Jump to content

JOHN BUTLER

Apostles, Judas, GB, Raymond, Satan, Holy Spirit

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

JOHN BUTLER -
Space Merchant -
430
5461

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

It appears this person is saying the Watchtower somehow believes the 6 creative days is the same as the 1000 years, is like a day to God in 2 Peter 3:8. Now I can understand someone like TTH would agree with such misguided logic, 

No you can’t.

TTH does not agree with it. He has picked up on the aeons and epochs of that recent Watchtower that JWI may have misattributed to someone else. At any rate, I refered to it, too, and I take both words to mean long periods of indeterminate length, the first encompassing the second, and the ‘beginning’ of Genesis 1:1 being as long as anyone wants it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

The second explanation seems to fit the GB.

Likely both....as they do all men.

Interestingly, two consecutive serious programs were shown on National TV tonight. The first stated that the Bible said the earth was created 6000 years ago, the second stated that the Bible said the earth was created in 6 days. Well, the notions fly thick and fast wherever you care to turn. Here, it seems, is no exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

TTH does not agree with it. He has picked up on the aeons and epochs of that recent Watchtower that JWI may have misattributed to someone else. At any rate, I refered to it, too, and I take both words to mean long periods of indeterminate length, the first encompassing the second, and the ‘beginning’ of Genesis 1:1 being as long as anyone wants it to be.

Good, then your not a creationist. What would the inference be with that nonsense that is taken out of context with the Watchtower 1968? Nothing more than an interpretation of man's existence starting from 4026B.C. that ends in 2975AD. Does this mean God is resting after 1975? Did Jesus not do miracles in the Sabbath?  The watchtower started a chart with the phrase "CHART OF DATES FROM MAN’S CREATION TO 7000 A.M." To some, it might be seen as a type o,  just like the thousands of type-o's, there are in the Watchtower publications. However, the implied is from Creation that, as you state has an infinite number through man's existence 7000 A.M. Therefore, that doesn't prove a darn thing. There is still a separation to those that don't distort the publication. if the bible students understood to a certain extent, it should have never been that difficult for faithful witnesses.

"The length of the day of creation is a question which heretofore no one has been able satisfactorily to answer. Many Bible students think that because Peter says "One day is with the Lord as a thousand years" that each day of creation must be of that duration. Peter however was speaking of the period between the day of creation and the day of the Lord; his language can fully apply, only to that period; and is without doubt very strong inferential proof of the theory that the period from the dominion of the first Adam to that of the second will be six thousand years, to be followed by the "Millennium" or the seventh thousand as the antitype of the Jewish Sabbath."

By the way, God rested after creation as cited in Genesis. That doesn't mean God would rest within Man's existence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, FelixCA said:

It appears this person is saying the Watchtower somehow believes the 6 creative days is the same as the 1000 years, is like a day to God in 2 Peter 3:8.

As I believe I made clear, the Watchtower has never presented anything like a belief that the 6 creative days are the same as the 1000 years. So this idea should cause you no worries, since no one said it, and no one implied it. So hopefully you can rest a little better now. 

9 hours ago, FelixCA said:

Since it’s a totally different understanding. This person JWinsider has gone beyond what the Watchtower is actually saying.

This reminds me of some of the logical problems we just looked at, where something is admitted to be probable or possible in some of our prior publications, but then within the space of a sentence or two, what initially "appeared" to be true, actually becomes "totally" true, and a supposedly solid conclusion is drawn from the false premise. 

You have made several other mistakes just like this, so that a reasonable person would likely have already dismissed many of those conclusions you drew about R.Franz, too. And if you really thought that what 'this person' was saying was the false idea that only you had brought up, then I think that a reasonable people would also not be able to automatically trust conclusions you derived elsewhere from reading the Watchtower, reading anything written by R.Franz, or perhaps even other people on this forum. When a person needs to resort to making up things out of thin air as you apparently just did above, then you also lose credibility when it comes to your stories and anecdotes that reveal supposedly hidden personality traits that no one else who knew these people for years has ever reported before today.

9 hours ago, FelixCA said:

That is another way of attempting to disprove 1975.

To disprove what about 1975? 1975 could still be the end of 6,000 years of man's existence, and since the Bible puts no particular significance on 6,000 years, it could also have been the same year Eve was created, just as the Watchtower once said (that Eve too had also been created that same year in 4026 B.C.E.). I fail to see what this might DISPROVE about 1975, that wasn't already disproved by the Watchtower articles.

9 hours ago, FelixCA said:

An erred perception but understandable. Since number 7 is a pivotal number in Biblical determination. Anyone with sense would surmise Peter was symbolically referring to what he meant with a 1000 years.

Anyone should realize what Peter was saying from the very context of these words: that Jehovah's thoughts are higher than our thoughts and his ways are higher than our ways, and that his determination of the times and seasons will always be in his own jurisdiction, not ours. We shouldn't be toying with chronology if we think it can somehow be the key to becoming prepared for something that will come as a thief in the night. Chronology will never be the key to helping us become the kind of persons we ought to be while we await the end of this system. If anything, it would much more likely be a detriment to our true Christian conduct. We might be motivated by a time or season instead of by love for Jehovah, his patience, and of love for our neighbor.

9 hours ago, FelixCA said:

Therefore, the Watchtower used that same symbolism to interject the date 1975 as being the end of the 6th day of man's existence, not creation.

That's absolutely correct. The Watchtower said there might be up to a two-year gap between the end of the 6,000 years of "man's creation" and the end of 6,000 years of "creation." (Both Adam and Eve.) Of course, at one point the Watchtower did actually slip up and say that Eve was also created in 4026, the same year as Adam. That was another example of the premise being built up with words like "apparently," "evidently," and "possibly" and then, within a few sentences, what was possible became supposedly demonstrable, declarative and dogmatic.

But even this slip-up that said Eve was also born in 4026, was never given as a guarantee that the Millennium would begin that same year. At that point, we only taught that it would be "appropriate" for God to act that year. The time period for the beginning of the Millennium was still relegated to the:

  • entire decade of the 1970's,
  • then by the end of the 20th century,
  • then by the end of the lifespans of currently anointed persons whose anointing overlapped with persons in an earlier group of anointed persons who saw the sign in 1914 and understood what it meant. 
9 hours ago, FelixCA said:

However, I do find it fascinating and funny how people want to distort the Watchtower’s understanding to coincide with apostate views.

Rather than distort, we should want to see the truth and make sure that it keeps us humble enough to avoid further error. Israel was humbled by failures, too. That didn't automatically mean they were no longer God's people. It just meant that what befell them should be used as examples to learn from. The people that make up spiritual Israel are also human, and will also fail many times. We can learn from these examples to improve, and not make the same mistakes over and over again. We can also show all potentially interested persons that we are not so cult-like that we would defend what is wrong. We would not want to hang onto false reasoning that might blind us to what is right. This is one way that even apostate views might help us to improve:

  • (1 Corinthians 11:19) 19 For there will certainly also be sects among you, so that those of you who are approved may also become evident.
9 hours ago, FelixCA said:

For this reason, I will no longer interact with certain people here anymore.

In all seriousness, I saw that reaction coming as soon as I pointed out some of the more obvious errors you had recently made here.  For some reason, I have never seen you simply acknowledge an error, or even try to address one. Instead, you seem to repeatedly just "lash out" with new diversions you appear to just make up. I still hope to show that most Witnesses have much credibility and honesty. It's true I point out errors from our past, and some of these still effect traditional doctrines of the present, but more and more of these have been humbly acknowledged. From those taking the lead, to those of us in the "rank and file" we have made great strides in humility and made great improvements over those days of so much illogical dogmatism. We should be able to compare the brighter present with some of the actual darkness of the past. This exercise will highlight the ways in which the "dross" is filtered to keep making the gold more and more refined. I'm not trying to make fun of the dross, but I'm surprised and find it disappointing when someone thinks it necessary to keep defending the dross.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

By the way, God rested after creation as cited in Genesis. That doesn't mean God would rest within Man's existence.

The same 2011 Watchtower article, pointed out earlier, makes some good points on this topic, note how the footnote can also be appied:

*** w11 7/15 p. 24 par. 3 God’s Rest—What Is It? ***
First, consider Jesus’ words to opposers who criticized him for healing on the Sabbath, which they construed as a form of work. The Lord said to them: “My Father has kept working until now, and I keep working.” (John 5:16, 17) What was the point? Jesus was being accused of working on the Sabbath. His reply: “My Father has kept working” answered that charge. In effect, Jesus was saying to his critics: ‘My Father and I are engaged in the same type of work. Since my Father has kept working during his millenniums-long Sabbath, it is quite permissible for me to keep working, even on the Sabbath.’ Thus, Jesus implied that as regards the earth, God’s great Sabbath day of rest, the seventh day, had not ended in his day.

[Footnotes]
The priests and Levites performed work on the Sabbath in connection with the temple and ‘remained guiltless.’ As the high priest of God’s great spiritual temple, Jesus could also carry out his spiritual assignment without fear of violating the Sabbath.—Matt. 12:5, 6.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

Peter however was speaking of the period between the day of creation and the day of the Lord; his language can fully apply, only to that period; and is without doubt very strong inferential proof of the theory that the period from the dominion of the first Adam to that of the second will be six thousand years, to be followed by the "Millennium" or the seventh thousand as the antitype of the Jewish Sabbath."

The latter part of your theory is still based on trying to defend a chronology system that attempts to put the times and the seasons in our own jurisdiction. It could be dangerous to our Christianity besides being presumptuous. Also, the premise that Peter was speaking about the period between the day of creation and the day of the Lord is without foundation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FelixCA said:

What would the inference be with that nonsense that is taken out of context with the Watchtower 1968? Nothing more than an interpretation of man's existence starting from 4026B.C. that ends in 2975AD. Does this mean God is resting after 1975?

TTH don’t do dates, cat. He don’t go there.

Cat to cat, I’m telling ya.

That goes for you, too, @Outta Here. You guys itching for a cat fight?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Top Cat O’Malihan said:

TTH don’t do dates, cat. He don’t go there.

Cat to cat, I’m telling ya.

That goes for you, too, @Outta Here. You guys itching for a cat fight?

Far from it. I’m busy collecting the Bible Student publications to make it into a DVD library. Halfway there. It’s all on pdf. At least from 1879-2013 The Herald of Christ Presence is the longest running BS magazine, up to 2019 and running. Which I will incorporate as an ongoing publication.

 

Even though they don’t favor the Watchtower doctrine after 1916, they don’t stab each other in the back as some do within the Watchtower Brotherhood. Case in point, having to say, you guys itching for a catfight. Best illustration ever, LOL! 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of tosh and rabble !       None of this really matters does it ?

It's becoming a hate and judgement page !

I'm an ex JW and yes my personality has gone down hill since leaving the Org, but some of you are JW's or pretending to be, and I'm quite surprised at the attitude of many. I've always been a rebel and you know why as I've given you my life story,  but many of you will at your Sunday meetings, all smiles and pretend 'love' for the congregation. Yes here it has become a war zone.

TTH talks about the 'worldly wicked' and how we need the swat team to keep us in place. But this forum has become the war zone of keyboard warriors. I do not see one ounce / gram of love in any on here. 

I know I'm no better and yes the rafter is big in my eye, but I'm no longer a JW so I've dropped a lot of the hype. But many of you are supposed to be JW's, the 'only true religion' remember ? Where is your love ? Jesus said we should love our enemies, not try to 'get one over on them'. Everyone on here seems to have the same reason for being here, just to out do the others. 

Srecko is the only person that I have found to be genuine. TTH is too busy gaining material for his books :) The rest are just bent on getting the upper hand. I don't think Jesus worked in such a way. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

He has picked up on the aeons and epochs of that recent Watchtower that JWI may have misattributed to someone else. At any rate, I refered to it, too, and I take both words to mean long periods of indeterminate length

JWI may have misattributed? Them's fighting words! Snarl. Hiss. 😉

Yes, You had referred to it, too. My response to something Outta Here said was based on him saying the same thing last year, because he seemed to tie it to the old thinking about the timing of Adam and Eve's creation and the potential obsolescence of the once all-important gap between them. Here was the context of his words:

image.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

What a load of tosh and rabble !       None of this really matters does it ?

It's becoming a hate and judgement page !

Sorry that I added so much evidence for that assessment in my last few posts, especially. But I do take issue with the idea that "none of this really matters."

Witnesses have long moved on from being too concerned about the personalities of R.Franz and F.Franz. But for some persons, dredging it up again can immediately bring up feelings of hate and judgment. For me, everyone is imperfect and liable to mistakes, including me of course. But I'm concerned when a Biblical principle gets violated and we feel that facts no longer matter:

  • (Exodus 23:7) . . .“Have nothing to do with a false accusation . . .  for I will not declare the wicked one righteous.
  • (Proverbs 17:15) . . .Anyone who acquits the wicked one and anyone who condemns the righteous one —Both of them are detestable to Jehovah.

The point is exaggerated, but the principle remains. We don't want to let our feelings get in the way of facts when it comes to how strongly we condemn or praise the lives of imperfect men. This includes R.Franz and F.Franz. Sure, it's comforting for some to see one as a devil and one as an angel; it fits a "world view" that some can use to bring a hammer down on others. This goes for ex-JWs who want to see R.Franz as a kind of "angel" and Witnesses who want to see R.Franz as a devil, for example. But there are cracks in these "world views" that anyone can see. Seeing those cracks reduces the comfort level of some and threatens to reduce the power of the hammer for others.

The Bible says to let our reasonableness become known to all, and yet reasonableness from one person will often trigger unreasonable responses. And I can see how I have been unreasonable here a few times, but it's always good to have someone else point it out too, as you have. We can't always see our own faults very well. 

But there is another way in which I think it's wrong to dismiss all of this saying, "None of this really matters does it?"

It's because our very Christianity should be focused on the sort of persons we ought to be every day, precisely because we know that the end could come at any time within our lifetimes. And precisely because we know that it might come, in effect, 1,000 years from now, after we die, for example. Jesus had a good reason for emphasizing why dates and times and seasons were not in our jurisdiction, but in the jurisdiction of the Father. The time was none of our concern. Yet, as a group, we have put so much energy into dates and chronology, and even used this "urgency" as a motivator instead of love as a motivator. To me, I "harp on it" because Jesus and the rest of the Bible made it clear that this really did matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2019 at 6:22 AM, JOHN BUTLER said:

I don't care who denies it, but that is what was taught. Creative days =7,000 years. Rest day 6,000 years then Armageddon, then 1,000 years of Christ's rule. Then Christ hands it all back to God ( possibly for a Jubilee year ? or some such).. 

Yes. This goes all the way back to Russell's "Photo-Drama of Creation" which emphasized the 49,000 years of creative days. I don't think anyone here has denied that this is what we taught. But in the 1970's, the cracks in this view were already beginning to be seen. It had become a way to put more emphasis on 1975. But it was also realized that 1975 could become an embarrassment. And the Aid book, produced by a team led by R.Franz, had provided evidence that the very foundation for all this emphasis was built on sand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Yes. This goes all the way back to Russell's "Photo-Drama of Creation" which emphasized the 49,000 years of creative days. I don't think anyone here has denied that this is what we taught. But in the 1970's, the cracks in this view were already beginning to be seen. It had become a way to put more emphasis on 1975. But it was also realized that 1975 could become an embarrassment. And the Aid book, produced by a team led by R.Franz, had provided evidence that the very foundation for all this emphasis was built on sand.

Although none of this brings any of us closer to God, I will share another thought that I had years ago.

I thought 2015. 40 years in the wilderness for the Org not being ready in 1975. :)  But we are not supposed to now and we know we are not supposed to know.

That is why it is not important. Because it does not bring any of us closer to God. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Just a suggestion, an ambiguity check is always in order.

Outta, I always fact check before leaping into an assumption. It’s best not to show people how ignorant we are here, just because the “Herald” has had slight name changes over the century. It doesn’t stop being THE HERALD.

herald3.jpg

herald2.jpg

herald.jpg

Unless you are going to argue like JWinsider with wordplay with the phrase " The Herald of Christ Presence " as it's also known by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep saying it doesn’t matter. Yet you’re a creature of habit to keep bringing up the past as though it has somehow been a mistake. Just keep reminding yourself, it’s a mistake with people like you. It’s your personal opinion that the Watchtower has erred. Yet, you don’t wish to see the flaws in your own interpretation. This is the kind of things that are willing to be accepted by who, Comfortmypeople, JTR? These people would be just in the dark as your explanation. You have made yourself a “messiah” to proclaim your false understanding and your false teaching with anything related to the Watchtower. People that have no business being part of an organization, it clearly feels disdain for.

You and your kind have lost the right to criticize the Watchtower as a faithful member. Knowing Butler was an Ex-JW from other sites, proves how far people are willing to go to make others think they have a sad story to tell and have a legitimate grievance, even though it took him long enough to finally come out with the truth.

He knows where he stands before God and is not a hypocrite, or at least not now that he admits it. Where does that leave some of you? Especially those that are no longer in good standing with the Org.

Therefore, with the presentation offered by JWinsider proves one thing, distortion of facts, just like Raymond, since he is offering no scriptural proof, just overdrawn conclusions on what he personally thinks the Watchtower publications are conveying.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

You keep saying it doesn’t matter. Yet you’re a creature of habit to keep bringing up the past as though it has somehow been a mistake. Just keep reminding yourself, it’s a mistake with people like you. It’s your personal opinion that the Watchtower has erred. Yet, you don’t wish to see the flaws in your own interpretation. This is the kind of things that are willing to be accepted by who, Comfortmypeople, JTR? These people would be just in the dark as your explanation. You have made yourself a “messiah” to proclaim your false understanding and your false teaching with anything related to the Watchtower. People that have no business being part of an organization, it clearly feels disdain for.

You and your kind have lost the right to criticize the Watchtower as a faithful member. Knowing Butler was an Ex-JW from other sites, proves how far people are willing to go to make others think they have a sad story to tell and have a legitimate grievance, even though it took him long enough to finally come out with the truth.

He knows where he stands before God and is not a hypocrite, or at least not now that he admits it. Where does that leave some of you? Especially those that are no longer in good standing with the Org.

Therefore, with the presentation offered by JWinsider proves one thing, distortion of facts, just like Raymond, since he is offering no scriptural proof, just overdrawn conclusions on what he personally thinks the Watchtower publications are conveying.

 

 

 

 

Sorry Felix I have no idea whom your first paragraph was aimed at but the bit about " Knowing Butler was an Ex-JW from other sites,  " has confused me totally. Can you name the other sites that you think you know me from ? 

But once again I read more aggression. It does not bring any on us closer to God or Christ. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FelixCA said:

You keep saying it doesn’t matter. 

Top Cat O’Malihan said that I didn’t do dates. That is only partly true. I don’t do them, true, but it is only because I have already pronounced the final word:

A post of years ago:

............

From our readers:

 

Dear Tom Sheepandgoats:

How can I figure when the world will end?

Sincere Person

 

Dear Sincere Person:

The only thing you're sincere about is saving your skin! Nevertheless, here's how you do it.

You start with the well-known verse in Mathew:

Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.     Matt 24:36

Got it? Nobody knows the day and the hour. While, at first glance, that might seem unhelpful for your calculation, in reality it is the key to success! The method is straightforward. Since no one knows the day and the hour, that means if anyone claims a certain date for the end of the world, that's not it. To visualize how the method works, start with a calendar. 

    Hello guest!
 
 

Now, let's consider an example. May 21st. Say someone declares this day to be the end of the world. Since he knows it to be true, that's not it. On your calendar, you cross out May 21. Cross it out, not in pencil, but with a permanent marker. That way, no atheist can later erase it, trying to confuse you or your pets.

 

    Hello guest!
 

Repeat the process. Whenever you come upon a day someone just knows is the day and the hour, cross out that day. With a bit of research, you ought to eventually have a calendar looking like this.

 

    Hello guest!
 


There! That's all there is to it. You'll cross out all days except one. That's the day! Be ready.

  

I can hear the cynics, already. “Hold on a minute, Sheepandgoats!  You can't tell me that every day of the calendar is taken. There may be a lot of nutcakes, but surely not so many as to fill up every day on the calendar!” 

On the surface, it seems a valid objection, but in reality, it just reveals laziness on your part. I admit, if you just count nutcakes predicting the day and hour, you'll fall short. You must count more than just the nutcakes. You must also count the screwballs, the cranks, the fruitcakes, the starry-eyed lunatics, the wolflike false prophets, the round-the-bend idiots, the maniacal crackpots, the self-aggrandizing demented, the certifiable crazies, the raving beserk, the unhinged wackos, and the moonstruck schizos. It's a little work, I admit, but it's not rocket science. If you count all these characters, you easily eliminate the wrong days, leaving only the truth to assert itself!


Now, since I do nothing but think about God all day long, I've worked through all this, and I know the date. But, if I really knew the date, that wouldn't be the date, would it? So I don't know. I've only been able to narrow it down to three possibilities. There are only three days throughout time that no one else has claimed. Thus we can see the breathtaking splendor of the heavenly plan. Three things are proven:

1. God is a trinity.
2. He works in mysterious ways.
3. Matt 24:36 holds. You can't tell the day and the hour; your best shot is a 33% chance.

 

Now, should we give Mr Camping some credit? It's not easy to do. I agonize over it. His formula, seven 1000-year days after the flood, seems awfully simplistic. He's throwing everyone in a tizzy over that? Haven't I said before

    Hello guest!
 If I met him, I'm not at all sure I would like him. Besides, he buys into all the typical hash of trinity and hellfire, doesn't he? Don't get me started on this rapture stuff. And what's to say about those folk who buy into his prophesies? Why weren't they wearing ties as they announced the end? So, I suppose, not being on board, I run the risk of going to hell. Maybe if I say kind words, I will go to a softer version of hell...some place with merely an abominable climate, like here in Rochester, which I am used to. At any rate, it seems worth the effort. So....

Harold Camping, too, was aware of “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” He didn't just blow it off as if it never existed. He worked around it in a very clever way. He said that verse related only to that specific period of time in which it was written, not now! Now all the Trinitarians laugh at such a silly explanation, yet they blunder as greatly regarding the second part of the verse: "...no man knows the day and hour, nor does the Son, but the Father does!" Still, they would have me believe that the Son and the Father are the same!

Look, Camping stuck his neck out and looked ridiculous, he messed up a lot of people, but at least he is in the spirit ofJesus admonition to “keep on the watch.” I'll give him credit for that, if no more. I mean, I've heard atheists and skeptics carry on about how can people be so credulous to buy into end-time obsessions. I'll tell you how. You need look no further than 

    Hello guest!
on the front cover of it's “Apocalyse Now” edition, before tearing their hair out with “What the #@%!" is Next?! So at least Camping errs in furthering a Bible theme, that there will be an end of this system of things. I mean, if the ridicule of him comes from those steamed over his goofball formula, or his presumption of nailing the day and hour, well and good. But if it comes from those mocking the very notion that one day God will intervene in world affairs so that the earth does not end up totally ruined.....well....I hate to pick sides. I'm not sure which is the worse.

Years ago I called on some science person who had read the book Life – How Did it Get Here; by Evolution or by Creation. In the course of discussion, he asked what difference did it make. Who cared? Either way, evolution or creation, we're here. I answered that if God was responsible for bringing about earth and the life on it, then he just might have some purpose for it, and might not stand idly by while human mismanagement destroyed it. But if evolution was responsible for all, then if there was any hope for earth's future, it lay with humans. And they weren't doing so well, then or now. The man's wife, who up to that time had had little to say, remarked 'that's a good point.' 


Well......alright already Sheepandgoats. You say there's three possibilities? Spill. What are they? Not so fast! It'll cost ya. Look, Camping and everyone else draws a salary for what they do. What should I and Jehovah's Witnesses be the only ones not to cash in? Contact me and we'll talk. Do you want to be ready for the big day or don't you?

************************

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Top Cat O’Malihan said that I didn’t do dates. That is only partly true. I don’t do them, true, but it is only because I have already pronounced the final word:

A post of years ago:

............

From our readers:

 

Dear Tom Sheepandgoats:

How can I figure when the world will end?

Sincere Person

 

Dear Sincere Person:

The only thing you're sincere about is saving your skin! Nevertheless, here's how you do it.

You start with the well-known verse in Mathew:

Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.     Matt 24:36

Got it? Nobody knows the day and the hour. While, at first glance, that might seem unhelpful for your calculation, in reality it is the key to success! The method is straightforward. Since no one knows the day and the hour, that means if anyone claims a certain date for the end of the world, that's not it. To visualize how the method works, start with a calendar. 

    Hello guest!
 
 

Now, let's consider an example. May 21st. Say someone declares this day to be the end of the world. Since he knows it to be true, that's not it. On your calendar, you cross out May 21. Cross it out, not in pencil, but with a permanent marker. That way, no atheist can later erase it, trying to confuse you or your pets.

 

    Hello guest!
 

Repeat the process. Whenever you come upon a day someone just knows is the day and the hour, cross out that day. With a bit of research, you ought to eventually have a calendar looking like this.

 

    Hello guest!
 


There! That's all there is to it. You'll cross out all days except one. That's the day! Be ready.

  

I can hear the cynics, already. “Hold on a minute, Sheepandgoats!  You can't tell me that every day of the calendar is taken. There may be a lot of nutcakes, but surely not so many as to fill up every day on the calendar!” 

On the surface, it seems a valid objection, but in reality, it just reveals laziness on your part. I admit, if you just count nutcakes predicting the day and hour, you'll fall short. You must count more than just the nutcakes. You must also count the screwballs, the cranks, the fruitcakes, the starry-eyed lunatics, the wolflike false prophets, the round-the-bend idiots, the maniacal crackpots, the self-aggrandizing demented, the certifiable crazies, the raving beserk, the unhinged wackos, and the moonstruck schizos. It's a little work, I admit, but it's not rocket science. If you count all these characters, you easily eliminate the wrong days, leaving only the truth to assert itself!


Now, since I do nothing but think about God all day long, I've worked through all this, and I know the date. But, if I really knew the date, that wouldn't be the date, would it? So I don't know. I've only been able to narrow it down to three possibilities. There are only three days throughout time that no one else has claimed. Thus we can see the breathtaking splendor of the heavenly plan. Three things are proven:

1. God is a trinity.
2. He works in mysterious ways.
3. Matt 24:36 holds. You can't tell the day and the hour; your best shot is a 33% chance.

 

Now, should we give Mr Camping some credit? It's not easy to do. I agonize over it. His formula, seven 1000-year days after the flood, seems awfully simplistic. He's throwing everyone in a tizzy over that? Haven't I said before

    Hello guest!
 If I met him, I'm not at all sure I would like him. Besides, he buys into all the typical hash of trinity and hellfire, doesn't he? Don't get me started on this rapture stuff. And what's to say about those folk who buy into his prophesies? Why weren't they wearing ties as they announced the end? So, I suppose, not being on board, I run the risk of going to hell. Maybe if I say kind words, I will go to a softer version of hell...some place with merely an abominable climate, like here in Rochester, which I am used to. At any rate, it seems worth the effort. So....

Harold Camping, too, was aware of “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” He didn't just blow it off as if it never existed. He worked around it in a very clever way. He said that verse related only to that specific period of time in which it was written, not now! Now all the Trinitarians laugh at such a silly explanation, yet they blunder as greatly regarding the second part of the verse: "...no man knows the day and hour, nor does the Son, but the Father does!" Still, they would have me believe that the Son and the Father are the same!

Look, Camping stuck his neck out and looked ridiculous, he messed up a lot of people, but at least he is in the spirit ofJesus admonition to “keep on the watch.” I'll give him credit for that, if no more. I mean, I've heard atheists and skeptics carry on about how can people be so credulous to buy into end-time obsessions. I'll tell you how. You need look no further than 

    Hello guest!
on the front cover of it's “Apocalyse Now” edition, before tearing their hair out with “What the #@%!" is Next?! So at least Camping errs in furthering a Bible theme, that there will be an end of this system of things. I mean, if the ridicule of him comes from those steamed over his goofball formula, or his presumption of nailing the day and hour, well and good. But if it comes from those mocking the very notion that one day God will intervene in world affairs so that the earth does not end up totally ruined.....well....I hate to pick sides. I'm not sure which is the worse.

Years ago I called on some science person who had read the book Life – How Did it Get Here; by Evolution or by Creation. In the course of discussion, he asked what difference did it make. Who cared? Either way, evolution or creation, we're here. I answered that if God was responsible for bringing about earth and the life on it, then he just might have some purpose for it, and might not stand idly by while human mismanagement destroyed it. But if evolution was responsible for all, then if there was any hope for earth's future, it lay with humans. And they weren't doing so well, then or now. The man's wife, who up to that time had had little to say, remarked 'that's a good point.' 


Well......alright already Sheepandgoats. You say there's three possibilities? Spill. What are they? Not so fast! It'll cost ya. Look, Camping and everyone else draws a salary for what they do. What should I and Jehovah's Witnesses be the only ones not to cash in? Contact me and we'll talk. Do you want to be ready for the big day or don't you?

************************

 

 

You are barking mad Tom. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Forum Statistics

    60,079
    Total Topics
    109,448
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,198
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Thope
    Newest Member
    Thope
    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.