Jump to content
The World News Media

Srecko Sostar

Member
  • Content Count

    2,932
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    41

Srecko Sostar last won the day on January 15

Srecko Sostar had the most liked content!

6 Followers

About Srecko Sostar

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

3,126 profile views
  1. Translators translated words they found in copies of Scriptures. Did Moses wrote Hebrew word that we have today translated in Bible as - "day"? And did the word he wrote signify what people today think it meant? How did Moses understand the inspiration, which told him to write the word “day” or a word that signifies what is not (which need not be understood) a day of 24 hours, but it is 7000 years or some other longer period of time? Should he have been interested in how long the "day" lasted? Did Moses anywhere in his writings gave specific idea how to understand "Creative day" duration
  2. I think i can understand what you say. On other side, if Genesis book speak about "Day" in which God created this and that, than "faith" will believe what Moses wrote - "the day" (from sun to sun or from from sunrise to sunset), not 1000 or 7000 years or eons. If believer have faith that God can create things in literal 24 hours, because he can and want, than interpretations, on what word "day" means in Genesis and what "day" means in other part of Bible, are not necessary for faith but for mind.
  3. Because of the identical flood stories, but in different parts of the planet, it could be that similar cataclysms occurred in different places at different times to different people. It would also mean that “God warned" not only Noah, but other individuals or groups of people around the world as well.
  4. .. said in video: I hope that perpetrators everywhere are brought to justice Not to use groups as scapegoats Crimes to not go unpunished Family CSA and Institutional CSA Beliefs of organization not driving behavior of CSA JW have not/are not guilty for "typical" CSA as it is case in many other religious organizations because JW do not have set clergy as in Catholic Church. JW operate as lay organization. No "Sunday Schools" JW are not "closed society" Most cases in JW are in fact incest, abuse inside family and relatives The JW families decided to
  5. The history that emerged in Croatia in 1991 has no influence on the history that was created in the USA at the same time. The records that were created at that time are of the greatest importance for each nation separately. And every nation can best interpret the historical records of its own history. But let's say that the then president of Croatia, F. Tudjman, asked the then president of the USA, George H. W. Bush, to send an air force and retaliate against the JNA, which was against the independence and creation of the Croatian state. What will be written about it in Croatia, and what
  6. I am not versed in this subject enough, but I suppose that the ancient peoples at some point introduced a systematization (record) of their history on the basis of several factors; the change of seasons, the movements of the sun and the moon, and the existence or duration of rulers. Were the Egyptians more precise than the Babylonian and Assyrian “astronomers and historians”? Did the Babylonian astronomers know better than the Assyrians? That can be discussed, of course, but for some other reasons. In the context of this club, the question arises; Is all this dilemma aimed at further prov
  7. I agree on that what you said about "revision". But in "second edition" author came with completely new idea, not just add few new information about old theory. In fact, he completely rejected his own old theory. For example, "overlap generation" is not just minor revision of "generation of 1914" with one or few new details. That is completely new doctrine based on old (wrong) elements. When Mansikka add 20 years to Nabonidus rule period (17 years) which is official by historians, that is serious thing. When author rejecting own previous conclusion and bring to readers idea of new king,
  8. This is funny. And this is more funny. I recently heard a good observation about this issue, on video. Namely, every thought uttered, that calls into question the established official doctrine of the WTS, every uttered question that opens a dilemma about the doctrine or the dilemma about the accuracy of a particular JW statement and written article, JW members consider it a danger to their faith, temptation or spirituality test, and even as prophesied persecution and devil's attack. So, any questioning, critical thinking and challenge of existing (or former) religious te
  9. A modern parallel of current events with a humorous break from Mansikka's book. Impeachment! Evil-Merodach betrayed the state and the people. In order to circumvent the decision of the Babylonian Senate, which forbade him to run for king again, E-V changed his name, thus circumventing the administrative ban and defeating the opponent in the elections. :)))
  10. Yes, it is possible that he came up with the idea. In the first version, he added 20 years to Nabonidus. In this second version, he came up with a new solution. Extend the reign of E-M by changing its name to "Neb V". But, by changing own name, has the E-V alias "Neb V" also changed his tolerant attitude towards other religions? To be popular, king don't need to change own name, but to change own behavior. In this case, to start persecuting Jews and everyone else who is not at the will of the "populists" who advocate authoritarian populism.
  11. Just a few words of review on these two statements he gave. “Neb V” is unknown to world history, but it was also apparently unknown to biblical writers who were “inspired” by God to record significant events. Let’s put it this way; if “Neb V” is not recorded in the Bible, then it is completely irrelevant to “biblical chronology,” to 607 BCE and to 1914 CE. The second thing concerns the religious feelings aka diversity of "Neb V". How does Mansikka know what religious feelings the unknown king had? On the basis of what "records" did he come up with such an idea, when there is no record of
  12. Thus, people who read his works might come to the conclusion that the author is superficial in his research and inference. I don't know how much time passed between his first and second conclusion. It’s nice when a man admits his mistake, but has he explained somewhere why he changed his original opinion and rejected his original conclusion? Mansikka does not have only one problem, how to squeeze the non-existent 20 years into a certain period between Nba II and Cyrus. With his maneuvers, he should arrange all other historical figures not only in Babylon but also all around Babylon. Do
×
×
  • 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.