Posts by MeanMrMustard

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

Imagine a biography about John. In the biography, in response to a question about after dinner activities, John's grandmother says:

"John will clean the kitchen, and the family will take a walk for 30 minutes."

Employing scholar's method of "exegesis", clearly (because John is the main subject by context - his biography), this should be understood as John cleaning the kitchen for 30 minutes while simulateously taking a walk for same amount of time. And even though the next paragraph in John's biography lists each family member on the walk (some 20+), the writer definitely didn't mean it as family, but rather the main subject (John) only on the walk.

Also, there is no way John could start cleaning 15 min into the walk, as it's not the family, but John only, it's all 30 min.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

According to you. But the Bible says 70.

The Bible says 70 years of servitude of nations (plural). You are attempting to make an equivalence between "70 years" and "desolation". It's nowhere in the Bible, especially Jeremiah 25:11.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

Utter nonsense. The text is quite ambiguous according to scholars and commentators for a number of translations into English are possible based on the Hebrew text. The immediate context proves that the subject in view is not Babylon or the nations but Judah.

Pure delusion. I invite everyone to go to biblegateway.com, type in Jerimah 25:11. At the bottom there is a link to view the scripture in every English translation they have. All of them... ALL.. render the verse this way. I'm sure you can find a "version" out there that renders it differently, but it's not a translation, it's some version that inserts preconceived ideas into the text.

And this is the trouble JWs find themselves in here. The prophecy originated in Jerimiah, and Jerimiah was painfully clear. The grammar used is so clear that just about every translator that's ever given this verse a shot has rendered it as two separate thoughts (in one way or another). And then for good measure Jerimiah starts to list off the nations to which the servitude would apply (v 18). And then goes into what the servitude means in chapter 28 (and it's not strictly desolation and exile).

This is simply your opinion for I would argue that the 70 years of servitude and desolation apply both to Judah and the nations.

Yes. Yes you would.

Grammar won't help you because the text as it reads is ambiguous so you have read this verse in context and the subject in focus is the Land -Judah.

Flawed logic. It's very similar to the "during every birthday in the Bible something bad happened, therefore birthdays are bad" type of logic.

Servitude or 'serving Babylon under Neb's reign took different two different forms , first , one of vassalage under a present monarch and an Exile whereupon the Monarch was deposed and forced into Exile to Babylon.

Right. And because it's 70 years of servitude (even applying to other nations), the Exile fits quite well with the official historical data. But not 607.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

Sure it is. That is what the verse says. Jeremiah was applying God’s word in Leviticus and the irony of the curse for breaking the covenant.

The point is that the phrase "to fulfill the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah" in 2 Chronicles can't be applied to the language that wasn't in Jerimiah. Ezra was bringing together something from Leviticus, but that doesn't change the content of Jerimiah.

The land was paying off its sabbaths all the days it was desolate, until the seventy years (of servitude of the nation's to Babylon) was over (completed/fulfilled). This is in no way requires an equivalence of desolation to 70 years.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

To fulfill, or finish, 70 years. It's the same language. There is no equivalence there.

Read it carefully.

Note: Again, you are attempting to set up internal contradictions in the Bible.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

Daniel 9:2 — 2 in the first year of his reign I, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of years mentioned in the word of Jehovah to Jeremiah the prophet to fulfill the desolation of Jerusalem, namely, 70 years.

Right "to fulfill" or complete. It's not a statement of equivalence. Daniel, in the first year of Cyrus, was reading Jerimiah and knew it was 70 years of Babylonian reign. That reign has just ended, and he knew that the 70 years was over, and the punishment could be completed / fulfilled.

Note: if you read this as saying "Jerusalem was destroyed and the Jews were in Exile for 70 years" then you set up an explicit internal contradiction in the Bible, since Jerimiah's words were crystal clear. You sure you want to do that?

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

'And all this land will be reduced to ruins and will become an object of horror, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years". - Jer. 25:11, NWT, 2013 .

You will notice that there are four elements in this verse:

1. Land (Judah) to be desolate

2. Land to become an object of horror

3. Nations to serve Babylon

4. Period of 70 years

All of these elements are tied together in a single verse, ...

In the same verse, yes. But there are two grammatically independent statements, separating elements 1 and 2 from 3 and 4. Element 3 and 4 are in the second half of a compound sentence. Some Bibles render this verse with a separating semicolon (making the separation stronger than ", and"). Some some Bibles just make this verse two separate sentences completely.

The 70 years in the last half of the verse applies to the servitude. That's it. You can't push it back into the first half of the verse without breaking grammar.

To read this verse grammatically it states Judah would become desolate, an object of horror. (THOUGHT ENDS, NEW INDEPENDENT CLAUSE) The nations would serve Babylon 70 years.

As for context - ch 15, v 18 - "as it is this day." The servitude had already started at the time of the writing of Jerimiah 25.

What does servitude mean? Ch 27 is pretty explicit, listing nations, and encouraging every nation that doesn't want to be destroyed to "bring its neck under the yoke" of Babylon.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

What they need is a young Fred Franz. Someone new, someone smart. Someone capable of spinning new doctrinal webs. Then perhaps there is a way of saying, "607 is wrong, and so is 1914, but in reality, we were right all along"...

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

70 years in Babylon.

70 years for Babylon.

God was punishing Judah for their sins same as he punished the northern kingdom. The prophets were sent to Judah with the message and restoration prophecies not to the uncircumcised nation although affected, Jerusalem was the target. I find no other way to interpret the scriptures than Judah spent 70 years in Babylon for idolatry and so the land could rest to pay back its Sabbaths. Archeology will vindicate 607.

Just read it grammatically. Just because Jerimiah was speaking to the Jews doesn't change the meaning of words.

Babylon was going to reign for a while. Judah was going to "serve" the king of Babylon, along with the other nations round about, for 70 years. It was highly encouraged that Judah accept this servitude. They didn't. So it got worse, in 587, a couple decades into the "servitude", with the final deportation and destruction of Jerusalem. The captives went off into exile to "fulfill" (Chronicles and Daniel) or complete the rest of the time.

Then as v12 says, when the 70 years ended, Babylon was punished/removed from power. But the order in v12 matters.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

MeanMrMustard

Exactly. Not just the King but the nation and its land became a desolate wasteland which clearly did not happen in 539 BCE with its immediate fall under Cyrus.

You just said "exactly" to my statement, and then affirmed the exact opposite. Just read v12 grammatically. The 70 years ends, and then the king of Babylon is brought to account, and then sometime after its made a desolate wasteland... on and on... That doesn't change the order.

JW version of the history of the period harmonizes well with Jeremiah's prophecy as later confirmed by Daniel, Zechariah and Ezra. Thus as you say, the 70 years of Exile or Captivity to or for Babylon ended in 537 BCE with the Return under Cyrus.

No, it explicitly contradicts a plain grammatical reading of the original prophecy in Jerimiah.