BTK59

You are engaged in a pointless battle, stubbornly claiming superiority, while continuously proving me right and yourself wrong. I refuse to engage in a futile argument with an overly opinionated individual who defies all logic to defend someone who has openly admitted their wrongdoing. It's time to let it go.

Is James's word not sufficient for you? Haha! I am confident that if you were to visit his congregation, they would offer you guidance. There's no need for me to prove anything to you. Are you denying the conclusion reached by secular law that his egregious act against children is a disfellowshipping offense?

If James himself has explicitly stated something as a certainty, then your personal opinion is irrelevant. Therefore, we must decide whether to believe you, a nonconformist, or James.
It seems that you are being held responsible for not sharing the message of Jesus and the Christian faith with someone. Now, you are attempting to rationalize James' expulsion by comparing it to the actions of the apostles. This appears to be unchristian behavior and thinking.

I believe it is essential for people to question how Tom perceives himself as a witness, particularly considering all his questionable and multiple accounts. Is it not a grim thought that God might consider you to be superior to Him?

You may attempt to shift the blame for your own bad behavior onto me in this situation, but rest assured, it will be in vain. God sees and understands the true intentions of every individual's heart. Thus, this passage is applicable to some people here in this context.
James 1:26-2:13 New International Version
26 Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless. 27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
Proverbs 26:24-26
Proverbs 26:24-26 24 Enemies disguise themselves with their lips, but in their hearts they harbor deceit. 25 Though their speech is charming, do not believe them, for seven abominations fill their hearts. 26 Their malice may be concealed by deception, but their wickedness will be exposed in the assembly.
Why did you quote proverbs if you are not following the advice? Is there a similarity between what you are doing and the actions of the Pharisees during Jesus' time?
1 Peter 2:1
1 Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.
Keep in mind the purpose: the Bible does not silence those who speak the truth. It seems that some individuals here are attempting to suppress it.

Why not take this opportunity to reflect on your own conduct, particularly as a professed Jehovah's Witness, instead of shifting the focus from your failure in history to defending someone whose actions seem deceptive despite their claims of remorse? Let's delve into this topic further and discuss your own adherence (Ad Nauseum) to Christian principles.

By whose standards do you judge? You cannot grant forgiveness to an unrepentant person. Therefore, your brand of remorse holds no weight. What truly matters is whether he persists in attacking the Watchtower, the Elders, and the Governing Body in a slanderous manner by accusing them of following God's laws. He is the one who committed a heinous act against children, not the Watchtower. Therefore, what justification could he possibly have for attempting to shift the blame onto the actions of the Watchtower? What excuse do you have for defending a disfellowshipped individual as a former bethelite? You have no excuse whatsoever.
You are projecting the same ignorance that you accuse me of, as you are also attempting to justify your own unchristian behavior.
Indeed, you, Tom, and the others in your closed club all belong to the category of "revilers," who do not hesitate to criticize your brother. It is important not to misuse scripture to justify your actions without proper understanding. But, in this case, who is truly worse: you, Tom, the others in your closed club, or me? I am simply defending God's truth, while it seems like you are only bringing disgrace to His name and distorting the very essence of what a true Christian should be.

This is another flawed example. Where did you acquire your knowledge of scripture? None of what you stated aligns with the apostle Paul's understanding. Instead, Jesus exemplified the difference between sin and repentance, as none of those individuals actually sinned against Jesus.
You not only embarrass yourself with your lack of historical knowledge, but you also twist scripture to rationalize your emotions towards someone who has been disfellowshipped and has shown no signs of repentance. Prepare to give an account for your actions on judgment day.
However, you consistently contradict yourself with a straightforward fact - the expression of remorse. James/Pudgy's secular actions are being questioned in a legal setting, and his behavior in this instance displayed no indications of remorse. He attacked, accused, and slandered the Watchtower, just as you often do. Therefore, your moral principles do not align with the teachings of religious texts; instead, they conform to your imperfect human nature.
People should devote themselves to Christ and God, rather than a misguided and immoral individual.
In this instance, Paul was actually referring to the incorrigible brother within the community, not the world, as you are suggesting. It is important to consider the specific context in which Paul's words were spoken.
1 Corinthians 5:13 New International Version
13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.
Your conduct as a JW reflects poorly on the principles of Christianity, as it seems that you accept and excuse the bad behavior of others. Claiming that you are not doing anything wrong does not align with being a JW. Remember that God sees and will judge all actions.
When either you or Tom become upset about disfellowshipping someone for speaking the truth, dissenters should indeed be disfellowshipped for demonstrating unchristian behavior that goes against the teachings of Christ.
There is a distinction between poor judgment exhibited by fallible individuals. They make no sense with their actions.

This is a weak argument, especially considering that Apostle Paul was explicit about God's intentions when he declared "have nothing to do with them." Therefore, instead of using your own emotions and misbehavior to rationalize going against God, it is better to refrain from dishonoring Him and tarnishing the reputation of the Watchtower.
Loving your enemy does not imply forming an association with them, as you are suggesting. If you had taken the time to pay attention to my previous comment about expressing concern for his well-being, you would realize that it demonstrates the concept of loving your enemy without any personal ties. I am not in favor of the decisions he made that caused him to encounter legal issues.

It's clear that Pastor Russell and the groups he proudly led had no association. Even today, these independent Bible Students continue on their own path, with some even embracing Adventism, as was the case in Pastor Russell's time. This does not mean that Russell was heavily influenced by Adventism, but rather that he found certain aspects intriguing enough to investigate. The false claim that Pastor Russell was an Adventist is an apostate vision, and today's Bible Students who support Russell's perspective will ardently defend this truth.
However, my statement remains valid. Not a single apostate has taken the trouble to mention that Brother Adam Rutherford, who is unrelated to Joseph Rutherford, made reference to the Babylonian Chronicles in his book volume 3.
It is irrelevant if certain Bible Students associate him with their long-forgotten alliances. What truly matters is what is referenced in all of his books. Personally, I own eight of them, and they all consistently refer to AD 1914 and how it marked the culmination of the Gentile Times, just as Russell had mentioned.
So, that's for the update. I'm sure someone else will find it interesting.
John and Edgar Morton had their own comprehensive ideology, which Pastor Russell only briefly mentioned in one of his publications. I recall it being a three-paragraph long piece. However, it is important not to overemphasize the influence of the Morton's ideology on Pastor Russell, as his primary interest lied in the Great Pyramid. He merely utilized the pyramid to validate certain biblical interpretations through calculations. It is crucial to note that Pastor Russell did not extensively engage with the pyramid schemes that others were involved in.
Of course, he visited the Great Pyramid, but that's not the point. The associations were "independent", meaning they would think and act independently in the best interest of their respective churches. Although this sometimes conflicted with Russell's own views, he never sought to impose his authority over others.
The key here is whether people are truly interested in the truth. For instance, if someone is genuinely interested in the truth as presented in Adam Rutherford's books, they should make a point to read all of his published works.
By examining the historical events, one can clearly understand the significance of the year 1776, which contrasts the alternative perspective of 1799 as a significant date. It is worth noting the inclusion of both 1917-1918 and 1914, as mentioned by the person in question. It is important to avoid distorting their words or manipulating their ideas.
I found it quite interesting when Adam depicted the British Empire as the savior of the Jews in 1914. Referring to Britain as "Israel" and the Jews as "Judah" adds a poetic touch to the story.
Anglo-Saxon Israel or Israel-Britain -- Adam Rutherford -- 1939
Snippet:
"It is important to notice, too, that since the Great War of 1914-1918 Great Britain (Israel) and the Jews (Judah) have occupied the Holy Land together, the latter being under the guidance of the former,"
 
 

What motivated brothers in the past to stand up for Pastor Russell and correct the misconceptions surrounding pyramology? Some brothers took it upon themselves to directly address the issue by personally funding the placement of a pyramid stone near Pastor Russell's grave. Unfortunately, there was misinformation circulating that claimed the Watchtower had acquired and installed the stone.
"Pastor Russell
was always firmly opposed to all forms of occultism, as will be discussed in greater detail in the section on Pyramidology later in this chapter; and he never knowingly employed any mystic symbols in his ministry and teachings."
"PYRAMID USAGE. Finally, we need to comment on yet another absurd charge in connection with the Pyramid. This was made by David Reed, who attempts to build a case on the alleged usage of questionable forms of pyramidology in the Pastor’s over all ministry. First, he cites the fact that a seven-foot-tall stone pyramid was used in the Society’s Rosemont Cemetery near Pittsburgh to mark the location of burial plots for members of the Bethel staff, including Pastor Russell, and then writes."
Another misconception that was circulating at that time involved the confusion between the "name" Rutherford and another Rutherford who was involved.
"A monthly publication, Pyramidology, by Dr. Adam Rutherford of New Castle, began in 1941. The Forest Gate Church (London) Bible Monthly was published 1936-1985. Phillys Stracy compiled an evening devotional book, Songs in the Night."
This insider knowledge may seem irrelevant today, as it reflects people's confusion in the past about the language used by others. However, it is important to acknowledge that we cannot make well-informed judgments about those conditions since we were not alive during that time. Whether Pastor Russell found the pyramid scheme intriguing but useless, or if later under Rutherford it was condemned as the devil's work because of the usage by other Christian denominations, none of these matters as it holds any significance now.

What positive outcomes can be achieved by spreading disinformation? You are the one responsible for manufacturing these controversies, unwilling to accept the truth when it is presented. Let's consider the example of the Russell comment and the apocalyptic rumors about the end of the world. You are well aware that Russell had to issue a full-page disclaimer to counteract the misleading ideas propagated by certain individuals, just like the Watchtower eventually did for the year 1975. However, you persist in promoting a false narrative, continuing to fuel this controversy. So, what beneficial response are you hoping to achieve with your personal denial?
This controversy is purely a product of your imagination, not of the Bible students, the Watchtower, or Jehovah's Witnesses. It has already been clarified, so it requires a nonconformist diehard to keep revisiting this deceit. Therefore, what is the benefit of airing this nonsense in public? Who stands to gain from this other than apostates?
What relevance does any of that have to do with the remarkable progress achieved by the Watchtower since gaining full control in 1950? Do the events of 1933, which a sister found controversial, truly matter? Did she fully grasp the significance of what she was reading? It is true that 60% of Bible students were in the process of relearning, while 30% did not adhere to Pastor Russell's ideology and chose to leave, leading to a separation from the IBSA. History shows that. However, what does this ultimately prove? Merely having access to dubious insider information does not hold much weight, especially when your own credibility is questionable.
Does today's Watchtower endorse pyramidology just like Brother Rotherford failed to endorse in his tenure as the head of the Bible Student Association under the publishing house the Watchtower? What was the true motivation behind the pyramidology that you personally find distasteful? It aimed to present an alternative perspective on chronology, which even Pastor Russell himself found intriguing but not essential. Those were Pastor Russells thoughts about it, regardless of what you dream up to refute his actual words by misrepresenting them, just like you did with "the end of the world in 1914" apostate fiasco.
What positive lessons can be derived from inaccurate information? You are eager to persuade others to adopt your perspective, so demonstrate how one can benefit from learning from misrepresentation. Instead of accepting your lack of credibility and deceitful conduct, how can one actually learn from your experiences? If tarnishing your reputation is your aim, then congratulations on a job well done as a role model.
Before criticizing others, it would be wise to reflect on your own actions. It seems that you are quick to judge others, especially me, while disregarding your own anger when you ban someone. Why do you continue to ignore this?
Matthew 7:3-5 English Standard Version
3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
 

That's why it's pointless to pretend, because we're aware of who has the power when they get angry.
I have witnessed him endorsing meaningless content, indicating that he is still active. It is highly likely that he is anticipating the Watchtower to face charges in another impartial court, as they are engaged in the work of Satan.
Regarding Pudgy, there are two distinct possibilities: one pertains to his health, while the other is related to legal matters. Naturally, I sincerely hope that his health is in good condition. However, if the situation is indeed legal in nature, it is plausible that a court ruling might impose restrictions on his internet access for a certain duration. In such a scenario, it is likely that we won't see any posts from him for approximately three years or so. Perhaps you should consider reaching out to him, either yourself or through JWI, if you are genuinely concerned.

We are both aware that this was not always the situation when "typesetting" was the only option, and reprints were the only way to make corrections. You also understand how apostates thrive on attempting to prove that the Watchtower manipulates their publications to conceal whatever their distorted minds conceive.
I understand that you hold a different perspective on the significance of the year 568 BC. I acknowledge that you prefer the year 587 BC.
The Watchtower's interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's reign by his years are explained just like historical data. Show me precisely where VAT 4956 tablet provides evidence of Jerusalem's destruction in 587 BC, as you insist. In the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, he was occupied with other military campaigns. Therefore, can you demonstrate how the astronomical tablet specifically relates to Jerusalem's fate? There is historical evidence that places Nebuchadnezzar approximately 400 miles away from Jerusalem at the time of its destruction in 587 BC. However, I am curious about the alleged proof that firmly establishes the year 568 BC as the date of Jerusalem's destruction. Instead of making baseless statements, please provide credible evidence to support your claim. It is time to put an end to these unsubstantiated arguments and present factual information.
 

Of course, you do. When you make false statements, who holds you accountable?
As I mentioned before, I truly have no concern about your identity or beliefs. I am fully aware of the indisputable facts, and if you desire to persist with your petty manipulations, feel free to do so.
 
Of course, you have no problem banning just one individual whom you believe has hundreds of accounts, as opposed to many users using the same writing style. A former member was known to be straightforward and blunt, much like you, Tom, and others who have a similar writing style, leading one to assume multiple individuals. Your mind games are your own.
You are absolutely right. There are instances when you just banned an individual in order to safeguard and protect others, particularly when they resort to profanity or are found to be spreading outright falsehoods that have been proven false.
When apostates like Srecko make false allegations and those are proven to be false, who is the one to face the consequences, Srecko the apostate, or George? Save it for your group.
 

However, throughout the past 10 years, you have obstinately defended a false premise, much like your current stance, rendering this observation inconsequential when it originates from you.
Why are you spending 13 whole pages trying to defend your inaccurate interpretation of the events of 587 BC and AD 1914? It seems like you're not paying attention to the actual scripture you posted, so bringing it up doesn't really help your argument.
When Jesus spoke about being alert to future events, no one with sincere spiritual beliefs would accept your misleading presentation. Your lack of spiritual conscience undermines your attempt to gain favor with God.
Hence, in addition to the proverbs you mentioned that apply to you, true Christians should also pay attention to the entirety of scripture, not just what is convenient for them. Otherwise, you will make the Bible meaningless.
Ephesians 5:6-12 New King James Version
6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. 7 Therefore do not be partakers with them.
2 Thessalonians 2:3-16 English Standard Version
3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness[a] is revealed, the son of destruction,
Matthew 24:4-36 New International Version
4 Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.
What aspects of these signs do you, as a dissenting observer of the truth, struggle to comprehend?
When you slander the Watchtower as fortune-tellers, you are promoting an apostate view, indicating a refusal to comprehend the numbers "driven" by scriptural observation. As a result, this lack of knowledge reflects a lack of faith. Visitors should not take comfort in paying attention to such lies and accusations, as they are driven by apostasy.
Incorrect. Your assertion is a misinterpretation aimed at deflecting responsibility. It is completely unrelated to the accurate comprehension of resurrection, which is based on a deep understanding of scripture. Therefore, there is no justification for raising this point to mask your shortcomings as a Christian. Another useless deflection tactic.
Our teachings are firmly rooted in scripture, which you have chosen to refute. This raises the question: what kind of teacher are you?
Your rejection of the word of God based on personal ignorance and lack of knowledge is concerning. The unfounded claims you enthusiastically advocate for apostasy should be a greater cause for alarm for the audience than your limited understanding of history. Once more, it is worth questioning who you are to dismiss well-established historical evidence that contradicts your assertion of an "absolute" year as 587 BC.
Making erroneous judgments about someone's Christian life without a basis is unjustifiable. It is unethical to make unfounded allegations against the Watchtower organization without a clear understanding of Christian principles. Therefore, the only failure evident here is on your part.
Why do you insist on continuously launching these ad hominem attacks against the Watchtower organization?

You're the ignorant apostate. Nowhere in that tablet does it state that it's exclusively meant for Jerusalem. You shouldn't be arguing history, as your stubbornness is misleading others. Demonstrate where in VAT 4956 it explicitly states that Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in his 37th year, considering that in 587 BC, during Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year, he was engaged in conflict with Egypt and bringing judgment against Ammon, Moab, and other nations, as well as being involved with other kings such as the King of the Medes. I challenge you to provide conclusive evidence. Do not dismiss history and avoid diverting from the topic.
That is why VAT 4956 fails completely, as there are other historical events that confirm the activities of Nebuchadnezzar during his 37th year. By disregarding these facts, you are simply trying to validate your own false assumptions.
It's true that you've been fixated on this for 10 years. However, you haven't been able to show where exactly the astronomical tablet states that in the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar the destruction of Jerusalem is described using similar language. Even the Babylonian Chronicles can't be misused in this manner.
I utilize historical data from the 18th or 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar to reinforce the credibility of the conclusions drawn about 607 BC, which you seem to overlook. It is important for the public to remain cautious of individuals who pose as Christians but may be deceiving them, as there is no concrete evidence regarding VAT 4956 that cannot be interpreted in various ways, contrary to what you are trying to impose on others.

Despite your contradictory arguments, you persist in advocating for it, which is quite perplexing.
I did not mean to support only the perspective of mainstream secular history. There are additional historical records that I consider. However, if I were to focus solely on one aspect, I would highlight that starting from 605 BC, Nebuchadnezzar was involved in a conflict with Egyptian King Hophra, which lasted until 587 BC.
You are telling the people to solely believe in VAT 4956 when there are other tablets.
Can't disagree with that, you have been an imposter for a long time.
I am specifically referring to written language, rather than the calculations that you seem to be fixated on. Show me evidence that clearly states that this tablet is intended to portray the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC, as described in written accounts. The only falsehood here lies in your own presentation.
If we consider one of the interpretations of Nebuchadnezzar's early reign in 605 BC, we can understand that in his 18th year, he was occupied with King Hophra and Armis in 587 BC. Feel free to challenge these established sources if you disagree. Would you like a reminder?

We have always known the true identity of the librarian, so there's no reason to pretend. Consider the significance of being placed in Dante's 9 circles of hell, as you have depicted. I believe the banishment occurred after the display of your profanity-laden post. I was not aware that revealing the truth that releases people from Satan's grip was meant to be perceived negatively.
 

By all means ex-bethelite, refute what is also written in history that may or may not be absolute as you claim history is. Your audience awaits you. There are myriad alternative historical accounts.

1."This tablet left much room for conjecture. The kings, the allies of his power and - his general and his hired soldiers - he spoke unto. To his soldiers - who were before - at the way of - In the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon - the king of Egypt came up to do battle (?) and -es, the king of Egypt - and - of the city Putu-Jaman - far away regions which are in the sea - numerous which were in Egypt - arms and horses - he called to - he trusted- 2 Ever since this fragment was published."

 2."Apries returned with an army against Amasis but was defeated and killed. A fragmentary Babylonian text (ANET 308) appears to mention a Babylonian attack on Amasis in the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, 568-567 B.C.E."

3."It is known that the Apis bull was never slain. There are historical sources that tell a different story. Cambyses was not the villain, Nebuchadnezzar was. It happened forty years earlier, in 568/567 BC. A clay tablet, now in the British Museum, mentions a Chaldean attack on Egypt. "In the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of the country of Babylon, went to Mizraim (Egypt) to make war. Amasis, king of Egypt, collected his army and marched and spread abroad." We recall how Hophra ordered an attack on Cyrene in Libya, but the army was defeated. Hophra sent Amasis, a general, to stop the rebellion; but the army made Amasis their king. Amasis at once announced himself pharaoh."

Show how people should only take your word because you and Tom control this site, and a lie is better than the truth.

That's precisely what you must debunk: history. I couldn't care less about your presentations, but unless you can provide evidence to the contrary, VAT 4956 holds no significance. So far, all I've been getting from you are distortions and lies.
You've wasted 14 pages of empty evidence. So, who is really the one obsessed?
Present evidence that supports the claim that VAT 4956 is the primary tablet that requires scrutiny when compared to other tablets detailing battles with Egypt during the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar. Avoid appearing defensive by providing accurate information to address any discrepancies.
You are free to entertain whatever false beliefs you wish to hold onto. However, compelling people to accept a false premise is a matter for God to judge. In the meantime, it is possible to calculate back to 568 BC from the Babylonian and Egyptian conflict, landing in the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, starting from the secular point of 605 BC.
Avoid using the Watchtower as a basis for your flawed perspective. Your focus should be on discussing secular history instead of referencing the Watchtower. Your incorrect assumption lies within secular history, not the teachings of the Watchtower. Therefore, it is best to separate the two and concentrate on the core of your argument.
The apostate position still stands, doesn't it? To support the secular chronology, you would need to disprove 2 Kings 24, as I previously mentioned. Thus, the 18th year referred to in the Bible is inconsistent with the secular chronology. Your theory lacks credibility unless you are willing to accept the possibility that something other than what actually happened in the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar, as supported by secular history concerning Egypt, could be true.
I ensure that the historical accounts are accurate and align with biblical narratives. It is not my responsibility if you fail to recognize the evident truth.
This is just one of many alternative perspectives. Including the temple, the palace, some affluent homes, and the outer wall when Nebuchadnezzar's Captain arrived would have halted the destruction of Judah, including Jerusalem, much earlier. In that scenario, Nebuchadnezzar would not have been in Jerusalem, as your VAT 4956 and apostates suggest.

Maybe you can truly comprehend this. The ultimate authority lies in God, so it shouldn't concern anyone else. If God found any errors in the calculations about 607 BC made by the Watchtower, he would have personally corrected them, along with his faithful servants. However, what God actually did was disfellowship a member of the governing body due to his involvement in apostasy. This speaks volumes about the power of God, far more than secular history ever could.
Anyone who lacks an understanding of scripture and secular history should refrain from offering opinions that degrade both subjects.
I believe that when someone looks into the eyes of a deceitful person like you, they come to a different conclusion, not based on basic English comprehension. For most of us, it's quite straightforward. I trust common sense to interpret the passages without reading between the lines.
I concur as well. You lack the skill to have initiated this argument a decade ago.
Please continue your efforts. I am eagerly awaiting the specific reference in VAT 4956 that explicitly mentions the documentation of the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC. It seems that the tablet merely mentions the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, much like other tablets that refer to his 37th year for various events. However, as someone who questions your sincerity, it appears that you are attempting to compel others to accept your distorted chronology without providing any evidence. How many times have I requested you to substantiate your claims? Leave aside that particular tablet, and instead, choose any historical record that supports your argument.
Remember YOU DON'T CARE!
Instead of wasting your time searching on Google for information to disprove, let me remind you that those three examples are just the tip of the iceberg. There are countless other events that support my argument. Just to give you a taste, consider this: there is one event that clearly places Nebuchadnezzar as far as 400 miles away from Jerusalem in 588/7 BC. So, you see, you'll need to refute overwhelming secular evidence.

I hear he went down into the abyss locked in combat with a mortal enemy who was yelling ‘Fly, you fools!’ and imagining he had saved the day. Only, unlike the movie, he remained suppressed and it was his adversary who emerged in renewed form.
 
he he he ))))))))))
 
You know, whatever happened to Srecko—another one who has disappeared? Maybe he and Pudgy also went down into the abyss, locked in mortal semi-disagreement.

This is acceptable, however the difference is, the Watchtower doesn't support 587 BC as the destruction of Jerusalem like you do. What's the purpose of accepting the correct chronology when it conflicts with your own? It's illogical to even suggest it.

For a decade, you have opposed the Watchtower's chronology, and now you bear the responsibility for the lives you have misled. The accuracy of the Watchtower's chronological order, supported by secular history, is undeniable and not influenced by apostate perspectives or corruption.