When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed? Why It Matters - What the Evidence Shows

by wannabefree 224 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  breakfast of champions

  I'm at my one year anniversary of my 'awakening' and look what happens! More spiritual food at the proper time!

  Here's my 2 cents:

  After the 'overlapping generations' bullshit last year, people like myself said, Something ain't right here... and started researching stuff like 607 etc. only to find the whole thing is bogus. A complete fabrication.

  I think the bigger issue is with regards to the direction of the religion. With GB 2.0 at the helm and 2014 fast approaching, they had the chance to scrap all the 607/1914/generation gibberish and move on into the 21st century. We now know that is not going to happen.

  Wait and see. Articles such as this will be referenced in future magazines as 'proof' that Yes despite the seeming delay of Armageddon, Christ's kingdom has been happily puttering along in heaven for the past century - I've already heard this sentiment at the DC (although apparently no one else has) And if you doubt or question 607/1914 or the overlapping generation, we would be more than happy to disfellowship your sorry apostate ass.
• 

  diamondiiz

  garyneal: They explain the 606/607 with the simplistic no-zero year mistake. Problem is that Russell's understanding of 536BC was not what WTS teaches 537BC to be.
• 

  sd-7

  garyneal--If I recall correctly, the Revelation book states that simultaneously, the Society (1) realized there was no zero date and (2) found "further research" confirming the 607 B.C.E. date. In other words, they conveniently made two errors that cancelled each other out. However, no research has ever been provided that I have seen to explain why Jerusalem was destroyed one year earlier than they originally claimed. Given the reasoning used in this article, 537+70 = 607, there doesn't seem to be any reason to conclude that there was ever any such research done.

  But it would be interesting to sift through and see when the change was made, exactly. I wonder when the first occurrence of the change happened? Just shows how crazy they've made us, that I'd even have such a thought...

  But your point is a good one. If a scholar could prove that Jerusalem was actually destroyed 20 years earlier than all the other evidence and scholarly consensus pointed to, I would think such a person would not only want to present it, but prepare an ironclad case for it and even receive accolades for making this new discovery! He or she would hardly lose their job over it, if they had a competent case and could debunk any defenses of 587. The Society, on the other hand, well, it's holding up the house of cards. More of a foundation cornerstone than Jesus himself, although they'd never even be conscious of it.

  --sd-7
• 

  outsmartthesystem

  Diamond - All the society says is that they noticed that 606 less 2520 years takes us to 1915.....and "research made it necessary" to change the date back to 607BCE. Thus preserving the 1914 date. What they've never made known to the best of my knowledge is just what "research" was done that "made it necessary" to do so
• 

  outsmartthesystem

  Dammit! Sorry SD-7
• 

  breakfast of champions

  I remember reading the 606 date in 'Studies in the Scriptures' and thinking What the hell is this?

  Then through research found the footnote in the 'Revelation' book which basically said Oh isn't it just providential that we made two mistakes that cancelled each other out in the end. Tee hee!
• 

  Nobleheart

  It's troubling they come up with these articles. The average JW would definitely be impressed by the 'deep research' undertaken by the 'faithful brothers'. Most JWs can't even remember how the WT relates 607 with 1914, and they stick with simply reading the explanation from Reasoning or Bible teach appendix, so it'll go unnoticed by these.

  For a small group who's heard about the 587/586 date, this article would be 'meat in due time' to reaffirm in their minds how the GB alone sticks with the supposed Bible date, at odds with 'worldly wisdom'.

  Families with 'apostates' members would read this and go 'Aha, more confirmation he/she is wrong and we're right all along!'

  I can imagine a few JWs hoping that more archaelogical evidence eventually emerges to corroborate 607.
• 

  wannabefree

  garyneal: Bottom line, what do the secular scholars have to lose if 586/7 is wrong?

  It's not the secular authorities, it is Satan. I was talking with an elder about this the other day and he put Satan as the culprit behind the 586/587 shenanigan. Satan is blinding the minds and confusing history to deliberately mislead mankind away from the truth about 607 ... and he is doing a good job at it too.
• 

  breakfast of champions

  Oh that sneaky snake Satan!
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @sd-7:

  You wrote: However, no research has ever been provided that I have seen to explain why Jerusalem was destroyed one year earlier than they originally claimed.

  I found this in the revelation book. It references "The Truth Shall Make You Free" (1943, pp. 239)

  *** re chap. 18 p. 105 Earthquakes in the Lord’s Day ***

  Providentially, those Bible Students had not realized that there is no zero year between “B.C.” and “A.D.” Later, when research made it necessary to adjust B.C. 606 to 607 B.C.E., the zero year was also eliminated, so that the prediction held good at “A.D. 1914.”—See “The Truth Shall Make You Free,” published by Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1943, page 239.

  Does anyone have access to this book? It is not in the WT library, of course. MeanMrMustard