was listening to bbc radio 4 late sunday night, and in a programme about migration, they referenced the "babylonian conquest of jerusalem in 607 b.c.
" which caught my attention.. did they not mean 587 b.c., or did i understand it wrong?.
the link to the programme is below - sorry if you're not in the u.k. as you probably won't be able to listen to bbc programmes.
They might not feel it's important enough to warrant a slot in the feedback programme, though that doesn't mean you won't get a response. If they are going to do a piece on the issue, they probably want to research it more and give an explanation why the error was made.
This weeks Feedback was mostly about people talking when eating on the radio
was listening to bbc radio 4 late sunday night, and in a programme about migration, they referenced the "babylonian conquest of jerusalem in 607 b.c.
" which caught my attention.. did they not mean 587 b.c., or did i understand it wrong?.
the link to the programme is below - sorry if you're not in the u.k. as you probably won't be able to listen to bbc programmes.
besty - probably half of those references are on here and other exJW sites! 587 is so widely accepted, it's hardly ever contested.
Island Man - it's difficult to see how they can justify saying 607 in the context they did. They were talking about the events that Psalm 137 references, i.e. exile. I don't think anyone could reasonably say there was any kind of "conquest" or "exile" in 607 B.C. from Jerusalem surely?
EDIT: Never mind Island Man!
was listening to bbc radio 4 late sunday night, and in a programme about migration, they referenced the "babylonian conquest of jerusalem in 607 b.c.
" which caught my attention.. did they not mean 587 b.c., or did i understand it wrong?.
the link to the programme is below - sorry if you're not in the u.k. as you probably won't be able to listen to bbc programmes.
Also now on Youtube:
was listening to bbc radio 4 late sunday night, and in a programme about migration, they referenced the "babylonian conquest of jerusalem in 607 b.c.
" which caught my attention.. did they not mean 587 b.c., or did i understand it wrong?.
the link to the programme is below - sorry if you're not in the u.k. as you probably won't be able to listen to bbc programmes.
Haha oh dear what have I done
Searcher - you could also put the audio as an audio track to a blank video file and upload it to youtube which can be viewed here. I'll have a go at that myself maybe...
was listening to bbc radio 4 late sunday night, and in a programme about migration, they referenced the "babylonian conquest of jerusalem in 607 b.c.
" which caught my attention.. did they not mean 587 b.c., or did i understand it wrong?.
the link to the programme is below - sorry if you're not in the u.k. as you probably won't be able to listen to bbc programmes.
Oh good - I'm glad to know it's not just me then!
That's what I thought Londo.
BBC Radio 4 feeback is indeed probably the best place to write to. The "Feedback" programme is on Fridays at 16:30 I think, and repeated on Sunday nights as well I believe.
was listening to bbc radio 4 late sunday night, and in a programme about migration, they referenced the "babylonian conquest of jerusalem in 607 b.c.
" which caught my attention.. did they not mean 587 b.c., or did i understand it wrong?.
the link to the programme is below - sorry if you're not in the u.k. as you probably won't be able to listen to bbc programmes.
Was listening to BBC Radio 4 late Sunday night, and in a programme about migration, they referenced the "Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem in 607 B.C." which caught my attention.
Did they not mean 587 B.C., or did I understand it wrong?
The link to the programme is below - sorry if you're not in the U.K. as you probably won't be able to listen to BBC programmes. The reference to "607 B.C." is about 21 minutes 20 seconds on, so if you listen from about 21 minutes onwards you will hear it:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b048j435
I thought it was only JWs that think Jerusalem fell in 607 B.C.?
it might be the way i think and see, but the first time i looked at the image on pg 27 of the april 15th watchtower i was trying to figure out how it applied to this study.
this is a darkened black and white image that appears in my edition of this magazine, (its colour online).
anyway, para 9 talks about a brother that had an issue with looking at online porn.
Why does the WTS always talk about men and boys masturbating; no masturbating sisters? No sisters viewing porn?
Can you imagine how elders would go about counselling a sister for that? If a sister ever did do the crazy thing of actually telling the elders about it, I would love to see how that conversation would go!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28166192.
mostly about the new preaching tactics - i.e.
- standing in the street holding up magazines.. i have seen them many times in and around glasgow..
Just spotted it as well. It's #2 on the most read stories of today right now - above most of the main news stories of the day!
Edit: Another thread here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/281531/1/BBC-Article-on-Train-Station-Witnessing
is there any resource that shows a higher incidence of child abuse ?.
Similar to your thread Focus, I thought one UK ex-politician described it pretty well the other day. He said:
"Where there are children, paedophiles will be attracted. It isn't a coincidence that in the Catholic church, in the teaching profession and in children's television there are paedophiles. They are there because that's where there are children. And indeed, in a number of these environments, including television and the Catholic church - the first in the case of celebrity and the second case the need to avoid scandal - there was a pretty great certainty that they were not going to be exposed or prosecuted. So you have a lethal combination - you have a ready supply of children and you have a guarantee that people aren't going to be brought to justice. What is going to happen there? You are going to attract a lot of paedophiles."
my father is coming in town in two weeks, and i'd like to accompany him to the one meeting he'll be in town for.
i haven't been to a meeting for some time now, and i was wondering what's the book they are using for the book study.
anyone still current on that?.
