586/587 the K.I.S.S. approach --- no VAT4956, Ptolemy, Josephus needed

by Alleymom 147 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  NOdenial

  This is the first time that I have read this thread.

  If I had this information 5 years ago - I wouldn't have had half the internal agonizing with leaving the borg.

  Great information Alleymom.

  NOdenial
• 

  bonnzo

  tried to read all the posts. goood info. insightful. than my eyes crossed and my head exploded.
• 

  donkey

  btt.. Alleymom rocked the WT
• 

  dorayakii

  I was stunned to silence at the simplicity and logic of your posts Alleymom. I can't express how grateful i am to have this simple explanation to print out and show to people who need to be reasoned with useing the KISS approach.

  The issue of 1914 being a pivotal date was always something that kept me from freeing myself mentally from the WT society. I reasoned that even if they got the event wrong, at least the date was right, and something big DID happen in 1914. I soon began to realise that the society just writes things to suit themselves so that they can decieve their "sheep" into believing that they are the only one's who have been chosen.

  As an example, let's say that in 1990 a religious man said that Bible prophecy indicated that the world would come to an end in 2001 and that Satan would battle with the Christ and the Christ would win. Let us also say that this man and his followers published this warning far and wide here in the U.S. September 11, 2001 would make this man a prophet even though the world did not end and the Christ did not visibly battle with Satan. Fundamentalist Christians would say that yes the "world came to an end" because the world we knew has ended and is now changed forever. They could also say Christ (Christianity) did and is doing battle with Satan the father of all evil and evil doers and 2001 marked the beginning of the last fight to rid the world of the evils of terrorism the last enemy to peace on earth.

  Although i'm not quite sure where you stand on the WT society IW, i sure enjoyed your analogy because it was something i was thinking of posting when i hadn't yet realised you'd already done it. Religions and cults have been choosing dates for Armageddon from far back in history. The WTS themselves have chosen many dates even before 1914. With World War One happenning in that year, they hit the jackpot and manipulated 1914 to add weight to their being "appointed over all of Christ's belongings". This claim is so audacious that i can hardly find the appropriate superlative adjective to describe it.

  This thread needs to be kept up, up, up so that newer ones can see it and forever abolish any guilt for disagreeing with the unscholarly and unreasonable WTS.
• 

  nicolaou

  I found this quote in the 1965 Watchtower Bound Volume and pulled it off the CD. As with page 184 of the 'Babylon' book it is useful as it presents each of the Babylonian kings from Nebuchadnezzar to Nabonidus in sequence and with their length of reigns. Just posting it here for reference.

  ***

  w65 1/1 p. 29 The Rejoicing of the Wicked Is Short-lived ***

  BABYLON’S

  LAST DYNASTY OF SEMITE KINGS

  Nebuchadnezzar was now growing old, and eyes began to turn toward a successor for him. By his Median queen Amytis Nebuchadnezzar had his first son, Evil-merodach. He had two sons-in-law, Neriglissar and Nabonidus. The latter was the husband of Nitocris, Nebuchadnezzar’s daughter by his wife of the same name. This marriage produced Belshazzar, who was therefore a grandson of Nebuchadnezzar and a great-grandson of Nabopolassar, the founder of the last dynasty of Semite kings of Babylon.

  Amel-Marduk (Evil-merodach) as the oldest son succeeded Nebuchadnezzar to the throne in 581 B.C.E. ....

  Evil-merodach reigned two years and was murdered by his brother-in-law Neriglissar, who reigned for four years, which time he spent mainly in building operations. His underage son Labashi-Marduk, a vicious boy, succeeded him, and was assassinated within nine months. Nabonidus, who had served as governor of Babylon and who had been Nebuchadnezzar’s favorite son-in-law, took the throne and had a fairly glorious reign until Babylon fell in 539 B.C.E
• 

  City Fan

  
  Nicolaou,

  Is there any chance you could paste the quote from page 184 of the Babylon book as well so I can compare the two. It's interesting that according to this 1965 Watchtower Nabonidus would have reigned for 37 years.
• 

  SeymourButts

  At the bottom of pg 183 of the book Babylon the Great: "Amel-Marduk (Evil-merodach) as the oldest son succeeded Nebuchadnezzar to Babylons throne in 581 B.C."

  pg.184 Babylon The Great

  "After reigning but two years King Evil-merodach was murdered by his brother-in-law Neriglissar. According to the inscriptions that have been found, this usurper of the throne spent most of his time in building operations and reigned four years. When he died, his son Labashi-Marduk, though not yet of age, succeeded him. He was a vicious boy, and within nine months he had his throat cut by an assasin. Nabonidus, who had served as Governor of Babylon and who had been Nebuchadnezzar's favorite son-in-law, now took the throne and had a fairly glorius reign till Babylon fell in 539 B.C.
• 

  City Fan

  Thanks Seymour,

  Looks like this too tries to assign a reign of 37 years to Nabonidus, even though this contradicts statements in the AID book and the quotes by Alleymom on post 2 of this thread.

  Here's a great article by AlanF which includes the difficulties that arise when trying to insert an extra 20 years to the reign of Nabonidus:

  http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/6040/gentile6.htm

  CF.
• 

  Dansk

  As there has been a revival of interest in this particular topic of late, especially by newer ones here, I am bringing it back to the top.

  Ian
• 

  blindersoff

  This is soooo powerfull. If one follows up with a Google for the fall of Jerusalem, how can ANYONE really believe the 607 date?

  B