Paradise Cafe Discussions - A Place For Bible Research And Christian Encouragement

A Discussion will be held at: http://www.theologues_dialogue@yahoogroups.com

AnnO'Maly and Wrench from Touch Stone will be presenting their research, opinions and views.

Hi! :wave:
I couldn't get the link to work:help:
I was thinking of AnnOMally just the other day...

thanks DDRLS:)
:peace:

Hi Willa,

It only brings you to the main log in page. I'm with jwtruthseekers on Yahoo, so I just needed to sign in and put 'theologue' in the search box to find it. If you're not with one of the Yahoo groups, I guess you must sign up. But then you must also register for membership of Theologue_Discussions.

I hope this info works.
Brendan.

Thanks Brendan,

When someone asks a computer question I get the :shocked: look.

designs

Hi designs,

I never even saw that you had started the thread. Assuming it was Willa, I didn't scroll up. I managed to get a membership on the forum, but when I read the general guidelines, it seems that the forum is run by JWs who are willing to communicate with non-JWs, but not ex-JWs. So I just hope that I am at least allowed to stay and enjoy reading the discussions, if not participating.

Regards,
Brendan.

All points of view are allowed if taken from a technical or theological position. In other words a Denomination isn't attacked but their positions can be. Such as the Vicars of Christ or the Return of Christ.
They try not to end each thread with 'burn in Hell heretic!'.:D

In the discussion coming up between Ann and Wrench the evidence pro and con of Jerusalem falling in 607 will be discussed. We'll see if it leads into the connected discussion of the Gentile Times theory and if some Church can lay claim to being the sole Vicar of Christ.

Fun, no!:read:

designs

Re: "...pro and con of Jerusalem falling in 607..."

A quote:

"...the Bible itself testifies that the 70 years had ended when the king of Babylon was called to account with the fall of Babylon in 539 BCE. Therefore counting back 70 years from that pivotal date would not bring us to 607 BCE and this invalidates the whole 1914 calculation.

No need then for lengthy discussions on who ruled when and for how long; all we need to remember is that Daniel refers to Jeremiah 25:12 which shows that the Society misapplies the period of the 70 years, making their whole argument and anything that is based on it invalid."

(from "Should you believe in the 1914 doctrine?")

http://uk.geocities.com/i_witnessing/articles/1914.html

:coffeeread: :whistle: :bubblegum:

...

Hi Guys,
I’ve been hopping from here to Shelter to get the full picture. So the discussion has not yet taken place! I’ve read the book The Gentile times Revisited by Carl Olaf Jonsson and loved it. I believe a man named Ralph Furuli argues the Watchtower side of it. The reader is at a loss to stay abreast of the technicalities involved in constellation movements and cuneiform writings etc. For the average reader, Don Cameron’s Captives of a Concept probably sums the situation well with its basic premise, that the ‘slave’ chosen by Jesus in 1919 because of their giving the proper food at the proper time is complete nonsense.

I think a lot has been written about whether the 70 years was the length of time of Babylon would dominate the nations, or the time that Jerusalem would be left desolate.

Brendan.

Another easy way to demolish the date 607: There is no scripture or any other evidence that tells us when the Jews arrived back in Judea. They could have arrived in 537 yes, but also any other year from 539 onward. So there's no basis to claim a scriptually pinpointed date for the start of the gentile times.

Hi Brendan,

Just a quick word.

AnnOMaly is an excellent debater and also Wrench. On Timothy Kline's site 'Pathways' some years ago, we were transfixed to our computers when Ann and Wrench discussed the 'heavenly woman' and 'the Jerusalem above'.

I think some kind of Internet history was made for the JW forums at that time as it went on for days at a time, thousands of people were reading and many, many pages on that thread.

This latest could be similar. If it has begun, maybe keep us informed?

Regards,
Tessa

Yeah, a million different and complicated things can be debated on this subject, which is great if you do it for the intellectual challenge. But the simple question for JWs is, is 1914 a date pinpointed by the scriptures? And the simple answer is no. Why? Because the fact is that the scriptures do not provide a date for when the exiles returned to Jerusalem.

It is obvious that if Jehovah had intended us to pinpoint the date 1914 he would have provided the scriptures to establish it without question. JW apologists such as Wrench arrogantly claim superiority over the evidence and overwhelming consensus of historians that Jerusalem was destroyed in 586/87 BCE on the supposed higher ground that they base their belief on scripture. What a deception. Their assertions about the 607 are not based on scripture but on man made ideas and counting pyramid inches.

Let no one think that this subject is so difficult that the question is still open. The deception is plain for all to see.

Because the Gentile Times is so tied in to the mentality of the Watchtower Leadership and the 'rank and file', F.Franz's words, it is important to have it dismantled systematically and Ann is studied enough on the archeological evidence and the scriptures to do it.

Take notes everyone.

designs
Former JW Elder

Sure, go ahead, I'm all for the systematic dismantling of it. Mark my words though, everyone will be dizzy by the time Ann has run rings around Wrench running rings around Ann. Wrench will create a cloud of dust and smoke and take the patronising and self righteous moral high ground that ultimately his reliance is on scripture over mere human and inconclusive secular evidence (watch this becoming more noticeable towards the end as his arguments get a little thin, you can expect an ad hominem or two as well). After much debate over prophecies and timelines and lunar observances and lines scratched on clay most will observers will retire early, deciding it's all rather complicated, and a few might even assume that if the evidence is that contentious there might be something in the WTS story after all.

As a positive suggestion, I'd suggest they start with the agreement that since it is a fact that the bible does do not pinpoint the year 607 (because it does not pinpoint the year 537), they might as well leave it out of the discussion. That way they can concentrate on interpreting the historical facts, not on interpreting the bible. :whistle:

Hi Tessa,

I haven’t been able to keep up with the discussion on TouchStone or the thread here either. It is a pity. I enjoyed The Gentile Times very much. The astronomical side of it was a bit beyond me, so I think Ann and Ray’s discussion might go over my head too. How are you doing with it? Do you think I’ll be able to keep up? Or are you asking me to keep an eye on it? I can certainly try! All their posts are in my e-mail inbox.

I’m not familiar with Ray’s posts; I never knew about TouchStone before. I know Ann a little bit. She was gone from Channel C before I got there, unfortunately. She still writes a rare post there, which is always worth reading.

Thanks for the background info. I never knew the original Pathways. I was a bit late finding out about forums and missed a lot of good stuff.

Regards,
Brendan.

Hi Brendan,

'All their posts are in my e-mail inbox.'
Given that it is a bit difficult for some of us to join 'theologue' I thought it might be possible for you to let us know how it's going - the debate.

Don't worry if you can't :)


Regards,
Tessa