BTK59

Of course, you claim to understand and persist in your actions. However, if that feeble attempt to manipulate my words is the best you can come up with, it is clear that I am not the one appearing foolish. Even when presented with COJ's own words, you still choose to turn a blind eye. It is no surprise that you rely on others like Pudgy for support. A humorous situation indeed. LOL!
Listen to my words. The phrase Bethelite was intended specifically for you, so cease dwelling on a juvenile excuse.
You're becoming a joke at this point. Is this how you conduct yourself in the closed club, like a child? LOL!
JWinsider has been the epitome of deceit for a whole decade, promoting nothing but falsehoods through manipulation, distortion, lies, and deception, rendering his credibility null and void.
Do you need assistance in understanding the profound connection linking Pyramidographia, numerology, and philosophy, which has elevated Pyramidology to the realm of mysticism? Allow me to guide you in your quest for genuine knowledge by conducting thorough research.
If you often find yourself in perplexity, seek assistance from one of the members within the exclusive club. I am not inclined to offer aid to individuals who have abandoned their beliefs.

During your time in Bethel, you were absorbing everything. Many Bethelites accepted the conclusions of that apostate, and some of you still do. Since that information was available then, it could have been used to challenge and refute 40 years of misinformation. Why didn't people like you take the time to conduct thorough research for the truth? You seem to think your personal research now is of value; why didn't you do it back then? It's not enough to simply say that it was a sensitive issue no one wanted to address, given that we are still dealing with the consequences of poorly researched claims made by unqualified individuals.

You seem to have limited knowledge about the connection between Christian Science and pyramidology. However, scientific tests have been conducted on several pyramids, not just the one briefly referenced by Pastor Russell.
Instead of only conducting a Google search to confirm your biased presentation, like you did with Brother Adam Rutherford, broaden your knowledge.
Absolutely! They discussed how the Great Pyramid could provide evidence for certain events that they were already familiar with. I don't think there's a need for personal bias and exaggerations in this matter. You are also right, Russell was not a spiritualist; he condemned it. However, that does not mean that those involved in Pyramidology did not focus on the spiritual aspects of it, much like the ancients. Your tendency to cause confusion on this issue should be well documented for the public.
Your statement didn't specify the type of Bible Student association he was affiliated with. You only referred to him as a Bible student as if he were associated with the Watchtower Bible Student associations, which he was not. The PBI was a distinct type of Bible student association that diverged in many aspects from the teachings of the Watchtower, whether by Russell or Rutherford. Therefore, I did not fabricate this information; your mistaken assumption did.
Why bother defending your deceitful facade? It holds no significance for me, as I am already aware of your dishonesty. It's gratifying to see that your friends are finally recognizing the illogical approach you have embraced.
You have been personally affected by this for ten years. Are you just now realizing the spiritual damage you have caused? It's too little, too late.
You are simply wasting time with nonsensical conclusions. While it may work within your closed community, it should be taken seriously for visitors to grasp the decades-old deception perpetuated by some individuals who identify themselves as JWs.
 

I fail to understand why you are defending such an egregious person who is clearly a liar. It seems unnecessary for you to overlook his repugnant actions when his own words speak volumes.
He not only discusses the Babylonian Chronicles at length, but also provides a compelling explanation for why he discredits the Watchtower Chronology with his carefully chosen words. It's time to be honest with the public and stop deceiving them.
The Gentile Times Reconsidered -- Jonsson, Carl Olof -- 4th ed., rev. and exp, 2004
If these lists are correct, the first year of Nebuchadnezzar would be 604/ 603 B.C.E. and his eighteenth year, when he desolated Jerusalem, would be 587/86 B.C.E., not 607 B.C.E. as in Watch Tower chronology. p.99
The Babylonian Chronicle BM 21946
This chronicle covers the period from Nabopolassar’s 21st year (605/04 B.C.E.) to Nebuchadnezzar’s 10th year (595/94 B.C.E.). Photo used courtesy of D. J. Wiseman (shown in his Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon, Plate VI). p.101
Why not give a Justification for persisting in this deceitful path despite your knowledge of the truth, please elaborate it to your exclusive circle of acquaintances.

Just like you were so quick to place the attention of a false narrative about Brother Adam Rutherford being a Bible Student, you forgot to mention his specific affiliation within the Bible Student association before he moved on to another religious sect.
He was a member of the PBI. 
Pastoral Bible Institute
In 1918, the former directors held the first Bible Student Convention independent of the Watch Tower Society. At the second convention a few months later, the informal Pastoral Bible Institute was founded. It began publishing The Herald of Christ's Kingdom, edited by Randolph E. Streeter. An editorial committee continues publication of the magazine[68] in a reduced capacity, and reproduces other Bible Student movement literature, including Russell's six-volume Studies in the Scriptures. [67]
The forty-fifth Annual Meeting of the members of the Pastoral Bible Institute, Inc., was held at 10:00 a.m., September 21, in the Central Y.M.C.A., 1315 Pacific Avenue, Atlantic City, New Jersey.
members of the Institute during the previous year; after which the meeting proceeded with the election of a new Board. Brothers C. M. Glass and Adam Rutherford were appointed to act as Tellers. While they were counting the votes, the rest of the friends enjoyed a season of fellowship in praise, prayer, and testimony. At the conclusion of the count, the names of the following brethren were announced as elected F. A. Essler, J. C. Jordan, A. L. Muir, J. T. Read, P. L. Read, W. J. Siekman and P. E. Thomson
Your presentation, which led people to believe he was somehow connected to the Watchtower Bible Students, is false. You need to conduct more thorough research before getting caught in a lie. This is not an ad-hominem attack, but rather the truth. Furthermore, Adam's transition to identifying as a British Israelite, tracing back to the lost tribes of Israel, particularly during the years of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, is noteworthy. Some historians have linked Charles Piazzi Smyth to the revival of that ideology, and some believe he was part of the British Israelite faction. If you claim to be a researcher, then strive to be an excellent one. That's also the truth.
I have been aware of his history for over 40 years. Why haven't you, since you were at Bethel and heard the false claims made by Carl Olof Jonsson? Why didn't your conscience guide anyone there to investigate Adam Rutherford's book series, which directly addressed the Babylonian Chronicles?

Exactly. I mentioned Adam Rutherford to expose the falsehoods that you and COJ persistently propagate regarding the Babylonian chronicles. Moreover, your attempt to bring up Pyramidology only worsened the situation, as it was clear that you were grasping at straws in order to divert attention from your weak arguments, just like you consistently do.
There's no need for you to continue in your childish game. For one,
"especially an uneducated person like Carl Olof Jonsson, whom you have supported in the past. As an ex-Bethelite
Just because I placed a period on the sentence doesn't mean anything, if I had placed a comma:
whom you have supported in the past, as an ex-Bethelite  is referring to you. So, you continue to look foolish. I don't  need to explain anything to a grown man acting like a 6-year-old.
You're once again displaying your arrogance through your comments on grammar. Take a moment to reflect upon your own grammar mistakes and perhaps consider maturing.
Why do you persist in defending COJ when he clearly contradicted 607 BC in favor of 587 BC and dismissed the 2520-year prophecy ending in AD 1914, just like you? Stop denying that you are defending him.
It is clear you lack compjrehension skills. It's obvserious you haven't read Adam rutherfords volume three in its proper context. You just want to mamipulate words to comeo ut ahead, your just a loser that can't being wrong.
"With the defeat of the Egyptians and Assyrians in 607 B.c., the domination of the peoples of Syria and Palestine passed from Egypt to Babylon. This assumption of Babylonian authority over all western Asia is confirmed by Jeremiah as dating from the accession of Jehoiakim (who was placed on the throne by Pharaoh Necho, but soon transferred his allegiance under the pressure of Babylonian authority). This explains the otherwise mysterious intrusion in Jeremiah 27,1, of the words, “ in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim ” into a prophecy given in the reign of Zedekiah (verse 3) concerning the period of servitude to Babylon. "
According to Rutherford, the year 607 BC held great significance as it marked the end of military campaigns in the region and the beginning of the destruction of Judah, including Jerusalem. In his view, this date played a crucial role in pinpointing the end of the gentile times in AD 1914. It is important to note that Rutherford's viewpoint remains valid, regardless of whether he mistakenly believed that the final blow to Jerusalem occurred in 585 BC.
It's hard to believe that people in a sound state of mind would accept the notion that God would make the Babylonians wait for 20 years to destroy Jerusalem in 587/6/5 BC, considering that they already held control over the entire region by 607 BC. The account in 2 Kings 24 clearly points to that specific period of destruction. Could you clarify whether you are suggesting that 2 Kings 24 should be dated to 587 BC or 585 BC? Furthermore, I would be interested in seeing concrete evidence to support your claim, especially regarding the VAT 4956 tablet. Can you provide any conclusive proof that the astronomical tablet states that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BC, as you and other dissenters claim? Show me the evidence you rely on.
I have clearly presented evidence from the Babylonian Chronicles that details the military campaigns of the Babylonians in 607 BC and the parties involved. What specific aspects of this historical record are you dismissing without reason in order to defend an inaccurate date? Rather than challenging me with meaningless arguments, focus on refuting the campaigns as I have asked you to and providing concrete evidence, rather than baseless challenges that only serve to undermine your position. You should do the same for WW1. So, come on! Get serious for a change and stop making irrelevant arguments.
Adam Rutherford used 607 BC as the starting point for his chronology, not 585 BC. He combined the reigns of 3 Judean Kings in 607 BC. By refusing to acknowledge 607 BC, you are willfully challenging it out of ignorance to support an untenable argument.
You have a serious problem with 607 BC, and I'm glad people have contacted me showcasing your apostasy. They aren't wrong, just like the "Proverbs" you quoted isn't wrong, just like your personal judgement by God won't be wrong for leading people astray for that apostasy.

Prove how scripture is wrong with:
 
2 Kings 24 New International Version
24 During Jehoiakim’s reign, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon invaded the land, and Jehoiakim became his vassal for three years. But then he turned against Nebuchadnezzar and rebelled. 2 The Lord sent Babylonian,[a] Aramean, Moabite and Ammonite raiders against him to destroy Judah, in accordance with the word of the Lord proclaimed by his servants the prophets. 3 Surely these things happened to Judah according to the Lord’s command, in order to remove them from his presence because of the sins of Manasseh and all he had done, 4 including the shedding of innocent blood. For he had filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and the Lord was not willing to forgive.
How God sent devastating forces to destroy Judah in either 587 BC, 586 BC, or 585 BC. However, historical records do not depict any significant devastation in Judah during that particular time period. The Babylonian Chronicles, which end in 594 BC, do not provide any conclusive evidence of Judah's destruction. Instead, history shows that there were military campaigns against other nations, such as Ammon, Moab, Edom, and Egypt, which were believed to be God's judgments. Even though there is a Babylonian chronicle mentioning a siege on Jerusalem in 598 BC, there is no further mention of Judah's destruction in 587 BC. So, in order to demonstrate how you, as an ex-Bethelite, will prove God wrong and assert that 2 Kings 24 occurred in 587 BC, you must enlighten the public by using your expertise in biblical interpretation and your magical wand to conjure non-existent historical facts.
Present the complete devastation of "Judah" in 587 BC, as that is the necessary evidence to challenge the notion that 2 Kings 24 refers to the same year.
The city of Babylon existed in the region as early as 610 - 607 BC. Now, shed some light on why they chose to postpone their actions for two decades, employing historical facts and a respectful approach to interpreting biblical texts, as it's important to maintain humility when discussing matters concerning God, which is evident you lack.
 

I fail to understand why JWI persists in this pattern of falsehood and deception, unless he had a personal connection with that Swedish apostate.
It is imperative to highlight the exact position of the apostate in relation to the Watchtower and why his hands are stained with blood, as documented in his correspondence to the organization in 1977. While JWI is now well-informed about this correspondence, it's uncertain whether he was aware of it during his time at Bethel. Considering the prevalence of rumors and gossip, it's unlikely that such significant information would have remained completely unknown. Yet, he persists in this venture of defending. It is worth noting that these events occurred a decade after Brother Adam Rutherford had already published his book.
The audacity here lies in Carl Olof Jonsson's claim that a so-called brother had conducted a comprehensive study of the Neo-Babylonian period, which was clearly fabricated and a blatant lie. He unequivocally stated that 587 BC was the accurate date for the destruction of Jerusalem. This deceit is being vehemently defended by JWI, who is relying solely on his own judgment.
COJ unequivocally rejects the notion of 607 BC, and unequivocally refutes the conclusion of 1914. In fact, he goes as far as to deem it "profound" to verify such claims. COJ's own statements stand as indisputable evidence, while JWI attempts to manipulate them to deny, undermine, or divert attention from the undeniable truth.
Carl Olof Jonsson
Sweden
May 20, 1977
"Dear Brothers,
A brother has done a thorough study of the Neo-Babylonian period in relation to our present understanding of the "appointed times of the nations". His "treatise", which is written in all honesty and sincere love for truth, has been carefully and critically examined by some able brothers, but it has not been possible to refute the arguments and the conclusion that 587 BCE, not 607, is the correct date for the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple. If this conclusion is correct - and it really seems very hard to avoid all the facts presented - the consequences will be far-reaching as re, all things we attach to 1914: Christ's parousia, the establishment of God's Kingdom, the ousting out of Satan, eta."
His book is founded on deception, as he persistently perpetuates falsehoods. If he and others with apostate inclinations had genuinely conducted a "thorough study" of the Neo-Babylonian period, they would have encountered Adam Rutherford's works and comprehended how to accurately place the Babylonian Chronicles in their chronological order, thereby establishing the correct starting point of 607 BC, without relying on the erroneous date of 587 BC. Such corrections should have been reflected in COJ's book if he possessed any semblance of conscience. However, much like Satan blinds these apostates, he continues to obstruct those who seek victory, rather than embracing the truth.
Another important point to highlight is JWI's persistent manipulation, resorting to deflecting tactics in order to insinuate that someone is not stating something directly and redirecting the discussion towards a nonsensical argument. This is a clear example of employing wordplay at its lowest level.

 

Since you brought the name Charles Piazza Smyth
I believe this individual is yet another proponent of the British Israelite theory. I trust that the public will come to recognize how Pastor Russell addressed information that contradicted the unfounded assertions being presented here. Certain Bible Students, much like numerous independent Bible Students, exercised discernment when assessing Charles Piazza Smyth's writings, and that's why the "association" also considered other works.
It's important to consider Pastor Russell's views on this matter. Russell didn't pay much attention to occultism, and since Pyramidology is associated with Christian Science, he didn't give it much consideration either. He was intrigued by the great pyramid, but not in a way that suggested he sought enlightenment from it. Instead, it served as confirmation of things he already understood.
Pastor Russell was not influenced by Charles Piazza Smyth's works, unlike other "independent" Bible student associations. In fact, some modern-day Bible students have acknowledged this. If Pastor Russell had been alive during Brother Adam Rutherford's time, he would have likely agreed with his findings, further affirming his own knowledge. While he may not have formally endorsed Rutherford, he would have found his works intriguing, like any rational individual would.
Did Pastor Russell have a personal interest in pyramidology, as falsely claimed by some? Of course not! This is just another deceitful argument used by apostates to divert attention from their own shortcomings.
The crucial aspect lies in his true opinion on Christian Science. It is evident that, at some stage, he must have been accused of being connected or associated with a prominent Christian Science figure named Mary Baker Eddy. His response, soaked in sarcasm, was:
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE--Was Pastor Russell a Pupil of Mary Baker Eddy?   Q70:2:: QUESTION (1912)--2--Was Pastor Russell ever a pupil of Mary Baker Eddy? (Laughter.) ANSWER--Not that I know of. (Laughter--applause.)   If Pastor Russell were alive today, it is possible that he would consider Jehovah's Witnesses to be an occult, but such an opinion would lack a solid biblical foundation. In my view, I would have respectfully disagreed with his assessment in this matter.   Harvest Gleanings vol 3 Nevertheless our text is not inappropriate to our topic, because Spiritism, Occultism, is a doctrine, and hence, as a whole, is to be proved or tried, to be weighed in the balance of reason and Scripture, and to be either accepted as true, or rejected as error. There is no middle ground, These things are either of God, or of the Adversary. It is our desire at this time to set before you conclusive evidence that Spiritism is of the Adversary, and, with its variations of Occultism, Hypnotism, Mesmerism, New Thought, Christian Science, etc., is the work of Satan, deluding the world of mankind, and leading them into the most woeful snares imaginable.   In certain cases, Pastor Russell believed that individuals who engaged in pyramidology for mystical purposes were undoubtedly carrying out the work of the devil. Brother Joseph Rutherford is not the only one.   Beware of the deceptive presentation of articles here, intended to mislead the public by distorting facts. The articles are designed to create a false impression of being good and right while actually being deceitful and misleading.  

JWI, you should focus on monitoring your own multiple accounts instead of worrying about others. Continuously bringing it up only makes you appear foolish.

So, you're suggesting exposing you as a fraudulent witness and an apostate. That's great; it's important for others to know who they're dealing with – someone who used to be part of the Bethel community and is now engaging in questionable actions. Quite amusing, I must say!
The current Watchtower has strengthened the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses based on their own understanding. Your criticism of the Bible students is meaningless because you lack an understanding of true chronology and are solely focused on defending your false claims. You will have to defend yourself on judgment day for causing strife, division, and leading others astray like an apostate.

Since you brought the name Charles Piazza Smyth
I believe this individual is yet another proponent of the British Israelite theory. I trust that the public will come to recognize how Pastor Russell addressed information that contradicted the unfounded assertions being presented here. Certain Bible Students, much like numerous independent Bible Students, exercised discernment when assessing Charles Piazza Smyth's writings, and that's why the "association" also considered other works.
It's important to consider Pastor Russell's views on this matter. Russell didn't pay much attention to occultism, and since Pyramidology is associated with Christian Science, he didn't give it much consideration either. He was intrigued by the great pyramid, but not in a way that suggested he sought enlightenment from it. Instead, it served as confirmation of things he already understood.
Pastor Russell was not influenced by Charles Piazza Smyth's works, unlike other "independent" Bible student associations. In fact, some modern-day Bible students have acknowledged this. If Pastor Russell had been alive during Brother Adam Rutherford's time, he would have likely agreed with his findings, further affirming his own knowledge. While he may not have formally endorsed Rutherford, he would have found his works intriguing, like any rational individual would.
Did Pastor Russell have a personal interest in pyramidology, as falsely claimed by some? Of course not! This is just another deceitful argument used by apostates to divert attention from their own shortcomings.
The crucial aspect lies in his true opinion on Christian Science. It is evident that, at some stage, he must have been accused of being connected or associated with a prominent Christian Science figure named Mary Baker Eddy. His response, soaked in sarcasm, was:
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE--Was Pastor Russell a Pupil of Mary Baker Eddy?   Q70:2:: QUESTION (1912)--2--Was Pastor Russell ever a pupil of Mary Baker Eddy? (Laughter.) ANSWER--Not that I know of. (Laughter--applause.)   If Pastor Russell were alive today, it is possible that he would consider Jehovah's Witnesses to be an occult, but such an opinion would lack a solid biblical foundation. In my view, I would have respectfully disagreed with his assessment in this matter.   Harvest Gleanings vol 3 Nevertheless our text is not inappropriate to our topic, because Spiritism, Occultism, is a doctrine, and hence, as a whole, is to be proved or tried, to be weighed in the balance of reason and Scripture, and to be either accepted as true, or rejected as error. There is no middle ground, These things are either of God, or of the Adversary. It is our desire at this time to set before you conclusive evidence that Spiritism is of the Adversary, and, with its variations of Occultism, Hypnotism, Mesmerism, New Thought, Christian Science, etc., is the work of Satan, deluding the world of mankind, and leading them into the most woeful snares imaginable.   In certain cases, Pastor Russell believed that individuals who engaged in pyramidology for mystical purposes were undoubtedly carrying out the work of the devil. Brother Joseph Rutherford is not the only one.   Beware of the deceptive presentation of articles here, intended to mislead the public by distorting facts. The articles are designed to create a false impression of being good and right while actually being deceitful and misleading.  

Those who truly comprehend the prophecy of Ezekiel regarding the judgments upon Ammon, Moab, and Edom also recognize the similarities in the judgment that befell Egypt. In terms of historical perspective, it is crucial to emphasize that the Watchtower timeline diverges from the conventional Ussher's chronology, which sets the creation at 4004 BC. Scholars, historians, and archaeologists have long relied on this conventional starting point, but the alternative proposed by the Watchtower offers a fresh perspective. A more accurate one.
Under this understanding, the events that took place between 590-580 BC are indicative of divine judgments upon the kingdoms of that time. Historical evidence allows us to establish a connection between the kingdom of Ammon and the year 588 BC. However, it is important to note that these judgments were happening simultaneously, leading to the conclusion that the historical accounts focus mainly on military events rather than biblical events. Despite this, both theologians and scholars have attempted to intertwine these two aspects, even though they are aware that the historical data, whether archaeological, written, or astrological, does not align perfectly. It is worth mentioning that Babylonian astronomers were magicians whose primary purpose was to seek out signs that would captivate the king and his kingdom, rather than anticipating the retribution that the Jewish God would unleash upon them.
JUDGMENT AGAINST AMMON. (Ca. 588 B.C.?) The Daily Bible
Into His Presence, Volume 2, Napoleon Burt · 2020
The Ancient Arabs: Israel Eph’al 1982 - Page 177
Ezekiel 25:1-7 New International Version
A Prophecy Against Ammon
25 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, set your face against the Ammonites and prophesy against them. 3 Say to them, ‘Hear the word of the Sovereign Lord. This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Because you said “Aha!” over my sanctuary when it was desecrated and over the land of Israel when it was laid waste and over the people of Judah when they went into exile, 4 therefore I am going to give you to the people of the East as a possession. They will set up their camps and pitch their tents among you; they will eat your fruit and drink your milk. 5 I will turn Rabbah into a pasture for camels and Ammon into a resting place for sheep. Then you will know that I am the Lord. 6 For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: Because you have clapped your hands and stamped your feet, rejoicing with all the malice of your heart against the land of Israel, 7 therefore I will stretch out my hand against you and give you as plunder to the nations. I will wipe you out from among the nations and exterminate you from the countries. I will destroy you, and you will know that I am the Lord.’”
People tend to fixate solely on what is said about Jerusalem, but it's crucial to widen our focus to the entire region. It is important to remember that the kingdoms of Aram, Ammon, and Moab were allies of Babylon and allowed Babylon free passage through their territory. This does not mean that the King of Ammon liked the Babylonian King; he actually disliked him. However, his dislike for the King of Judah was even stronger. No different from what happened between Egypt, Judah, and Babylon. There was no love between the Judean king and Babylon, but he favored Babylon over Egypt, leading to the conflict between King Josiah and King Necho II.
Thus, the alliance was purely a matter of convenience.  It's possible that the neighboring countries like Egypt and Jordan of today hold similar ideologies to those of ancient kingdoms of Aram, Ammon, and Moab toward Israel and Judah. These kingdoms were positioned adjacent to Israel and Judah. This strategic alliance with Babylon also compelled the Egyptians to travel through the coastline to support Assyria. In the end, all these kings would face judgment from God through the hands of the Babylonians and other allies like the Medes.
2 Kings 24:2 The LORD sent against him bands of the Chaldeans, and bands of the Arameans, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the people of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the LORD, which he spoke by his servants, the prophets.
There is a crucial part of Judah that people, either deliberately or inadvertently, overlook: Jerusalem. It is essential to grasp that when God unleashed those marauders to bring devastation upon Judah, Jerusalem, being an integral part of Judah, would undoubtedly have been affected. To believe that the marauders would decimate every other city in Judah while leaving Jerusalem unscathed, solely for the purpose of ensuring historical accuracy depicting its destruction in 587 BC, is a fallacy propagated by those who stray from the truth.
Those who attempt to refute such events are, in fact, refuting the divine word of God as it is written in 2 Kings 24. Their so-called refutation revolves around speculations on chronological order, by going against the teachings of scripture. It is essential to recognize that scripture is a sacred text, set apart from man-made historical findings, which rely on human calculations rather than God's wisdom.
Furthermore, it is important to consider that the Babylonian Chronicles abruptly end in 594 BC. As a result, there is no mention whatsoever of the years 587 BC or 585 BC in these chronicles. However, when examining the historical events recorded, we do find references to Jerusalem in the year 598 BC, as well as accounts of numerous military campaigns that took place in 607 BC within those chronicles. It is worth noting that during this period, a band of marauders was actively wreaking havoc in Judah, including the city of Jerusalem, and as stated by scripture, Babylonian marauders were also involved in these destructive acts.
Can this be explained through historical events without relying on the Watchtower chronology, which differs from the conventional chronology? One simply needs to understand the region where Nebuchadnezzar was documented to be in, according to their own Babylonian chronicles ABC4.
[5] The nineteenth year (607/606): In the month Simanu the king of Akkad mustered his army and
[6] Nebuchadnezzar, his eldest son, the crown prince,
[7] mustered his army. They marched to the mountains of Za[...].
[8] The king of Akkad left the prince and his army there while he returned to Babylon in the month of Du'ûzu.
Therefore, according to the strict guidelines of examining secular history and the Bible's account in 2 Kings 24, it not only matches the description but also aligns with the pattern established by God for the judgement against Judah, including Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar's presence in every Babylonian campaign was not necessary. Such a belief would be foolish. Of course, he would get credit for directing a military campaign from afar, especially a successful one. 
Who was left to oversee the military campaigns in the western region, from the Zagros Mountains that transcend far up to Turkey? Nebuchadnezzar, according to the chronicles since Napolossar went home. This is the time period when Napolossar's health started to decline. History teaches us that the Medes and Babylonians besieged Harran in 610 BC, which clearly demonstrates the vibrant activity taking place in the western region during that time.
Particularly noteworthy is King Necho's attempt to assist the Assyrians in Harran, which was thwarted by the Babylonians and Medes after clashing with King Josiah of Judah in either late 610 BC or early 609 BC. The historical evidence of Egyptian King Necho's presence in Riblah in 609 BC, seeking to depose a Judean king and install his own, indicates the proximity of the Babylonians in the region, where the Arameans (Syria) are situated to the west of the Euphrates.
All of these events occurred between 610-607 BC, as confirmed by historical records. There is absolutely no basis for a fictional date of 587 BC, created solely to rationalize the mistakes made by previous generations. The supposed explanation for 587 BC is entirely distinct. 
However, it remains a topic of discussion for individuals who are unwilling to acknowledge their erroneous beliefs even after a decade. They are unable to admit their mistakes and are troubled by the thought of leading others astray.
All of these topics have been extensively discussed, as the title suggests. Countless posts, by numerous professional accounts, have been unjustly disregarded for challenging people's beliefs which prove them wrong.  Then, these individuals have the audacity to assert that no evidence has been presented in the last 10 years, as if their inability to recognize it somehow qualifies them to pass judgment. 
It is truly foolish for an ignorant person to believe that they have been communicating with the same individual all this time, especially when they consistently use the same writing style for all their accounts. This means the jokes on them. Furthermore, George presented additional persuasive evidence to undermine the credibility of this individual's criticism. It is clear that this person is compelled to criticize, as their stance in this forum would otherwise be undermined by a decade's worth of manipulation, distortion, and lies, as revealed by George.

LOL. I can hardly believe anyone else read this far into the thread. At this point I thought I was just teasing BTK/nkboswell/Alphonse with a little dose of his own medicine.
It's an interesting thought. Some people have come at this from angles I never thought of. I saw one online source wondering whether Satan made sure that WW1 would start during the same year that Barbour and Russell had predicted would be the end [of the time of troubles]. If a major world event could happen in 1914 it could have the effect of tricking Jehovah's people into hanging on to a false tradition for many more years. 
It is amazing that Barbour had pinpointed a year for the end so many years in advance. And even though every prediction for 1914 failed, no one can deny that it was still a major historical turning point. Of course, Barbour came out of an era where almost every year from 1843 to 1890 was being prophesied as the end by someone. Even the Watchtower was also expecting prophetic fulfillments that had been predicted for the time periods surrounding 1878, 1881, 1904, 1910, 1912, 1914, 1915, 1917, 1918, 1925 etc. If WW1 had broken out in any of those other years the shift of emphasis and definitions would have been just as quick for highlighting how we had been correct about any of those years, too. No doubt we would always be able to point out that we got something right, and then just change the definition of what we had predicted so that we could better explain that it was Jehovah's guidance. 
Since so much emphasis had been on "the end of the Gentile Times" all we really had to do was drop the half-dozen "predictions" for 1914 and shift emphasis to the "Gentile Times." Then we only had to change the definition of what was meant by "Gentile Times" and we'd look like geniuses. (By "we" I mean the brothers representing the Watchtower Society in those times.)

Misunderstanding history and biblical chronology does not necessarily imply the presence of contradictions. Such contradictions only arise in your mind, as you are the one perceiving them as contradictory.
There is an abundance of compelling historical evidence to consider additional factors for that particular year, which you persistently refuse to acknowledge. Therefore, I will refrain from engaging in pointless arguments over baseless counterarguments, as the public is capable of conducting its own research. I firmly believe that George attests to that. But since you or Tom banned that person, it seems to have been erased.
Your actions as a witness consistently highlight your dysfunction. It is evident that you are pretending to be one, and it is not difficult to comprehend this fact.
Indeed, a person who speaks the "truth" has no reason to fear judgment from God. However, individuals who inflict conflict, discord, and lead people astray with deceit, distortion, and misguided intentions must bear the weight of concern before God. This principle holds true not only for those present but also for certain members in the exclusive group who still align themselves with that individual.
I don't resort to anger to justify banning people; that's something you and Tom do. There is ample evidence that you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge, which seems like a futile attempt to defend false claims. Therefore, I concur with the Bible and historical events. I have doubts about your professionalism and research skills. Hence, your credibility is nonexistent.
Overall, the majority of our brothers do not share apostate views like the ones you're expressing. Our focus should not be on questioning the truthfulness of our brothers, but rather on addressing the distortions presented as false truth being forced and presented here. When scripture admonishes us to avoid such behaviors, it becomes clear that you do not align with the faithful brothers, but rather stand as a stain among them.
I haven't encountered any positive perspectives here so far. Criticizing the Watchtower, the Governing Body, the Elders, and their interpretation, as well as their chronology, seems to be the only thing you find beneficial. Your mindset on adhering to Bible truth as presented by an organization you disparage and slander appears to deviate from the civilized world under the guidance of Christ.
Are Tom and you missing Pudgy (James) so much for that reason?

Your personal fallacy lies in not considering the historical context that could reveal the fallacy in this conclusion.
I was unaware that the scholarly works presented by both George and I were actually non-canonical books. These works are actually based on historical evidence, meticulously presented by professionals in the field. It seems that you are unfairly basing your criticism on just one book, without acknowledging the broader context.
 
Your personal investigation into Brother Adam Rutherford did not delve deep enough. Although he may have been recognized by the Bible students, his background goes beyond that. As I mentioned, he was a British Israelite with a lineage that can be traced back even further. Are you troubled by the fact that Rutherford was correct while your champion, COJ, was not?
Multiple individuals, besides Joseph Rutherford, alleged that Pyramidology was associated with Satanism.
Your personal observations are causing confusion by trying to manipulate them with wordplay. I guess this is when you get very upset enough to ban.
Indeed! We are aware of your stance on 587 BC versus 607 BC, which aligns with that of other dissenters. However, it is crucial to note that the evidence you continuously dismiss has valid explanations of its own. Thus, your refusal to acknowledge these explanations renders your opinion insignificant and lacking credibility. Consequently, I cannot accept your distorted perspective on history either.
If you haven't witnessed the enlightenment brought about by many individuals over the course of a decade, what makes you believe that you are intelligent enough now to understand, especially if you still fail to comprehend it?

It appears that the excuses are coming from you. Why should I keep posting numerous pieces of evidence to debunk your personal fallacies when you keep deleting them every time you ban someone? That doesn't seem logical. Your opinion is irrelevant. I am focused on revealing the real truth about your deceit to the public, not to any apostate.

I won't waste any more time on this pointless argument about who deleted the past information and who the true librarian is. However, I must point out that the only thing you got right is that you reject the Watchtower Chronology. I have no obligation to prove anything to you or people like you.
I'm intrigued by the Babylonian Chronicle ABC4 - what specific aspects of it are posing challenges for you? What parts are you finding difficult to comprehend?

Those who truly comprehend the prophecy of Ezekiel regarding the judgments upon Ammon, Moab, and Edom also recognize the similarities in the judgment that befell Egypt. In terms of historical perspective, it is crucial to emphasize that the Watchtower timeline diverges from the conventional Ussher's chronology, which sets the creation at 4004 BC. Scholars, historians, and archaeologists have long relied on this conventional starting point, but the alternative proposed by the Watchtower offers a fresh perspective. A more accurate one.
Under this understanding, the events that took place between 590-580 BC are indicative of divine judgments upon the kingdoms of that time. Historical evidence allows us to establish a connection between the kingdom of Ammon and the year 588 BC. However, it is important to note that these judgments were happening simultaneously, leading to the conclusion that the historical accounts focus mainly on military events rather than biblical events. Despite this, both theologians and scholars have attempted to intertwine these two aspects, even though they are aware that the historical data, whether archaeological, written, or astrological, does not align perfectly. It is worth mentioning that Babylonian astronomers were magicians whose primary purpose was to seek out signs that would captivate the king and his kingdom, rather than anticipating the retribution that the Jewish God would unleash upon them.
JUDGMENT AGAINST AMMON. (Ca. 588 B.C.?) The Daily Bible
Into His Presence, Volume 2, Napoleon Burt · 2020
The Ancient Arabs: Israel Eph’al 1982 - Page 177
Ezekiel 25:1-7 New International Version
A Prophecy Against Ammon
25 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, set your face against the Ammonites and prophesy against them. 3 Say to them, ‘Hear the word of the Sovereign Lord. This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Because you said “Aha!” over my sanctuary when it was desecrated and over the land of Israel when it was laid waste and over the people of Judah when they went into exile, 4 therefore I am going to give you to the people of the East as a possession. They will set up their camps and pitch their tents among you; they will eat your fruit and drink your milk. 5 I will turn Rabbah into a pasture for camels and Ammon into a resting place for sheep. Then you will know that I am the Lord. 6 For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: Because you have clapped your hands and stamped your feet, rejoicing with all the malice of your heart against the land of Israel, 7 therefore I will stretch out my hand against you and give you as plunder to the nations. I will wipe you out from among the nations and exterminate you from the countries. I will destroy you, and you will know that I am the Lord.’”
People tend to fixate solely on what is said about Jerusalem, but it's crucial to widen our focus to the entire region. It is important to remember that the kingdoms of Aram, Ammon, and Moab were allies of Babylon and allowed Babylon free passage through their territory. This does not mean that the King of Ammon liked the Babylonian King; he actually disliked him. However, his dislike for the King of Judah was even stronger. No different from what happened between Egypt, Judah, and Babylon. There was no love between the Judean king and Babylon, but he favored Babylon over Egypt, leading to the conflict between King Josiah and King Necho II.
Thus, the alliance was purely a matter of convenience.  It's possible that the neighboring countries like Egypt and Jordan of today hold similar ideologies to those of ancient kingdoms of Aram, Ammon, and Moab toward Israel and Judah. These kingdoms were positioned adjacent to Israel and Judah. This strategic alliance with Babylon also compelled the Egyptians to travel through the coastline to support Assyria. In the end, all these kings would face judgment from God through the hands of the Babylonians and other allies like the Medes.
2 Kings 24:2 The LORD sent against him bands of the Chaldeans, and bands of the Arameans, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the people of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the LORD, which he spoke by his servants, the prophets.
There is a crucial part of Judah that people, either deliberately or inadvertently, overlook: Jerusalem. It is essential to grasp that when God unleashed those marauders to bring devastation upon Judah, Jerusalem, being an integral part of Judah, would undoubtedly have been affected. To believe that the marauders would decimate every other city in Judah while leaving Jerusalem unscathed, solely for the purpose of ensuring historical accuracy depicting its destruction in 587 BC, is a fallacy propagated by those who stray from the truth.
Those who attempt to refute such events are, in fact, refuting the divine word of God as it is written in 2 Kings 24. Their so-called refutation revolves around speculations on chronological order, by going against the teachings of scripture. It is essential to recognize that scripture is a sacred text, set apart from man-made historical findings, which rely on human calculations rather than God's wisdom.
Furthermore, it is important to consider that the Babylonian Chronicles abruptly end in 594 BC. As a result, there is no mention whatsoever of the years 587 BC or 585 BC in these chronicles. However, when examining the historical events recorded, we do find references to Jerusalem in the year 598 BC, as well as accounts of numerous military campaigns that took place in 607 BC within those chronicles. It is worth noting that during this period, a band of marauders was actively wreaking havoc in Judah, including the city of Jerusalem, and as stated by scripture, Babylonian marauders were also involved in these destructive acts.
Can this be explained through historical events without relying on the Watchtower chronology, which differs from the conventional chronology? One simply needs to understand the region where Nebuchadnezzar was documented to be in, according to their own Babylonian chronicles ABC4.
[5] The nineteenth year (607/606): In the month Simanu the king of Akkad mustered his army and
[6] Nebuchadnezzar, his eldest son, the crown prince,
[7] mustered his army. They marched to the mountains of Za[...].
[8] The king of Akkad left the prince and his army there while he returned to Babylon in the month of Du'ûzu.
Therefore, according to the strict guidelines of examining secular history and the Bible's account in 2 Kings 24, it not only matches the description but also aligns with the pattern established by God for the judgement against Judah, including Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar's presence in every Babylonian campaign was not necessary. Such a belief would be foolish. Of course, he would get credit for directing a military campaign from afar, especially a successful one. 
Who was left to oversee the military campaigns in the western region, from the Zagros Mountains that transcend far up to Turkey? Nebuchadnezzar, according to the chronicles since Napolossar went home. This is the time period when Napolossar's health started to decline. History teaches us that the Medes and Babylonians besieged Harran in 610 BC, which clearly demonstrates the vibrant activity taking place in the western region during that time.
Particularly noteworthy is King Necho's attempt to assist the Assyrians in Harran, which was thwarted by the Babylonians and Medes after clashing with King Josiah of Judah in either late 610 BC or early 609 BC. The historical evidence of Egyptian King Necho's presence in Riblah in 609 BC, seeking to depose a Judean king and install his own, indicates the proximity of the Babylonians in the region, where the Arameans (Syria) are situated to the west of the Euphrates.
All of these events occurred between 610-607 BC, as confirmed by historical records. There is absolutely no basis for a fictional date of 587 BC, created solely to rationalize the mistakes made by previous generations. The supposed explanation for 587 BC is entirely distinct. 
However, it remains a topic of discussion for individuals who are unwilling to acknowledge their erroneous beliefs even after a decade. They are unable to admit their mistakes and are troubled by the thought of leading others astray.
All of these topics have been extensively discussed, as the title suggests. Countless posts, by numerous professional accounts, have been unjustly disregarded for challenging people's beliefs which prove them wrong.  Then, these individuals have the audacity to assert that no evidence has been presented in the last 10 years, as if their inability to recognize it somehow qualifies them to pass judgment. 
It is truly foolish for an ignorant person to believe that they have been communicating with the same individual all this time, especially when they consistently use the same writing style for all their accounts. This means the jokes on them. Furthermore, George presented additional persuasive evidence to undermine the credibility of this individual's criticism. It is clear that this person is compelled to criticize, as their stance in this forum would otherwise be undermined by a decade's worth of manipulation, distortion, and lies, as revealed by George.

It is intriguing how you justify your disagreement with Watchtower Chronology, especially considering that it is discussed in an apostate site, AD1914, alongside your own rejection of 607 BC for the reasons you mentioned. King Nebuchadnezzar was not king in 607 BC. However, numerous reputable individuals, including Bro. Adam Rutherford, have been able to discern this, while you seem to be unaware of these facts.   This is a compelling reason why one should not take your personal observations seriously, as you do not appear to be a serious researcher. Fortunately, people can turn to Adam Rutherford's works and learn how he properly utilized the Babylonian Chronicles, as opposed to the incorrect methods employed by apostates in the past, including some active witnesses here and of course this would include Carl Olof Jonsson.   It's good that you are finally being honest with the people whom you personally caused to stumble with your conflicted views. It's important to acknowledge that your opposition of 1914 and 607 can be easily proven.   As always, you tend to react with frustration and possible banning, or attempt to cleverly manipulate the situation with wordplay to maintain a favorable image. However, it seems unreasonable that you only value your own words and those of your friends, without consideration for the general public.  

Certainly, you do. You have been contending with misinformation for 10 years. What aspect of those dissenting views is leading you to shift your position?   Your claims are merely speculative, as he has his own method for determining those dates. Furthermore, you conveniently overlook the fact that he relied on the Babylonian chronicles to validate his claims, which is my main argument that you seem determined to evade.   More speculation: just because you can't figure it out personally, doesn't mean the rest of us are handicapped. That seemingly only applies to you. He didn't seem to have a problem organizing historical events in their proper order. It seems disingenuous to criticize just because you don't get it.
Someday, you will inevitably grasp the simplicity that honest researchers effortlessly comprehend. However, in the meantime, it is of little value to entertain conjecture and speculation from dissenters who stubbornly refuse to accept facts, whether they are rooted in biblical or historical evidence. Those who are interested are free to delve into the positive findings of the Watchtower Chronology.   Unfortunately, as more people search the internet, they are increasingly exposed to misinformation, not only from unreliable sources such as apostates and several active witnesses but also from biased search engine owners who prioritize deception over truth in their results.

You have consistently expressed your opposition to the Watchtower Chronology and your support for the historical view of 587 BC, aligning yourself with apostate friends past and present. I understand your position on this matter. If you are engaging in mind games, that is your concern.
Your actions will never absolve you of the responsibility for causing conflict, division, and distress (stumble) to genuine visitors who came seeking the truth, only to encounter a supposed witness taking such reckless actions to share an untrustworthy opinion.
If you are uncertain about the true meaning of the gentile times, let me clarify that it is not about predicting Armageddon. Rather, it is based on the proximity of the actual event of "tribulation." It appears that you and your misled circle of friends are still confused about this.
You keep bringing up a misinterpretation of 587/6 BC despite criticizing me for being confused about your interpretation. Cease playing your childish games.
However, it seems that you haven't fully grasped the details of historical events that lead us to the year 607 BC, as you still hold the belief that Nebuchadnezzar was the king in 605 BC. Let's examine the historical events surrounding Cyrus: indeed, he defeated Babylon in late 539 BC. In mid-538 BC, he issued a decree for the Jews to return home, and by 537 BC, when they were already back in their homeland, they erected an altar. These facts are straightforward enough. Consequently, we can indeed trace back the 70-year period to the year 607 BC.
There's no window for error using the date 539 BC.
Wow, that's a surprising statement. Have you received counseling or have you developed a conscience? It appears that the truth in your recent comments truly reveals your authentic self and how you wish to be perceived, not as a true witness. As I mentioned before, lacking understanding shouldn't be an excuse for causing others to stumble for more than 10 years.

You seem to struggle with interpreting past information accurately due to a lack of research skills. This is a critical issue for a self-proclaimed researcher.
If Brother Adam were alive today, I highly doubt that he would agree with your understanding of the historical events surrounding Nebuchadnezzar's kingship in 605 BC. He has his own chronology which places the destruction of Jerusalem in 585 BC, whereas you have been adamant in advocating for the date of 587 BC. Even in his astronomical data, I haven't found any inclusion of information other than Ptolemy's Canon.
It appears that you tend to only support ideas that do not align with the Watchtower Chronology when it comes to historical events. However, I also observe your agreement regarding how Adam Rutherford, a member of the "British Israelite" sect of Christianity, successfully utilized the Babylonian chronicles to establish a reliable chronology. On the other hand, the COJ, unfortunately, failed to accomplish the same feat.
I always strive to maintain consistency, which is why individuals like George were banned for. Just like George, there are various explanations surrounding the active military campaigns during the years 590,589, 588, 587, 586, 585, 584, 583, and 582 BC, etc. Consequently, my commitment lies in ensuring that different correct interpretations of historical events are consistently acknowledged.

In volume 3, the mention of 587 BC and 586 BC is not in the context one might expect, as argued by apostates. Those who dissent arrive at their conclusion based on an astronomical tablet dated in 568 BC. The inconsistency here lies in their assertion, which hinges on retracing either the 18th or 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar back to their given dates, when we could just as easily utilize those year dates from 626/5 BC to arrive at 607/6 BC. The king's list is not necessary to extract the value of Jeremiah's mission. Adam Rutherford's approach, while one of many, is driven by the Sabbatical year or cycle. He does not endorse 587/6 BC as he believes it to be in error, but instead opts to link it to 585 BC which hinders that apostate claim of the astronomical tablet VAT 4956 from 568 BC that COJ and all apostates used to confirm the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC. They would also need to explain those 2 years.
library.biblicalarchaeology.org
According to the introduction to his eponymous biblical book, Jeremiah became a prophet in the 13th year of King Josiah, that is, around 626 BC. In that same year, the Chaldeans took control of the city of Babylon, and so began the rise of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, which in 40 years would swallow up Judah.
 
Pyramidology -- adam rutherford -- Volume 3, 1966
Hence 587 B.c. is also an erroneous date for the fall of Jerusalem. 
So 588 B.c. is not the correct date either for the Fall of Jerusalem. 
according to the system of chronology herein set forth, the destruction of Jerusalem took place in 585 B.c.
Naturally, this does not correspond to our comprehension of events based on our initial standpoint in time.
However, in all of Adam Rutherford's books, there are references to 607 BC and AD 1914. Regardless of any other connections and methods he may employ, it is ultimately these two dates that hold the utmost significance to the Watchtower Chronology. Rutherford emphasizes and establishes a connection with the Babylonian Chronicles in his own unique manner.
As I previously mentioned, his works should be interesting for any dedicated researcher. However, for myself, in certain instances, I must respectfully disagree with his perspective on historical chronology.

In seeking to avoid succumbing to the snares of the devil's influence, it's paramount to heed the wisdom of Proverbs 6:16-19. I find this book to be truly fascinating. While I'm aware that you're unable to divulge its content in full due to fair use restrictions and the fact that it was published in 1966 and thus falls outside the public domain clause of 1923, I'm curious if Adam Rutherford referenced the year 587 B.C.