TD......good question. Have you visited and read in detail the numerous websites that specifically argue against 607? Having visited them recently, I found it of interest that a lot of the arguments those websites used, were almost exactly the same arguments Jonnson used (not that there's anything wrong about that). Also, after reading a few older threads, its become patently obvious that this is a well respected book and hence I thought it would be interesting to a lot of people to discuss it in place of the recent preponderance of atheist/creation threads.
Jeffro.....great question. I'm actually reviewing the thread Ethos and other JWs have made here so I can spot any patterns, any remiss approaches that I perhaps could make due to my unfamiliarity with the audience of this forum and what their specific affinities and/or antipathies are when it comes to argumentation. I hope my approach to be very coherent, solidly argued, and as I said not simply a rehash of what you all have debated to death. I'd like to make sure no questions/arguments go ignored as well. So in turn I'd like to ask you: From a competent debator....what do you expect?
cedars....I did not intend my name to be construed as such. For me, its a simple reminder, everytime I log in...to never let cognitive dissonance, bias, delusion or anything else to deter from facing the facts. Face The Facts is one of my fav Rutherford-era publications as well. Hope that clears that up for ya.