Do JWs still believe in 1914? (page 10)

Mad Dawg

In regards to pegging the date 1914, DJ said:

Betty Davis was nominated for an Academy Award in the "Best Actress" category for her work in the movie "All About Eve," and her last Oscar nomination in this same category occurred 12 years later when she was nominated in the movie "What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?"

Well said, DJ. The key to your statement is that there is an "anchor date" (1950) from which to count forward 12 years. Please list the verse that gives the anchor date for the Scriptures. As far as I know, there is nothing in them that pegs the Scriptures (particularly the Hebrew Scriptures) to the BC/AD timeline that we use today.

nugget

yes that shows you can quote the accepted doctrine but most JWs can't. You are also using the 607 debunked starting point that has already been discussed and proved to be erroneous. You have shown here what you understand and are not showing what JWs understand or what is accurate. I could quote all that myself if I needed to but the deathly hush at book studies when the question was raised indicates to me that JWs accept it without questioning it.

OUTLAW

EggNogg..

If you want to know about Pre 1975 in Watchtower World,you should ask..

It`s obvious you don`t know about that period of time..Making shit up doesn`t make you look all that smart..

..................;-)...OUTLAW

sizemik

EggNogg . . . instead of all that (whatever it is) you posted above . . . why didn't you just say . . . "we make it up as we go along" . . . and save us all that electronic loo-paper

OUTLAW

Sizemik..

Eggnogg isn`t part of the "We"..

He`s not a JW..

He`s a Bullshit Artist that pretends he`s a JW..

..................;-)...OUTLAW

The Finger

Djeggnog,

What I am saying here is that anyone that made statements that began with "because the faithful and discreet slave have had that Armageddon is coming in 1975..." or "considering the faithful slave has strenuously pointed out that because Armageddon will be here within the next few months...," or words to this effect, with predicates like "why not continue driving your clunker since there are only a few months left" and "why not forego replacing that old carpet when you know that only a little time remains" and "why would you be working overtime when it would be more prudent to be spending the next few months in the full-time service," may have been guilty of "adulterating the word of God" (2 Corinthians 4:2), even slander, in projecting beyond what they knew the faithful slave to have actually said, and so these elders might also have been guilty of "lying against the truth" (James 3:14) since the faithful slave has never suggested more than that the year 1975 marks 6,000 years of human history

It would seem from what you are saying that there were alot of appointed men in the congregations who shouldn't have been. Unyet these appointments come from the top.

What? At Jeremiah 1:6, 7, after Jeremiah proffered his being "but a boy," what did Jehovah say to Jeremiah? "Do not say, 'I am but a boy,'" Jehovah told him. 'I have chosen you to speak on my behalf, I have chosen you to speak for me.' "But to all those to whom I shall send you, you should go; and everything that I shall command you, you should speak." Back in 647 BC, Jehovah told Jeremiah, as we read in the very next verse: "Do not be afraid because of their faces, for 'I am with you to deliver you,' is the utterance of Jehovah." (Jeremiah 1:8)

You may have been "but a boy," a young man like Jeremiah, but you could have told those in the congregation that had heard these elders say such strange things in their ears, "Do not listen to the words of [these elders] who are prophesying to you people. They are making you become vain. The vision of their own heart is what they speak-not from the mouth of Jehovah." (Jeremiah 23:16) "Do not listen to the words of [these elders] ... because falsehood is what they [have prophesied] to you." (Jeremiah 27:14)

you made me laugh DJ.

djeggnog

@djeggnog wrote:

Betty Davis was nominated for an Academy Award in the "Best Actress" category for her work in the movie "All About Eve," and her last Oscar nomination in this same category occurred 12 years later when she was nominated in the movie "What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?"

@Mad Dawg wrote:

The key to your statement is that there is an "anchor date" (1950) from which to count forward 12 years. Please list the verse that gives the anchor date for the Scriptures. As far as I know, there is nothing in them that pegs the Scriptures (particularly the Hebrew Scriptures) to the BC/AD timeline that we use today.

How would you have been able to come up with "1962" as being the date when at this particular event -- the Academy Awards -- Ms. Davis was nominated in the "Best Actress" category, except by doing a bit of research? If you accepted the premise of the question, that it was 12 years after Ms. Davis' Academy Award nomination in 1950 that she was nominated for her work in the movie, "What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?" then it would be clear to most that that nomination had to have occurred in 1962 (1950 + 12 = 1962). This means that Ms. Davis received an Academy Award nomination in the "Best Actress" category for "What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?" in 1962, and you would know this based upon my mention of her "All About Eve" Academy Award nomination in this same category and the fact that I indicated in my post that the nomination occurred "12 years later, meaning after Ms. Davis' 1950 nomination.

This is exactly the point I was making as to dating when the events recorded in the Bible had to have occurred, for one need only do a bit of research and do a little math to determine when it was that a particular event occurred to be able to figure out the date when some other event recorded in the Bible must have occurred. It seems, @Mad Dawg, that, for whatever reason, you didn't really understand my point. I wasn't really talking about counting forward 12 years; that was just an illustration. I was really talking about how we can ascertain when a particular event occurred based on established dates on which we know other things occurred.

@nugget:

yes that shows you can quote the accepted doctrine but most JWs can't.... You have shown here what you understand and are not showing what JWs understand or what is accurate.

What makes you say this? Are you sure that out of 7,313,173 in the world that I am the only one that can explain how it is we arrive at the year 1914 when counting from the year 607 BC? What you are saying sounds rather incredible.

You are also using the 607 debunked starting point that has already been discussed and proved to be erroneous.

You are free to believe whatever it is you want to believe, but there is absolutely no one on JWN -- @Alleymom, @aligot ripounsous or anybody at all that thinks themselves able to prove scripturally that Jerusalem wasn't destroyed in 607 BC, but in 587 BC or in any other year that's out there -- that will successfully be able to debunk the date of 607 BC.

@djeggnog

poopsiecakes

Well hell, with all of these wonderful sports and cinema references you're using, who knows what this wicked world will bring about in the next 5, 10, 50, 75 or 100 years from now that will make everyone say 'phew good thing the end didn't come yet or we wouldn't have had [insert amazing performance here]'.

The Finger

Second, I would think that only someone retarded or someone completely unaware of how the world works (like a teenager) would have been persuaded to pay heed to such advice from anyone. I don't know why, but for some reason I've been assuming here that you were an adult in 1975.

Dj,

I have to admit I stopped laughing when I read this.

It seems kind of rude. It sounds like your saying my parents are retarded. Is that what you are saying?

OUTLAW

You are free to believe whatever it is you want to believe, but there is absolutely no one on JWN --

@Alleymom, @aligot ripounsous or anybody at all that thinks themselves able to prove scripturally that Jerusalem

wasn't destroyed in 607 BC, but in 587 BC or in any other year that's out there -- that will successfully be able to debunk the date of 607 BC.....@djeggnog

DjEggNogg..

There are Librarys filled with Books..That Prove your a Moron..

##############################################################################