by Nathan Natas 138 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
nicolaou:
I don't think anyone is denying that it istaught (like a hoop to jump through or a box to tick) but I think the consensus is that no-one cares about it.
In principle that is shifting the goal posts (and many JWs being apathetic about it isn’t new either). In practice, I don’t think ‘scholar’ got the memo. 🤣
They are producing less printed content overall, so all of their doctrines are mentioned less than they used to be. Most of their video content is appeal to emotion.
'E'. B.I.T.E.
The 'E' part of the BITE model.
The printing era of the Borg is gonzo elonzo.
Now,,,all the Borg has to do is appeal to 'emotion' Enter the cringeworthy,,cheap videos with horrible acting.
And the nauseatingly inducing music playing in the background.
The business model is shifting. To televangelists. Appeal to ""emotional" propaganda.
The Borg had to consult with someone
....and with this new ""digital era"" they can manipulate doctrine and propaganda digitally..& scrap the printed material & .....save $$$ also.
Make up stuff as they go along and deny they even said stuff like "Jerusalem was destroyed in 607BCE,,we never said that""
By going digital,,,they can do this. Make "it" up as they go along & mislead people.
Jeffro
On the other hand, I have reconciled all of the relevant verses. The siege ended in July 587 BCE. Correct application of the dating systems consequently identities the start of the siege in January 589 BCE.
---
On the other hand for a beginning date for the siege against Jerusalem we see this:
Jeffro -27 January 589 BCE
Thiele- 15 January 588 BCE
Lipschits - early January 587 BCE
Finegan - 15 Jan 588 BCE
Steinmann - 27 January 589 BCE - Tuesday
Jones - 588 BCE 3416 AM
Jonsson -, January 589 BCE
scholar JW
'scholar':
On the other hand for a beginning date for the siege against Jerusalem we see this:
Jeffro -27 January 589 BCE
Thiele- 15 January 588 BCE
Lipschits - early January 587 BCE
Finegan - 15 Jan 588 BCE
Steinmann - 27 January 589 BCE - Tuesday
Jones - 588 BCE 3416 AM
Steinmann is also correct. Good on him. The selected sources that incorrectly place the end of the siege in the wrong year also have the wrong year for the start of the siege. No surprises here.
(Great citations by the way. 😒)
Jeffro
Steinmann is also correct. Good on him. The selected sources that incorrectly place the end of the siege in the wrong year also have the wrong year for the start of the siege. No surprises here.
--
The matter is further complicated by debate about the length of the siege of Jerusalem. Further, I have just accessed the book by Robb Andrew Young who supports 587 BCE rather than 586. In his study on page 21 he states "The correct date of 587 BCE for the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem is substantiated by examination of the exile of Jehoiachin".Then in the very next paragraph, he begins "It is thus preferable, in my opinion, to date the fall of Jerusalem to 587 BCE".
Methinks rather an odd comment considering he discusses the subject at some length of som 4 pages with extensive footnotes.
scholar JW
Not odd at all. Young correctly indicates that it was 587 BCE, provides reasons, and concludes that it is therefore the preferred position despite some other sources still using the incorrect 586 BCE. Only odd thing is your inability to process information.
Jeffro
Not odd at all. Young correctly indicates that it was 587 BCE, provides reasons, and concludes that it is therefore the preferred position despite some other sources still using the incorrect 586 BCE. Only odd thing is your inability to process information.
--
What is odd is that you are unable to recognize the difference between an opinion and dogmatism. The fact is that as with your contrivance as with Young's discussion, both are based on some assumptions hence an opinion.
scholar JW
Its like this 2 class system of salvation the Borg clings to. They cant " scrap it".
The blood doctrine.
The shunning policy..
& Not but definitely NOT least. The 2 witnesses rule.
If they ''scrap" ANY of the above. The Borg collapses.
Same with the 587 & 1914 date tied to it. Thats the fine thread holding it all together. Its like having a knit sweater. If you start taking the "thread" out,,, your sweater is shredded. Torn to bits.
If they ''scrap" ANY of the above. The Borg collapses.
I think they can announce New Light on any of those issues "above" and the majority of the R&F will just smile, nod, give praise to the Lord and the GB, and go right along as normal. (See below.) Nothing is going to "collapse".
Sure, you might have a little fallout, but by and large, people here think too much. There are not any "thinkers" (or at least not many) still in. The PIMOs might quietly bitch a little, but they will remain as PIMOs because it is to their advantage to continue to do so (or else they'd already be POMO).
