i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.
thanks..
đ¤Śââď¸ round and round we go
The Jews arrived in 538 BCE based on comparison of Ezra and Josephus. In any case thereâs no basis for the dogmatic claim that it was 537 BCE.
Attention to the Jewsâ return world explicitly be given after Babylonâs 70 years had been fulfilled.
Serving Babylon was explicitly the way to avoid exile.
The Bible never mentions 70 years of exile.
library.
magazines.
the watchtowerâstudy edition | april 2023. study article 17. jehovah will help you deal with lifeâs uncertainties.
Unverifiable anecdote is unverifiable
the large horn on the goat is the first king of greece (8:21), obviously alexander the great.
after his death, alexander?s kingdom was divided among four of his generals (8:22).
the high priest), and further causes the daily sacrifices to cease, and the sanctuary to be defiled (8:11).
Always first-class material from Leolaia!
For Daniel made more simple, see also Danielâs dreams and visions.
jerusalem will be trampled by the nations until the gentile times are fulfilled.
â luke 21:24 .
the bible book of luke records jesus prophecy of the last day with his parousia including the verse about the gentile times.
Vidqun:
Fisherman, I prefer Jesus' interpretation.
*The interpretation later attributed to Jesus.
Jesus warned: When one catches sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation, âstanding in a holy place,â âstanding where it ought not,â then let those in Judea begin fleeing to the mountains
This interpretation, attributed to Jesus after Jerusalemâs destruction, is called an analogy.
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 .
Fisherman:
Besides cut and paste, unlike TD, youâve never translated anything it seems.
So? JWs just parrot dogma without consulting so much as a concordance. I have a better understanding of and more honest approach to the concept than you. đ
jerusalem will be trampled by the nations until the gentile times are fulfilled.
â luke 21:24 .
the bible book of luke records jesus prophecy of the last day with his parousia including the verse about the gentile times.
Even without considering the superstition involved in extending the period to the modern era, Revelation 11:2 specifies the length of the âgentile timesâ as 3.5 years.
Also, Luke was written before 132, and there is no reason to suppose the book is magical.
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 .
Fisherman:
I donât think the Bible can be translated using strict rules of grammar alone. I think that the translator has a belief to begin with and the grammar conforms to that belief when interpreting and translating to another language. His belief is the rule or the guide and not the grammar.
Tell me you prefer doctrinal bias over accuracy without telling me you prefer doctrinal bias over accuracy. đ
jerusalem will be trampled by the nations until the gentile times are fulfilled.
â luke 21:24 .
the bible book of luke records jesus prophecy of the last day with his parousia including the verse about the gentile times.
Vidqun:
Daniel, a contemporary of Ezekiel,
Nope. Daniel was written in the 2nd century BCE.
would predict a second destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, this time by the Romans:
Nope. The author of Daniel refers to oppression by Antiochus IV.
This fact Jesus would reiterate in his Olivet discourse:
Nope. The trope was reused in comments later attributed to Jesus, but it was not the original intent of Daniel.
So, the "times of the Gentiles" start in 70 CE.
Nope. The âtimes of the gentilesâ began with the Roman response to the Jewish revolt in 66CE and culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70CE. Revelation 11 explicitly gives the duration as 3.5 years.
The âappointed times of the nationsâ are to be fulfilled when Jesus, who has the legal right, receives his kingship, this time in a heavenly setting (cf. Dan. 7:13, 14; cf. Rev. 11:2, 15, 18).
Nope. As a descendant of Jeconiah, Jesus would not have the legal right to be king (Jeremiah 22:28-30).
jerusalem will be trampled by the nations until the gentile times are fulfilled.
â luke 21:24 .
the bible book of luke records jesus prophecy of the last day with his parousia including the verse about the gentile times.
Itâs always funny watching believers trying to make the Bible fit their beliefs. Luke says the gentile times were future in Jesusâ time and Revelation says Jerusalem would be trampled by the nations for 3.5 years. But believers, desperate for it to be relevant now, ignore what the Bible actually says and make up all manner of nonsense.
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 .
đ¤Śââď¸ Even if God were behind the Bible, it still wouldnât be evidence of support for your chosen denomination. And you havenât even gotten past square one of establishing that God even exists.
