Jump to content
The World News Media

Leaderboard

The search index is currently processing. Leaderboard results may not be complete.

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/25/2020 in all areas

  1. Maybe, but even if Christ was enthroned in 1914, what was the indication that their lease ran out then, and not 1,260 years earlier, or 100 years after? What indicated that their time was now being borrowed? How is that any different from the borrowed time they were on in 1910, or 2010? Wouldn't they have been on "borrowed time" from at least the time when Daniel 2 & 4 said that Jehovah was about to set up a government that would crush these kingdoms, and even the most powerful and haughty of rulers had to acknowledge that Jehovah is still in full control of whether they were given a "leas
    4 points
  2. What reason would he have to sow doubt? What personal benefit would he derive from it? It is obvious that he is just trying to find the truth. I think it would be better to try to challenge his arguments rather than ascribe bad motives.
    4 points
  3. No. That's just a part of it. 1914 was initially based on parallel dispensations that went back to the beginning of Israel in the days of "Jacob" (aka, Israel) and the length of time from the birth of Jacob to the end of the Jewish/Israelite dispensation. That length of time was supposed to be exactly equal to the length of time from the birth of Jesus to the end of Christian dispensation on earth. There was another idea that the date 1914 would also be the end of the Gentile Times, the farthest limit of any gentile rulership, so that the ancient worthies would be resurrected and begin a
    3 points
  4. Although, naturally I am seeking the truth, and I can see no personal benefit from expressing my opinions about this, I do have to agree that it sows doubt. My grandmother used to tell me "if 1914 is wrong, then we're in the wrong religion." She was born in 1914, and I was born in 1957. Back in 1980, I told her that the brother I was doing research for at Bethel wanted the beginning of the generation changed from 1914 to 1957 (and already had some other members of the Governing Body agreeing with him). That's one of the times she repeated the above statement. I asked her, if they ch
    3 points
  5. Russell never acknowledged anything from John Aquila Brown, and initially (back in 1876 when contributing an article to George Storrs' magazine) he acknowledged no one else but the idea that it must now be God's proper time to reveal meat in due season through "his servants, the prophets." In fact, many Adventist-style religious commentators of the time acted like they personally were the source of information, while also dropping strong hints that they might personally be the "faithful and wise slave" through whom God was now working and giving food at the "proper time." Barbour gave hints of
    3 points
  6. Right. But as you know, they didn't think the last days had started then. The last days were still starting from 1799, with evidences from famous meteor showers (stars falling) and an unexplained "dark day" (sun not giving its light). The millennium was already associated with Jesus rule from 1874 with a special enthronement in 1878 to match the parallel dispensation of 33CE. Also, there was no specific use of earthquakes, famines, pestilences, and worldwide wars as indications of a special time within these last days. Russell claimed that Jesus meant such things would be going on since t
    2 points
  7. I can understand why she would say that. It's a kind of knee jerk reaction because 1914 is so significant in JW doctrine and probably even more so to the average publisher since many haven't even bothered researching it properly and just "believe".
    2 points
  8. No, it's based on trying to make sense of prophecy. All knowledge is progressive. If you argue that, then you might as well argue with the medical field, for example. Why didn't they know everything about the human body immediately, and why did they have to find out facts about it through trial and error? And they're still learning. And so are we.
    2 points
  9. Bible readers have seen three Babylonian deportations for literally THOUSANDS of years now. Can you find even one theologian who says there were only one or two? Even those who think there might have been a fourth, identify the primary three in same way that others do. They are not beginning to see something new in their Bible studies. Even the KJV, in 1611 had it right, in Jeremiah 52:28-30: 28This is the people whom Nebuchadrezzar carried away captive: in the seventh year three thousand Jews and three and twenty: 29 In the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar he carried away captive
    2 points
  10. Some reactions on this thoughts are these: What WTJWorg is/ was trying to do? To make "sense" of own interpretations on some/many Bible verses that are or are not "prophecy"? Are we want to talk about "knowledge", human knowledge about this and that? And to be involved in this sort of process that can go in two directions: 1) development towards an improved or more advanced condition aka so called "progressive knowledge", and/or 2) deterioration aka the process of becoming progressively worse (flip-flop doctrines and "new" doctrines interpretations that they, GB, needed to create fo
    1 point
  11. I believe you are right on both accounts. “Jehovah’s organization” stands in place of YHWH. It is a mountain-like “rock” that defies our true and only, Rock. The teaching of the Wt. proves that its organization is an idol, since “salvation” is only possible through adherence to the organization. They attach the name “Jehovah” to it. “To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?” says the Holy One. Isa 40:25 “With whom will you compare me or count me equal? To whom will you liken me that we may be compared?” Isa 46:5 God has one spiritual “organization”; His
    1 point
  12. Well yes, of course, that is evident. This is a case of trying to make prophesy fit after the prophesy has happened (if it had already happened, lol). Because it was when the "last days" started?
    1 point
  13. “Lord, the God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven above or on earth below—you who keep your covenant of love with your servants who continue wholeheartedly in your way. 22,23 “When your people Israel have been defeated by an enemy because they have sinned against you, and when they turn back to you and give praise to your name, praying and making supplication to you in this temple, 34 then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your people Israel and bring them back to the land you gave to their ancestors. 33,34 When your people go to war against their enemies, wherever y
    1 point
  14. I just have to laugh when @Anna so casually says the bit about : This was obviously meant literally when Russell wrote about it, as he believed the Jews would literally go back to Palestine, but obviously they didn't. So then it had to be revised and was applied spiritually, in that the spiritual nation of Israel was born on which the "gentiles" had no hold. Russell is seen as being basically the founder of the CCJW. So this comment above is so funny. Is that what 1914 is based on ?
    1 point
  15. Well no, not if you believe 1914 was the year Christ was enthroned. I was just recently reading one of the older publications (on line) about this and if memory serves right the gist was that this happened more from a spiritual point of view. That the gentiles no longer had a hold on God's people, that they were no longer held in "captivity". As you know, it was paralleling the captivity of the Jews in Babylon, and so when the gentile times were over, the Jews were free. This was obviously meant literally when Russell wrote about it, as he believed the Jews would literally go back to
    1 point
  16. There was a topic about the scriptural problems with 1914 which had deliberately avoided the physical, archaeological evidence for 587/586 as the year when Nebuchadnezzar's destroyed the temple in Jerusalem. So I have be moved those recent posts about this evidence to here, because that old topic is extremely long and had sat there since 2017 before these new posts were added in the last few days. I won't get to this immediately, but this will affect posts by @Arauna@César Chávezand possibly others. The topic will likely become a "Scriptural" topic too as the WT makes an issue of int
    1 point
  17. yes - he will for once and for all in human history prove that humans cannot rule the earth successfully! ... it will be beyond reasonable doubt.... because humans will bring the worst rulership ever on earth and use the height of human discovery to oppress fellow humans and perpetrate the worst atrocities against humankind. It will stand forever as the worst kind of rulership ever!
    1 point
  18. This would be true "if" it wasn't for the fact that continuing one's research would find, the Jews were also liberated from the Ottoman Empire which concluded their submission to none Jewish rule. The Fact it took 3 years later to amend and consent that in the League of Nations is inconsequential. Therefore, it's not war the only thing to consider. However, The "level" of crime against humanity would preclude Jesus saying about the signs. That war was not an ordinary war. Perhaps you misunderstood just like you normally do. Was I referring to not seeing Christ enthroned in Heaven or wa
    1 point
  19. That is correct. There are several different independent lines of evidence that all point to same conclusion: that Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year would have been 587 BCE, not 607. All the evidences that point to the time period of Cyrus are part of the same evidence that shows Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year was 587/6. If you can show evidence for Cyrus ending the Neo-Babylonian dynasty in 539, then this is simply part of the same evidence that puts the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/6. I think that a lot of Witnesses don't realize that even the very idea that they can put a date on Cyrus (like 539) i
    1 point
  20. To keep things straight, I used color highlighting to the deportations you have enumerated and to map these deportations to both the Scholar/Theologian dates and the Watchtower dates. DEPORTATION Scholar/Theologian Dates (ST) WT Dates (WT) COMMENTS FIRST 607/6 BC (ST) 627 BC (WT) (Nebuchadnezzar's earliest recorded years, in the "Babylonian Chronicles" even including time when still a warrior prince under his father's reign.) The one you mention as 605 for all practical purposes, will be the same as the
    1 point
  21. Wow! I am glad you responded. In spite of my strong reservations about our reasons for choosing 1914 as some Bible-derived date, I'm still looking for some reason to hang on to a piece of this. You are one of the few people here who will actually give a bone for this old dog to chew on. My opinions about the Bible-derivation have become stronger in the last couple years, and that's mostly over the doubling down on the recent generation changes, and some curious discoveries about how Furuli's research ended up being promoted in the Watchtower, and a couple of NWT translation issues. B
    1 point
  22. We both know this statement is blatantly wrong, but expected from you, I figured you would challenge the way Bible scholars and Theologians are now excepting the 3 deportation while you personally have denied it. How many theologians consider only 2 deportations, plenty. Most consider the "first deportation to have happened in 598/7 BC. The rest is none responsive, so I won't waste my time on that.
    1 point
  23. If the governing bodies faith was so strong, they wouldn't solicit for funds, set up donation arrangements, sell real-estate like hotcakes. That picture is disgusting and in my opinion is slight elderly abuse, as they are insisting elderly people should starve for the sake of giving their last quarter to the watchtower.
    1 point
  24. This reminded me on tropical disaster in Philippine in 2014. i think. And JWorg video showed one JW family who, instead of food, were put WT publications in it.
    1 point
  25. I quote agenda 2030: We+resolve,+between+now+and+2030,+to+end+poverty+and+hunger+everywhere;+to+combat+ inequalities+ within+ and+ among+ countries;+ to+ build+ peaceful,+ just+ and+ inclusive+ societies;+ to+ protect+ human+ rights+and+ promote+gender+equality+and+ the+empowerment+ of+women+and+ girls;+and+to+ensure+the+lasting+protection+of+the+planet+and+its+natural+resources.+We+resolve+ also+ to+create+conditions+ for+ sustainable,+inclusive+and+ sustained+economic+growth,+ shared+ prosperity+ and+ decent+ work+ for+ all,+ taking+ into+ account+ different+ levels+ of+ national+ deve
    0 points
×
×
  • 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.