Jump to content
The World News Media

I have barely seen a more stupid chart in my life


TrueTomHarley

Recommended Posts

  • Member
2 hours ago, Arauna said:

However, Noah's generation was 120 years.

I believe how we can make consensus about length of any or some particular generation. 

Surely none of the men that came up out of Egypt, from twenty years old and upward, shall see the land which I sware unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob; because they have not wholly followed me ....... The Lord’s anger burned against Israel and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until the whole generation of those who had done evil in his sight was gone.

Here we have Bible confirmation how ONE "generation" is 40 years in length, but interestingly in this 40 years generation period WERE people from 20 years of age and upward. Contrary!  Younger (0 year -20 years) people were not a part of, they not CONSTITUTED this particular Generation that have to die in wilderness. Here we have situation how people of all ages lived in the same period of time, but were not part of same "generation".

Here we have one group of people (who had done evil ), of various ages when all this was occurred. But Bible text called all of them who done evil- generation. Not because they somehow "overlapped" in sense of long period of time as TV preacher David Splane explained "Generation of 1914". No, this people in the wilderness, all of them contribute to "evil thing" in one short, particular moment of their life. And their joint activity made them to be ONE GENERATION, that must die in 40 years. In that context we have GENERATION of 40 years.

In Noah's generation example is 3x40 = 120 years that God left to people of that period of time. That doesn't mean how every men and woman in Noah's time lived 120 years and then die in Flood. Bible reports speaking of people who lived hundreds of years as normal life span in those period of time.  In Noah example, we don't see separation in terminology: These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. Gen 6 9. Here we have all people, young and old, good and bad to be under same wording - "His Generation".

In this two examples we see how time length of some particular "generation" in some particular event is changeable and not depend of capacity of how long human life span is in that period of time. Also we see how quality and belongings of one group of people sometimes are separate from each other and sometimes are mixed, together.

In this two Bible examples we see how ONLY ONE EVENT, for each period, of them is in focus. First is that the Israelites were afraid to enter the Promised Land. Second is Human that not listen to Noah. 

In Jesus prophecy about Last Days of Jerusalem, we see how all was happen and finished in relatively short period of time. If we "count" from From 33 AD  to 70 AD (37 years), or even less period of time. Perhaps is more important when events (signs) started, when they primarily were, started happening, and not when Jesus did made prophecy (in 33 AD). Because Jesus said: So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 

https://books.google.hr/books?id=sWv7YVmcpREC&pg=PA106&lpg=PA106&dq=generation+of+40+years+bible&source=bl&ots=JIV_yYY5i2&sig=ACfU3U3cNcNqdC8ZRbCbiriWGcWIh_8_wA&hl=hr&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiuhO7u-O7pAhUNr4sKHfWXBeUQ6AEwDnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=generation of 40 years bible&f=false

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 4.8k
  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I know this wasn't directed directly at me, but I am just as likely to ridicule the chart as several others around here. The reason is reason: (Philippians 4:5) 5 Let your reasonableness become k

People should be defended wherever possible. The motives can be quite pure and still mistakes are made. In fact, I would say that there are specific good motives that make certain kinds of mistakes ev

You know, I can get my head around this. I really can. I’ll still refer to you from time to time as ‘the brother with the rotten attitude’ because who knows how many brothers you have stumbled in

Posted Images

  • Member
6 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

context we have GENERATION of 40 years

This generation jehovah could not work with due to lack of faith. They were spiritually  too weak to fight the wars to take the land...  only Joshua and Caleb showed faith.  So this generation had one quality in common...... lack of faith.

9 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Here we have all people, young and old, good and bad to be under same wording - "His Generation".

It was a "staggered generation....... some were 500 years old, some 200, some 30.....Noah's parents who were older than Noah, aunts uncles and cousins too. But all these people did come to an end in ONE event......... These were all part of the pre-flood generation.   But  persons lived THROUGH the flood.  So they were still part of the pre-flood generation....... 

16 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

y (in 33 AD). Because Jesus said: So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand

A specific sign given..... agreed.  OUR SIGN IS THE WORLD-WIDE PREACHING WORK AND THE SLAVE! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 6/7/2020 at 12:36 AM, Arauna said:

To outright dismiss this indicates a bias and unacceptance that staggered generations even exist- which I would say is illogical and unscientific..... and unyielding to even contemplate it - which is NOT a mature Christian quality because we are to "ponder over things and make our advancement".

I think nearly everyone accepts that staggered generations exist. The staggered generation might even include people born more than 90 years earlier than the point identified (1914) and more than 90 years after the point identified (1914). I believe you might have even commented on a chart about a year ago that was included in a post to prove that we SHOULD accept "staggered generations" in the expression "this generation."

The problem is that you start out making claims about the generation of 1914, and say that there are 180 years worth of staggered generations from 90 years prior to 1914, and 90 years after 1914. That's fine. But you don't have the right to just move the starting point to around 1992 instead of 1914.

When you account for persons being 10 years of age to "discern" 1914, then the staggered generations, as you showed yourself, could range from perhaps 1814 to 1904 to 1994. (With variations depending on how old people need to be in 1914, or with a "proper" age of anointing.)

But the Watchtower doctrine uses some (unintentional?) sleight of hand to move that starting point of the staggered generations from around 1904 to around 1992. This way it can start an additional 90 years or so, beginning around 1992 or so and therefore it can for another 90 years or so from there (up to about 2082 if necessary). 1814 to 1904 to 1992/4 to 2082/4. This means that your staggered generations have been changed from a total of 180 years to 270 years. What's to stop them from being defined as 360 years, or more, if that ever became necessary. 1814 to 1904 to 1994 to 2084 to 2174, etc. (And we certainly hope it would not be necessary.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

staggered generations from 90 years prior to 1914, and 90 years after 1914. That's

The point is NOT the date 1914 itself - although the kingdom was established then.  It is the generation that would be influenced by the events triggered by the birth of the kingdom  when satan was thrown out of heaven and brought the signs of perousia to the earth. 

This would include WW1 and WW2.   I am of the post WW2 generation....... my generation was effected by the WW2. If I were anointed while brothers were still alive which saw WW1 then I am still part of that generation - seeing the events triggered by jesus on the throne (perousia). I am aging but still kicking...... I am still part of that generation which is doing world-wide preaching work and seeing  the FDS in action, apart from all the other signs. ...... as mentioned by Jesus..... signs that this generation will see.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But you don't have the right to just move the starting point to around 1992 instead of 1914.

I don't have right, correct..... but I never made the assumption...... you did because you are stuck on a date and not the generation.....the SIGNS that Jesus gave to this generation....

But I understand your thinking because you do not believe in the SIGNS and assume we will not be able to discern the time (not the day but the times we are living in) and neither do you accept 1914.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Arauna said:

The point is NOT the date 1914 itself - although the kingdom was established then.

 

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

But I understand your thinking because you do not believe in the SIGNS and assume we will not be able to discern the time (not the day but the times we are living in) and neither do you accept 1914.

 

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

because you are stuck on a date and not the generation.....the SIGNS that Jesus gave to this generation....

Apologize, this comments of yours are for @JW Insider I took liberty to say: WT and GB stuck on date and signs with generation issue. All 3 (three) components are strong part of WTJWorg 1 (one) doctrine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
11 hours ago, Arauna said:

If I were anointed while brothers were still alive which saw WW1 then I am still part of that generation

My older brother and I visited a house in service (in Missouri) in 1964 where a 104 year old man remembered the civil war and told us about how his relatives died, how two of their three slaves ran away, and how he remembers his father coming home from the fighting when he was about 5. We returned several times to offer him the magazines nearly up until the time he died in about 1966. 

I am so glad that I can say I am part of the U.S. Civil War generation.

11 hours ago, Arauna said:

. . .because you are stuck on a date and not the generation.....the SIGNS that Jesus gave to this generation....

But I understand your thinking because you do not believe in the SIGNS and assume we will not be able to discern the time (not the day but the times we are living in) and neither do you accept 1914.

You say I am stuck on the date 1914, when I should be stuck on the generation of 1914. But you also say that you understand my thinking because "neither do I accept 1914."

That inherent contradiction of yours says a lot to me. It says that the reason I don't accept that this generation is in large part because I don't accept 1914. The corollary, of course, is that the reason people accept the stretching of the generation to as much as 180 years, is because they accept 1914. In other words, this stretching of the definition is only true for people who accept 1914. If I accepted it, then whatever people say in support of it will always be true, even if it would otherwise be false. 😊

On 6/7/2020 at 12:36 AM, Arauna said:

And a staggered generation  can - as illustrated - be many more years..... even up to 180..... if one looks at the reality on the ground.

As you showed, the staggered generation is from some starting point and can go 90 years back and 90 years forward, for example, for a total of 180 years. Therefore those who discerned the sign in 1914 could have been born up to 90 years before, and lived to up to 90 years after. I have no problem with the 180 years of a staggered generation. The generation that discerned a sign in 1914 could run out as late as 2004 (or 1994 if they had to be at least 10 in 1914 to "discern," or 1989 if they had to be at least 15 in 1914 to be "anointed").

Also, tt was not me who said that the generation was about anointed persons who could discern the sign in 1914. Brother Splane was the one stuck on that 1914 date. By the way, I think it's revealing that Brother Splane didn't consider this new "generation" theory very seriously before presenting it. Otherwise he would not have used a scripture in Exodus that doesn't support his view, and he also would likely have noticed that his chart has a glaring error on it. It shows that "this generation" is passing away well before the great tribulation starts, when the entire point is that the great tribulation can't happen before this generation passes away. It depicts only anointed who are not part of group one or group two living at the time the great tribulation begins. To me, it's just a mistake, but it shows that he took his focus off the scripture that shows the exact opposite of what his chart depicts.

I believe 100 percent in the generation of 1914, and that it could represent as much as 180 years worth of a staggered generation. There were grandparents and great grandparents who could perceive the signs of war and pestilence during that WW1 period. Their children and grandchildren and great grandchildren who were also alive and growing up in 1914 could go on living for another 90 years or so, too. They can all legitimately be called a part of that generation, even though it's already a stretch to say that  "the generation" is still alive when 95 percent of it had already died before 1990.

11 hours ago, Arauna said:

 I am of the post WW2 generation....... my generation was effected by the WW2. If I were anointed while brothers were still alive which saw WW1 then I am still part of that generation

This is why I mentioned the civil war generation above. You are part of the post WW2 generation, and you were also alive when persons saw the Civil War. Therefore if there were anointed brothers alive during the civil war, you are part of the Civil War generation too. You will probably claim that I am being ridiculous, but it is to help us think whether there is any point at which we would have balked at this explanation. If, by special mightiness, you are still alive in 2042 and the end has not come by then, does the existence of the FDS and the preaching work mean that you are still in the 1914 generation no matter what?

At what point in the future, if any, would the definition no longer be valid? 2033, 2042, 2050?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
10 hours ago, Arauna said:

 I am of the post WW2 generation....... my generation was effected by the WW2

I am generation of communist era, and i am generation of post communist era. I am affected with feudalism. And capitalism too, because they invented private property and market economy philosophy. 

Oh no, private property and market economy draws its roots from "paganism". And all what have "pagan origins" are forbidden for Christians aka JW members. Well WTJWorg must reconsider their Legal Status, because of "pagan origins" of secular laws. :)) 

But i am also affected by US Civil war, and affected by volcano Vesuvius, especially after the 79 AD eruption. :))

All what was written (and we inform ourselves about it) about every events in the past and present make us to be "generation of that something". :))

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.Org1976

      Jw.Org1976 0

      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.