It is always best when topics can be debated so that all sides can have their say; so that opposing views can be aired and the reader can make his own decision based on all the available evidence.
Russell did this in his debate with Eaton on the doctrine of Hellfire.
We have written about and challenged many of the long-held beliefs of Jehovah's people. However, we have heard little in defense of these beliefs. While commenting does provide some give and take, a more structured format will be of greater benefit to the readership. With this in mind, we are encouraging anyone who so desires to take up a position on the opposite side of an argument so that we can present a more balanced and comprehensive consideration of these important and delicate topics.
These discussions will be posted in the permanent pages of this forum. The first has already been published. Notice the "Discussions" top;ic at the top of this page. Click it and a subtopic appears: "1914", and to the right, the first of the discussions under that topic, "Apollos and J. Watson". Click that to see the first discussion on 1914.
Unfortunately, that topic has not been as fully developed as we would like, so there is still much room for others to take up the position in defense of our official teaching. If you would like to defend our official position on 1914, please email me your submission at meleti.vivlon@gmail.com in an MS Word or plain text format. The purpose of the initial submission will be to present the opposing view, not respond to the assertions made in Apollos' initial submission. That will be done in round two, when both sides respond to each other's initial submission. Depending on the level of discussion, we can then move to one more response before concluding with a rebuttal, or we can go right to the rebuttal as the third step.
For this topic, here are the points that need to be addressed in any submission defending our official position from Scripture and history:
1: Nebuchadnezzar’s dream from Daniel chapter 4 has a fulfilment beyond his day.
2: The seven times of the dream are meant to represent 360 years each.
3: This prophecy applies to the enthronement of Jesus Christ.
4: This prophecy was given to establish the chronological extent of the appointed times of the nations.
5: The appointed times of the nations began when Jerusalem was destroyed and all the Jews were taken into exile in Babylon.
6: The 70 years of servitude refers to 70 years in which all the Jews would be exile in Babylon.
7: 607 B.C.E. is the year in which the appointed times of the nations began.
8: 1914 marks the end of the trampling of Jerusalem and therefore the end of the appointed times of the nations.
9: Satan and his demons were cast down in 1914.
10: The presence of Jesus Christ is invisible and is separate from his coming at Armageddon.
11: The injunction against Jesus’ followers getting knowledge of his installation as king found at Acts 1:6, 7 was lifted for Christians in our day.These discussions will follow our forum's rules on commenting etiquette, so we will endeavor to be respectful, but truthful and above all, our arguments must be based in Scripture and/or historical facts.
The gauntlet has been thrown down; the invitation is open.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by Steve on 2013-04-23 23:44:27
At this point I only quickly read through the debate. I plan to read it again tomorrow.
It is stunning how much the JW argues by reasoning without evidence. He makes numerous unsubstantiated assumptions in putting fourth his case. Of course I did this myself in my younger years, but this was prior to having truly studied the scriptures and experiencing the rebirth.
Steve
Comment by junachin on 2013-04-24 14:13:03
I think it would be good to specify somewhere that Apollos vs. JW does NOT mean Apollos versus Jehovah's Witnesses, but rather versus someone whose initials are JW.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-04-24 14:34:19
Good point. JW is the alias used by J. Watson, one of the commenters on the site. I'll make a note of that in the discussion header.
Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-04-24 14:45:05
Yes. Thank you junachin. I should have thought of that. It would certainly have given the wrong impression.
Comment by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-04-25 00:06:30
I have come to realize that one disadvantage to discussion on a page rather than a post is that there is no commenting provision. So in the future, I'll make sure there is a post introducing each discussion to provide a means for readers to add their comments.
For example, I have a comment for this post. Reading J. Watson's submission and rebuttal, I noticed that she is accepting 607 B.C.E. on the basis of Scriptural rather than secular evidence. However, 607 B.C.E. is based on secular evidence. We accept 539 B.C.E. as the date of the fall of Babylon because it is a date the majority of scholars agree upon. There is no Scriptural support for 539 B.C.E., only secular support. So the question is, since we have two dates that are supported secularly--587 and 539 B.C.E.--why accept the one and not the other? Why not accept 587 B.C.E. and then count forward 70 years to get the time the Jews were freed. You still have your Scriptural 70 years. And you end up with 1934? Hey, it even makes more sense from the stand point of Satan being ousted from the heavens and coming to earth with great anger. It gives him five years to bring about the second world war.
More fun with numbers!
Comment by on 2013-04-28 03:04:32
Are you serious about about biblical historical facts Meleti. Some like to debate, I prefer proof about any biblical or historical subject. Lies by their very nature are bound to perish.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-04-28 07:36:11
Very serious. We have provided Biblical proof for our position on 1914. As for historical proof, all that exists for either side of the argument are the conclusions of secular scholars. There is no means of dating the year of the Babylonian exile from Scripture. So we have two dates on which the majority of scholars agree: 539 and 587 B.C.E. The question arises, why do we choose 537 B.C.E. and count backwards to get 607 and not instead choose 587 and count forward 70 years to get 517 B.C.E. The latter would give us 1934 as an end date. I'm not prompting that as a fulfillment of Bible prophecy, because there are many other factors that discount this whole line of reasoning, but for a moment, just consider it as if everything else about our interpretation about Nebuchadnezzar's dream were true and the only thing left in doubt was the start date. 1934 is a much better candidate than 1914. It gives the Devil five years to work out his rage at being cast down, which coincides with the greatest single war of history. We could say that Jesus inspected the temple from 1934 to 1942. We became Jehovah's Witnesses in the 30's. We "properly" identified the wheat class by determining who the great crowd of other sheep where. And Rutherford died, removing an autocrat and freeing us from creature worship. After his death, author's names no longer appeared on the publications and the modern Governing Body arrangement was set in place.