Jump to content
The World News Media

At what moment "The Truth" has ceased to be "The Truth"?


Srecko Sostar

Recommended Posts


  • Views 17.8k
  • Replies 338
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I understand your points and you have expressed them very well. I will address each point you raised separately, but first I just want to mention a few general things which have perhaps shaped the per

Hey Brother Billie..your way out on this....it is undeniable if you watched the ARC...we as a people were found to have faulty policies...that’s a fact..we were forced to ammend them. Kids suffer

I think this point showed excellent insight. I wondered if this is what you meant from the start. The very context shows that the type of leadership in this case is more like the local elders rather t

Posted Images

  • Member
24 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Here, if you are losing a debate, it is common to label the one winning the debate, an Apostate.

Yes, but in this case, especially in what is taking place in Speaker's Corner, you have those who attest to a false doctrine trying to take up and cover more ground to teach something that is not of the church. Examples would be that God has wives one of his wives being Mary, and they'll preach it. God is 3 persons, they'll preach it. You debate with them, and correct them, and they will attack you, even insult you when you profess the truth.

Speaking about apostates, one of them professed he can heal people with the touch of his hand on to you, Benny Hinn style. Such ones need to be put in their place and be corrected on what the Bible says.

That being said, this place I still see it as Controversial Posts (being ready to be pit to the test), and as did before in a discussion of religious history, it shall be done here also. Most importantly a truth will be spoken and it will be told.

In this sense however, people are claiming to have apples and such ones believe said people, but when I ask for apples, it turns out, they didn't have any apples at all, to my surprise, I lecture them on as to why they made such an error in claiming to have these apples that are, in their case, non-existent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, Equivocation said:

He is linking you with them because your reaction to their comments means you agree with them

In general perspective it can be said so, BUT please have in mind that this (your's) must not be 100% correct conclusion, judgement. I will mention here what i have in mind when i put "like" on some people comment. I put "like" on general comment as such. That does not mean how i must be in agree with every word, dot or some aspects inside comment. 

6 hours ago, Equivocation said:

with the other guy witness or Frida. 

Who is Frida !!?? 

6 hours ago, Equivocation said:

Not every day a a young guy gives advise to an adult but this one fits the bill. 

So again, ...... Who is Frida? :)))))))))))))) 

Or you need to be given an extra advice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

In general perspective it can be said so, BUT please have in mind that this (your's) must not be 100% correct conclusion, judgement. I will mention here what i have in mind when i put "like" on some people comment. I put "like" on general comment as such. That does not mean how i must be in agree with every word, dot or some aspects inside comment. 

You sure about that? Granted when it is evident of what someone likes in agreement to something and or dislikes something, favors something and or continues such as an absolute, not to mention evident and yet subtle response to said response. Example how you stated, even mocked that of could abuse and neglected services itself whereas you made claim as if it was pulled from books from JWs, when that information was pulled directly from a site that carters to educating people about abuse.

As for the Bible, I merely took up verses of Wisdom and Knowledge to be in application to people, in turn even children - granted that in Jesus' childhood days, knowledge and wisdom was very important, likewise, it should be important for us also.

That being said, he is correct and I made this remark also, thus it being correct. You cannot shift something that has already existed and even having it's own definition, and in that definition it even states (in an online context) to register an approval of or agreement with (a post or poster) by means of a particular icon - that solidifies the claim of agreeing with someone or not, with or without a response. The same goes with an expression of gratitude as with liking what is said. As for us CSE folk, the difference is over there compared to here is that you gain a reputation the more someone agrees with you, the more reputation you gain.

In this sense, you agree with anything that is spoken of, and this isn't the first time. Remember, Biblical Facts? I do.The number of times you agree with what is not true is rather telling, as with other discussions, moreover, you even agreed to the claim I am somehow misogynistic against women just for a typo error, I asked for proof that day too, yet no one deliver, thus people love to make claims they cannot cash.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Who is Frida !!?? 

The young one claims that he knows you and or has ran into you before (granted it seems you are everywhere and not just this forum i.e. of how I found out about Glasgow your comments were elsewhere too), hence referring to you as Frida. Perhaps someone or something associated with you in your life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

You sure about that?

Yes i am sure as it is surely/doubtless that, for example,  blue color has many variations (color shades) of that same color. So, my like, my laugh, my upvote, my sadness  and other expressions of my emotions and state of mind are not fixed, concreted in only 7 possibilities, putted as options by owner of this forum, for public display of mood that some can show in life.

:)))))) only Frida i know  is a dog. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Yes i am sure as it is surely/doubtless that, for example,  blue color has many variations (color shades) of that same color. So, my like, my laugh, my upvote, my sadness  and other expressions of my emotions and state of mind are not fixed, concreted in only 7 possibilities, putted as options by owner of this forum, for public display of mood that some can show in life.

You do realize what this form template is - right? All in all, the things highlighted was pulled from a dictionary (hence the definition) in regards to online forums and posting, therefore, that information outweighs what you are conveying.

If you are curious, this is what this form is supposedly using: https://invisioncommunity.com/

that being said, you know the practices of internet forums where anything goes. This is just elementary information, Srecko.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

:)))))) only Frida i know  is a dog. 

Well if you have mentioned it somewhere before in some shape or form, probably that is the reason. Hence if you are using other social media spaces including this one, someone of that same space must have recognized you and or confronted you before. An there is a saying, once it is on the Internet, people know.

That being said, that deduces the connection - your hands is on every form of media besides this one, so you merely engineered your own unmasking.

Other than that, I have dogs too, 2 of them, a small Peekapoo, and a Husky.

The family love the dogs, just as I love them also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
8 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

Well if you have mentioned it somewhere before in some shape or form, probably that is the reason. Hence if you are using other social media spaces including this one, someone of that same space must have recognized you and or confronted you before. An there is a saying, once it is on the Internet, people know.

That being said, that deduces the connection - your hands is on every form of media besides this one, so you merely engineered your own unmasking.

Other than that, I have dogs too, 2 of them, a small Peekapoo, and a Husky.

The family love the dogs, just as I love them also.

Own unmasking? :))))))) 

Dogs are best friends,

they are not like some 

people who calls you Frida,

(or calls you with some other attributes, like SM for example :))))))

when you are not Frida but Srecko :))))))))))

Elementary respect in communication with other people, here or elsewhere. But as you said correctly, unmasking.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Own unmasking? :))))))) 

Well if had seen you before and or mention had mention anything regarding pets and or dogs, then that is the evidence there, and the fact he makes reference to you as such, is evidence that this is not the first time he had confronted you or spoke to you - forumwise.

So for example, if I stated somewhere I love Samsung devices, a even have shirts and a list of other things, a Samsung FanBoy if you will, then I go to multiple forums by the same name, surely someone would find out of who I am and the love for Samsungs I harbor..... I love such things, for such are merely tools.

But this may be the same case with you should anyone seek you out and or if you had spoken to anyone else, granted in our last discussion about trust funds and who is a beneficiary, the information you pulled most likely pins you to another social media based place besides this forum.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Dogs are best friends,

they are not like some

This I agree with. Not only they are best friends, but they protect you and your loved ones, and are part of the family.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

people who calls you Frida,

Well you revealed that have a dog named Frida, if that is the case. If Evo is calling you that then you may have mentioned dogs to him elsewhere.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

(or calls you with some other attributes, like SM for example :))))))

I am only known as Space Merchant here, if anyone is families with me, the way I speak, debate, discuss what have you, and the liking of Ye Ol' English, they will recognize me as J.C.D. Now if I was referring to myself as Space Merchant/S.M. elsewhere and all over the place, people would be calling me by that instead of J.C.D. if anything, if you look like someone be it you are visible on a forum or social media and or in real life, people will refer to you as such, example Xavier Woods/Austin Creed, although I look nothing like the guy.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

when you are not Frida but Srecko :))))))))))

Usually if paired up with or linked with someone, people will remember and or recall you by referring the other person and or thing associate with you. Example, I am Space Merchant, but JTR would refer to be as a Storm Trooper, but it is still directed towards me.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Elementary respect in communication with other people, here or elsewhere. But as you said correctly, unmasking.

Well if you can be searched somewhere and be mentioned of here by someone who recognizes and or knows you, it is technically an unmasking, thus if you post elsewhere, and be recognized here, it is of your own design. Granted the very word does mean expose the true character of or hidden truth about.

That being said, if there is one thing you most likely know about me, S.M. as some like to refer to me now, I am not a fan of conspiracy and or false information, nor do I stick to one side, I tend to seek all information to find conclusion and or balance, practically in a truther-sque fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 11/15/2018 at 8:50 AM, JOHN BUTLER said:

You've probs already done this but my brain just goes and all becomes so fuzzy. I'm only 69, is it dementia already ? 

The human brain shares some characteristics of human muscle, although mostly made of fat.

I saw a sign in a Space Training Area ... "Only exercise the muscles you want to keep"

Read two books a week, and you will probably keep you mind whole and functional your whole life.

Use it, or lose it.

A good test is see if you can chew bubble gum, yodel, and operate a yo-yo at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
    • I'm not bothered by being singled out, as you seem to be accustomed to defending and protecting yourselves, but it's a good idea to keep your dog on a leash. Speaking of which, in a different thread, TTH mentioned that it would be great if everyone here shared their life stories. As both of you are the librarians here, I kindly ask you to minimize any signs of intimidation or insincerity. It is you people who need to be "banned" here. However, it is quite evident that you hold a negative influence, which God recognizes, therefore you are banned from your own conscience in His eyes.
    • One issue with historian Flavius Josephus is that he suggests that the Royal Captain of the (Guard) can also be regarded as General Nebuzaradan. A confusion arises from Josephus' account of the captives mentioned in Jeremiah, as he claims that they were taken from Egypt instead of Babylon. Since Nebuchadnezzar was occupied in Rilah, he directed his generals to lay siege to Jerusalem. This could potentially account for the numerous dispatches that Nebuchadnezzar would have sent to the west, but the considerable distance to Borsippa still poses a challenge. As a result, the Babylonians managed to gain control of regions such as Aram (Syria), Ammon, and Moab. The only territories that remained were the coastal cities, where the Egyptians held sway. King Josiah decided to form an alliance with Babylon instead of being under Egyptian rule. So, that part of the territory was covered until King Josiah was defeated.  It's interesting how they started back then in 4129, but still end up with the same conclusion with Zedekiah's Defeat 3522 607 B.C. 3419 607 B.C. even though their AM is different.  
    • In the era of the Bible Students within the Watchtower, there were numerous beginnings. It is essential to bear in mind that each congregation functioned autonomously, granting the Elders the freedom to assert their own assertions and interpretations. Most people embraced the principles that Pastor Russell was trying to convey. You could argue that what you are experiencing now, they also experienced back then. The key difference is that unity was interpreted differently. Back then it had value where today there is none. To address your inquiry, while I cannot recall the exact details, it is believed to have been either 4129 or 4126. Some groups, however, adopted Ussher's 4004. It is worth mentioning that they have now discarded it and revised it to either 3954 or 3958, although I personally find little interest in this matter. I believe I encountered this information in the book titled "The Time is at Hand," though it may also be referenced in their convention report. Regardless, this is part of their compelling study series 3. Please take a moment to review and confirm the date. I am currently focused on Riblah. The Bible Students who firmly believe that Israel is the prophetic sign of Armageddon have made noteworthy adjustments to their chronology. They have included significant dates such as 1947/8 and 1967/8, as well as more recent dates. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that, according to their calculations, 2024 holds immense importance. The ongoing tension of Iran targeting Israel directly from its own territory amplifies the gravity of the situation. If their trajectory continues, the subsequent captivating event will occur in 2029, rather than as previously speculated, in 2034 by some.
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.3k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    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.