nations serving Babylon’ means. The context of 70 years of all the nations serving Babylon is quite clear, and Jeremiah’s description of the ‘yoke’ even more so.
Even the Watch Tower Society’s own Isaiah commentary recognises that it is 70 years of Babylon’s dominance. 😂
Poor pitiful ‘scholar’.
bible says flood occurred approximately 4000 years ago.
that is about *200 generations of breeding to get to the population on earth now.
keep in mind that the population increase is geometric.
Population growth is generally exponential, not geometric, but the rate also is not consistent due to various factors.
Because Noah is a fictional character adapted from the Gilgamesh epic, the chance of him and his family populating the planet is exactly zero.
According to the fictional chronology in the Bible, the ‘flood’ occurred about 4535 years ago. This varies from JW chronology mainly due to the erroneous 20 year gap in JW chronology and the incorrect interpretation of Israel (which didn’t exist yet) ‘going into slavery’ because of that one time Isaac was teased by his brother.
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
‘scholar’:
You cannot even show a verse that say '70 years of Babylon's domination'
🤦♂️
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Longlivetherenegades:
Where in the Bible can you show me word for word Chislev 1st 607 BCE. Where?😎
No need to go that far. He can’t even show the verse that say ‘70 years of exile’ 😂
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
I owe you no explanations. Several threads on this forum are awaiting responses from you. You previously repeatedly refused to address them.
I have already provided information confirming 587 BCE is the correct year based on details in the Bible and the known chronology of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign.
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
🤦♂️
’scholar’:
Prove it. I have a copy of BM 21946 so list the reasons for your stupid claim and I will argue that this tablet proves 607 BCE rather than 587 BCE
Huh? The tablet confirms the placement of the first siege in early 597 BCE, and other additional information from the Bible confirms the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BCE. BM 21946 does not itself confirm the year of Jerusalem’s destruction at all. But feel free to present your trite case for this idiotic claim that you can prove 607 from BM 21946. 😂
And the tablet also contradicts the Watch Tower Society’s interpretation of the events in the early part of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign.
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
‘scholar’:
Thus current scholarship as shown by many reference works that 586 BCE remains the best candidate.
The assignment of 586 BCE is based on Thiele from the 1940s. 586 is still frequently parroted, but modern scholarship, particularly after the publication of BM21946, favours 587 BCE.
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
🤦♂️so… basically… ‘how can it be a year that is universally recognised as one of the possible years? It must instead be a year that is universally rejected by scholars based on an interpretation that isn’t directly stated anywhere’. Do you even listen to yourself? 😂
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
The correct year is definitively 587 BCE based on the Bible and extant contemporary documentation. You like to muddy the waters by saying nonsense like ‘587/586 or 588’ but the reality is that 607 is definitely wrong and that fact wouldn’t be altered even if the correct year were not exactly known.
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
🤦♂️ fallacy: argument from popular opinion, also a straw man argument
