why i do believe in 607 (page 2)

ThatSucks

:: perspicacia: About the Pharisees, the oral traditions was more important of
bible. That's why i do not think it's a good compare.

If this means what I THINK it means, than I think the reasoning is less than sound because what we consider 'the Bible' today is a collection of oral traditions itsself. The WT literature is nothing but the written traditions of JWs, everchanging as they are. The Pharisees' traditions were based on biblical canon, as is WT literature. That's why it is a good comparison, IMO.

Edited by - ThatSucks on 17 June 2002 12:36:26

Farkel

Frank,

: If the WTBTS will say that, they will have to explain it.

Yeah, we're all VERY familiar with their "explanations." Their explanations always have five parts

1) Blame the rank and file for speculating

2) Never admit that they were the ones who taught the doctrine the whole time it was in existence and forcibly expelled any member who challenged their explanation.

3) Introduce the new understanding they just pulled out of their asses.

4) Congratulate themselves and tell everyone how wonderful they are.

5) Introduce a new book on the matter and get braindead dubs excited to sell it.

5a) Quietly let the old books on the subject go out-of-print and hope no one notices.

Their major "new light" always gets revealed like this: "Over the years, some zealous brothers have speculated about the date 607 B.C.E. as being the start of the Gentile Times, some even go so far as saying that the 2,520 year period from 607 B.C.E. terminated in 1914 C.E. as a fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy in Daniel chapter 4. However, we bring a 'heart of wisdom' into the matter and through careful study of the scriptures have discovered that....blah, blah, blah, bullshit, bullshit, bulshit, blah, blah, blah, more bullshit.....even more bullshit, blah, blah, blah."

Farkel

ThatSucks

:: perspicacia: I will not leave the BORG because i know they are imperfect men
and they can make mistakes.

Funny how you won't leave the BORG because you know they are imperfect men and they can make mistakes, yet it's interesting to note that you condemn the adherents to catholicism to eternal destruction because of the mistakes they have made in the past. Were the catholic adherents not simply imperfect men who made mistakes also? Is the only difference between imperfect catholic adherents and imperfect witness adherents is that one is a witness and the other is not? Does this not show some undue bias on your part? Who are you to 'judge'?

:: DO NOT CONFOUND LOYALTY WITH PERFECTION.

And why not? YOU have to confound loyalty with perfection to accept a bunch of men in brooklyn, ny as 'God's sole channel of communication to mankind', so why shouldn't anyone else do the same? That wouldn't be because they are referring to the GB of JWs in a bad light would it? Does this not show some undue bias on your part? Again, who are you to 'judge'?

hillary_step

Hello perspicacia2,

Can we presume that you have read Carl Jonnson's 'Gentile Times Revisited'?

If so, can you explain why you feel that the numerous lines of evidence that he presents in this book, one of the most well researched on the subject that I have ever read, are incorrect. We are all aware that the Biblie is not a book of chronology and that it contains very few dates, inclusing 607BCE or 587BCE, so dates need to be resolved on body of evidence.

The WTS have never seriously attempted to challenge Carl Jonnson's research. The closest they come to challenging him, is to forbid, upon risk of disfellowshipping, persons like yourself from reading his findings. What do you think is contained in this book that needs to be kept from the view of Jeohvah's Witnesses? Many 'lurkers' who are JW's visit this site and it would be good to get all this out into the open for them to see.

Surely perpicacia2, you can see that something is seriously amiss here.

Best regards - HS

AlanF

Perspicacia, you're suffering from "my religion right or wrong" syndrome. Not only is that attitude condemned by the very Bible you claim to go by, but by the very organization you worship -- as long as the sentiment does not apply to them.

In short, you're a hypocrite.

AlanF

Fredhall

AlanF,

A person can go a long way when he or she refers to the Bible. It is to sad you cannot say that for yourself.

Farkel

Freddie,

: A person can go a long way when he or she refers to the Bible

Usually such a trip involves men in white suits and jackets will VERY long sleeves.

Farkel

Fredhall

Farkel,

Unlike you, I'm not wearing a dress you sexy white boy.

perspicacia2

Hello Step,

YOU WROTE:
Can we presume that you have read Carl Jonnson's 'Gentile Times Revisited'?
If so, can you explain why you feel that the numerous lines of evidence
that he presents in this book, one of the most well researched on the
subject that I have ever read, are incorrect.

Sorry, I didn't. All the informationas I have came from WTB ,
APOSTATE's web-sites and some Italian books.
Could you please give me details to order it ?

YOU WROTE:
We are all aware that the Biblie is not a book of chronology
and that it contains very few dates, inclusing 607BCE or 587BCE,
so dates need to be resolved on body of evidence.

<<the Biblie is not a book of chronology>>
Isn't it??!
Could you explain me Daniel 9:2, please ?

YOU WROTE:
The WTS have never seriously attempted to challenge Carl Jonnson's
research. The closest they come to challenging him, is to forbid,
upon risk of disfellowshipping, persons like yourself from reading his
findings.

HA HA HA! I've read a lot of apostate's books and i'm stronger
than ever. Maybe you are making a mistake or you think that
i'm a new one. You will never disfellowshipped to have read
a book, but you could in the moment you will teach something
you have read in that book.
You can even find something correct in some apostate's book,
as i did. But the correct thing to do is to discuss it directly
with governing body (as I did) and if the information is correct
they will confirm it (as per my cases).
So:
***********************************************************
it is the attitude and not the information that make the apostates.
***********************************************************
But this was not the subject of the thread.

So, for a while, let's forget the Jerusalemm fall.

- 539 is a sure date. (they say it is... or not?)
- 537 is the year of hebrews return. (if not please explain)
- back of 70 years we arrive to 607. (if not please explain)
- 70 years are a symbol of Satan's rule (I've different secular
books that makes this statement)
- also the seven times are the symbol of Satan's rule

If the 70 years started from 607 (537+70 ; without talking about
Jerusalemm fall) also the 7 times should start from the
same point. (if not please explain)

Could you please tell me what's wrong in the above statements?

Please take note that i will continue this discussion with you
only, because your words sounds good (sorry i'm not able to
explain what i mean in English language but you can check what
the others told me : <<i'm suffering of some syndrome>>, <<I'm hypocrite>>,
<<I elevated myself to a position of Judge>>, ect ect)

Regards
Frank.

Fredhall

Frank,

They can only explain from COJ book. LOL......

why i do believe in 607

Share this