Jump to content
The World News Media

God's Kingdom Rules


HollyW

Recommended Posts

  • Member

" Would you not expect the teachings of a religious organization that claims to be the sole communication between God and mankind as the appointed faithful slave of Matthew 24:45 to be in full harmony with God's Word?"

If this was the argument, used to identify the true religion then the true religion would have had to know ALL, right from the get go. This was  impossible as Christianity had become so tainted with falsehoods, that it took time to sift through its teachings, comparing them with the Bible and then getting rid of stuff that wasn't Biblical. Knowledge is progressive. No JW ever claimed that they had a sudden flash of revelation and suddenly understood everything. It was down to good old hard work and study, and a desire to progressively find the Truth. We are still learning. So no, one should not expect the appointed slave to be fully in harmony with God's word, but we can expect them to be doing their best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 10.6k
  • Replies 206
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Whoops! Maybe what I meant to remember was that he was never "disfellowshipped" which means that technically he is not "officially" an "apo-state." I see that his experience says nothing of being

Allen, Just point out what was said that you believed was wrong. No one is going to understand what your point is if you keep telling people they don't have their facts straight, and then, when y

Can I put an end to this argument (discussion)? On page 50, paragraph 5 and 6 of the book says: "As we saw in Chapter 2 of this book, the Bible Students spent decades pointing out that the year 1

Posted Images

  • Member
1 hour ago, HollyW said:

 

On page 21 of this book, "God's Kingdom Rules", there's a drawing of a street scene with Jesus above it and this caption printed on it: "In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence."

However, history buffs will know that the Bible Students had already discerned Christ's invisible presence as having begun in 1874, and they continued that declaration throughout 1914 and several decades after it.

This is from Rutherford's Biographical sketch of Russell after his death:

Like other Christians he was looking for the Second Coming of Christ. Between 1872 and 1876 he discovered that the Scriptures clearly teach that the Lord would return as a spirit being, invisible to human eyes, not in a body of flesh, and that His Second Presence was due in the autumn of  1874.  This led to the publication of a booklet entitled "The Object and Manner of Our Lord’s Return," which had a phenomenal sale.
 
Many students of the Bible throughout the United States and Canada responded to the information derived from that book, and Pastor Russell’s correspondence became voluminous. Realizing the necessity of keeping the Truth before the minds of those who had begun to investigate, in 1879, he began the publication of "The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence," and was its sole editor to the time of his death. [Overland Monthly/OV442- The Late Pastor Russell (By J.F. Rutherford)

 

 

Why the dishonesty in the 2014 book?

 

There is no dishonesty. Russell got his ideas about the date from Barbour and soon after that parted ways with him and also scrapped the date. The important thing was that Russell discerned, as opposed to what Christendom taught, that Christ's presence would be invisible. There is no mention of the year 1874 in the booklet. Russell states "It is not my object in this pamphlet to call attention more fully to the TIME.......those interested in knowing the evidences as to the time I would refer to Dr. N H Barbour... (page 62. The object and manner of our Lords return).

1874 was Barbour's date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
15 hours ago, Anna said:

" Would you not expect the teachings of a religious organization that claims to be the sole communication between God and mankind as the appointed faithful slave of Matthew 24:45 to be in full harmony with God's Word?"

If this was the argument, used to identify the true religion 

The WTS says that is the argument used to identify the true religion:

[w69 3/15 p.165-167] We need to examine, not only what we personally believe, but also what is taught by any religious organization with which we may be associated.
Are its teachings in full harmony with God’s Word
, or are they based on the traditions of men? If we are lovers of the truth, there is nothing to fear from such an examination. It should be the sincere desire of every one of us to learn what God’s will is for us, and then to do it.—John 8:32.

Or do you think maybe they meant that for just other religious organizations and not their own?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
14 hours ago, Anna said:

There is no dishonesty. Russell got his ideas about the date from Barbour and soon after that parted ways with him and also scrapped the date. The important thing was that Russell discerned, as opposed to what Christendom taught, that Christ's presence would be invisible. There is no mention of the year 1874 in the booklet. Russell states "It is not my object in this pamphlet to call attention more fully to the TIME.......those interested in knowing the evidences as to the time I would refer to Dr. N H Barbour... (page 62. The object and manner of our Lords return).

1874 was Barbour's date.

What I posted from the 2014 book, "God's Kingdom Rules"........

 
"In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence.
"

.....is not honest since it was not in 1914 at all but in 1876 that the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence as having begun in 1874......and, yes, Russell was convinced of 1874 by Barbour in 1876, which is why in 1879 he named his magazine Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence ---- he was heralding Christ's invisible presence as having begun in 1874.  And, as Ann has pointed out (thank you, Ann) that continued to be the WTS teaching clear thru 1914 and on into the 1930's.

So, in reality, Russell and the Bible Students missed BOTH dates of his invisible presence---the first by a couple of years and the second by 20 years or so.

What they were actually discerning in 1914 was that all of Russell's predictions about that year had failed miserably.  They were expecting to be raptured to heaven, that didn't happen.  They were expecting the Great Tribulation and Armageddon would be over, instead a world war erupted.  They were expecting the Millennium Kingdom to come, it didn't.  You can see the other things they were expecting from the seven proofs Russell had been teaching them since 1889---none of them took place either before 1914 nor after, nor any time since 1914.

So, no, the Bible Students had not begun to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence in 1914 and it is dishonest to say they had.  The religious leaders of the WTS should know this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
29 minutes ago, HollyW said:

The WTS says that is the argument used to identify the true religion:

 

 
[w69 3/15 p.165-167] We need to examine, not only what we personally believe, but also what is taught by any religious organization with which we may be associated.
Are its teachings in full harmony with God’s Word
, or are they based on the traditions of men? If we are lovers of the truth, there is nothing to fear from such an examination. It should be the sincere desire of every one of us to learn what God’s will is for us, and then to do it.—John 8:32.
 

 

Or do you think maybe they meant that for just other religious organizations and not their own?

It is relative. As "fully" as humanly possible, in their limited human capacity. There is STARK contrast between how "in full" harmony Christendom is, and how "in full" harmony Jehovah's Witnesses are. There is no comparison. Christendom is based on "the traditions of men" .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 minutes ago, Anna said:

It is relative. As "fully" as humanly possible, in their limited human capacity. There is STARK contrast between how "in full" harmony Christendom is, and how "in full" harmony Jehovah's Witnesses are. There is no comparison. Christendom is based on "the traditions of men" .

Do you think they meant to say, "Are its teachings relatively in harmony with God's Word?"

Can a religious organization that says that also say the entire range of their teachings must be accepted as the truth on pain of being excommunicated and shunned for apostasy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
24 minutes ago, HollyW said:

What I posted from the 2014 book, "God's Kingdom Rules"........

 

 
"In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence.
"

 

.....is not honest since it was not in 1914 at all but in 1876 that the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence as having begun in 1874......and, yes, Russell was convinced of 1874 by Barbour in 1876, which is why in 1879 he named his magazine Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence ---- he was heralding Christ's invisible presence as having begun in 1874.  And, as Ann has pointed out (thank you, Ann) that continued to be the WTS teaching clear thru 1914 and on into the 1930's.

So, in reality, Russell and the Bible Students missed BOTH dates of his invisible presence---the first by a couple of years and the second by 20 years or so.

What they were actually discerning in 1914 was that all of Russell's predictions about that year had failed miserably.  They were expecting to be raptured to heaven, that didn't happen.  They were expecting the Great Tribulation and Armageddon would be over, instead a world war erupted.  They were expecting the Millennium Kingdom to come, it didn't.  You can see the other things they were expecting from the seven proofs Russell had been teaching them since 1889---none of them took place either before 1914 nor after, nor any time since 1914.

So, no, the Bible Students had not begun to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence in 1914 and it is dishonest to say they had.  The religious leaders of the WTS should know this.

Well I guess it depends how you look at it. From our perspective, yes, the Bible Students did begin discerning Christ's presence in 1914.  It is no secret that the Bible Students were disappointed. It was written about quite a number of times, that their expectations were wrong. In fact, page 50, paragraph 5, of God's Kingdom Rules, does not hide the fact either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 hours ago, Anna said:

Russell got his ideas about the date from Barbour and soon after that parted ways with him and also scrapped the date. The important thing was that Russell discerned, as opposed to what Christendom taught, that Christ's presence would be invisible. There is no mention of the year 1874 in the booklet. Russell states "It is not my object in this pamphlet to call attention more fully to the TIME.......those interested in knowing the evidences as to the time I would refer to Dr. N H Barbour... (page 62. The object and manner of our Lords return).

1874 was Barbour's date.

Hello Anna,  Welcome. Hope you don't mind if I add a few points.

Russell never scrapped the 1874 date, ever.

The 1873/4 date was actually originally suggested as a possibility by "Father Miller" himself back around 1843/4, but many of the Second Adventists after Miller preferred looking to closer dates in the 1850's and 1860's. (Many others did what Miller himself did, and said they shouldn't be setting dates any more. The Seventh Day Adventists generally followed Miller's advice.)

Barbour had the advantage of having been promoting the 1873/4 date from all the way back when other date-setters were still focusing on those 1860's dates. This is what made Barbour's name most closely associated with 1874 among the remaining Adventist date-setters. (He was the only one left standing after the previous failures.) Therefore, after the the 1860's failure, this meant that Barbour had a newly "captive" audience of Second Adventists that would quickly number to around 15,000 subscribers in time for the initial 1873 date expectations. He had to start building up the numbers again after the two main failures in 1873 and 1874, but Barbour (via one of his "Herald" contributors, B W Keith, and prior to Russell "discerning" it) declared 1874 to be correct as the beginning of an "invisible" presence, and then set 1878 as the new date for Christ's return.

This is why it was so urgent for Russell to put money into publicizing 1878, and why he funded a much larger distribution of Barbour's "Three Worlds" in 1877 that spelled out the "times and seasons" aspect of the Lord's Return, while Russell himself wrote a smaller booklet that focused on the "object and manner" aspect of the Lord's Return. Russell did get his name put on "Three Worlds" as co-author, but I've read that he probably didn't add much of anything himself. But all of this was focused on preparing for 1878. 1874 was used as a foundation to prove that 1878 was urgent!

Russell says that when 1878 failed, Barbour started spouting some bad doctrine in order to create a "distraction" from the failure of that date. Russell said that 1874 was still right, and 1878 was still right, but that they had expected the wrong thing. Russell then funded the Watch Tower magazine due to the urgency of the 1881 date when he was sure that the Bride of Christ would be joined with Christ in heaven, while remaining Christians would participate in a 40-year harvest that lasted from 1874 to 1914. 

It's true, as Ann said, that the 1874 was dropped around 1930, but there were some ways in which the "1874 chronology" (based on a chronological year-by-year correspondence between Jewish and Christian events) remained for several years, even after 1874 itself was dropped. Note the last vestige of this chronology:

*** kr chap. 5 p. 50 par. 5 The King Shines Light on the Kingdom ***
The harvest would extend from 1874 to 1914 and would culminate in the gathering of the anointed to heaven.

This 40-year harvest remained "on the books" up until 1961, but it had been slightly adjusted:

*** w54 3/1 p. 150 par. 5 Restoration of True Religion Today ***
Not until the Lord of the harvest gave the command could that be done. Corresponding to the events of the first advent, there is first an “Elijah” work performed, like the work of John the Baptist, to warn the people, trying to bring them to repentance. Such a work was prosecuted in a particular way from 1878 to 1918

*** w51 7/1 p. 410 par. 6 ‘Time, Times and Half a Time’ ***
6 Now note further corroborative proof of this period of time: “I will cause my two witnesses to prophesy a thousand two hundred and sixty days dressed in sackcloth.” (Rev. 11:3, NW) The “two witnesses” are the antitypical Elijah-John-the-Baptist work, and their being introduced at this time is important, for it helps us to understand Daniel’s prophecy. . . .  foreshadowed great works to be accomplished at this end of the system of things, and which were also to be done before 1918. . . . So it was antitypically with the work done from 1878 to 1918.

*** w52 2/1 p. 78 par. 7 Jehovah’s Theocratic Organization Today ***
But again we ask, “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics to give them their food at the proper time?” In 1878, forty years before the Lord’s coming to the temple for judgment, there was a class of sincere consecrated Christians . . .

*** w60 10/1 pp. 606-607 The Great Wheat Harvest ***
What was foretold in the illustration of the great harvest has been taking place in our day,. . . Christ’s anointed followers have been separated from Christendom, and imitation Christians appearing among them are removed as weeds are removed from harvested wheat. . . . The history of Jehovah’s witnesses, particularly since 1918, verifies the accuracy of what Jesus prophesied. . . .  As the harvest period in the illustration . . . . The more than forty years [1918 to 1960] that have passed since its beginning is short when compared with the centuries that have passed since the congregation was planted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
Just now, Anna said:

Well I guess it depends how you look at it. From our perspective, yes, the Bible Students did begin discerning Christ's presence in 1914.  It is no secret that the Bible Students were disappointed. It was written about quite a number of times, that their expectations were wrong. In fact, page 50, paragraph 5, of God's Kingdom Rules, does not hide the fact either.

They didn't begin discerning it in 1914.  In fact, it wasn't an official "discernment" until 1943.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
40 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Hello Anna,  Welcome. Hope you don't mind if I add a few points.

Russell never scrapped the 1874 date, ever.

The 1873/4 date was actually originally suggested as a possibility by "Father Miller" himself back around 1843/4, but many of the Second Adventists after Miller preferred looking to closer dates in the 1850's and 1860's. (Many others did what Miller himself did, and said they shouldn't be setting dates any more. The Seventh Day Adventists generally followed Miller's advice.)

Barbour had the advantage of having been promoting the 1873/4 date from all the way back when other date-setters were still focusing on those 1860's dates. This is what made Barbour's name most closely associated with 1874 among the remaining Adventist date-setters. (He was the only one left standing after the previous failures.) Therefore, after the the 1860's failure, this meant that Barbour had a newly "captive" audience of Second Adventists that would quickly number to around 15,000 subscribers in time for the initial 1873 date expectations. He had to start building up the numbers again after the two main failures in 1873 and 1874, but Barbour (via one of his "Herald" contributors, B W Keith, and prior to Russell "discerning" it) declared 1874 to be correct as the beginning of an "invisible" presence, and then set 1878 as the new date for Christ's return.

This is why it was so urgent for Russell to put money into publicizing 1878, and why he funded a much larger distribution of Barbour's "Three Worlds" in 1877 that spelled out the "times and seasons" aspect of the Lord's Return, while Russell himself wrote a smaller booklet that focused on the "object and manner" aspect of the Lord's Return. Russell did get his name put on "Three Worlds" as co-author, but I've read that he probably didn't add much of anything himself. But all of this was focused on preparing for 1878. 1874 was used as a foundation to prove that 1878 was urgent!

Russell says that when 1878 failed, Barbour started spouting some bad doctrine in order to create a "distraction" from the failure of that date. Russell said that 1874 was still right, and 1878 was still right, but that they had expected the wrong thing. Russell then funded the Watch Tower magazine due to the urgency of the 1881 date when he was sure that the Bride of Christ would be joined with Christ in heaven, while remaining Christians would participate in a 40-year harvest that lasted from 1874 to 1914. 

It's true, as Ann said, that the 1874 was dropped around 1930, but there were some ways in which the "1874 chronology" (based on a chronological year-by-year correspondence between Jewish and Christian events) remained for several years, even after 1874 itself was dropped. Note the last vestige of this chronology:

*** kr chap. 5 p. 50 par. 5 The King Shines Light on the Kingdom ***
The harvest would extend from 1874 to 1914 and would culminate in the gathering of the anointed to heaven.

This 40-year harvest remained "on the books" up until 1961, but it had been slightly adjusted:

*** w54 3/1 p. 150 par. 5 Restoration of True Religion Today ***
Not until the Lord of the harvest gave the command could that be done. Corresponding to the events of the first advent, there is first an “Elijah” work performed, like the work of John the Baptist, to warn the people, trying to bring them to repentance. Such a work was prosecuted in a particular way from 1878 to 1918

*** w51 7/1 p. 410 par. 6 ‘Time, Times and Half a Time’ ***
6 Now note further corroborative proof of this period of time: “I will cause my two witnesses to prophesy a thousand two hundred and sixty days dressed in sackcloth.” (Rev. 11:3, NW) The “two witnesses” are the antitypical Elijah-John-the-Baptist work, and their being introduced at this time is important, for it helps us to understand Daniel’s prophecy. . . .  foreshadowed great works to be accomplished at this end of the system of things, and which were also to be done before 1918. . . . So it was antitypically with the work done from 1878 to 1918.

*** w52 2/1 p. 78 par. 7 Jehovah’s Theocratic Organization Today ***
But again we ask, “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics to give them their food at the proper time?” In 1878, forty years before the Lord’s coming to the temple for judgment, there was a class of sincere consecrated Christians . . .

*** w60 10/1 pp. 606-607 The Great Wheat Harvest ***
What was foretold in the illustration of the great harvest has been taking place in our day,. . . Christ’s anointed followers have been separated from Christendom, and imitation Christians appearing among them are removed as weeds are removed from harvested wheat. . . . The history of Jehovah’s witnesses, particularly since 1918, verifies the accuracy of what Jesus prophesied. . . .  As the harvest period in the illustration . . . . The more than forty years [1918 to 1960] that have passed since its beginning is short when compared with the centuries that have passed since the congregation was planted.

 

Thank you JW, you are right of course, my statement was rather arbitrary. I had researched this topic quite a while ago, but I should have gone back and refreshed my memory. I am pressed for time right now and I should have waited until I had time to get my facts right before posting, instead of just shooting from the hip. Not a good habit if you want to present a proper  argument.

Thanks for all the additional information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 9/21/2016 at 4:57 PM, HollyW said:

In fact, it wasn't an official "discernment" until 1943.

This has been stated in the Watch Tower publications, but it might also be slightly misleading:

*** ka chap. 11 pp. 209-210 par. 55 “Here Is the Bridegroom!” ***
In the year 1943 the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society published the book “The Truth Shall Make You Free.” In its chapter 11, entitled “The Count of Time,” it did away with the insertion of 100 years into the period of the Judges and went according to the oldest and most authentic reading of Acts 13:20, and accepted the spelled-out numbers of the Hebrew Scriptures. This moved forward the end of six thousand years of man’s existence into the decade of the 1970’s. Naturally this did away with the year 1874 C.E. as the date of return of the Lord Jesus Christ and the beginning of his invisible presence or parousia.

This change to the end of 6,000 years of man's existence had been 1872-1873 and was moved to 1976 (then later changed 1975). 

[The person who did most of the outlining of the ka book was the same person who completely wrote the 1943 book, and the 1944 book, "Let God Be True."]

Those particular meanings that had been attached to 1874 were already assigned to 1914 before 1943, although not all of the significance attached to 1874 had been completely removed. The Watchtower apparently avoided any publicity about these changes so this happens to be the only specific mention of when this doctrine was changed. However, some of the changes were mentioned in 1925, and perhaps even a hint in 1922, but seemed not to "stick" until 1930/1.

Another change between 1943 and 1944 was the definitive change to the zero year problem that had resulted in keeping 606 on the books until it was changed to 607 after 1944.

*** re chap. 18 p. 105 Earthquakes in the Lord’s Day ***
Providentially, those Bible Students had not realized that there is no zero year between “B.C.” and “A.D.” Later, when research made it necessary to adjust B.C. 606 to 607 B.C.E., the zero year was also eliminated, so that the prediction held good at “A.D. 1914.”—See “The Truth Shall Make You Free,” published by Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1943, page 239

Also, the mechanism behind the "1874 chronology" is what I have sometimes referred to by that term. The mechanism is the use of corresponding time parallels between the Jewish-era "advent" and the Christian-era "advent" and this remained in use even in the 1950's. Some of this remained with a slight adjustment to 1874 using 1878. And it was for the same reason that 1918 remained important. (The "temple inspection" had been 1878 and was moved to 1918, and 1918 had become the date for the first resurrection for related reasons.) 1878 was dropped as the beginning of a 40-year harvest as late as 1961 (evidently). And, lastly, the year 1918 which had also used the "1874 chronology" in this sense, was not dropped in about 2007 (evidently). The idea of the first resurrection in 1918 was once definitive, and has now become only "an interesting possibility."

*** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 12 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
Could it, then, be reasoned that since Jesus was enthroned in the fall of 1914, the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility. Although this cannot be directly confirmed in the Bible

========added in a late edit rather than creating a new post====

These are footnotes in the Proclaimers book that help explain how some of the "parallels" worked:

  • *** jv chap. 28 Testing and Sifting From Within ***
  • That 1878 was a year of significance seemed to be fortified by reference to Jeremiah 16:18 (‘Jacob’s double,’ KJ) along with calculations indicating that 1,845 years had apparently elapsed from Jacob’s death down till 33 C.E., when natural Israel was cast off, and that the double, or duplicate, of this would extend from 33 C.E. down to 1878.
  • Extending the parallels further, it was stated that the desolation of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. (37 years after Jesus was hailed as king by his disciples when he rode into Jerusalem) might point to 1915 (37 years after 1878) for a culmination of anarchistic upheaval that they thought God would permit as a means for bringing existing institutions of the world to their end. This date appeared in reprints of Studies in the Scriptures. (See Volume II, pages 99-101, 171, 221, 232, 246-7; compare reprint of 1914 with earlier printings, such as the 1902 printing of Millennial Dawn.) It seemed to them that this fitted well with what had been published regarding the year 1914 as marking the end of the Gentile Times.
  • See “The Truth Shall Make You Free,” [1943] chapter XI; “The Kingdom Is at Hand,” pages 171-5; also The Golden Age, March 27, 1935, pages 391, 412. In the light of these corrected tables of Bible chronology, it could be seen that previous use of the dates 1873 and 1878, as well as related dates derived from these on the basis of parallels with first-century events, were based on misunderstandings.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • JW Insider

      JW Insider 9,695

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,381

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.