Wrong date

by tattoogrl333 44 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hawkaw

  tattoo,

  May I suggest you ask your little bible friend how many secular dates are in the bible? (Answer will be none)

  So the next question is .... So how did they come up with 607 BCE????? (Answer some secular authority will be given for the coming back of the Jews on ta certain date)

  Next question what do these same secular authorities say about the date of the fall of Jer.?

  Just a thought.

  I highly recommend you thoroughly research this.

  AlanFs stuff is great at ( http://www.geocities.com/osarsif/index2.htm

  hawk
• 

  rem

  Tattoogrl,

  No - hardly any witnesses at all know about the incorrect date or the Society's explanation of Babylonian history. This was the issue that made me see that the Society is extremely dishonest. There is no argument for 607 being the date for Jerusalem's Destruction. There is very much evidence for the 586/587 date and absolutely none for 607.

  The Society knows they are wrong about this issue, but it is extremely important to them for 607 to be correct because otherwise their 1914 chronology is all wrong. If that is all wrong, then they have no claim to be god's special organization or the "faithful and discreet slave". They are extremely dishonest in that they try to discredit modern scholarship on this issue but cannot show any evidence in their favor.

  Most witnesses don't even know about this issue due to the fact that witnesses don't usually look up sources outside of the Society's publications.

  rem

  "Most people would rather die than think; in fact, they do so."
  ..........Bertrand Russell
• 

  tattoogrl333

  why would I would come to a Jehovah witness site and pretend to be studying? Fortunately I do not find life that boring!!! I realize that the lady I am studying with is not the strict uptight JW that others on this site seem to be talking about. Which is one reason why I am somewhat confused. Although I know everyones stories are real I just find it hard to see the shunning and strict rules that others have experienced. Although I have sensed some coldness by the male members.
• 

  Fredhall

  Tattoogrl333,

  Just look at these fools. They are not trying to help you to get everlasting life. The person who is studying with you is.
• 

  humble

  Since the fall of Babylon date has been confused by many and cannot be confirmed (some think it was 586, others 587, even some sources put at about 605 BCE), then we have to use a date that pivotal date (a confirmed or that historical sources agree as accurate). That date is the year that Babylon was taken by Cyrus, which is 537 BCE. Prophecy foretold that the Jews would be in captivity from the Babylonians for 70 years. The Jews were taken captive when the Babylonians took over Jerusalem. So if you subtract 70 years to the pivotal year of 537 BCE, you come up with 607 BCE as the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians.
• 

  RunningMan

  The JW's got themselves into a bit of a bind over the 607 BC date.

  607 is the starting point for the beginning of the gentile times. If
  the date was adjusted to 586, then the gentile times would have
  ended in 1935, which was a completely inconspicuous date.

  Overall, the 607 thing is a central error in their doctrines. In fact,
  the 1914 calculation is one of the only completely unique doctrines
  that they have. If it is wrong, they have very little claim to
  God's direction.

  Stick to your guns on the date problem. You have them cold.

  If you need some technical information to refute them, I have
  a document that I saved a while back that is very useful.
  Send me an e-mail if you are interested.
• 

  Fredhall

  Amen Humble!
• 

  Fredhall

  RunningMan,

  1935? If so, that means we are still in the last days.
• 

  drahcir yarrum

  Tattoo:

  Just look at Fred. Doesn't he look like something from a bad nightmare. His utterances are from the demons (if there are such things). Fred wants you to be as deceived as he is. Misery loves company. I don't know him, but based on first impressions of his comments I'd bet he is smarmy.

  What I'm going to tell you isn't really my thing, but if you are trying to determine a Christian religion to commit to, I've always been intrigued by the notion of a personal confession of Jesus as your savior. No church, no works, no muss and no fuss. Just a scripturally supported salvation with no strings attached. There's just something freaking refreshing about it. I'm not there, but I understand those who are.
• 

  Moxy

  lol@fred. think about what you just said.

  tattoo: sorry to offend. i dont mean to imply that you are pretending. this sister who is studying with you seems very irregular as witnesses go. your comments indicate that you understand that to be true as well. dont take anyone's word for anything about the 587/607 dates. check it all out for yourself. check out what humble says and see how compelling it is under scrutiny.

  mox