đ¤Śââď¸ the doofus who thinks that âall the nations serving Babylonâ means âJewish exileâ would proceed to lecture me about the contents of Jeremiah. đ Seriously, just go away. I have already provided a website that furnishes all necessary details for a decent understanding of the relevant topics.
Posts by Jeffro
-
282How 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 .
-
-
-
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
đ¤Śââď¸ just go away. 607 is complete nonsense. Completely debunked with no historical or biblical support whatsoever. Youâre dogged efforts at defending the belief are laughable and embarrassing.
This is where you err in making invalid claims about Neb's first siege described in this tablet. For such a description supports 607 BCE rather than 587 BCE as a proper understanding of events described in the tablet itself proves.
Complete nonsense. The erroneous 20-year gap in JW dogma isnât in any way supported or addressed in BM 21946 as most of the events are simply pushed back 20 years and the tablet doesnât reference absolute years, only events relative to years of reign. But the erroneous JW interpretation of âkingshipâ as âvassalageâ does conflict with events of Nebuchadnezzarâs 5th year as indicated in the tablet. But this seems to beyond your ability to comprehend. You are hopeless at this.
-
69
Did Jesus COME with the clouds of heaven in 1914?
by Fisherman intake for example revelation 21: 10. .
ââŚ.and he showed me the holy city jerusalem coming down out of heaven from god.
here john sees something happening, action.
-
-
Jeffro
Fisherman:
You know very well this did not happen in 70.
Indeed. It was expected shortly after that though. Their expectations were simply wrong, and Christians have been making up other interpretations ever since.
-
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
âscholarâ:
No problem for its an explanation of the servitude of Judah principally for 70 years commensurate with other nations which at that time Babylon was the World Power inaugurated in 607 BCE.
Ah yes, the JW (Adventist) doctrine of the âmarch of the World Powersâ. Except, in their own doctrine, the World Power immediately before Babylon was⌠Assyria. And Babylonâs final conquest of Assyria was in⌠609 BCE. This is completely consistent with all the nations serving Babylon for 70 years until it was conquered by Persia in 539 BCE. Even though this could be presented as some remarkable âfulfilment of Bible prophecyâ (though the texts were heavily edited after the events), this is not convenient for JW dogma. What a tangled web of fantasy indeed. đ
-
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
âscholarâ:
Go away and play with your pretty charts and lose yourself in a tangled web of fantasy.
Notice how âscholarâ dismissively refers to âpretty chartsâ and (in other posts) ambiguous complaints about âmethodologyâ but does not rebut any specific content. If he were confident in his position, or at least sincere, he could instead go through point by point, indicating specific problems. 586 or 587?
But at the crux of every debate with âscholarâ, youâll always end up at âthat doesnât account for the 70 years of exile [that isnât mentioned anywhere]â.
-
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
âscholarâ:
You have made certain claims about this tablet that in some way supports 587 BCE and I have said that this document supports 607 BCE.
Poor âscholarâ seems oblivious to the fact that asserting BM 21946 supports 607 BCE (without any possibility of 606 or 608) only reinforces the fact that there is no ambiguity regarding the correct identification of 587 when the erroneous 20-year gap in JW chronology is removed. đ
Of course, on its own BM 21946 doesnât say anything about Jerusalemâs destruction at all. But when the biblical chronology is considered in light of the dating of the first siege identified in BM 21946 (not to mention all the other contemporary records of the neo-Babylonian period), 587 BCE is confirmed as the correct year.
When dealing with someone who thinks âall the nations serving Babylon for 70 yearsâ really means â70 years of Jewish exileâ, there is no point trying to engage that person logically. But other readers can see the JW nonsense for what it is.
-
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
I donât care what you ârequireâ, nor about your tedious misrepresentation of what I said. Your nutty 607 doctrine is thoroughly wrong from every angle. Youâre clearly beyond help, as recently demonstrated by your pitifully sad âinterpretationâ of Babylonâs 70 years at Jeremiah 25:11. This isnât some balanced difference of opinion open for âdialogueâ. Your unfounded position is thoroughly wrong. You can go away until I feel like trouncing you at another juncture.
-
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
đ You claim to understand this subject but you need every little thing explained. đ¤Śââď¸ Parroting the number of lines on the tablet is pointless when it is obvious that you donât understand the content or how publication of the tablet aided with establishing the chronology of Nebuchadnezzar. I have sufficiently shown other readers the depth of your cognitive dissonance for now. You may go.
-
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
đ¤Śââď¸ Given his ineptness, Iâm not really surprised that âscholarâ is waiting for something that was never suggested and isnât the purpose of BM 21946, while glossing over the fact that it contradicts JW chronology during the actual period that the tablet addresses. He probably doesnât even understand what the contradiction is. Pathetic.
-
20
mentally 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.
-
-
Jeffro
It does strain credulity to accept that they do sincerely believe their nonsense. But then again, people like âscholarâ seem thoroughly ensconced in cognitive dissonance.