It does strain credulity to accept that they do sincerely believe their nonsense. But then again, people like ‘scholar’ seem thoroughly ensconced in cognitive dissonance.
Posts by Jeffro
-
20mentally ill/delusional or con artist?
by enoughisenough inmaybe this has been discussed in the past and i wasn't here... what do you think?
are the gb members knowingly pulling a con, or do they have delusions of grandeur?
i will go out on a limb here to say that i think they are con artist.
-
-
-
69
Did Jesus COME with the clouds of heaven in 1914?
by Fisherman intake for example revelation 21: 10. .
“….and he showed me the holy city jerusalem coming down out of heaven from god.
here john sees something happening, action.
-
-
Jeffro
And… you’re wrong.
The ‘great tribulation’ described in Revelation is the same one. You just don’t understand the genre. 😔
-
69
Did Jesus COME with the clouds of heaven in 1914?
by Fisherman intake for example revelation 21: 10. .
“….and he showed me the holy city jerusalem coming down out of heaven from god.
here john sees something happening, action.
-
-
Jeffro
In his defense, it’s not quite 2000 years yet. 😂
-
69
Did Jesus COME with the clouds of heaven in 1914?
by Fisherman intake for example revelation 21: 10. .
“….and he showed me the holy city jerusalem coming down out of heaven from god.
here john sees something happening, action.
-
-
Jeffro
Since Jesus’ coming explicitly follows the ‘great tribulation’, the JW interpretation is quite obviously wrong.
Since it was explicitly expected within a generation of Jesus (after the ‘great tribulation’ from 66-70CE), most modern Christian interpretations are also quite obviously wrong.
-
282
How Will They End 1914 Teaching?
by EmptyInside ini'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 .
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
BM 21946 does not support 587 but supports the biblical date of 607 BCE as its historical outline of Neb's foray into the Hattu land clearly proves.
Wrong as usual. The tablet has Nebuchadnezzar staying in Babylon in his 5th year to build his army but JW chronology requires that he was on campaigns demanding tribute throughout Palestine during that period. 🤦♂️
-
282
How Will They End 1914 Teaching?
by EmptyInside ini'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 .
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
Judah alone would serve Babylon for 70 years along with the other nations who would be in servitude to Babylon concurrently.
😂 alone… concurrently… the fact that he doesn’t see a problem here really demonstrates an interesting pathology. 🤦♂️
-
282
How Will They End 1914 Teaching?
by EmptyInside ini'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 .
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
Adventists do not have this belief of the '70 years' but share an identical belief to that of COJ and yourself.
Wow. He also doesn’t know the distinction between ‘Adventist’ and ‘7th-day Adventist’. Maybe he needs a Venn diagram. 🤦♂️
-
282
How Will They End 1914 Teaching?
by EmptyInside ini'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 .
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
In fact, the said scholar has long argued that the 70 years were of three elements: Servitude to Babylon-Exile in Babylon- Desolation of Judah by Babylon.
Yes, we’re painfully aware of your frequently repeated parroting of Adventist nonsense that distorts the clearly stated application of the Bible’s references to all the nations serving Babylon for 70 years until it was conquered by the Persians. 🤦♂️ 🙄
-
282
How Will They End 1914 Teaching?
by EmptyInside ini'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 .
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
It is like this. You make a claim about the BM 21946 that it supports 587 CE which I reject because I claim that the Babylonian Chronicle supports 607 BCE rather than 587 BCE.
You’re seriously doubling down on this nonsense? I didn’t make any such claim. BM21946 does not directly support Jerusalem’s destruction in 587BCE, because it doesn’t mention that siege at all. Because 607 is definitely wrong, the tablet naturally doesn’t support that year either.
The correct year is 587BCE. Repetition of Thiele’s dating from the 1940s does not trump the fact that the source material, including the Bible, BM21946 and thousands of contemporary cuneiform records, only allows for the event occurring in 587BCE.
-
282
How Will They End 1914 Teaching?
by EmptyInside ini'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 .
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
You first made the claim that BM 21946 supports 587 BCE rather than 607 BCE
I never actually said that at all, and I initially thought the inept ‘scholar’ was simply lying. But it occurs to me that he was just confused about my correct statement that modern scholarship (as opposed to modern parroting of older scholarship) favours 587BCE because I included a parenthetical clause that this is particularly since the publication of BM 21946 established dating for earlier events in Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. He really is quite tedious. 🤦♂️