i love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
I don't know if you know this, schnell, but the JWs are the only people who claim that Babylon was destroyed in 607. Of course, the WT claims like with the 1914 thing, that "it depends on your definition of destruction". Historians place the destruction of Babylon at different years, none of them even close to 607 (or 606) BC.
Oh, for sure. I just love how this convoluted philosophy of history completely fails. It does not work.
i love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
@btlc, Correction accepted! It still doesn't work. :)
several years ago i started a thread on this forum in which i asserted i had not seen witnesses door-knocking in my village for at least two or so years.
years before that - in pre-trolley times - in going about my business (or pleasure), i'd catch sight of them on the streets as they shuffled in their groups from door-to-door: sometimes there'd be contingents of witnesses, including young couples, parents and their kids and middle-aged and older ones.
in other words, a good cross-section of ages and stages in life.. in fact, i can remember times when witnesses were so visible in numbers when going out in their car groups, you literally couldn't escape them.. then, in more recent years, i've seen very, very little...if not anything (and i count myself sensitive to noting whether jws are out and about).
I certainly get their competition from time to time.
i love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
Because 1 CE is included in the 1913 years? Okay, I can accept that.
... Except that it is said to have terminated well into 1914, in October.
i love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
Also...
From Year 607 BCE to 1 CE is 607 years
From Year 1 CE to 1914 CE is 1913 years
607-1 = 606
(Ooops! Forgot the zero year!)
607 - 1 -1 = 605
1914 - 1 = 1913
1913 + 605 = 2518
CORRECTION:
607 - 607 = 0
1914 - 1 = 1913
1913 + 607 = 2520
There we go, that's better. Now we still have it leading to... 1913.
i love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
@OnTheWayOut, and as I pointed out in the other thread to "the-question" about 607 BC, the 2520 years is entirely astrological, which makes their demonization of astrology quite duplicitous.
i love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
@steve2, how about this. 1914 was a year of the Tiger in the Chinese calendar. So were 1974 ("Stay alive till 75!"), 1986 ("Peace and security!"), and 2010 ("Overlapping generations? Wth?").
i love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
@Outlaw, Bingo! :P
i love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
I love math, I love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.
2520 - 607 = 1913
Not 1914.
2520 - 606 = 1914
From what I understand, Russell realized this. He had previously used 606 BC, of course, but then he switched it to 607 BC. I know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?
2520 - 607 - 1 = 1912
???
Okay, so 2520 years after NOTHING HAPPENED, the Titanic sank. *shrug*
Am I wrong here? What am I missing? If anything else, let's explain it for posterity.
it seems that metro witnesses have beeen directed to now have a total of 5 people at each location, as well as 'encouraged' to witness on their lunch breaks, (thus being able to count their time all the way through).
these 2 things should help boost the yearly hours..
@Finkelstein, "Oh, we aren't selling anything, but if you'd like to make a donation..."
@scratchme1010, I feel for them, but if someone sees what's up, I don't know that I feel sorry for them. That epiphany of "Oh crap I'm in a cult!" is usually followed by leaving said cult. I feel sorry for the kids, and not just for holidays or college, but for all the completely unnecessary stress that could have been entirely avoided.
