Since moving back to another town I've met up with an elder I knew from way back. (I met him coming out of a Salvation Army shop.)
He visited me at home a few weeks ago, and as I seem to be getting more comfortable at fading I invited him in and told him I was very concerned over the 607 bce. teaching and the U.N. debacle. I told him he needed to research these things for me and come back with answers. Didn't think he'd bother. He did. He gave me a mish-mash of WT articles and some stuff by Rolf Furuli. I guess I shouldn't have been surprised at his lack of imagination but maybe he felt obligated to return.
I figured that any reply I gave him would never be listened to so I thought I could write a short letter to him that avoided all the chronology but might get him to actually research the subject for himself. He had expressed doubt about some things in the past so perhaps considering my thoughts might be a litlle scary for him.
So, do you think the following style of letter might get someone thinking rather than defensive ??
Thanks for any comments.
THE 607 bce VERSUS 586/7 BCE DEBATE
Virtually all secular and religious authorities agree on the destruction of Jerusalem occurring in 586/7 bce. The Watchtower Society maintains that these authorities are wrong and the destruction occurred in 607 bce.
This matter of twenty years or so would seem to be a fairly academic matter at first glance.
The problem the Watchtower has with the accepted date of 586/7 bce. is that, if accepted as historical fact, then the calculation of the beginning of the Last Days and Jesus Christ's invisible presence would have to begin in 1934/5 ce. and not 1914 ce.
1914 is a critical year in Watchtower theology. The basis of Watchtower teaching centres, to a large extent, around the belief that mankind is living in 'the last days of this system of things'. The belief is that, with the outbreak of World War 1 in 1914, mankind had arrived at a point in history where Satan and his Demons had been hurled from the heavenly realm to the confines of the earth in order to wreak havoc with mankind 'for a short time' and then the destruction of the incorrigably wicked would occur at Jehovah's hand in the battle of Armageddon.
The longest lasting teaching with regard to this 'short time' was that a number of 'the generation of people who were at an age of understanding of world events in 1914 would be alive to witness Armageddon and live on into the new earth'. This teaching has been modified two or three times since 1995 and the term 'generation' has a somewhat looser definition than the seventy or eighty years that were originally accepted. (Compare the positioning statement change at the bottom of page 4 in both the Oct. 22, 1995 and Nov. 8, 1995 Awake's)
When there is a conflict between secular dates and Biblical chronology, the Watchtower will follow the Biblical line as being infallible. The Insight on the Scriptures Vol. 1 on p. 450 para. 1 says'..it is only when the secular chronology harmonizes with the Biblical record that a person may rightly feel a measure of confidence in such ancient secular dating'. This is a commendable attitude by Christians who view the Bible as the final authority on all sorts of matters. The Watchtower does admit, however, that even based on the Bible record there is room for errors to come in and explains this in the Insight book Vol. 1 p. 463 para. 1 when discussing a chart of the Kings of Judah and Israel; “The chart is not intended to be viewed as an absolute chronology but, rather, as a suggested presentation of the reigns of the two kingdoms.” After pointing out that the ancient historians recorded on the basis of facts and figures well known to them but not to us, the publication re-iterates; “...we may be satisfied with simply setting out an arrangement that harmonizes reasonably with the Biblical record”.
The problem, though, is that many learned men can and do read Scripture and come to varying understandings of what they have read. Many individuals claim Divine direction or guidance or inspiration in order to interpret what they read as the mind of God. The Watchtower makes claim to being the sole instrument of God, especially since 1919 and as such believe that they are specially directed toward correct understanding of Biblical Truth by Him. They claim that no other entity has this relationship with the Creator.
Given the vast collection of opinion, research and argument on this subject not just in books, tracts and articles but also on a myriad of internet sites, most ordinary people, without an academic background, are simply overwhelmed. They may well think that it's too complicated for them to figure out. (Compare Ec. 12:12). If you are one of Jehovah's Witnesses it is far easier to simply accept that the Watchtower Society must be correct and get on with life. If you accept the Watchtower teaching that 1914 is arrived at by counting 2520 years from 607 bce., then 607 bce. is the correct date.
If you don't agree with this statement then you are at odds with The Watchtower. The most cherished date in the Watchtower's short history is unquestionably 1914 ce. If this pivotal date were overturned in favour of another, then the entire chronology for the 'last days', 'this generation' and the choosing of the 'faithful and discreet slave' for example, would be rendered meaningless.
If you have faith that the Watchtower Society is, in fact, the sole dispenser of Truth, then you must accept that 607 bce. is the date of Jerusalem's destruction.
If you are unsure about who has got it right, then you open yourself up to all sorts of uncomfortable questions.
The bottom line is; no one can force you to accept one point of view over the other. Clearly there has been enormous research on both sides of the question. But in matters that require faith, neutrality is not usually an option. Jesus is recorded as seeing things as black and white when he said, at Ma. 12:30, “He that is not on my side is against me...”. I don't want to argue with Jesus, but, 2000 years down the road and after a proliferation of religious groups and individuals, I'd like to get out to the sidelines and think a bit more carefully about who or what to believe. Who knows, I might decide to not put my trust in anyone much at all.