I seek concrete evidence.Explain it in a few words or post links that can contradict JW material.If 607 is a lie then 1914 is lie.
I want to know whether 607 is valid or not.
by XPeterX 157 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
-
JWoods
1914 was a lie because what they prophecied (the coming of Christ and the end of this system of things) did not happen.
That is all the proof you need that the related 607 was meaningless, and the chronology to get to 1914 was meaningless.
-
Titus
OMGJ
-
Soldier77
The research that mentallyfree has been doing at the library is most excellent. Follow that link MrsJones posted. It has pictures of the encyclopedias.
-
-
mrsjones5
another excellent link
-
leavingwt
Why examine the evidence? Just have 'faith' that WT is correct. Facts are helpless when confronted with the Power of Belief.
-
changeling
It's not. The WT is the only source that backs 607. All serious, scholarly sources speak of 587. There is no debate on this date.
I did my own research when I first left the WT. I started with the "Judeica" section in the bookstore because I figured the Jews would know when their main city was destroyed... From there I went to all books on ancient history I could find in 2 different, large bookstores. I also researched online using reputable historical societies and university sites.
Furthermore, I used WT sources that spoke of the line of ascension of different kings of the time (Babylonian, Egyptian...). When you do the math, you get 587.
The truth on this issue is crystal clear.
-
yknot
Wanna stump a hardcore JW chronologist......?
Ask him the history of the chronology itself!
Peter here is something to consider: 1874 was the presence of Christ officially until 1943.
1878 was the first resurrection until the 1930's when Rutherford changed the date to 1918 and retrodated everything under the understanding that holy spirit wasn't necessary anymore......yes the WTS was being guided by Angels.... angels who communicated with Rutherford!
1914 shifted to the 'entrhonement' in 1922 (I think, I might be off a year).
So if 607 is all that it said it is.....why all the shuffling?
Further consider that the man who wrote the 1943 chronology also wrote the 1975 one too!