they are not your leaders!.
here it is, in print, on page 110 above the picture of "the nine".. "the governing body relies on god's holy spirit for direction.
its members do not regard themselves as the leaders of jehovah's people.
"The Governing Body... do not regard themselves as the leaders of Jehovah's people."
Careful how you read this. It says they do not regard themselves as the (only) leaders. That they expect their followers to obey them without question in every respect is repeated in almost every Watchtower.
70 years of captivity?.
i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.
that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.
Isaacaustin said:
Since they returned the prior year, what year does that mean???? 538BCE.
Interesting... putting all that together, it would appear that the Jewish return happened in 538 BCE in the first year of Cyrus, as a result of his decree at his inauguration in spring of that year (what better time to announce such a decree). So the Jews didn't hang about, they not only got organized, they made a journey that possibly took several months to get back to Jerusalem by the end of that year. The following year, 537 BCE, they started on the foundations of the temple, and this, being the second year of Cyrus, agrees with Josephus and Ezra, also with the destruction of the temple being fifty years earlier in 587/586 BCE. Interestingly, the completion of the temple in 517/516 BCE, is 70 years from its destruction. Given the overthrow of Babylon in 539 BCE, the 70 years of domination must have started in 609 BCE, which I guess is when the vassal king was installed in Jerusalem.
Assuming I've got this right, this all seems to make sense. Unfortunately, it provides wiggle room for Scholar and the WT - all they have to do is say that the 'desolation' of the land was symbolized by the temple's destruction, and therefore only ended when the foundations were laid... in 537 BC!
BFS
70 years of captivity?.
i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.
that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.
Scholar said:
In short the scriptural basis for 537 BCE is based on the last few verses of 2 Chronicles and the introductory chapters of Ezra so I have answered your question, solved your problem
Thank you Scholar, it would have been good if you had solved your problem. I've read those scriptures and they do not tell us anything at all about the elapsed time between Cyrus' announcement, and the exiles' arrival in Jerusalem. Even the exact timing of the announcement is ambiguous. Maybe you have realised this yourself since you are now backtracking:
From these texts one can see that there is an adequate historical basis for the Return by the seventh month 537 BCE.
So, you appear to accept that you only have scriptures which are "adequate" to provide a historical "basis" for a theory that the date of the exiles' return was 537 BCE. If the historical basis is only "adequate" for a theory that the date is 537 BCE, how can you possibly claim that just by adding 70 years to that date you suddenly have the bible proving that 607 BCE is the "only possible" date for the destruction of Jerusalem? By your own words that claim is manifestly untrue.
You have failed to provide scriptural support for your assertion, and you have failed to provide references to any of the many independent scholars whom you claimed could absolutely verify 537 BCE as the date of the return. You have no proof, scriptural or otherwise, that 607 BCE is the start date for any bible prophecy and it is time you faced up to the fact that those dates were man made in order to provide the date 1914.
BFS
70 years of captivity?.
i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.
that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.
Scholar said:
The scriptures provide the historical facts that enable a competent scholar to calculate the precise date for the Return and this was 537 BCE which is the view of most scholars.
Scholar, I asked you several times to back up your claim, using scripture, that the bible shows 537 BCE was the only possible date for the Jews return to Jerusalem. It is blindingly obvious that you are unable to such proof and therefore your claim is shown to be untrue.
Now you are shifting the focus from the biblical proof which you previously claimed to have, to the "view" of unnamed "scholars" who have instead become your authority. So, since it is quite obvious that you cannot provide scriptural support for the date 537 BCE, please provide me with references to the accredited "scholars" whom you claim will support your statement that the precise and only possible date for the Jews' return was in 537 BCE. This time the proof should be quite easy to produce since apparently "most scholars" agree with you.
Let's hope this doesn't turn out to be another lie.
BFS
70 years of captivity?.
i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.
that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.
Scholar,
Since the scriptures do not identify the year 537 BCE as being the date for the return of the exiles, there is thus no scriptural basis for the year 607 BCE being the date for the destruction of Jerusalem, and therefore the marking of the year 1914 CE cannot be based on bible prophecy.
So, if not from scripture, from where was the date 1914 obtained? Are you content with the possibility that you are supporting the teachings of demons?
Or perhaps you might heed Jesus' warning:
"So, if people say to you, 'Listen! He's out on the desert!' don't go; or, 'Look! He's hidden away in a secret room!' don't believe it. For when the Son of Man does come, it will be like lightning that flashes out of the east and fills the sky to the western horizon". Matt 24:26 Complete Jewish Bible.
BFS
70 years of captivity?.
i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.
that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.
Scholar said: "The date 607 BCE is the only possibile date for the Fall of Jerusalem according to the Bible"
Scholar,
I am still waiting for a SCRIPTURE that shows that 537 is the ONLY POSSIBLE date for the return of the exiles to Jerusalem. But I'm not going to get it, am I, because you don't have one.
You continue to insult others from this platform, yet you have been caught in a lie. Are you not even the least bit ashamed?
BFS
70 years of captivity?.
i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.
that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.
The liar scholar JW said:
No lies arr needed because the Bible is quite definite about the matter. There is compelling evidence both from the Bible and secular history that the Jews returned home in 537 BCE by the seventh month and even the apostae Jonsson has to concede this point even though he promotes 538 BCE with considerable difficulty. The date 537 is in harmony with the best and most recent scholarship. scholar JW
This is why I call you a liar. You are already moving the goalposts by claiming "secular" support and "compelling evidence", when your actual lie was:
"The date 607 BCE is the only possibile date for the Fall of Jerusalem according to the Bible"
I will apologize and retract my statement that you are a liar when you provide the SCRIPTURE that shows that 537 is the ONLY POSSIBLE date for the return of the exiles to Jerusalem.
70 years of captivity?.
i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.
that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.
The date 607 BCE is the only possibile date for the Fall of Jerusalem according to the Bible
This is a lie. The year 607 is arrived at in only one way, which is by counting back 70 years from 537, and there is NO SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE THAT THE JEWS RETURNED TO JERUSALEM IN 537.
they were trying to avoid the census????.
does anyone have any historical research on exactly how the census was performed duing those days?.
were people really expected to travel for days to go "turn themselves in"?.
A large part of this anti-Christian argument hinges on the date of Herod's death, allegedly in 4 BC. But Herod did not die in 4 BC. Josephus tells us that he died after an eclipse of the Moon, before a passover. The eclipse in March 4 BC is used to fix this date (other indications by Josephus being ambiguous). However, there was no time, after that eclipse, for all the events mentioned by Josephus to have happened in the short time available before passover. There was another eclipse in Jan 1 BC that fits the bill admirably, putting Herod's death in 1 BC. That a 'census' (or rather registration) took place in 3 BC, under Quirinius, is quite plausible; for the reasons why, and a full historical analysis, see The Star of Bethlehem by prof. Earnest L. Martin, which also shows the astronomical events pointing to the year September 3/2 BC for Jesus' birth.
the following comparison of pharisees and jehovah's witnesses was included in my letter of disassociation.
it will also be featured in the next witchtower issue.
but since it is a serious topic, i wanted to post it here:.
Yes, JWs have created an excellent modern reproduction of the Pharisees.
And if Jesus came back today he'd be disfellowshipped.
