ALL aspects of 1914 doctrine are now problematic from a Scriptural point of view

[JW Insider]

23 hours ago, bruceq said:

23 hours ago, JW Insider said:

If there are really hundreds more quotations he he made saying 1914 "would be indicated with a War," then you should at least be able to find ONE, wouldn't you agree?

Done already. I don't need to prove to you, you should know already.

You should still be able to find at least one quotation that indicates this. You shouldn't say "done already" if it wasn't done. And as I explained above, I do already know that it isn't true. Russell did not predict any kind of war resembling WWI in 1914. This must be one of the reasons that Russell (after 1914 came and went) began using the year 1915 as the date for the end of the Gentile Times.

That doesn't say a lot for whether there were any anointed in 1914 who were truly able to discern the sign in 1914, does it? Yet, that's how we define the beginning of the "two-group generation." In fact, the Watch Tower continued saying that Jesus' Parousia had begun in 1874 all the way up until the formal change in 1943/4, nearly 100 years after Barbour first started promoting 1874 as the date for Jesus' Parousia. It might even be why it wasn't until the 1920's that the Watch Tower ran the story of Russell announcing the End of the Gentile Times in early October 1914 (Can't give the exact day when that announcement happened, because it's also changed 3 different times.)

On 8/25/2017 at 9:55 AM, bruceq said:

BTW when you said you receive "special interpretation" where does it come from?

As I said, I don't receive "special interpretation." I was referring to the way YOU defended a "special interpretation" by claiming that it was OK to use the least likely definitions of someone's words. The analogy I used was probably confusing. Sorry.

By the way, these topics that reverted back to 1914-related subjects will probably go back to their respective topics where they started from.

[JW Insider]

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Counter to what Arauna stated about the unreliability of Babylonian sources to get at the truth about dating Babylon's fall to 539 BCE, we cannot get to the truth about 539 BCE (or the year of Jerusalem's destruction) without Babylonian sources.

Thanks for making it so clear. I love it when someone can say in just a couple paragraphs what it takes me 15 pages to say.

[Arauna]

You're right - I do not care and I have lost interest in reasonings going in circles.  The sources about the Greek calendar are on the internet.  

Even if I bring rock-solid proof  - I do not think the individuals (who are pushing their own ideas) are here to come to an honest accessment of facts.  They think they have all the facts.

The Babylonian dates have NOT been verified in our previous  discussion and if you accepted those - then my accessment of your honesty is correct. It is synchronized with Egyptian dates - which has severe problems. 

The Olympiads are more reliable than the Babylonian chronologies and it confirms the death of Cyrus to be 530 BCE.  I mentioned 3 sources if I remember correctly?

Cyrus ruled Babylon for 9 years according to its sources - so he started rule in 539BCE.... the battle of Opis was just a side issue -  to also give an indication of the timeline when Babylon fell in 539 BCE.... . The Olympic games were held every four years - so the timekeeping was pretty accurate and it was the first reliable timing system instituted for the specific reason of pinpointing historic events in the ancient BCE period.

The Babylonian data consists of mostly king lists and some were simultaneous ruler ships while other names have not yet been placed - there are many problems..... and there are no dates given so that one can properly synchronize to BCE dates and therefore Egyptian sources are used.

The signs on the earth which indicates the riding of the horses (Rev 6) and the signs since 1914 on the earth have confirmed its accuracy - the one main sign of the Parousia being:- that in the last days the preaching of the 'kingdom ' will be preached in ALL the inhabited earth. .... the proof is in the eating of the pudding!  There is no other organization doing this work on the entire planet - FREE of CHARGE..... and it has been going on for many years.  Things are heating up all over the world - and propaganda and its accompanied violence is now being spread all over the earth to gather the nations together for Armageddon...... . and the religions are riding the beast!   The religion is controlling the people and governments have to conform to their laws and their peoples who et violent if they do not get their way!

The world wide "security'  issues with bombings and killings by terrorists - and almost every day terrorists are being caught in Europe on the verge of committing great atrocities. Only some get to do them.  Governments will get tired of this.  They cannot turn against a "religion of peace" and will turn against all religions.....Other religions are also becoming violent!  We have reached the time when the "security issues " are paramount in every secular government's thoughts!   ..... and we all know that "peace and security" will be the first call before the final end.

The EU, UN and many leftist organizations want ONE ruler ship or one system where all the diversity of humans and their different life philosophies will be accepted.  They are trying to force peoples to accept one another and will institute harsh laws to obtain this.  In Germany and England people have already been convicted for hate speech because they speak against a particular religion..... so laws will be enforced to curb this - while right wingers get more angry at the 'covering over' and lies of the governments as well as the many innocent peoples dying because of the fundamentalist ideologies...... the governments will then act to curb all religion and dissident thinkers.  The controlling agenda is already in action!.... the stage is set.... The longer it builds the greater the implosion! 

 

[Noble Berean]

21 hours ago, Arauna said:

The kings were appointed by Jehovah. It went well with them and the nation if they inquired from Jehovah and followed the directions of the prophets.  Disaster struck when they did not follow the instructions from the prophets. Jehovah kept sending prophets and they kept rejecting them.

We don't have prophets today, so what Biblical reference point do we use to understand how to view the GB?

[TrueTomHarley]

10 minutes ago, Noble Berean said:

We don't have prophets today, so what Biblical reference point do we use to understand how to view the GB?

All the letters from 1rst century apostles and older men to the congregations and all reactions from them toward those who challenged their authority.

[Ann O'Maly]

4 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

I believe it's reasonable to quote a source when the source is correct, and that it's reasonable to not quote a source when the source is not correct.

Sometimes we mistakenly think a source is incorrect due to our own preconceived ideas or lack of knowledge. Sometimes quoting sources we believe are incorrect is necessary for critical analysis, discussion, or to acknowledge an alternate POV exists.

4 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

This 'rule' that you seem to lean on pretty heavily,  "We cannot accept 539 BCE as being verified for certain events, while rejecting the dates for other events that have been verified by using the exact same methods and sources that were used to confirm 539 BCE. This would be an intellectually dishonest approach."  -and with which I confess myself to be unfamiliar [other than seeing your's and JWI's several invocations thereof] seems highly impractical, and not something widely* practiced , or even practicable, in reality?

Again, the methods and primary sources from which we deduce 539 BCE as being the correct year for Babylon's fall, are the same methods and primary sources from which we deduce 587 BCE as being the correct year for Jerusalem's destruction. I understand your caution and I get that it feels 'wrong' to you. Once you become more familiar with the lines of biblical, chronological and archaeological evidence, you should see how all those lines converge into one inescapable conclusion.

2 hours ago, Arauna said:

You're right - I do not care and I have lost interest in reasonings going in circles. 

This is why I tried to get you to follow a linear track of reasoning instead.

2 hours ago, Arauna said:

Even if I bring rock-solid proof 

I wish you had. It would have been interesting to explore.

2 hours ago, Arauna said:

The Babylonian dates have NOT been verified in our previous  discussion and if you accepted those - then my accessment of your honesty is correct. It is synchronized with Egyptian dates - which has severe problems. 

The Olympiads are more reliable than the Babylonian chronologies and it confirms the death of Cyrus to be 530 BCE.  I mentioned 3 sources if I remember correctly?

Cyrus ruled Babylon for 9 years according to its sources - so he started rule in 539BCE.... the battle of Opis was just a side issue -  to also give an indication of the timeline when Babylon fell in 539 BCE.... . The Olympic games were held every four years - so the timekeeping was pretty accurate and it was the first reliable timing system instituted for the specific reason of pinpointing historic events in the ancient BCE period.

The Babylonian data consists of mostly king lists and some were simultaneous ruler ships while other names have not yet been placed - there are many problems..... and there are no dates given so that one can properly synchronize to BCE dates and therefore Egyptian sources are used.

Well, I can see that the reasoning and information I presented have gone whoosh over your head and you're restating what prompted my questions about whether you really understood how BCE dates are arrived at for Babylonian regnal years and events. Never mind. Maybe one day it'll click. Thank you for responding anyway.

Edit to add: If "there are no dates given so that one can properly synchronize to BCE dates," on what basis do you trust 539 BCE, since it is a date that derives from the Babylonian Nabonidus Chronicle and other Babylonian sources?

[Noble Berean]

17 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

All the letters from 1rst century apostles and older men to the congregations and all reactions from them toward those who challenged their authority.

There were apostles and prophets in the first century (Ephesians 2:20). We know there are no prophets today, so are there still apostles? Can you have one and not the other?

[JW Insider]

52 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

I will give you a simple hypothetical, question.

I'm assuming that the question is "Would you consider the entire State of New York destroyed if only the Watchtower buildings were destroyed along with all the elite houses in New York? (Either New York City or New York State, not sure it matters to your point.) By analogy would we consider the entire city of Jerusalem destroyed if only the Temple and the elite houses were destroyed?

This is a question that gets asked fairly often by those who would propose that the "destruction" and "desolation" was upon the land-owning elite of Judea, and it was less important whether every poor person of the land was literally taken or fled. The numbers of the exiles in Jeremiah 52 and 2 Kings 25 has also led people to conclude this. Some would even claim that this emphasis on the desolation of the rich elites was a kind of propaganda to make it easier to reclaim their old lands after the return from Babylon, rather than giving it up permanently to squatters and carpet-baggers and immigrants who took advantage of the "porous borders" over those years from when the desolations first began. I have my doubts that anyone could figure this out through archaeology, and this specific history is not in the Bible, so I take no sides on it except to give the Bible the credit for giving us all the important parts of the history that we need to know. If other things happened, they are not of much concern to the prophecies or lessons we are expected to derive from their experience during this period.

But, for me, and for the same reasons, I treat that question as rather moot. That's because I have no particular stake in the specific chronology or politics of this period other than to recognize that the Bible places about 4 important events in the same short span of less than two years, and to note that the Bible again proves to be an accurate book of history and can even be supported by the evidence from archaeology during this period. There are four new fast days, evidently related to the the siege, the breaching of the wall, the burning of the Temple, and the death of the Governor (who was their "last hope of independent rule"). These events are all placed in the 18th and 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar, give or take a few months. 

So the 18th/19th year of Nebuchadnezzar is still the primary key for the important events based on the Biblical account.

Did you have another idea or proposal? 

One thing that might be important is to note that "Jerusalem" is destroyed in the sense of being the seat of God's Messianic kingdom. It's a judgment event of paramount importance because of what it represented and why it had been protected for so long in spite of wicked kings and corrupt religious practices. Even without the elite, the institutions fail, the economy fails; it is no longer a functioning nation without a capital. This is similar to why Tyre is forgotten for the entire 70 years of Babylonian power. It's a trading center that must plan imports and exports and prices. All that goes out the window if all the nations all around are threatened at any moment. Even if Tyre wasn't out of commission for 20% of that time period, it could no longer rise and function as a nation.

[Witness]

23 hours ago, Gnosis Pithos said:

PROVE 1914 IS WRONG!!!

It can be proven wrong very easily.

The Wt. teaches that God’s Kingdom, arriving in 1914 in the heavens, was the beginning of the signs of “pains of distress”, their choice of translation.  Certainly, the world clearly shows distress evident in the wars, famines, pestilences and earthquakes. 

The Greek word for Wt.’s use of “pains of distress” (ōdin) means pains related to child birth – labor pains.

This truth is found in Wt’s Greek Interlinear, reading: “All but these (things) beginning of pangs of birth”.  Why isn’t it read this way when translating the scripture on the same page? The Wt would be held responsible in explaining how the birth of God’s Kingdom supposedly arrives before birth pains.   “The Kingdom is Born in heaven”, yet it is then followed by birth pains? (kr chapter 2)

From “What Does the Bible Teach?” - “Just as Jesus predicted, his “presence” as heavenly King has been marked by dramatic world developments—war, famine, earthquakes, pestilences. (Matthew 24:3-8; Luke 21:11) Such developments bear powerful testimony to the fact THAT 1914 INDEED MARKED THE BIRTH OF GOD’S HEAVENLY KINGDOM and the BEGINNING of “the last days” (labor pains)  of this present wicked system of things.—2 Timothy 3:1-5. 

Clever, and twisted. 

Concerning looking into Satan’s world for signs of the coming Kingdom, it isn’t the world that is in labor, it is the promised New Covenant that gives “birth” to God’s Kingdom and not until Christ’s Kingdom heirs are complete in number. 

But the Watchtower says,

“Let your Kingdom come”: God’s Kingdom came in 1914 when Jesus was made King in heaven. God’s Kingdom will also come in the future when Jesus destroys the wicked”.  ws14 1/15 pp. 26-31

“Therefore, you should pray like this:

Our Father in heaven,
Your name be honored as holy.
 Your kingdom come.
Your will be done
on earth as it is in heaven.
 Give us today our daily bread.
 And forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
 And do not bring us into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one.
For Yours is the kingdom and the power
and the glory forever. Amen.  Matt 6:9-13

Obviously, God’s Kingdom has not come in any form, as Satan is still here.  Christ began ruling as King upon his ascension into heaven.  1 Cor 15:22-26

Then Jesus replied to them: “Watch out that no one deceives you.  For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and they will deceive many.

“The anointed and their other sheep companions recognize that by following the lead of the modern day Governing Body, they are in fact following their leader, Christ. “  9/15/2010 pg. 23

 ^“You are going to hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, because these things must take place, but the end is not yet.”

These “wars” against kings involves the anointed ones – who will either be sealed in “heaven” through their faithfulness to one Master, Christ…or Satan, who wins over God’s chosen ones with the offer of power, prestige and riches and a false sense of “peace and security” – the organization.   Rev 5:10; Heb 12:22; Eph 2:20-22

And in 1 Thess 5:3, the “labor pains” are again mentioned.  God’s Kingdom will not arrive until the full number of Christ’s heirs are with him; and the harvest is complete.  Rev 21:3

 Luke 22:31; Eph 6:12-14; John 16:2; Mark 13:13; Rev.2:9,10,13,17,7,24,26,28; 6:9,11; 3:5,9,12,21,22)

Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say:

“The salvation and the power
and the kingdom of our God
and the authority of His Messiah
have now come,
because the accuser of our brothers
has been thrown out:
the one who accuses them
before our God day and night.

They conquered him
by the blood of the Lamb
and by the word of their testimony,
for they did not love their lives
in the face of death.”  Rev 12:10,11

The full number of sealed, faithful priestly kings must conquer Satan's deceit before they are sealed.  Christ is waiting for this to happen before God’s Kingdom arrives.

“Then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when He abolishes all rule and all authority and power.”  (1 Cor 15:23-26)

It is the war is between truth and lies.   Satan is in control of the world, he can easily create a counterfeit fulfillment of the coming Kingdom of God, which is a Kingdom not emerging from corruption and filth, but is one of purity.  Job 14:4  In fact, up his sleeve are many counterfeits, counter-fulfillments. 

 ^“For nation will rise up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places.”

Gen 3:15; 1 Cor 1:18,19; Rev.12:7; 16:13-16; 17:14; 19:11,14;John16:2; 8:44; 2Cor.11:12-14,15,2-4,20; Gal.5:1; 2Tim.3:13; Jer.23:28,31,32

 All these events are the beginning of birth pains. Gal.4:26; Rev.12:1,2; Eph.2:6; Gal.4:19

The famine and pestilences are the result of thirst for God’s truth in Christ and the ultimate result. I see the “thirst” here as so many struggle over the validity of 1914.  Rev.18:8; Isa.5:13; Hosea4:6; Isa.65:13,17; Rev.6:6; Matt.25:8

Symbolic earthquakes are evident in the scriptures leading up to God’s Kingdom.  Mark13:25; Jer.49:21,22,24; Heb.12:27; Rev 6:12

Rev.13:11,14; Rev.19:20; 13:6,8; Amos 8:11

All of Jesus’ signs leading to the coming of God’s Kingdom primarily involve those to be Christ’s heirs and Bride, yet it also includes every JW who has been exposed to lies by fallen anointed ones, the “firstfruits” of Abraham’s seed (stars, trees).  Rev 6:12-14;8:11; Gen 26:4; 1 Cor 15:23; Matt 12:33

 

 

 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

4 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

There were apostles and prophets in the first century (Ephesians 2:20). We know there are no prophets today, so are there still apostles? Can you have one and not the other?

While we read of some prophets in the first century (how many were there?) they have no role in the circumcision ruling of Acts 15 - which was conveyed to all congregations as a decree. Past prophets were considered (Amos and Isaiah), witnesses were heard (most notably Peter, Paul and Barnabas) but there is no mention of contemporary prophets.

Possibly those who bellyached and refused to heed the decision did so on that account - that the then-prophets were ignored! and what right did the elders and apostles have to ignore the prophets?!! Surely those who scream bloody murder at GB decisions today would have screamed bloody murder back then.

Telling to me is the identification of who was acting as restraint to apostasy back then. It was the apostles themselves. The minute they died, it was as if the chorus rang out among the malcontents: "Ding Dong, the Witch is Dead." The 'elders' of the Acts 15 "apostles and elders" were not enough to hold back the rebels. What those rebels didn't dare do when the apostles were around, they did with impunity with their successors.

If apostasy could spin out of control the instant the apostles died, what possible chance does it have to not likewise overwhelm today. Plainly ones are pushing for that outcome with all their might. The only thing to thwart them - that they will not be able to prevail against no matter how hard they try - is the fact we are in harvest time now. 'Let the weeds grow along with the wheat until the harvest,' the Master told his workers. 'Come harvest time we'll bundle them up and toss them in the fire.'

[JW Insider]

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Then you really have no justification as secular history, to claim the "destruction" of Jerusalem in 587BC, even if you add any additional information that pertains to the historical inaccuracy of the event you "dogmatically" defend.

True, up to a point. And because I am now retired, I also don't have much use for "exponents" any more, so I also have very little justification as mathematics goes, to claim that the solution of the square root of 432 is about 20.78, even if I add any additional information that pertains to the mathematical inaccuracy of the solution I could "dogmatically" defend. That's because if I wanted to argue for more accuracy I could have claimed it was 20.78460969, instead. This doesn't mean I can't take an interest if someone starts claiming that the square root of 432 is 10.78, though, and gets angry if I don't believe it, too.

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

The Wall that was breached has little to do with the destruction but more to do with the burning of the temple. Now you suggest a 4th. What would the 4th distention be to the outcome of yet again a failed proposition?

These four that I suggested are the same four that I already suggested in the post. In case you thought it was three, I will re-quote what I said and enumerate them for you here:

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

the Bible places about 4 important events in the same short span of less than two years, and to note that the Bible again proves to be an accurate book of history and can even be supported by the evidence from archaeology during this period. There are four new fast days, evidently related to #1 the siege, #2 the breaching of the wall, #3 the burning of the Temple, and #4 the death of the Governor (who was their "last hope of independent rule").

The reason I suggested these four in particular is because they are the same four that the Insight Book suggests. Sometimes, remember, that it's OK to just accept and appreciate the excellent research provided by the Governing Body.   Next to the NWT, it's my favorite publication. Note:

• *** it-1 p. 812 Fast ***
• The Jews established many fasts, and at one time had four annual ones, evidently to mark the calamitous events associated with JerusalemÂ’s siege and desolation in the seventh century B.C.E. (Zec 8:19) The four annual fasts were: (1) “The fast of the fourth month” apparently commemorated the breaching of JerusalemÂ’s walls by the Babylonians on Tammuz 9, 607 B.C.E. (2Ki 25:2-4; Jer 52:5-7) (2) It was in the fifth Jewish month Ab that the temple was destroyed, and evidently “the fast of the fifth month” was held as a reminder of this event. (2Ki 25:8, 9; Jer 52:12, 13) (3) “The fast of the seventh month” was apparently held as a sad remembrance of GedaliahÂ’s death or of the complete desolation of the land following GedaliahÂ’s assassination when the remaining Jews, out of fear of the Babylonians, went down into Egypt. (2Ki 25:22-26) (4) “The fast of the tenth month” may have been associated with the exiled Jews already in Babylon receiving the sad news that Jerusalem had fallen (compare Eze 33:21), or it may have commemorated the commencement of NebuchadnezzarÂ’s successful siege against Jerusalem on the tenth day of that month, in 609 B.C.E.

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

That's why you consider it "moot".

Whoops! You made a bad guess. That wasn't the reason. I actually told you why I considered it moot. No guessing game here.

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

You can't justify your first comment

I should have no need to justify it. Look at it again and you will notice that I said it was "one thing that might be important to note." I'm surprised you would even have a problem with such a suggestion. Perhaps you forgot that it comes from the Watch Tower publications.

• *** w83 1/1 p. 10 par. 1 The Kingdom Issue to the Fore! ***
• Back in the days of King David of Israel the city of Jerusalem was made the capital city of the typical kingdom of God. Thus Jerusalem became the symbol of the typical kingdom of Jehovah God by his anointed king over the independent nation of Israel. So, in harmony with this, JesusÂ’ words at Luke 21:24 referred to the treading or trampling down of the typical kingdom of God.
• *** rs p. 96 Dates ***
• “Jerusalem” represented the Kingdom of God because its kings were said to sit on “the throne of the kingship of Jehovah.”

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

You can't justify your first comment, now you change the rules for an erred perception of a literal destruction as all archeology suggests, along with your scholars

And, just because you call my point about a literal destruction a "failed proposition" and an "erred perception" you should remember that the Watch Tower publications must have made the same error in your judgment. Note whether this sounds like a literal destruction of Jerusalem, and this was just the first three that came up for 2016:

• *** w16 July p. 8 par. 6 Seek the Kingdom, Not Things ***
• God certainly was not going to preserve anyoneÂ’s material possessions in a city that was going to be destroyed.
• *** w16 June p. 16 Questions From Readers ***
• This prophecy was given in 612 B.C.E., and its initial fulfillment refers to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian army—something that was to occur just five years later. Although the pagan Babylonians were allowed to bring about that destruction, they were serving as JehovahÂ’s executioners.
• *** w16 March p. 30 par. 1 Questions From Readers ***
• Then, in 607 B.C.E., Jerusalem was destroyed and people of the southern kingdom of Judah were also taken into exile.

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

that now it just becomes a symbolic endeavor!!!!

You'll notice that this is also not true. I never said it "just" becomes a symbolic endeavor. You added that! If you are really interested in a serious conversation, there is no need to add words or twist words.

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

How many times have you and O'Maly, said you can't "pick" and chose what you want out of evidence. Yet you find yourself doing just that.

Actually, again, if you notice I didn't "pick and choose" what I wanted. I did just the opposite. I made two suggestions, both of which have support in the Watch Tower publications. But if you have another suggestion, I'm always ready to consider it.

As to "how many times" I have encouraged people to follow this valuable reminder, well, I doubt that it matters. Picking and choosing is a good thing when we are picking right from wrong, but when the whole of something is correct, we can't just accept a portion of the whole and deny another part of the same whole. So I suppose I've said that once or twice. Not as often as the Watchtower has made the same kind of recommendation:

• *** w06 11/1 p. 22 par. 1 Do You Share JehovahÂ’s View of Sacred Things? ***
• People pick and choose their values
• *** w03 4/15 p. 4 Spiritual Values—Where Are They Heading? ***
• in which everyone assumes the right to pick and choose his beliefs.
• *** w71 11/1 p. 662 Christian Maturity—an Elusive Goal? ***
• Or do we pick and choose
• *** w67 10/1 p. 586 par. 5 Finding Freedom with JehovahÂ’s Visible Organization ***
• We are not free to pick and choose according to our individual whims.
• *** w14 3/15 p. 13 par. 5 How to Maintain a Positive Viewpoint ***
• We cannot pick and choose which parts we will follow.

[JW Insider]

28 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

But, since you're sidestepping the obvious question, as usual, there's no further need for dialog.

I certainly didn't intend to sidestep any question. The only question I saw was your original question about "destruction" of Jerusalem, which I already answered as well as I could without sidestepping. Beyond that, of course, I don't know the answer, and was waiting for you to present your own explanation, if you intended to. Or are you saying you also don't know the answer? Or perhaps it was just a question with a hidden purpose?

The only other question I saw was the question about what I had inteded as the '4th event' and I pointed out that I had already given 4 events.

Did I miss a question?