Got any quick 1914 / 607 points?

by drew sagan 31 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  kid-A

  "I think Russell may have conveniently fit the pyramid numbers to this pre-determined date. And don't think that this stuff was created in a vacuum either."

  Irrelevant to the point.

  Read "Thy Kingdom Come" from cover to cover and you will understand the critical role that Pyramidology played in his early calculations, which were certainly not derived from the same sources the WTS currently uses to support the 607-1914 debacle. Russell was steeped and obsessed with Pyramidology and it was certainly more than a side-interest used to prop up the Miller-inspired dates. Obviously nothing is created in a vacuum, but the very fact that Russell could make a complete, "stand-alone" case for 1914 entirely independently of historical chronology, demonstrates the over-all fallacy of his date, irrespective of historical inaccuracies later adopted by the WTS.
• 

  M.J.

  This tree being the “true Christians” is the foundation for a lot of the WT's understanding of 1914 and since their understanding is inaccurate, everything that follows that is attached to this foundation including 1914, 607, gentile times, etc is incorrect. Rip out the foundation and the whole building will crumble. Perhaps I can find the article when I get home tonight and explain it better.

  
  

  This is an interesting point. The way I understand it is that the WTS generically makes the tree represent kingship and try to get away with it in that sense. So it's kingship in a generic sense that is bound up...first it's Neb and then it's God's own appointed kingship. Something seems kinda fishy about this but I can't quite articulate it right now.

  Another thing, Drew, that you may consider is looking into the "prophetic calendar" that the WTS likes to use. Ask if Nebuchadnezzar was crazy for 7 solar years, or was it more than a month shy of 7 years (2520 literal days)? If he was crazy for 2520 literal days, then a "year" here is defined as a "prophetic year" of 360 days...so why turn around and apply the "year for a day" rule to solar years, not "prophetic" years?

  If Nebuchadnezzar was crazy for 7 solar years, then he wasn't crazy for a literal 2520 days, but this number was representative of seven years, not counting the adjustment factors, like leap days, etc. So then the actual number of days he was crazy was higher than 2520.

  Actually there is ample evidence that the calendar in use for prophecy here was a solar calendar of 360 days, with four seasons consisting of 3 months of 30 days each. But in between the seasons were marker days on the solstices and equinoxes. So a typical year was 364 actual days, and the 4 marker days weren't part of a month or a season and thus weren't counted. Edited: Oh yeah I forgot that every 7th year a "leap week" is thrown in to adjust for the one day discrepancy between the 364 day year and a solar year. This info on the calendar is drawn from Leolaia's posts on the subject, which I can't actually find at the moment.
• 

  jgnat

  Those "True Christians" in 1914 were celebrating Christmas and birthdays, and believed that Jesus had been enthroned far earlier. They were in "error" according to "current light". So what exactly their "identifying mark" that separated them from the rest of Christendom?
• 

  M.J.

  Read "Thy Kingdom Come" from cover to cover

  Well, hats off to you for accomplishing such a feat. You're a better man than I...I don't think I could subject myself to that and retain my sanity...
• 

  Morocco

  Yeah, you're right drew, it does represent his rulership and sovereignty. I think I would like some fresh pepper with my foot. However, my point still remains. If you read Daniel 4 nowhere in it does it say this tree represents God in anyway. The WT slips that idea in there but has no way to back it up except their saying so. I would really like to see the scriptural evidence that says the tree ALSO represents God's sovereignty as well as Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom. Also in verses 28-37 the bible gives the record of the dream being fulfilled! All they are doing is taking something that has already happened and making it yet to happen. Plus any speculation of this end time is not only scripturally unsound, but the knowledge of it was forbidden even to the people closest to Jesus.
  
  Acts 1:6-7 So when they met together, they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.”
• 

  drew sagan

  Thanks for sorting that out Morocco. For a moment I thought we where getting new light on the subject.
  Your reasoning has been my point with this interpretation for months now (I think I made a post months ago that is right up with what you are saying). The real truth is that there are entire points with the interpretation built on assumptions and not fact. Where does the bible really say...
  1. that daniel 4 has a second fullfillment? (and if it does, do we realize it's the ONLY ONLY ONLY prophecy in Daneil that would have 2 meanings?)
  2. That the seven times is seven years
  3. that these are seven 'prophetic years' of 360 days
  4. that we then need to go a 'day for a year'
  5. that this is connected to the 'gentile times' spoken in luke
  All of this is assumptions, and there are many others as well. Not to mention the assumption that the Bible actually chooses the 539 date over the 587 date. Where does the Bible say one is right and one is wrong. At the VERY LEAST they are least both right as much as they both could be wrong.
• 

  Shazard

  Some quick points. 1st go that 70 years are not for Jerusalem but for Babilon. Jews have several exiles even one after destruction (Read Jeremia, in last chapters ther's report of several exiles). Dan 9:2 even does not talk about Jerusalem being desolated for 70 years, what is sayed there is something else, and there is desolationS (plural). Ecehiel 41 shows that exile was before Jerusalem, and there can't be exile if Jewish land is free and not under control of Babilon. year for day rule is out of context, God specifies the rule when it is used, and there is no reason that this is overall rule, coz then day for 1000 years can be taken as rule too
• 

  dust

  Maybe this could be of interest: http://www.witforjesus.org/jehovahs_witness/online/wdgr/wdgr_s02q01.php
  (But it's not "quick and easy".)
• 

  TheListener

  I posted this awhile ago and I still contend that other posters are better equipped to discuss this subject.

  Daniel 5:26 is discussing the destruction of Babylon:

  (Daniel 5:26) 26 "This is the interpretation of the word: ME´NE, God has numbered [the days of] your kingdom and has finished it.

  In the NWT (w/ references) Daniel 5:26 has a referene to Jeremiah 25:12 which states:

  (Jeremiah 25:12) 12 "‘And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of and against that nation ,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘their error, even against the land of the Chal·de´ans, and I will make it desolate wastes to time indefinite . . .

  Clearly then, the WTS is teaching us that the 70 years relates to . To further show this I have put up a quote from the Isaiah's Prophecy book. The society has added this information to sound the teaching down; you know repetition for emphasis.

  *** ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 Jehovah Profanes the Pride of Tyre ***True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years , since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination —when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above "the stars of God." (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble . What will then happen to ?

  The section above this line is a quick and dirty 607 argument. If you want you can use the information below as well: (good luck)

  The only thing left then is to figure out why the WTS says the 70 years ends in 537BCE and not 539BCE?

  You could say that this 70 years, Babylon's 70 years of ascension is separate from Israel's 70 years of servitude, but then 2 Chronicles wouldn't make sense because it too references back to Jeremiah 25:12.

  (2 Chronicles 36:20-21) 20 Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; 21 to fulfill Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah , until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years.

  So there you have it. Each scripture clearly cross-references the others (use NWT with references) and the Isaiah Prophecy I book clearly sets forth the Society’s viewpoint that different nations came under ’s rule at different stages.

  I’m no teacher and this issue isn’t my specialty but that’s my input .
• 

  Zico

  Hi Drew,
  
  Just to add to The Listener's points, you can also use this scripture:
  
  Jeremiah 52:28-30
  
  28 These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·rez´zar took into exile: in the seventh year, three thousand and twenty-three Jews.
  29 In the eighteenth year of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, from Jerusalem there were eight hundred and thirty-two souls.
  30 In the twenty-third year of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard took Jews into exile, seven hundred and forty-five souls.
  All the souls were four thousand and six hundred.
  
  Verse 30 shows that Jews were still being taken into exile in his 23rd year. Even if Society dates were correct, this would mean that Jews would still be being taken into exile in 602 BCE. According to Society teachings however, they reach the 70 years as they say that the land was completely desolate for 70 years, but clearly, it could not have been completely desolate in 602 BCE, as there were still hundreds of people living there! 5 years after the desolation was said to have happened.