thirdwitness: It is really only a matter of quibbling over a word or phrase and its perceived interpretation.
See, that is exactly what I've noticed from you apologists. You pick issues to debate that are nothing more than quibbling over a word or phrase and its perceived interpretation, but refuse to debate issues like the source of pre-baptismal requirements of Jehovah's Witnesses where there is a clear-cut difinitive answer available from the Scriptures that does not require interpretation.
1 Timothy 6:3-5
If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth, thinking that godly devotion is a means of gain.
You choose to debate over the 607 BC issue, a matter of interpretation.
You choose to debate over the parousia issue, a matter of interpretation.
You choose to debate over all sorts of issues that are nothing more than a matter of interpretation. I debate with you, to a point, but the debate is of your choosing. You will not discuss the other doctrine your organization of men teaches.
I clearly see your mentally diseased state. I recognize the symptoms, having recently recovered from it myself. I am still recovering, in fact. It is the other doctrine that your organization willfully puts in place of what the Bible says that I want you to discuss. But you have been unwilling, thus far. This is not the complicated matters of interpreting prophecy, this is the basic doctrines of a false religion. You have refused.
For instance, you cannot support your organization's pre-baptismal requirements Scripturally. You haven't even claimed to be able to, much less demonstrated your claim. It seems that this basic doctrine should be able to be established in very short order by someone of your self-assuming brags.
There is a verse that recommends the gathering together of those who have an entry into the holy place by the blood and flesh of Christ. You can't explain to anyone why that verse should also apply to unbaptized persons. (Hebrews 10:19-25) I doubt you can even explain why it should apply to those who are not members of the body of Christ.
You cannot explain how a man who had less than 200 Greek words spoken to him qualified for baptism, along with his whole household, per JW "requirements", much less qualified for receipt of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 10:34-43) He did not have a lengthy bible study, or attend a single meeting, or preach to anyone, or confirm knowledge of the condition of the dead, etc. to congregation elders, or even retire from his position as an officer in the Roman army. But he got baptized immediately. His family did not preach, or attend meetings, or confirm their basic knowledge of the Bible prior to baptism, either.
You cannot explain how a man who formerly did not believe in God could qualify for baptism, along with his household, per JW requirements after only one late night conversation with Paul and Silas. (Acts 16:25-34) He did not have a lengthy bible study, or attend a single meeting, or preach to anyone, or confirm knowledge of the condition of the dead, etc. to congregation elders, or even retire from his position as a jailer of Philippi. But he got baptized "without delay." His family did not preach, or attend meetings, or confirm their basic knowledge of the Bible prior to baptism, either.
You cannot explain how a man was qualified for Christian baptism after a brief conversation about the book of Isaiah and Jesus' fulfillment of prophecy, despite not attending a single meeting, not preaching to a soul, and not proving knowledge of basic Bible doctrine to a single person. (Acts 8:26-40)
You cannot explain how 3,000 in one day could be qualified for baptism when none had attended a meeting, preached to anyone, or confirmed their basic knowledge to anyone.
And there is no indication in any of these examples of a specific vow of dedication in prayer.
But you seek to find solace in men's interpretation, and uphold one interpretation of prophecy as superior when the basic foundation doctrines are complete crap, not founded on anything resembling Scripture. The basic doctrines, like the lofty interpretation of prophecy you so highly regard, are nothing but men's thoughts. (Psalm 146:3) Who are you trusting?
I hope you snap out of it and see what it is you are holding up to people as something to admire. It looks like a pile of crap from where I'm standing.