Am totally out of my league here but one thing that has always bugged me and that I have seen ignored here too - is the land did not become "totally" empty until Neb's 23rd year - which must be 582 (not 586) so there is not a real sabbath for the land until that happens - yes Judah went off into exile per the scriptures in 586 BC but the emptying of the land did not occur for another five years - Jeremiah 52:30 - so all the stuff about a 70 year sabbath cannot work even if one wanted to say it began in 607 - he would have to begin it in 602 BC and have the exodus from Babylon occur in 532 BC instead. "For in the 23rd year of Nebuchadrezzar, Nebuzaradan the chief of the bodyguard took Jews into exile - seven hundred and thirty two souls. Maybe I am thick of skull and have missed something along the way."
saltyoldlady
JoinedPosts by saltyoldlady
-
382
The Gentile Times Reconsidered
by Spade indisproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
-
-
-
100
Where did 607 come from?
by MrFreeze inokay so we've obviously established on this board that 607 is not the correct date that babylon destroyed jerusalem.
even before 1914 came around, the bible students still thought 1914 would be a pivital date.
the only way they can gain that info is from the 7 times or w/e.
-
-
saltyoldlady
Might as well add my tiny smattering of WTS history to this - Br Miller figured 677 BC was the date to start the 2520 years from because of the Jews being conquered by Esarhaddon, and the taking of Manasseh captive to Babylon - so he arrived at his speculation of 1843 for Christ's return. Then when that proved disappointing they moved the dates to 676 BC - 1844 AD. That date didn't work out either. Then some more Bible speculators came around (I'm also guilty of falling into this category but it's fun) and they figured the 1844 date was wrong because it represented a "double" for Christ's birth, and the real date should have been 30 years later - 1874.75 as that would represent his time of baptism. And 3 and 1/2 years later would represent his sacrifice - 1878.25 - and of course that was also used as proof of the elevated stand of the WT foundation - the beginning of its publication being germinated on May 29th expose of Barbour's mistaken views about significance of ransom sacrifice that Russell published in the Congregationalist News. This just happened to coincide with the day of Pentecost for that year I guess so this was supposed to be as significant as Peter's announcement a couple thousand years earlier - not quite right obviously but it worked to substantiate their own elevated views of what they thought they were about. Then they carried it a bit further and added 3 1/2 more years on top of that date to signify the end of the heavenly calling - 1881 as I remember as being a "double" for the time of Cornelius - the first Gentile convert to be called. And they went a bit further and added 37 years to the 1877/78 date and reached 1914/1915 era as representing the "double" for destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD (37 years after Christ's death). So they were convinced that the Great Day of Jehovah's Judgement would be in 1914. When I use the terms double here I am not referring to the old traditional Israel's double concept though that is what got this idea ringing in their craniums I suspect.
The other fun part of the 1874 date for Russell was that he calculated this was the end of the 6,000 years and the beginning of the 7th Day since he started time in 4126. 6,000 minus 4126 gives you 1874 in the old fashioned days of straight out arithmetic (not messing with the zero year at that time). So Russell was "doubly" (pun intended) convinced he had it right. Two important indicators, both wrong unfortunately. Russell wasn't the only one thinking the 6,000 years ended around that time because that famous Mason (can't draw out his name for the life of me right now but he wrote Dogma and Morals) also felt 1870 was the date - he started the time in 4130 - and Russell was an ardent Mason at that time - so aware of this also. This was the Mason's reason for publishing Dogma and Morals at that time.
To continue on the old Israel Double concept which should probably be a different thread was part of the basis for believing 1918 would be the time for Jehovah's approval or selection of his channel or organization - the faithful slave as it would double the birthdate of Isaac (wrong again of course) - and here comes another really hilarious one but it was a third proof for Russell for his erroneous convictions - If the double for Isaac's birth was 1918/1919 then 40 years subtracted from that would double his age 40 because everything done in reverse in the double concept like a mirror - and this would be the date Isaac was figuratively sacrificed which pictured Christ's sacrifice so 1878/1879 just HAD to be the date chosen by God for the start of the WT publication. Sad part of all this is Isaac was more likely sacrificed in a figurative way at age 37 than age 40 but oh well - details, details - what's a few years one way or another. LOL. And then of course the double for Isaac's birth doesn't really work out to be 1918 at all because they didn't even have their chronology straight. Errors on top of errors in this field. Like a minefield to even walk through it these days.
Back to the 607 thing - the Jewish people today actually believe in the 2520 day concept and figure their period from 604/603 to 1917 - adding in the zero year. They think Nebuchadnezzar marched thru Jerusalem in 604 BC taking some of the noble youth off to Babylon at that time together with some of the valuables from the Temple. And they believe this establishes the capture of Jerusalem via General Allenby in 1917 as "divinely ordained" - so even the Jewish nation plays with this one! Who am I to pass judgement on these things but they are fascinating to me.
-
60
Jehovah's Witnesses Are NOT Under Mind Control
by PublishingCult inhow would you respond to the assertion that 7.2 million members of the jehovah's witness religion are not under any sort of mind control?.
the argument being that every one is responsible for their own actions and cannot blame the indoctrinator for what he says and does.
how could they possibly be under mind control?.
-
-
saltyoldlady
Darth Frosty - You are right on! I used to get "so tired" of the constant judgmental questions - it is not genuine heartfelt love that motivates this kind of conversation - it is hollow and empty.
-
70
"Who else are we to go away to?"
by simon17 into the intellectually honest witness, it seems like it often comes down to this principle.
"fine, if the witnesses aren't the truth, then show me the better answer and i'll consider it.
" and how do you deal with that?
-
-
saltyoldlady
Dear Simon17 - I will indeed pray for you right now - but I have no magical powers - I can't make ice cubes appear on a hot summer's day. Nor do I have a suggestion as to what group to attend. I guess part of what I was trying to say is God gives us a choice as to where to go for "fellowship" but He can be found in many places - the WTS does not have an exclusive domain on Him. But please know that I care and I'm sure many others here that are reading your posts care about you and we will be praying for the lifting up of your spirits. It's never fun to be in a "difficult place" or down in heart and spirit.
-
70
"Who else are we to go away to?"
by simon17 into the intellectually honest witness, it seems like it often comes down to this principle.
"fine, if the witnesses aren't the truth, then show me the better answer and i'll consider it.
" and how do you deal with that?
-
-
saltyoldlady
So many wonderful responses here that I don't know whether my two bits will add much (guess with inflation looming I should call it my buck -LOL)
But I had the same questions in my heart as you - I felt I needed to find another religious group I could be equally committed to as I had been to the WTS - I tried out the Bible Students Movement for a bit before actually announcing my desire to leave in a formal manner - their beliefs about many things very very similar - but they didn't satisfy me as a group either. Finally it became an issue in my heart - am I putting love of the Christ first or family and friends? Do I really stand for truth in this org or do I feel compromised? And you know the results - I left.
I have not found another church home to replace what the WTS seemed to offer and now a year later I realize that I didn't need to - my drawing close to God has greatly increased - I spend more time with my Bible and in prayer than I ever did as part of the WTS - Jesus Christ and his Heavenly Father, Jehovah have become ever so much more REAL in my life - I can feel Holy Spirit working now in my life - I experience the answers to my prayers almost daily in both large and small matters - I've found a small (about 20 of us) interdenominational Bible Study group that meets once a week at the Senior Citizens Center within walking distance that provides great fellowship - many many varieties of Christian beliefs represented there such as Catholic, Greek Orthodox, conservative and liberal Protestant groups, Pentecostal, Messianic Jewish - and the exchange and sharing as we consider verse by verse discussion for two hours of specific passages of the Bible have been phenomenal. When I began we were in the Book of Colossians - now doing Exodus. I am learning, experiencing love that is genuine, and yes there are arguments at times - usually all done in good nature with an adequate dose of humor thrown in - sometimes quite intense - but it is REAL - there is freedom of expression. I wouldn't trade it for going back to the WTS and the supposed "unity of belief" for anything.
So do not let your heart be troubled - Exercise faith in God. Exercise faith also in Jesus Christ. Observe His word and keep his commandments and they will come and make their dwelling place with you - you will SEE Him because He lives and you will live. You will find peace.
-
23
Convention 2011 rumor
by baltar447 inso i have good reason there's a possibility that the convention may have so nu-lite on daniel prophecy.
coming from the geniuses that brought us the overlapping generation, one can only speculate what nuttiness they will come up with next..
-
-
saltyoldlady
Well I'll tell you what the brightest light would be - to admit they didn't have any light.
Now that would be TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
3
True Christian thiefs?
by punkofnice inwe all know how the jw's bang on about : 'we're true christians!'.
on 2 of the occasions we invited jw's to stay at our home overnight and enjoy hospitality i had items stolen!.
the first was a music collection album that my zealous sil took home with her.. .
-
-
saltyoldlady
Sorry you had those experiences Punkofnice - I can't recall that an exact thing such as you experienced ever happened to me BUT I was thinking about it the other day and began to count up all the con artists I have met and allowed myself to be taken advantage of over the years - came up with a dozen - DF'ing is nice for that reason - it clears the coast of these sap suckers.
And another experience I had that was truly surprising to me - I am the sort of person who delights in sharing books, DVD's, CD's, etc. I found enjoyable - and at the time of DA'ing I had 1 book and about 3 DVD's out on loan with three different individuals - all of whom I had counted as special friends for many years. Not even one of them found it in their heart to return my borrowed material. They wouldn't have had to speak with me - they could have just silently laid it at my doorstep as it is well protected and out of sight of the general traffic. These things cost money and I was amazed no one considered it the decent thing to do to return my material. Not even one of them. Guess they figure when you are cast out you are "literally" dead and buried. LOL.
-
48
Hello to everyone.... and could I ask a really basic question here please...
by JamesS ini'm james i'm new to this forum as of today and i'm a ex-jw who was "born into the truth" and then left it officially at the age of twenty after "drifting out" of it for some time.
i'm now 34 and whilst i'm not exactly happy with the world i'm living in, i'm largely happy with my own life.. one question i've got about this forum - i didn't join for a long time because i thought it was for active jw's (based on the web-site url), not ex jw's, but then looking at the threads, it seems it is more for ex-jw's!
what is the demographic for the membership?
-
-
saltyoldlady
Good Morning and Welcome - I had the same confusion as yourself in the beginning but came to realize it is named the way it is to welcome those who call themselves JW's to join and participate in the discussions and perhaps learn - you'll enjoy the great variety of contributions - truly something for everyone's palette.
-
382
The Gentile Times Reconsidered
by Spade indisproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
-
-
saltyoldlady
That's alright Villobolo - I forgive you.
And now for Lesson 5 - looks like I'm mostly just talking to myself here - but that's okay - it's good exercise for the grey matter.
Re Samuel - Bible tells us he was a young lad when he revealed Jehovah's message to Eli - Josephus pegs it as 12 years and that fits young lad so I'll play with that one - Since Eli died in 1158 BC that would mean Samuel had to be born at least by 1170 BC. We don't know exactly but 70 is good enough to fit the other definition we want - how old was he when he annointed King Saul - will this fit? The Bible tells us at 1 Samuel chapter 8:1 that Samuel had grown old when he appointed his sons as judges and he was definitely old when he annointed King Saul cause it was enough time after the appointment of his sons that the people had discerned they did not want the sons to take the role of leadership - they had not walked in their father's ways - they wanted a king instead. The Bible defines old as 70 to 80 so if Samuel was age 70 when he participated in the matter of making Saul King it would fit 1100 BC. And that works nicely. Almost no one else grants Samuel that long a time of judging - I could only find one other - Pascal - most have been thrown off by the 20 years plus 7 months detail thinking that was the length but in truth I believe this was probably the beginning of his serving as a Priest for the nation - had to be at least age 30 and if one adds 12 to 21 we arrive at 33 - probably identifies the time Samuel begins - see 1 Samuel 7:1-5 - states he took up judging - so we have to allow some time for him to be judging after that. This would all fit into the age 70 scenario - so unfortunately this part of the chronology just human reasoning. But any shorter time span won't allow him to become old and grey before Saul selected. He was old enough the people were beginning to worry about the possibility of his passing away and who would be over them in that case.
Now the period of the Kings - just add up the years again for the various Kings of Judah - because that is the line through whom the Christ will come - and we get 513 - WTS gets 510 but they had to do some fancy footwork to arrive at that figure - not justified by the scripture record itself. I'll stick with the 513 myself - and just guess where that lands us - 587 BC. My, oh my. You can't imagine my surprise when that happened. But there was no way 607 was going to fit no matter what gyrations one tried to do - so I had to accept it - the GB is still unwilling to do so. But by just working with Scripture figures and trying to be reasonable in the gap periods - Joshua and Samuel - it anchors 587 BC as the end of the line of Kings. I'll stop for here - the rest has already been well covered by others.
Summary - 4130 beginning
2470 date for flood
2181 birthdate for Abraham
Thus 2081 birthdate for Isaac, 2021 birthdate for Jacob and Esau, etc. etc.
1676 date of the Exodus
1636 date for crossing the Jordan into Canaan
1630 for division of the land
1608 - death of Joshua
1158 - death of Eli
1100 - beginning of the line of Kings with Saul
587 - end of the period of the Kings with burning of Jerusalem
And the fun part about all these dates is that now all (or perhaps I should say most - may be some I have not investigated yet) the secular history dates for interlapping with other world powers jive right on. That is amazing and fun. And perhaps the best substantiated date of all is 609 BC - five different world powers interact - Josiah for Judah killed in this passage - the above chronology has his reign beginning in 640 BC - ending in 609 BC. The most critical tie-in is that of Assur-Umballit II of the Assyrians - his reign is only 2 years - from 611 to 609, The next - Egyptian recoreds indicate Necho's reign of 15 years from 610 to 595. That one fits perfectly. He was coming to aid Assur-Umballit II and it was Necho who kills Josiah. Nabopolasser of the Babylonians reigned from 626 to 605. So this makes a fourth confirmation - 609 marks the beginning of the Babylonian 70 years of world power - ending in 539 - perfection. It is 609 that Babylon finishes off the last Assyrian King for that period - and the ally of Nabopolasser was Cyaxerxes - his reign is a long one - 625 to 585 so he makes a 5th confirmation. But the most interesting factor about his history is Herodotus identified his death as being shortly after a battle with Alyattes of Lydia. This battle was interrupted by a total solar eclipse of May 28, 585 BC. Rather difficult for WTS to push that one around. So 609 BC is even better anchor than 539 BC in my opinion. These items are all identified in Carol Olof Jonnson's magnificent work. And the WTS has known about it for over 40 years yet they fail to adjust.
Another tidbit - Franz realized that Russell used to calculate 580 years for the I Kings 6:1 scripture thanks to Benjamin Wilson and the scripture actually says 480 years so that is what led Freddie to slash off a hundred years. Many Bible scholars consider this particular scripture to be a forgery - that the date has been inserted perhaps from a marginal notation. That item is open to debate but no chronologer has ever been successful at accommodating it - Solomon's Temple per my calculations was begun in 1016 - Solomon began reigning in 1020 BC - 4th year 2nd month pushes it to 1016 or maybe 1017. Funny thing if instead of trying to anchor the exodus from Egypt 480 years prior - which just will not work - it is possible that some scribe wrote the words 480 years and Exodus - in the margin - and if one proceeds forward instead of backward one arrives at an Exodus - but this time from Babylon - not Egypt. Don't know - just possibilities. But even the 70 years of fasting spoken about in Zechariah tie up to perfection with the 587 BC date. So one can only conclude the WTS is being "obtuse."
Another item that may anchor the WTS with their current dates is their whole basis for authority anchored to 1918 - used to be the double for Jacob's birth and they believed that signified the birth of a new nation - Spiritual Israel - which they think they represent. Of course now that double would be 2018. LOL. The Israel's double concept is mentioned in fine print footnote in Divine Proclaimer's Book but it used to carry great weight with the older brothers. Was eventually abandoned.
-
11
Why the GB can get away with saying whatever the HELL they want--even literally
by Pika_Chu inhas anyone noticed that...no, no, i'm joking!
of course you all know what it's like to debate the r and f. you tell them about actual logical arguments that contradict the gb, and eventually all your "discussions" descend into a sort of "la,la,la, can't hear you!
i can't let those apostate ideas touch my ears!
-
-
saltyoldlady
And On The Way Out - (you must be Out by now with 13,000 posts plus.) The other day I compared the GB to George Orwell's Animal Farm - but no one seemed to notice. I suspect not many of this group have ever watched the cute (and profound) comedy Animal Farm - made from his classic work. But the pigs in the story are such a perfect analogy. I should have named my post Barks and Snorts instead - It was based on Matt 7:6.