I've said this before. Thanks Jeffro, AnnOMaly
What happened to Doug Mason?, I used to enjoy his comments and research
The Gentile Times Reconsidered (607 B.C.E.) -Part A1 - Jeremiah 25:10-12 Reviewed
by FaceTheFacts 259 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
AnnOMaly
problemaddict, I can't top Jeffro's 'Dummies' page. Great place to start.
johnamos, another of the 'growing-lawn-watcher's class,' I see. Welcome!
BroMac, Doug is OK last I heard. He's just very busy with other things at the moment.
-
BroMac
AnnOMaly
-
PSacramento
I never really paid that much attention to the NWT because I don't read it and find the translation overly bias to JW doctrines BUT I am curious as to how much difference there is between reading those passages in the NWT VS the NIV or the NASB for example.
-
Jeffro
I can't top Jeffro's 'Dummies' page. Great place to start.
I've renamed the page to 607 for Beginners. For readers not familiar with the for Dummies books, the old title might have seemed a bit harsh. (However, the address of the page has not changed.)
-
tornapart
welcome johnamos... great 1st post! Like the quote about Tyre and the 70 years. :)
-
Chevelle
Great discussion, minus the redundant insults.
-
Riley
After learning what the Watchtower taught prior to 1914, i have generally thought this was a rather pointless rabbit hole to go down.
I don’t think to read hundreds of pages and devote hundreds of hours to know they are lying.
-
TonusOH
The 607/587 debate remains relevant* because the WTS couldn't just drop that date, since it was tied to the 1914 predictions that Russell made. There is a lot that they can revise, such as the predictions themselves, which they modified to make it seem as if Russell was given direction from Jehovah, and which was a big part of the sales pitch for so long. But Russell's math needed the year 607BC to get to 1914, so they couldn't give in on that point.
I wonder, though, if that will change soon. 1914 itself is becoming an albatross for the WTS and no longer serves the purpose it once did, both as a recruiting device and as a way to keep the rank and file on tenterhooks. I suspect that they will ignore it and let it fade into irrelevance until they feel it's safe to discard it, at which point they'll gain new light about the 607/587 dates.
* Well, I mean that it remains relevant as a discussion point amongst JW supporters and critics. It serves more as a curiosity for exJWs and a defend-at-all-costs concept for JWs, at least for now.
-
Nikolaus
The discussion takes an interesting switch when you realize that the comment written 10 minutes ago is preceded by a comment written 10 years ago…