i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
The fact that you think my ‘methodology’ is ‘complex’ only demonstrates your own inability to comprehend quite simple deductive reasoning. There was no 70 year exile. No source mentions an exile of 70 years. 🤷♂️ 😂
Perhaps you should read the Bible and such books as Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezra, and Ezekiel and then you can read Josephus .scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
You can pontificate all you like about 587 BCE for the Fall of Jerusalem but your charts simply prove that the biblical/regnal data combined with the selected secular data that you use does point most likely to 587 BCE. However, the biblical data alone cannot fix with certainty a date for the Fall of Jerusalem as it simply lists the reigns of the Judean kings so this alone partially constructs a scheme of Chronology for that period of Jewish history. The chronologist must then take into consideration other historical realities such as the Exile of 70 years which then fine tunes the chronology which shows a gap of 20 years. Now, the Chronology can be corrected which anchors the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 BCE then with the known biblical data for the respective Monarchs whose reigns can then be properly adjusted.
The problem with your opinion and charts comes down to Methodology and that has now been recognized by Chronologists such as Rodger Young who first introduced the term into scholarly journals in his advocacy of 587 BCE by means of the use of Decision Tables Analysis. But again Young fails to account for the Jewish Exile even though he has produced studies on the Jewish Sabbaths and Jubille.
In short, your Chronology fails on two counts: An inadequate Methodology and a failure to accommodate the Jewish Exile. WT scholars have adopted a very different Methodology in their schemes of Chronology beginning with Charles Russell who even in those earlier times considered the historical reality of the Exile of 70 years.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
https://jeffro77.wordpress.com/2022/11/17/586-or-587/
---
A contrivance with pretty coloured charts along with a flawed methodology disproved by the historical fact of the Jewish Exile of 70 years. Plain and simple!!!
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
Entirely wrong. Based on the secularly agreed facts of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign along with what the Bible says, 587 BCE is the correct year. But JWs don’t really care what the Bible actually says. 607BCE has no support from any reputable source at all.
----
Entirely wrong. Your methodology as used on your website discussing 587 vs 586 BCE uses a methodology that is complex and simply a contrivance in order to prove the unprovable.I am sure that serious scholars who advocate 586 BCe are well aware of the contrary arguments against 586 but it still, remains the strongest candidate within current scholarship.
The dates 586 or 587 are falsified by the fact of the Jewish Exile which was of 70 years duration ending in Cyrus' 1 st year in 537 BCE and beginning in the 18th year of Neb and the 11th year of Zedekiah which brings the simple fact that the Exile could only have begun in 607 BCE with the Fall of Jerusalem.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
indoubtbigtime
If they ditch 1914, they'll have to ditch the Gentile Times prophecy, and the Last Days in general, but JWs without eschatology have no reason to exist. An alternative would be to just move End of Gentile Times to another date. They could for example accept the historical consensus about the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BC; that would give them 20 years of breathing time, and pass the hot potato to the next generation of GB; this sounds cynical enough for the GB to adopt. The problem, though, would be that every WT magazine has constantly fired against the historical date of 587 BC in favor of their baseless 607 BC. Changing that would be a huge flip-flop, but it wouldn't be news.
--
What you fail to realize is that the modern-day Church is an Eschatological Church or Organization as described in detail in the book of Revelation. Thus, such teachings or doctrines such as the Gentile Times, Last days, Parousia, Kingdom are all part of modern Biblical Theology fully developed by Jehovah's people since the days of the Early Bible Students.,
Then is no historical consensus for 587 BCE as the date for Jerusalem's Fall as most reputable scholars prefer 586 BCE thus 587 BCE is not the historical date but 607 BCE is the only validated date for the destruction of Jerusalem based on the historic Jewish Exile of 70 years.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
TD
Well yes, that is the point. You're ahead of scholar at least. They were not members of the great crowd. They were not even prospective members of the great crowd as JW's have taught since 1970. Do I have to show you how JW teachings on the Ransom and how it applies during the time of the end does not cover or account for that fact? Or conversely, can you show me, when and how the great crowd teaching was adjusted?
----
Let us cut to the chase and you provide your understanding of the 'great crowd' and how it relates to the present-day members of the other sheep who today coexist with the anointed in doing the Lord's work.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
TD
If you don't see the problem with the 1984 quote I've provided, then I don't think we have a whole lot to discuss.
If you believe that view expressed in that quote has been adjusted and there is some other basis (Other than a chronological understanding of a generation) to identify "prospective" members of the great crowd today, then I would appreciate a reference or two.
--
Just provide the 1984 quote that concerns you as you have not given specific information and then the said scholar will help you for scholar likes to help the little people.
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Jeffro
Except the ‘outbreak of the Great War’ was before October of 1914. But because something significant happened in that year, JWs quietly ignore that fact. 😂 (On top of the fact that the Adventist numerology is nonsense, on top of the fact that Jerusalem was definitely destroyed in 587 BCE, not 607.)
---
The outbreak of the Great War is usually assigned to events prior to October, 1914 and by that time the Gentile Times had ended on or about October,1916 with the inauguration of the heavenly Kingdom of God all such events are consistent with our Chronology and interpretation of Bible prophecy.
The simple fact is that Jerusalem was destroyed not in 586/587 or 588 BCE but in the verified date of 607 BCE.
----
And of course JWs also ignore the fact that in the Bible, Jesus’ parousia explicitly follows the great tribulation. JWs don’t really care what the Bible actually says when it disagrees with their nutty doctrines.
---
Not so for the Bible clearly indicates the Parousia beginning with the king's arrival must precede the Great Tribulation as shown by means of the successive events described in the Olivet Discourse.
Such 'nutty doctrines' keep you occupied by means of your fixation on our teachings and your presentation of pretty coloured charts!!!!!
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
TD
Fast forward the clock 40 years and it is clear that an adjustment is on the horizon.
--
How so? An adjustment to What?
scholar JW
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
TD
You can call it bright flash of light if you want. I would call it a rip in the fabric of JW theology that must needs be fixed. The idea that the proximity of the end justified the identification of the great crowd in 1935 might have made sense 50 years ago, but it just doesn't work anymore.
Salvation, the Ransom and the two Christian hopes are not trivial doctrines and modifying the significance of 1914 might actually be easier than tinkering with them.
----
No, it is a validated doctrine of Biblical Theology rightly espoused by Jehovah's people in keeping with the inspired utterance in Rev.1:1. Despite the passage of time our understanding is validated by the passage of time consistent with the nature of the fulfilment of biblical prophecy so the Lord's people are nourished by faith and the Christian hope for a New World.
---
Salvation, the Ransom and the two Christian hopes are not trivial doctrines and modifying the significance of 1914 might actually be easier than tinkering with them.
---
Indeed, such key doctrines have always from the time of the Bible Students been taught by God's people as no other group has done in conjunction with prophecy or eschatology inaugurated by the events of 1914 CE.
scholar JW
