Posts by scholar

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

Beth Sarim

1914 is a date the JWBorg has to stick to in order for it's nonsensical history to hold-up

As the new GB member tried to lay-out 'imagine it was 608 BCE'', just before the fall to the Babyllonians,,,they yet double-down on their foolhardiness of such unfounded dates to rev-up their dogma.

--

1914 and its subsequent history explains the rise of the modern-day eschatological Church known as 'Jehovah's Witnesses proclaiming God's Kingdom and fulfilment of Bible Prophecy.

---

Clearly,,,no one but the Borg will substantiate that 607BCE fall but them and they have to become more unreasonable with that date.

Because no other Historian Scholar will support it. It's ridiculous.

- the celebrated WT scholars and the said scholar champion 607 BCE as the only date- the only possible date for the Fall of Jerusalem based on the historical reality of the Exile of 70 years.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

Phizzy

"the convoluted selection of ‘2520 years’ doesn’t even have any direct biblical basis." I would suggest it doesn't have any indirect basis either.

--

False for it is based on both direct and indirect evidence.

----

The Book of Daniel is agreed by a consensus of Scholars to be a thinly veiled political/religious tract against Antiochus Epiphanes 1V, no way was the seven times/years envisaged by the writer to be any longer than what the Chapter says, seven years of madness for the King. "Daniels" prophecies were supposed to happen very soon, apart from the vague apocalyptic stuff.

----

Nonsense for scholars are divided as to the time of writing or composition of the book of Daniel.

Scholars are inconsistent with their treatment of the Neb's literal 7 years vacancy from the throne which falsifies secular NB Chronology.

----

To extrapolate 2520 years from "Daniel" is a twisting and misuse of Scripture, and you have to be deranged to accept it.

--

No for it comes down to exegesis of the biblical text which clearly shows the equivalence of the Danielic 'seven times' interpreted by the dating formulas contained in the book of Revelation which contain the keys for unlocking sacred mysteries.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

Jeffro

1914 is just one of many dates proposed by Adventists following the great disappointment. It is complete nonsense, and the convoluted selection of ‘2520 years’ doesn’t even have any direct biblical basis.

---

Nonsense. 1914 and the Gentile Times of 2520 years are based on rock-solid biblical exegesis and have been confirmed by the fulfilment of events since 1914 as part of the Sign of Christ's presence or Parousia so you cannot be any more direct than these facts.

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

Jeffro

Can you imagine if JWs did abandon 1914 though. Poor old dupes like ‘scholar’ would have to start saying 1914 and 607 BCE never actually made any sense. It would be hilarious.

---

-- The jokes on you as you do not recognize the fact of the Jewish Exile of 70 years which falsifies your laughable 587 BCE for the Fall of Jerusalem

scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

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. 🤷‍♂️ 😂

Link Dislike Like---

Perhaps you should read the Bible and such books as Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezra, and Ezekiel and then you can read Josephus .scholar JW

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

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

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

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

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

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

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

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

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

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 .

scholar

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