i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Stavro
I thank you for your kind comments and I am sure Rolf would appreciate this. Sadly, it appears that with the departure of Rolf from the scene it would that scholar out of the entire world wide Witness population remains alone in the advocacy of 607 BCE and other related matters.
scholar JW emeritus
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
stavro
It's nice to see you are as enthusiastic as ever Scholar JW. I know you don't get to express your opinions on doctrinal matters as freely as you would like over on JW talk. I can't help but feel you must be a little disheartened with the level of scholarly insight provided by the current Governing Body.
---
Yes. Times have changed so one must move with such change and this can be both difficult and challenging. One such recent adjustment was the recent development with my friend Rolf Furuli who had sent me a personal copy of his book on our beloved Religion and the governing body which was a most interesting read. Further, here in Australia we are in the news with CSA in relation to the Redress scheme so we live in very interesting times alongside the current pandemic.
scholar JW emeritus
-----
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Mr. Finkelstein
I have to admit Scholar you have courage, determination and spunk to come to this forum and fight for the JWS doctrines
----
Thank you for your kind words. Scholar is here to help and to act as an Apologist.
scholar JW
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Finkelstein
I am here for the sole purpose of amusing you
scholar JW
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Finkelstein
I think its more of a problem for yourself and all JWS particularly the JWS leaders , most bible scholars and ancient historians agree with the time of Jerusalem's destruction being between 586 to 587-
---
Such chronology is not of our making so we have no interest for it is a problem for those scholars who cannot make up their minds whether Jerusalem fell in 586 or 587BCE
----
The problem rests in how to dissolve the doctrine of 607 BCE and 1914 and keep or retain the delusion that the organization is god's chosen and the organization is the FDSL and not commercialized false prophets.
----
There is no need to dissolve anything as this doctrine is sound well established as part of Bible prophecy and confirmed by the outbreak of the First World War in 1914 CE.
---
Scholar JW
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Beth Sarim
Lloyd's Evan's video is simply a rehash of Carl Jonsson's hypothesis so there is nothing to see here as the said has refuted such view many times on this forum.
scholar JW
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Finkelstein
Was it 586 BE the date preferred by scholars or was it 587 BCE the date preferred by Carl Olaf Jonsson?
-- that is your problem to resolve not mine
---
Irregardless the information from both secular (Archaeology) and the bible, weighs heavily in favor of either year, certainly not 607 BCE
------
No the Bible does not only weigh heavily on 607 BCE but it alone is the only possible date
----
Of course one has to insert themselves with intellectually honesty to draw that comprising conclusion.
--When you have resolved the 586/7 controversy then can you speak of intellectual honesty
scholar JW
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Finkelstein
You seemed to have skip over and be dismissive to the actual date/year of final destruction of Jerusalem which the WTS says it was 607 BCE. ???
----
No that is your problem for you do not exactly or precisely what year Jerusalem whether it was 586 or 587 BCE whereas WT has identified the exact year as 607 BCE and that is the very stark difference.
scholar JW
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Finkelstein
Interesting that the WTS takes only certain writings in the bible (Daniel's vision 70 years) to support their claim of 607 BCE but reject or dismiss all other pertaining scriptures
---
What a stupid statement to make for one only has to read WT publications in relation to the 70 years to see that we refer To Chronicles, Daniel. Jeremiah and Zechariah all these texts support fully our interpretation of the 70 years as a period of servitude-exile and desolation.
scholar JW
i don't know if anyone has stumbled across this video, but it just blew may away.
omg!!!
just goes to show why in dubland they adhere to the 2 witness rule so adamantly and are so anal about it.
Johnamos
if you are looking at the perspective of the 70 years then that could only have applied in Zedekiah's time ending his reign in 607 BCE.
If you discount the 70 years then Babylonish domination would have begun according to Dan 1:1 in the third year of his kingship during the reign of Jehoiakim when his vassalage to Neb would have commenced in 617 BCE.
Nice and easy
scholar JW
