When JW.org drops 607BCE...

by Nathan Natas 138 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Jeffro

  ‘scholar’:

  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.

  Notice how ‘scholar’ is unable to directly assess any specific premises and instead falls back to vague and incorrect assertions that ignore the actual content.

  It’s particularly amusing having a JW apologist complain about supposed dogmatism while simultaneously holding a dogmatic view that the Jews returned in 537 BCE rather than 538 BCE, based solely on it being 70 years after 607 BCE, which is in turn based on being 70 years before 537 BCE (based on an interpretation that contradicts direct statements in the Bible). And that contrivance is the linchpin of his entire world view. 🤣
• 

  Scully

  There are so many people who were Disfellowshipped™ for not believing that 1914 was a pivotal date in Theocratic History™ - people like our dearly departed Grace Gough, aka Mouthy, must be spinning in her grave at this upcoming nu-lite. The WTS needs to stop the practice of Disfellowshipping™, because they always - like the snake-oil salesmen they are - eventually change their tune. They justify their position, saying that the person Ran Ahead of the Organization™, and were therefore an Apostate™.

  I f-ing hate them for ruining family relationships like that.
• 

  TonusOH

  If they had the truth, and if this truth was indeed a beacon of light that dispersed darkness, they would not have to disfellowship anyone. Or even preach very often, since such truths would draw people to them.

  If god wanted everyone to be saved, they'd be saved. If you have to work this hard to get people to learn the truth, maybe you don't have any truth to teach.
• 

  Rattigan350

  "Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE"

  That is not what starts the Gentile times so why does that even matter?
• 

  nicolaou

  Scully; I f-ing hate them for ruining family relationships like that

  Fucking. The word you really want to type is 'fucking' Scully. I guarantee you'll feel so much better for using it. I'll join you in fact; "I fucking hate that cult for ruining so many family relationships."

  Gently purgative? Fuck yeah.
• 

  Jeffro

  Rattigan350:

  "Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE"
  
  That is not what starts the Gentile times so why does that even matter?

  Well of course it isn't (though I suspect your interpretation is equally wrong).

  The 'gentile times' (Luke 21:24; Revelation 11:2) began in 66 and ended in 70. The 'gentile times' has nothing at all to do with the Neo-Babylonian period.

  The JW (Adventist) interpretation of the 'gentile times' is a complete mess.
  
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  Ignore the 607 date and let it "fade" away and base all the 1914 Hocus Pocus appointment on the "signs" -- WW1, Spanish flu, etc
• 

  Phizzy

  D.o.C, they have been leaning that way for a while, the only problem with that, which they will have to ignore and still do as you say, is that the whole "End Times" thing then hangs on a thread, they have got away for years though with their Eisegetical interpretation of the words of Jesus about the generation that was standing listening to him, that generation died, and nothing had happened, the prophecy failed.

  Every other prophecy of the End Time is similarly time constrained, EVERY Bible Writer makes it plain he believed his predictions would come true shortly after the time he wrote them, all those predictions FAILED !

  But J.W's, in common with other "End Time" loving Christians, will ignore the proper interpretation and understanding of Scripture, so the tenuous claims of the Org. will still convince the gullible.
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  But J.W's, in common with other "End Time" loving Christians, will ignore the proper interpretation and understanding of Scripture, so the tenuous claims of the Org. will still convince the gullible.

  
  

  For most of the R&F, they don't have to worry about such "deep questions".