DespicableME

LOL! Sometimes it's fun to see how the abysmally ignorant try to say something sensible.
The above is fairly typical: I certainly didn't say that to Scholar.
More abysmal reading comprehension on display.
AlanF

Nana Fofana wrote:
 
I thought last week's WT lesson might apply to why the land had to be desolated for 70 years despite Manasseh  repenting and being allowed to live longer and continue as king, even though-
The land did not have to be desolated at all, much less for 70 years. Do you not accept what the Bible says about this?
"'the nation that brings its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serves him, I will allow to remain on its land,' declares Jehovah, 'to cultivate it and dwell in it.'" -- Jer. 27:11.
AlanF

Both Jeffro and I have explained all this in great detail. The fact that you don't read it at all, or that you don't seem to retain what you read, does not change that.
As I've explained above and in the link I've given a dozen times, there were up to nearly six months for the preparation and the journey from Nisan 538 BCE. The journey was about four months, assuming that other biblical references to a similar journey can be used. That leaves nearly two months for preparation. And that assumes that the Jews were unaware of Cyrus' general practice of releasing captives, which they would have known of since Cyrus had been marching around the Near East for quite a few years. So they could have had a preparation time of up to seven months.
What do you think could not be accomplished in two to seven months?
Let's see that razor sharp Watch Tower trained brain in action!
AlanF

Free AS28! Free AS28! Free AS28!
He has done his time. He is repentant. And he manfully fights a disability. @The Librarian- The Americans With Disabilities Act compels you to act.
Come now - he is flawed, but the Assyrian is at the gates, taunting (boy, does he ever!) godly interests. The forces of theocracy needs him! - I am too dumb to weigh in. Few Witnesses are up on this stuff.
At least give him time for his glorious 'stache to grow back, then set him between the very pillars of peer-reviewed excellence, so he can bring down their house upon them.

I don't admit that yet. But this is a definite issue to watch out for, and it's easy for a double standard develop.
That's because the biggest reason to avoid banning people for as long as possible is that no moderator has time to look into all aspects of a conversation or "level of insult" in order to treat all sides fairly. I have others who create or share memes, for example, and I know that what is truly funny often includes that which makes us uncomfortable. Still, I have been much more offended by many of the statements and memes from others on this forum than having you tell me that I'm some kind of apostate who will be destroyed forever. (Also it's been a long time since you tried to say that in any direct way.) 
But it means that you will always carry the historical baggage of a time or two when you or one of your "doubles" appears to lose your temper. This is wrong, too, when there is no such thing as a fresh start, and you end up being told that you are walking on eggshells, so to speak.
However, I personally see a huge difference, so far, in the AlanF, scholar_JW dialogue. There was never a moment when this escalation seemed out of place or unexpected. It was not about temper. It was always about honest directness. Insult was part of the "style" right from the start, and it was accepted. In your case, I grabbed a few screenshots before they disappeared, and often purposely re-quoted some of what you had said so it wouldn't get lost, because I thought it was so over-the-top, but also out-of-place, and it lashed out at the person in abusive ways that wasted a lot of dialogue space when it was supposed to be about the topic. I think it was that combination that drew so much attention to your own style and drew many complaints from people who actually were on your side doctrinally, but didn't like the way in which you created an abusive, rabid image. Even so, you were allowed to go on for months without any repercussions, as far as I could tell. I think the moderators felt it was a matter of patience. (I get the feeling that there must be "real" moderators who also consider what is good for the site overall, and know that certain types of abusive behavior result in members leaving, and other types of colorful language and imagery are just considered part and parcel of argumentation.)
So, all in all, I don't believe you should have been banned, but even less so in this particular case do I think that AlanF should be banned. Even this particular reference to the word "excrement" refers to his opponent's argument, not the person himself. Also when the person himself is mentioned, it because of their own claims they make about themselves and of course, their method of argumentation. When a person asks to be judged on their own merit, they have to expect that judgment to be forthcoming.

From the 'Neil-Speak Glossary':
        Fact: /fakt/ : noun
        plural noun: facts
a thing that is imagined to be true but bears no resemblance to objective reality. post-truth, Trumpian, 'alternative facts'.  also commonly known as 'BS'.  

Ann O Maly
Your opinion is simply bluster lacking substance.
 
Yes and No. Their conversion had nothing to do with me for they related to us their experience in Hobart, Tasmania but the Hasofer's had always a deep and profound respect for the Witnesses. Regrettably, it was later after their deaths that we learnt that the wife had in fact been a baptised Witness which was never revealed to us.
That is your problem. I can only state the facts of the matter the rest is up to you.
scholar JW emeritus

Those 'greater minds' haven't benefited you any as far as scholastic honesty and integrity are concerned, unfortunately, even when your face is repeatedly slammed with the scriptural and historical evidence.
Well, that was a success story, lol.
Neil's heart-warming experience of how JWs helped an educated, professional couple convert to Judaism will doubtlessly be included in a forthcoming JWdotOrg Broadcasting production. You read it here first, folks.
The rest of your post is even sillier than your first paragraph so isn't worthy of comment.
Tap or click on the image, then tap/click again, then swipe or Ctrl + to enlarge? Your browser may need a cache clear-out and relaunching?

I must admit ... I do enjoy the dual edged bladed agenda driven conversions on this topic.
It reminds me of what author Stephen King said about writing one of his books ... I think it was "The Strand", where he had so many characters running around on the pages he could not keep up with them ... so he wrote in an explosion that wiped most of them out.
18 pages of debate to support something that may or may not have happened outside the physical Universe 100 or so years ago ... that was, or is invisible, to me (here comes a variation on one of my favorite expressions ...) is like milking a mouse because you need to make five pounds of cheese .... which has already been sold in advance.
That's a LOT of work !
So .... what's a simple Barbarian like myself to think with all these arguments and counter-arguments ...
I think I will make a bucket of popcorn! .... and watch the show!
Carry on Troops!

@AlanF

I obviously don't have any say in whether people are banned or not. I got a message from a moderator on two different occasions in the last two years asking whether I thought that you had gone too far with insulting and abusive speech and should be banned. My answer was always that you should NOT be banned, because the Internet is a rough and tumble world. Banning someone rarely does any good on the Internet anyway, as there are a million and one ways to get around it: make new accounts, map an account to a different IP address, use temporary email addresses that various services create to make this easy to accomplish, etc., etc. 
Any who venture into the world of Internet discussion forums must learn quickly that public statements will result in public ridicule even when those statements are right. It's up to mature people to distinguish right from wrong, even where someone's use of language might offend us. It's not always a pleasant experience for some, but as @scholar JW has indicated, he found this particular exchange enjoyable. It's an acquired taste. Expressive language, filthy imagery, even taboo words actually have their place in dialogue. I think it was pointed out that even the Bible does this, and the NWT 2013 Revised version explains in several of its footnotes that it has cleaned up some of this filthy or insulting imagery that appears in the original Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible.
 

@DefenderOTT
I know that you have already said (elsewhere) that you were not the originator of much of the post you offered above. Just to help clarify what you are saying, I noticed that the first four paragraphs are exactly what can be seen from a person who wrote this on YAHOO ANSWERS about 6 years ago. https://br.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20111008133433AA7SDXA Those are the 4 paragraphs that start and then end as follows:
Then you apparently added your own words in the fifth paragraph above:
Then it appears that you went back to quoting YAHOO ANSWERS, quoting the next three paragraphs, which started and ended, thus:
Then apparently you added your own words again to finish up the discussion.
I only went to the trouble of mentioning all this because I would like to respond at some point to those claims from YAHOO ANSWERS.
For reference, here is the remaining part of the quote that was found on YAHOO ANSWERS. Although it's mostly wrong, it's also partly correct, and it's well written, and I expect that the points will come up from time to time:
 

[I'm repeating here a post which is a response I just made to this claim about Armstrong, as it was moved to a new topic:]
And, don't forget that, in 1956, Herbert W Armstrong supposedly stole the idea from the February 1, 1955 Watchtower, which put the end of 6,000 years within one year of 1976:
*** w55 2/1 p. 95 Questions From Readers ***
In 1953 in preparing the chart that appears in the book “New Heavens and a New Earth” a one-year error was brought to light. By the aid of the New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures the difference between the two numbers appearing at Genesis 7:6 and Genesis 7:11 became apparent, especially since there are two different Hebrew words here maintaining a distinct difference. At Genesis 7:6 the number 600 referring to Noah’s age means 600 full years, being what is generally termed a cardinal number. Whereas at Genesis 7:11 the number “600th,” an ordinal number, means 599 full years plus a portion of another year. . . .  Inasmuch as previously our chronology considered Noah as 600 full years old when he entered the ark, instead of the actual 599 years and some months, as we now see, this has meant that the preflood dates must be shrunk by one year, this bringing Adam’s creation for the fall of 4025 B.C. Incidentally, Jesus, who became the second or “last Adam,” was born in the fall of the year around the first of October.—1 Cor. 15:45, NW. It is well to understand that all Bible chronology dates for events prior to 539 B.C. must be figured backward from the Absolute date of 539 B.C. In the sure date of 607 B.C. for the fall of Jerusalem we have an anchor for the chronology establishment of the important year of 1914. By an overwhelming number of physical facts occurring since 1914, this great turning-point year in man’s history, 1914, has been abundantly confirmed. According to Genesis 1:24-31 Adam was created during the last part of the sixth creative-day period of 7,000 years. Almost all independent chronologists assume incorrectly that, as soon as Adam was created, then began Jehovah’s seventh seven-thousand-year period of the creative week. Such then figure that from Adam’s creation, now thought to be the fall of 4025 B.C., why, six thousand years of God’s rest day would be ending in the fall of 1976. However, from our present chronology (which is admitted imperfect) at best the fall of the year 1976 would be the end of 6,000 years of human history for mankind, 6,000 years of man’s existence on the earth, not 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh seven-thousand-year period. Why not? Because Adam lived some time after his creation in the latter part of Jehovah’s sixth creative period, before the seventh period, Jehovah’s sabbath, began. . . . The very fact that, as part of Jehovah’s secret, no one today is able to find out how much time Adam and later Eve lived during the closing days of the sixth creative period, so no one can now determine when six thousand years of Jehovah’s present rest day come to an end. Obviously, whatever amount of Adam’s 930 years was lived before the beginning of that seventh-day rest of Jehovah, that unknown amount would have to be added to the 1976 date. Of course, just a decade or so later, the Watchtower began minimizing the amount of time it would have taken for a perfect man to name all the animals if Jehovah brought them to him in a steady stream. The flaw in this reasoning was that angels would surely know that amount of time that Jehovah had kept a secret, so they would be aware of the day and the hour "when 6,000 years of Jehovah's present rest day come to an end."
There is also evidence that Fred W. Franz, who wrote the article above, in 1955, began recalculating in the early 1970's and wanted to begin publishing October 1974 as the date for the end of the 6,000 years of human history. F.W.Franz, I am told, thought this would have strengthened the 1975 argument. But this was supposedly one of the few times when N.Knorr put his foot down and told him he had caused enough trouble with 1975, and that Knorr thought that this vacillation would actually weaken the faith that people put in the Watchtower.
You probably already know this, but to your point, many Witnesses had to be counseled not to listen to Armstrong's radio program, especially in the late 1960's and early 1970's when many Witnesses claimed that he sounded exactly like the Watchtower.

The chronology, interpretation, speculation   CAUTION The following discussion make reference to one of the "cornerstones" of the understanding of the "faithful and discreet slave". Since the author is not going to create a stumbling block for anyone, let alone create divisions, the reader is invited to consider carefully whether you want to read on. Continue or not to continue, therefore, it will only be a personal decision. An even better thing that we could do all: open the Bible and compare all the scriptures quoted or cited and evaluate, in conscience, whether its topics are logical and consistent with the Word of God         All you have read about the prophecy of the "seventy weeks" reported in the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy!" (Chapter 11) is worthy of attention and shows how the word of God is accurate and reliable even when ruling prophecies very distant in time. And 'historical accuracy was also evident and numerous scriptural references that gave weight and credibility to the whole matter. Anyone who approaches the Word of God without preconceptions can not help but be impressed by this demonstration of the power and wisdom from God. The explanation of the 70 weeks is beyond reproach, but can the same be said of other prophecies? What about those calculations on which many of us have based their hopes of a lifetime and who clashed with criticism of the majority? We are talking of 1914. This is also a prophecy of Daniel? This too was treated with the same wonderful accuracy of the seventy weeks we just read? Although it may not be easy, we try to be very objective because they understand or not understand the prophecy, like the rest of God's Word, can make a big difference for our eternal future - John 17: 3; 2 Thessalonians 1: 8   SAY THAT OF 1914?   The book "pay attention to the prophecies of Daniel" on pages 85 to 97 (italian edition) explains in detail the dream of Nebuchadnezzar and the prophecy of the seven times asserting it indicates the coming of God's Kingdom in 1914.
It would be profitable, therefore, take the book and compare with what you will read below.
The dream of Nebuchadnezzar actually prophesies the coming of God's Kingdom in 1914?   THAT'S IT'? Let's examine what is written in the book without bias. At first glance it seems that Jehovah God has wanted to give a lesson in humility to Nebuchadnezzar, which he did. The "seven times", at least for him, was seven years and this is confirmed by the whole story. Reading all this without bias, it does not seem that we have to look for other explanations more or less hidden. But let's take this argument that "the tree indicates a domain and a much more sovereign than the king of Babylon. It symbolizes the universal sovereignty of Jehovah, the King of heaven, especially with respect to the earth. " This means, first, that the Kingdom of God you are comparing, in a way, to the kingdom of Babylon and this contrasts with many biblical passages that describe Babylon as the greatest enemy of God's people. It also means that the "vigilante" (that is, an angel of the Lord) decides to overthrow the Kingdom of God and this is, to say the least, strange. Some will object that we should not look for similarities in every aspect of the prophecy but also to decide which part of the prophecy must have a second commitment and which not could be quite arbitrary. Basically we have no other scriptures that indicate there on what particular focus and which leave out. So you're saying that the tree prophecy applies entirely to Nebuchadnezzar, while only a small part would apply to the Kingdom of God. For the prophecy of the "seventy weeks," we did not need to break up the prophecy to try to understand who is applied or if they apply to more than one person because the subject was clear and very beginning. The whole prophecy of 7 times, however, is built on a single verse that is what it says ... " The tree grew and became strong, and its height it finally reached the heavens and was visible to the extremity of ' whole earth " (Daniel 4:11) The mentioned book says: "the big tree is the 'domain that reaches the ends of the earth', which embraces the whole kingdom of mankind. Therefore symbolizes Jehovah's universal sovereignty, particularly in relation to the earth. - Daniel 4:17. " There is a bit fragile, say risky, build a series of prophecies (all linked together) of this single explanation? Note that the specification "particularly in relation to the earth" is due to the fact that Jehovah's universal sovereignty is, in fact, universal, so the tree would have seen not only in all the earth but in the whole universe. By specifying, however, "in relation to the earth," we can rule the skies by the vision and take in the good application. However, we should ask ourselves a question. The fact that the tree reaches the heavens or the ends of the earth is a demonstration or even an indication that we are talking about God's Kingdom? We always leave it to the Bible to enlighten us. We notice what Jehovah said to Ezekiel in reference to Pharaoh. Ezekiel 31: 1-8 says ... "It occurred even in the eleventh year, in the third [month], the first [day] of the month, the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying:" Son of man, of 'Pharaoh king of Egypt and his crowd: " ' To look like in your greatness? Here, an Assyrian, a cedar of Lebanon, with beautiful branches, with thick shady ramifications, and a high height, so that its top was among the clouds. The waters made it grow; for the deep made him become high. With their current they went all around his plants; and sent their channels to all the trees of the field. So there was higher in height than all the [other] trees of the field. " ' And its boughs were multiplied, and its branches continued getting longer because of much water in its watercourses. Sui its branches made their nests all the flying creatures of the heavens, and under its twigs bore all the wild beasts of the field, and in its shadow dwelt all populous nations. It became beautiful in its greatness, in the length of its foliage, for its root system was on many waters. [Other] cedars not equalize in the garden of God. As for juniper trees, they had no resemblance to its branches. And the plane trees were not the same like the twigs. No [other] tree of God like him in beauty garden. " We note some similarities with the vision of Nebuchadnezzar? Both are compared to high and mighty trees. Both reach heights up to heaven in fact the expressions "reach the heavens" or "reach the clouds" are equivalent - Compare Job 22:14; Isaiah 14:14; Daniel 7:13 Of both of you notice the big difference with other trees. In both it is said that all the flying creatures and all the wild animals find food and shelter. Now, if we apply the principle that the tree that "reaches the clouds" must represent the Kingdom of God, then even the Egyptian empire should be an antitype of the Kingdom. Unfortunately, this story does not make any mention of "time" and therefore can not count anything. If you think it's ridiculous to think that the Egyptian empire will represent the Kingdom of God, why should it be acceptable to the Babylonian empire?   Jehovah goes on to say "For the reason that you became high height, so that it put its top even among the clouds, and his heart is exalted because of its height, I will give it into the hand of a despot of the nations" - Ezekiel 31:10, 11 The Pharaoh exalted, just as He did Nebuchadnezzar, and for this reason God decided to humiliate him - Matthew 23:12 Nebuchadnezzar escaped with seven years of madness while the Pharaoh's empire was besieged. This verse also emphasizes the fact that God takes away and "the kingdom to those who want" (and in this case he gave the kingdom to Pharaoh "despot of the nations"). Ezekiel 31: 12-14 continues ... "And strangers, the tyrants of the nations, cut it, and the people will abandon the mountains; and its foliage will certainly fall in every valley, and his branches will break between all the beds of the rivers of the earth. And all the peoples of the earth will come down from its shade and abandon. On its fallen trunk reside all the flying creatures of heaven, and its branches will certainly be all the wild beasts of the field; so that none of the watered trees may become high in height, or put her top even among the clouds, and because no drinking water is standing against them in his height, certainly as will all the data to death, to the earth below, in among the children of mankind, those who go down into the pit. ' " Although this tree is cut down and humiliated (Jehovah will do this through the king of Babylon). Because of the many similarities to the kingdom of Egypt, are we really sure that the tree "reached the heavens" refers to God's Kingdom?
  When we have to discuss  the 1914, we really like the Bereans? Or are we "Berean" only when we must refute the doctrines of Christianity?   There is another interesting detail which should give us pause. The Bible compares heaven to governments, be they human or celestial. Applying this concept to the tree that reaches the heavens and where other trees can not compete with it, would simply mean that this tree has a kingdom over other kingdoms (smaller) and Babylon the Great is said, in fact, who " a kingdom over the kings of the earth "- Revelation 17:18 The only legitimate parallel that you can do with Babylon, without fear of taking corners, is related to Babylon the Great because it is the parallelism that makes the Bible. In fact all the world empires mentioned in the Scriptures have had, for a time, a kingdom over other kingdoms. Cyrus claimed that he himself ... " I am Cyrus, king of the world, great king, legitimate king, king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of the four end (of the earth), son of Cambyses ( Ka-am -bu-zi-ia ), great king, king of Anshan, grandson of Cyrus . . . descendant of Teispe,. . . of a family (which) has always reigned. " ( Ancient Near Eastern Texts, edited by J. Pritchard, 1974, p. 316) Surely humility was not a feature appreciated by the Persians as even by the Babylonians but in fact the kingdom had power over other known kingdoms ( much to be called " king of the four ends of the earth") and then you could well say that its height he had reached the heavens and was visible or known to the ends of the earth. In the story of Ezekiel and that of Daniel there is no reference, no one, to the Kingdom of God but ... both reports mention a judgment from God on enemy nations, proud and violent. Any chronological calculation should respect the subject and in fact this part of Scripture is quite different from what is said about the "seventy weeks" - Daniel 9: 24-27 In the account of Daniel chapter 9 clearly speaks of the Messiah (see Daniel 9:25) and do not need to read what is not written. Anyone wishing to be controversial might discuss the starting date from which to count the "weeks" or even the alleged method * (one day for a year) but it certainly can not discuss the subject in existence (the Messiah). It could, ironically, even argue about who really was the Messiah (something which still discussing the Jews) but of course you can not argue that Daniel chapter 9 speaks of the Messiah! Instead Daniel chapter 4 speaks of Nebuchadnezzar and his kingdom, while all "the intention" for the Kingdom of God is built on four lines in the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy!" Read: "But the big tree is the domain that reaches the ends of the earth, which embraces the whole kingdom of mankind. Therefore symbolizes Jehovah's universal sovereignty, particularly in relation to the earth. - Daniel 4:17 "(Chapter 6, page 87 of the book Italian edition). It does not seem very strong statement with a very weak base? We try not to say to Daniel 4:17 that does not really say because you just know the basic rules of grammar not to distract from the subject. The subject is Nebuchadnezzar and God makes him understand that, due to the fact that he is exalted, would have removed the kingdom and would give it to whomever He had wanted (just as He did with Pharaoh). In practice, one who really governs is the Creator and the other kingdoms exist only because He allows it - Compare Romans 13: 1 So there is no reason to believe that the tree (that is, one of the many governments that Jehovah has allowed in the history of mankind), represents the Kingdom of God really is. If someone wants to suggest that the fact that God mentions His domain is indicative that the tree itself depicts your domain (and it's amazing stunt semantics) then we can take the story reported in 2 Kings 19: 14-19 and do the same reasoning. " Hezekiah then the letters from the hand of the messengers and read them, after which Hezekiah went up to the house of Jehovah and spread out before Jehovah. 15 And Hezekiah prayed before Jehovah and said: "O Jehovah, God of Israel, enthroned upon the cherubim, you alone are the [true] God of all the kingdoms of the earth . You yourself have made the heavens and the earth. 16 Incline your ear, O Jehovah, and hear. Open your eyes, O Jehovah, and see, and hear the words of Sennacherib which he has sent to blame the living God. 17 It is a fact, O Jehovah, the kings of Assyria have laid waste the nations and their country. 18 And they delivered their gods to the fire, because they were not gods, but the work of men's hands, wood and stone; so that they destroyed them. 19?And now, O Jehovah our God, save us, please, from his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth know that you alone, O LORD, are God . " Hezekiah knows very well that Jehovah was "the true God of all the kingdoms of the earth" and prayed that Sennacherib were stopped in his attempt to destroy Jerusalem. We know very well what was the response of Isaiah that last part says ... "Why is your turn you against me and your roaring have come up to my ears. I certainly put my hook nose and my bridle between your lips, And actually I take you back to the way by which you came "- 2 Kings 19:28 If we did the same reasoning alleged to chapter 4 of Daniel, then we could assume that the "Sennacherib" kingdom was a antitype of God's kingdom because he also had to learn (at his expense) that Jehovah is "the true God of all the kingdoms of the earth "or, in other words" rules over all mankind. " Alas, in this story there are no numbers, days, weeks or months to be calculated and therefore no reason to read "coming of the kingdom of God" even where it makes no mention. It 'possible that the strong desire to see fulfilled the prophecies influenced the intentions and then had driven to read what was really written? This means that, if we really want to see a second commitment to the story reported in Daniel chapter 4, you should respect the subject into being , namely Babylon . It is likely that the story of Daniel is simply telling the humiliation of Nebuchadnezzar and that the "seven times" mean only seven years, but we can not be categorical. In this regard it is worth reflecting on the fact that even the humiliation of Pharaoh, reported in Ezekiel, could have a second commitment as Jehovah says it "will shake the nations" and this could be a reference to the war of Armageddon. So, without staring too much of a specified date , if the story of Daniel had wanted to show us a second fulfillment of the prophecy, the report is actually saying, "Babylon will fall, it will remain inactive for seven days and then rise again." This can only bring our minds to the last mention that the Bible makes of Babylon - Revelation 17: 5 The clues regarding Babylon the Great took us to the nation of Israel so the question you should ask is ... "Since that year we should start counting 2520 years (ie 360 * 7) until you see the revival (if any) of Babylon? " From the story of Daniel the possible dates from which to count the seven periods of time are two: 1) Since Nebuchadnezzar had the vision or has fallen into "disgrace" (in fact, Daniel says "the tree is you" - Daniel 4: 20-22) 2) From the death of Nebuchadnezzar (if Nebuchadnezzar represents the kingdom of Babylon, his death is the moment in which the tree is "knocked down" but it is noteworthy that there is no reference to this in Daniel's narrative which, indeed, he says that the kingdom would have been assured - Daniel 4:26)   As for the first hypothesis it is impossible to have an accurate date because neither the Bible nor secular history tell us in what year Nebuchadnezzar was driven from his kingdom. This happened, of course, after 597 BCE (the year in which Nebuchadnezzar brings the first Jews prisoners in Babylon in accordance with the secular dating; there is a 20-year difference with that of the slave that, in fact, puts the BCE 617) and within the 570 BCE (when Nebuchadnezzar died in 562 BCE - according to the secular date - and the period of "captivity" lasts seven years, and the kingdom he is returned are deemed to have reigned for at least a year, the 570 is the last year helpful). However, in the first four chapters of Daniel are mentioned Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, first as children (Daniel 1: 3, 4) and then as strong men (Daniel 3:12, 27) and all this before Nebuchadnezzar to buckle the famous dream tree . This means that, by their deportation until the day in which the king erected the golden image, they passed at least 15 , 20 years. So if the Jews have come to Babylon in 597 BCE, but spend 20 twenty years before the construction of the idol of gold and having good outlet to the secular date (562 BCE), you can restrict the period from 577 BCE to 570 BCE Obviously they are only estimates but the important date is the maximum time limit (570 BCE) so if from deportation until the construction of the image had been 15 years instead of 20, the start date would be 582 BCE, but the last date useful as possible would always be 570 BCE Any revival of Babylon, if this is talking about Daniel, which is far from certain, would take place between 1943 EV (2520-577) and 1950 EV (2520-570). To reinforce this hypothesis there would also be the fact that the story of his expulsion is the last tale told Nebuchadnezzar. A few verses later, in fact, we no longer speak of him but of Belshazzar (Daniel ch. 5). It's reasonable to conclude, therefore, that Nebuchadnezzar had a vision in recent years, perhaps during the last decade of his reign.   The second hypothesis concerns Nebuchadnezzar's death and which occurs, according to the secular sources, in 562 BCE According to the slave is the case in 582 BCE (see the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy" chapter 7, page 99). Counting 2,520 years you get to 1958 EV in the first case and 1938 EV in the second case.   What about the recent history? If, as we have seen, Babylon the Great is the nation of Israel, this would indeed support the first hypothesis. The first hypothesis places the revival of Babylon between 1943 and 1950. The "resurrection" of Israel takes place, in fact, in May 1948. Knowing the fixation of human beings for dates and calculations, however, it is prudent to pay attention to more important things. The secular dates can not be safe, based on findings and comparisons more or less incomplete, and certainly we can not base our faith on this one - 2 Corinthians 5: 7 What would happen if the 597 BCE, as well as 607 or 537 or any other date on which we have based much of Bible prophecy (not that there was a real reason to do it) tomorrow will prove completely wrong? The consequences could be very serious and not only from a human point of view - Amos 3: 1, 2 We must not take for granted Jehovah's mercy we must be cautious in our statements. Since we have no certainty that the "seven times" does not depict just seven years, we should not get bogged down in these speculations. The most important thing is not perhaps understanding the identity of Babylon the Great? This is a crucial aspect of the prophecy because they are clues to guide us in the subjects and in the times we are living like road signs, and not the calculations - Compare Matthew 00:32, 33 and 2 Timothy 3: 1-5 and make a contrast with Matthew 24:36 There is no time stamp for the killing of two witnesses in sackcloth (see Revelation ch. 11), but we know that they are revealed at the end of the war. We know that the city called "Sodom and Egypt" is Babylon the Great, then Israel, and therefore we also know what country and what events to look carefully . What the Bible actually prophesies the year of his "resurrection" or not, it is certainly interesting but not essential for those who believe, it really is the inspired Word of God. Fundamental, if anything, will be "out of it" when the UN will prepare to destroy it.     * However, the Bible confirms the method "a day for a year" and also that this was the same method used by the people of God - Ezekiel 4: 6; Luke 3:15   For more information https://attenzioneallaprofezia.blogspot.it/

While I might be willing to discuss some things with those who want to remodel, that does not mean I am willing to discuss them with those who want to demolish. 
Especially when they have neither replacement nor concern over that lack.

Yes, Shiwiii, perhaps is as false as this false teaching:
(Galatians 2:11-13) “However, when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him face-to-face, because he was clearly in the wrong. For before certain men from James arrived, he used to eat with people of the nations; but when they arrived, he stopped doing this and separated himself, fearing those of the circumcised class. The rest of the Jews also joined him in putting on this pretense” Now, what if I openly declare the 1914 is a false teaching! I believe there is in the God’s word principles to guide my behavior:
(1 Corinthians 15:12) “Now if it is being preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how is it that some among you say there is no resurrection of the dead?” In this way, the Bible discourages spread different teachings between brothers. Of course, you’re saying: “it isn’t the same 1914 that the resurrection” … and you’re right.
But the Bible obliges me to refrain, to abstain to exercise some rights to benefit others: not eat meat or not make secular work on sabbath to protect the conscience of others.
(Romans 14:5-12) "One man judges one day as above another; …The one who observes the day observes it to Jehovah… the one who does not eat does not eat to Jehovah, … Not one of us, in fact, lives with regard to himself only… But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you also look down on your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. … So, then, each of us will render an account for himself to God." Even Jesus Crist follow a “false teaching” to avoid stumble others:
(Matthew 17:27) “But that we do not cause them to stumble, go to the sea, cast a fishhook, and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth, you will find a silver coin. Take that and give it to them for me and you.”  
So, my attitude is not stumble others. And regarding the person on charge of teaching to the worldwide brotherhood, well, I’ve quoted before:
“each of us will render an account for himself to God”

So with this statement, do you recognize the doctrines discussed here as being false teaching?  JWInsider has given ample proof to show that the doctrine of 1914, and the supporting evidence for such a doctrine, is in fact at odds with the Bible. 

This I agree with.
The idea that a chronology dependant on the corroboration of secular academia would be essential to our faith seems to me to violate the principle at 2Tim 3:16-17. So either side of a debate for or against the significance of the year 1914 on that basis seems (also to me) to be only of mild interest.
However, the application of Matt.24, Mk.13, Lu.21, Rev.6 (Horsemen), 2Tim.3:1-5 etc., to events and conditions since the early part of the 20th Century and the tying of these to the arrival Satan and his "angels" to eke out their desperate "short period of time" after their humiliating, heavenly defeat as described in Rev.12:12 is entirely plausible to me, and of far more interest than anything I have heard yet, au contraire.

Come now, surely we all can see the basic meaning there in Pr. 4:18 of the improving path of the righteous ones in contrast with the ever darkening road to destruction v19?  Even the cross reference to Ps. 119:105 makes it clear that God's Word lights the path, and to see this light as becoming brighter, as knowledge, understanding, and application of the same word increases, is no textual stretch.

I find it difficult and often embarrassing to discuss with people if these times are worse than the previous ones. I dislike focusing in “bad news”, you know: these earthquakes are more bad, the wars are more bad… Above all when my interlocutor is a well-informed person. This person easily could bring to my attention data as follows (from our publications)

*** g04 5/22 pp. 4-5 The Age-Old Fight for Better Health ***
[The Black Death] Within four years, say some historians, the plague spread throughout Europe and about a third of the population lost their life—perhaps between 20 million and 30 million people. Even remote Iceland was decimated. It is said that in the Far East, the population of China slumped from 123 million at the beginning of the 13th century to 65 million during the 14th century, apparently as a result of the plague and the accompanying famine.

No previous epidemic, war, or famine had ever caused such widespread suffering. “It was a disaster without equal in human history,” notes the book Man and Microbes. “Somewhere between one-quarter and one-half of the people in Europe, North Africa, and parts of Asia perished.”
The Americas escaped the ravages of the Black Death, thanks to their isolation from the rest of the world. But oceangoing ships soon brought that isolation to an end. In the 16th century, a wave of epidemics that proved even more lethal than the plague ravaged the New World.

In 1518 an outbreak of smallpox erupted on the island of Hispaniola. Native Americans had never been exposed to smallpox before, and the effect was catastrophic. A Spanish eyewitness estimated that only a thousand people on the island survived. The epidemic soon spread to Mexico and Peru, with similar consequences.

The following century, when the Pilgrim settlers arrived in the area of Massachusetts in North America, they discovered that smallpox had practically cleared the land of inhabitants. “The natives, they are near all dead of the smallpox,” wrote Pilgrim leader John Winthrop.

Other epidemics followed smallpox. According to one source, by a century after Columbus’ arrival, imported diseases had wiped out 90 percent of the population of the New World. The population of Mexico had shrunk from 30 million to 3 million, that of Peru from 8 million to one million.
****************************
Yes, now I should mention there are more epidemies, wars and so. I, instead, prefer to discuss about the value of Bible advice, the gems about God’s personality and similar, positive ideas.

As JWI has pointed out. Christ sign would have no doubt (Matthew 24:30) “Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief” No debate, no discussion, no doubt. This was the exact answer of Jesus about the sign his disciples asked him before. 

I once heard a brother from GB, when visiting Spain, explain that there are TWO signs. The first (wars, famine, etc.) would happen on earth. The second one would be the sing of Son of Man, and this would happen on heavens.

Well, the fact is that Jesus only mention ONE sign. As impossible to deny as the flash of lightning. There is no necessity to struggle with unbelievers to try to convince them. 

What about wars, earthquakes and pestilence? Jesus, specifically said: 
 
(Matthew 24:6-8) “You are going to hear of wars and reports of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for these things must take place, but the end is not yet. “For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be food shortages and earthquakes in one place after another. All these things are a beginning of pangs of distress” In other words. The wars, famine and calamities are proof we would be in THE BEGINNING of distress. Not a sign at all.

THE HORSEMEN

The picture well describes the universal taught about this vision: the catastrophic world conditions in the final era. We, the JW, properly view that these happenings occur after Jesus ride. Well, put it simple, I think this approximation has no scriptural base… at all. These are not world condition when Christ rules, they are, rather direct judgments of Christ against the enemies, when he starts his judgment against Babylon.

The proof? Always, always, always (three times) the Bible mention colorful horses, these meant angels, not situations:
 
(Zechariah 1:8-10) . . .“I saw a vision in the night. There was a man riding on a red horse, and he stood still among the myrtle trees in the ravine; and behind him there were red, reddish-brown, and white horses.” So I said: “Who are these, my lord?” The angel who was speaking with me replied: “I will show you who these are.” Then the man who was standing still among the myrtle trees said: “These are the ones whom Jehovah has sent out to walk about in the earth.”.  
(Zechariah 6:1-5) . . .Then I looked up again and saw four chariots coming from between two mountains, and the mountains were of copper. The first chariot had red horses, and the second chariot, black horses. The third chariot had white horses, and the fourth chariot, speckled and dappled horses. I asked the angel who was speaking with me: “What are these, my lord?” The angel answered me: “These are the four spirits of the heavens that are going out after having taken their station before the Lord of the whole earth. . . And, what we find as the mechanism using by Jehovah when punishing His enemies? These days that we’re reading Ezequiel, we are reading quite a few verses with the same idea: God will punish his enemies with: the sword of war,  famine and pest. Why not the same in the future?

Only one collateral idea. Will resurrect this persons? We have no problem to think that many of the people from ancient times who perished in that judgements, under the Babylonian or Assyrian siege will resurrect. Why not the people -or some people- during the Great Tribulation? Because is said the Hades is following the horsemen.

Well, I’m not completely sure about all of this. But I find it solves more problems than the contraire. 

While one could say that those things are 'sexy,' they are not nearly so sexy as the entire world being at war for the first time, with the 2nd time largely being a consequence of the first.  If that is not 'peace being taken away from the earth' (Revelation 6), I'm not sure what is. If that is not Satan cast down (Revelation 12) and being peeved about it, I'm not sure what would be. Throw in the greatest pestilence ever, and some 'acceptable' food shortages, and the coincidence, if it were to be one, is ...I am tempted to say...unprecedented. 
In contrast, Hitler and Roosevelt 'rose' for some time, just try selling the Federal Reserve as the issue to get everyone hyped over, and the Jews are a 'been there, done that' thing with our emphasis on spiritual Israel. They are all very problematic. With regard to a World War, you would have to be looking hard NOT to see it.
I wasn't suggesting that.

If one were to work from the date of Jerusalem's fall in 587 (or 586 BCE) then you could add 2,520 years to it and reach the year 1934. If you are looking hard enough for something, you can always find it and make it significant through some bit of world history or organizational history. (rise of Hitler, Roosevelt, Federal Reserve Act, Jewish immigration to Palestine begins, etc.)
Also, although the all the independent Babylonian sources are clear about when Nebuchadnezzar's 18th and 19th year began, the Bible uses both dates for the destruction of Jerusalem.
(2 Kings 25:8, 9) 8 In the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, that is, in the 19th year of King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar the king of Babylon, Neb·uʹzar·adʹan the chief of the guard, the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. 9 He burned down the house of Jehovah,. . .
(Jeremiah 32:1, 2) 32 The word that came to Jeremiah from Jehovah in the 10th year of King Zed·e·kiʹah of Judah, that is, the 18th year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar. 2 At that time the armies of the king of Babylon were besieging Jerusalem, . . .
There is no absolutely sure way to tell if this difference referred to two different ways of counting Nebuchadnezzar's year of reign, of if one refers perhaps only to a siege that started a year earlier. There is even a problem in deciding for sure whether the year began in the spring or the fall. Both methods are used in the Bible, and it's sometimes difficult to figure out which is which.
(2 Chronicles 36:10) 10 At the start of the year,* King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar sent to have him brought to Babylon,. . . [* NWT footnote: "Possibly, in the spring"]
In other words, one could stretch the 2,520 years to even reach only to 1933, or possibly as far as 1935 which was once a more significant date in our own history. It was, for nearly half a century, thought of as the end of the call to the heavenly hope, but now it is only seen as the year when the announcement clarified the earthly hope of the Jonadab class, and since which date the vast majority of new Witnesses have been "called" to an earthly hope.
Hanging on to the "1914 prediction" was considered a vestige proving that Jehovah's spirit was truly with the early Bible Students in a more special way than just their separation from Babylon the Great. Remember that it didn't really matter when Jerusalem was destroyed, as long as 1914 had still been predicted. (The actual initial method used was not even concerned with the destruction of Jerusalem.) When the idea of 2,520 years was added to the mix, the year for the destruction was determined, basically, by counting backwards from 1914. When Franz determined that Russell had made a one year error (due to his incorrect belief that there had been a "zero year") the destruction of Jerusalem was merely changed to 607 so that 1914 would still work. 1914 has always been the goal, not the actual date for Jerusalem's destruction.
Therefore, I doubt very much that a 20 year change is in the works. It would only buy the generation 20 more years, anyway, and would still require a two-lifespan generation to cover the FOUR+ biological generations that have seen "1934." (My 103-year-old grandmother-in-law [from Long Island, NY] would have been 20 in 1934 and was just here visiting her great-granddaughter over a week ago.) 
There are additional problems with revisiting the Daniel 4 and Luke 21:24 to make a change. It will receive renewed scrutiny, and having failed us in the past, will probably not seem so convincing this time. People will notice that there is no second fulfillment mentioned in Daniel 4, and a recent Watchtower (3/15/2015) has already come out to say that we no longer add second fulfillments unless the Bible explicitly tells us that one exists. As far as Daniel 4 is concerned, the entire dream was fulfilled on Nebuchadnezzar. Also, people will surely question how a brutal haughty King that destroyed Jerusalem can somehow represent Jerusalem. (We once taught that Nebuchadnezzar pictured Jesus, making Jesus a kind of Greater Nebuchadnezzar.)
If allowed to scrutinize the topic, all the other questions will surely surface this time, including the supposed "rule" that a day is always a year. If this were true, then why did Daniel multiply Jeremiah's 70 years by 7 to make 490 years? ("70 weeks of years"). Why do our publications never use a day for a year when the Bible speaks of 1,260 days, 1,290 days, or 1,335 days. Why are the 3.5 times of Revelation kept as a literal 1,260 days? Why does Revelation 11 say that the "Gentile Times" were only three and one-half times, or 42 months long?
 
 

I wish to mention regarding your quotes that I prefer using 1 Cor 13:12 regarding to our gradually increase in knowledge. Never Pro 4:18.
The Proverb, while is our favorite, cherished verse to probe that Jehovah teach us step by step, by no means Jehovah inspired Solomon to indicate this idea. If we read the context, the verse is talking about the behavior of bad and good persons, and how their respective life gradually improves or deteriorates.
As these ideas are always hidden for our “extended” applications, and never, never, never, ever is mentioned the correct and basic meaning, almost no one between we, the JW, can grasp the inspired meaning, only this “extended” one. A pity.
And yes, 1Cor 13:12 conveys perfectly the idea you’re talking about.

WAITING… AND FIGHTING
ARchiv@L, I appreciate your advice. Very laconic, but appropriate. Only to develop a little further my attitude, let me mention David example in, perhaps, the most difficult part of his life, when persecuted by Saul.

He had the temptation (as myself sometimes) to escape and wait if Jehovah fix the situation. But Jehovah had another plan for him:
(1 Samuel 22:5) In time Gad the prophet said to David: “Do not stay in the stronghold. Go from there into the land of Judah.” So David left and went into the forest of Heʹreth” And again in the middle of the fight…

And sure you remember when the future king was forced to run away between the Philistines, even in that painful situation, he continued to support the people of God… commanded by his worst enemy.
 
(1 Samuel 27:7, 8) “The length of time that David lived in the countryside of the Phi·lisʹtines was a year and four months. David would go up with his men to raid the Geshʹur·ites, the Girʹzites, and the A·malʹek·ites, for they were inhabiting the land that extended from Teʹlam as far as Shur and down to the land of Egypt”.  These wars, in spite of the opinion of his enemies, were considered, in reality “the wars of Jehovah” (1Sa 25:28)

To meditate in this example has helped to me to wait and fight. TO FIGHT against the outer enemy: the false religions and their false teachings: hell fire, trinity and so. I don’t meant fighting holding a banner in our conventions and shouting “the 1914 teaching is untruth”.

As I consider the Congregation has a Leader more wise and powerful than me, I WAIT he will fix any situation he considers worth of change when he considers the proper moment.

If you move the day back 20 years, does that fit with any verses? Should it be expected to?