a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
'If everyone is thinking the same, then Who is doing the thinking?"
You must be talking about the rank and file .. who would lose both friends and family if they had an independent thought on this or any other official teaching of the organization.
The GB/FDS does all the thinking yet there is not a scholar among them...as their record on chronology shows.
No one studying the Bible, scholar or otherwise, would come up with what the WTS has concluded on this prophesy
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Scholar
Ok, you admit you can't find one secular scholar that accepts 607 BCE as the date for Jerusalem's destruction.
How about one non-WT affiliated Bible scholar that accepts 607?
Right now you remind me of the mother who proudly views her son in a military parade and exclaims, "Look my son is the only one in step!"
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Yes, and apparently scholar would have secular scholars base their conclusions on a specific interpretation of prophesy to arrive at a WTS approved date for the destruction of Jerusalem. Otherwise they are confused and using sloppy methodology.
Perhaps he would have all secular scholars also add 2520 prophetic years to 607 to prove when the second coming occurred.
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Sloppy methodology for a 1 year difference does not mean the date must or even could be 20 years out. There should be a few non-WT affiliated scholars here and there that support 607 BCE. Can you name just 1 or 2 such scholars?
The reason for their confusion is their failure to account for the biblical 70 Years so it comes down to sloppy methodology.
Why should secular scholars take, not a biblical event, but a biblical prophecy into account...a prophecy by the way that is controversial in and of itself as this thread demonstrates? That would be sloppy methodology.
One non-WT affiliated scholar...is what I am looking for.
its taken from 1 thessalonians 4:13-17. now jesus compared the end to the days of noah .
but as the days of noah were, so shall also the coming of the son of man be.
why did he compare the two and does it give us a clue to which teaching is the right one?.
when Paul addressed his first letter to Christians there in about 50 C.E. Members of the congregation were distressed that some of their number were “sleeping in death.” However, what Paul wrote comforted the Thessalonians with the resurrection hope.
OK, but when did this resurrection hope become a reality for the ones Paul addressed here?
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Scholar
Certainly 586/587 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem is well accepted by scholars worldwide. Why do you think this is the case? Are there people in academia out there trying to hide the truth? Do you know of any scholars without Watchtower affiliation that support 607 BCE? What non-biblical evidence do such scholars cite to support 607?
i admit to not being very well informed about the watchtower's view on blood transfusions.
i have a couple of questions that i hope someone here is able to answer.. i understand that the watchtower now considers it to be okay to receive blood fractions.. my first question is: are all fractions considered to be permissible?
and if not, specifically which fractions are not permissible?.
And yet the anointed have no qualms drinking "blood" every year on the 14th of Nisan.
Yes, I know it is symbolic.....just like the water was to David.
You have no argument.
Why not answer real questions...like why the Watchtower does not stop mothers from nursing their babies or Christians from receiving organ transplants?
The GB/F&DS blood policies make no sense.
i admit to not being very well informed about the watchtower's view on blood transfusions.
i have a couple of questions that i hope someone here is able to answer.. i understand that the watchtower now considers it to be okay to receive blood fractions.. my first question is: are all fractions considered to be permissible?
and if not, specifically which fractions are not permissible?.
The David account is irrelevant to the discussion. It was water not blood that David refused because the men who brought it to him risked their lives to get it. Nothing about the subject at hand.
So again, why are organ transplants allowed by the WTS when they know millions of white blood cells are transferred with each transplant?
i admit to not being very well informed about the watchtower's view on blood transfusions.
i have a couple of questions that i hope someone here is able to answer.. i understand that the watchtower now considers it to be okay to receive blood fractions.. my first question is: are all fractions considered to be permissible?
and if not, specifically which fractions are not permissible?.
Alex,,,you seem to have a hard time answering specific questions, instead you provide outdated answers to questions nobody asked.
I'll reduce my 3 questions to just one
How can the WTS allow organ transplants when millions of white blood cells are transferred with every transplant?
Please explain.
