So i am correct in saying that 537BCE can not be proved?
Paul
from all of my research so far on the 607 issue the only argument that jw's have for it is the 70 year period counting backwards from 537bce.
as 539bce is the accepted date for cyrus conquering babylon, why do they say 537bce is the date he released the jews and not 538bce or 536bce for instance?.
paul.
So i am correct in saying that 537BCE can not be proved?
Paul
during the 1930's when the society was quietly moving jesus' presence from 1874 to 1914, it only seemed to ruffle a few feathers and most accepted this "brighter light.
" how could the society abandon 1914 and still keep most of its followers?
They will just keep quiet about it for a good number of years and then mention something later. A bit like 1925, that stopped getting mentioned. The famous "millions now living will never die", they just went silent on that too. I suspect by 2014 you will not here much mentioned of the significance of the date.
Paul
my favorites are:.
"paradise earth": not in the bible.
"great crowd" of "other sheep" - two unrelated texts... put them together, and voila!, you just changed the destiny of millions!.
No beards
Skirts should be below the knee and above the ankle
Men cannot have an ear pearcing
No tattoos
Shirt (white preferred) and tie must be worn at a meeting
Jackets must be worn when handling microphones
And many, many more....
Paul
from all of my research so far on the 607 issue the only argument that jw's have for it is the 70 year period counting backwards from 537bce.
as 539bce is the accepted date for cyrus conquering babylon, why do they say 537bce is the date he released the jews and not 538bce or 536bce for instance?.
paul.
So, what do historians say is the right year? It's not 607bce, so what is it?
587/6 BCE white dove. Only JW's come up with 607BCE, they would lose their 1914 doctrine if they changed it.
Paul
from all of my research so far on the 607 issue the only argument that jw's have for it is the 70 year period counting backwards from 537bce.
as 539bce is the accepted date for cyrus conquering babylon, why do they say 537bce is the date he released the jews and not 538bce or 536bce for instance?.
paul.
Thanks A&G. I have only recently been thinking about this. For the last week i have been going toe to toe with a JW on the 607 issue on a bible discussion site. After everything was going back and forth i eventually asked him from the angle of 587BCE and he refused to answer, said i was ridiculing!
Anyway it really got me thinking that i do not think there is anything out there to substantiate this date.
Paul
from all of my research so far on the 607 issue the only argument that jw's have for it is the 70 year period counting backwards from 537bce.
as 539bce is the accepted date for cyrus conquering babylon, why do they say 537bce is the date he released the jews and not 538bce or 536bce for instance?.
paul.
From all of my research so far on the 607 issue the only argument that JW's have for it is the 70 year period counting backwards from 537BCE. As 539BCE is the accepted date for Cyrus conquering Babylon, why do they say 537BCE is the date he released the jews and not 538BCE or 536BCE for instance?
Paul
my favorites are:.
"paradise earth": not in the bible.
"great crowd" of "other sheep" - two unrelated texts... put them together, and voila!, you just changed the destiny of millions!.
No worldly hairstyles
Paul
...to jedi master!
it is now my light sabre and i against the world!.
"you know the day destroys the night.
So have i....just took me a slightly bit longer than you.
Paul
jws say they are clean and pure and undefiled and not like the world but in reality there are those that do very evil things and they either have fallen through the cracks, have gotten disciplined or disfellowshipped.. we realize that just because a person says they are a christian, it doesn't mean they will always act like one.. regarding pedophiles, do you believe that jws have a huge problem involving an infestation of pedos?
.
I can always remember there were two guys in particular in my old cong who used to act in a way that wasn't right around girls. I am talking about tickling and being over physical in a leaching sort of way, rather than anything obvious and it was always girls, never boys with both of them. This was always noted amongst some of the rank and file but the amazing thing is that nothing was ever said and they still attend now. It was as if because they were witnesses, perhaps we were reading to much into it, whereas the reality is if these guys acted the way they did in another environment someone would at the very least have something to say.
I am also aware that in my old cong there was a case involving child abuse many years ago but the details of who was involved was a well kept secret only known to a few elders who were around at the time.
Paul
in regards to other posts about people dropping dead during meeting and assemblies, it has been my belief that jw's have a pretty weird way of dealing with death.
i'm not sure if its just my family or what but none of my brothers or sisters ever go to visit my dad's grave.
i know this for sure, because no one in my family burried him, i took his ashes and placed him in a cemetery, none of my jw brothers or sister ever asked where is dad located, and by that time my mom was already married to another jw.
You are so correct Andre about the way JW's deal with death. The JW funeral is a typical example, it's so different to the typical funeral. Only one or two are upset, it's treated more as a way to give a witness to the non believers.
Paul