The title. Is it a good translation of the Bible or am I significantly better off looking for other translations?
This was a rather bold statement given by my Bible study teacher. We were studying the "Enjoy Life Forever!" Book and looking over a chapter about 1914. When we got to the part about Jerusalem's destruction, he immediately told me that some people disagree with 607, saying it's a different date (you know, 587 b.c.e?) and that those who had the "facts and research" were like people who believe the Earth is flat. I'm dead serious, he compared scholars who agree that Jerusalem fell in 587 to conspiracy theorists.....
In conclusion, before we moved on to the next chapter, he states this "if you look around, you know, look at the Bible scholars, almost all of them agree that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607, it's widely accepted, that really is something to think about". He boldly states this without giving any evidence or peer-reviewed studies to support this, wow, I'm absolutely convinced the JWS have the truth...😑
Firstly this work is noting new and is mostly a collation of the excellent research in the Gentile Times Reconsidered and various Doug Mason articles.
I have extracted all the bible quotes and references relating to the destruction of Jerusalem and the claims made by the Watchtower, disproving each of them using only the bible.
I'm a never-JW and I wrote this for my fully-PIMI wife, but she refuses to read it or even let me go through it with her, so I thought I'd share it here and maybe someone can get some use out of it, especially for those trying to convince someone around this topic and want some bible only arguments. I've attached a link to the doc here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/toibnj1t2zicr1n/Jerusalem_Destruction_Bible_Investigation.docx?dl=0
I've also attached a link to all my PDFs relating to the subject that some of you may find interesting. Included in it are a collection of screenshots I took using astronomy software mapping some of the observations found in VAT 4956 to both the year 568 and 588, further disprving the claims of the WT.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fwo15fsnx1e4j87/AADE-n36K4ohwjOplp9Idg_6a?dl=0
Apparently the extent of Greek influence in the HB is a few words in Daniel. Why wasn't it deeper?
If the Bible is truly the basis of INC's doctrines, and the importance of having a church administration is one of its key doctrines, then why is it silent on how leadership is passed from James to his successor?
Unless, of course, they just made up their doctrine of succession to keep the Manalo business a family business.
Can anyone answer this?
