Israeli Bar Avaddhon

Members
  • Content count

    87
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Israeli Bar Avaddhon

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Who is Gog of Magog?

    Dear Melinda, I thank you first of all for expressing you kindly despite the fact that we disagree. Swapping your opinions in a kind way is the best thing. I appreciate it. Who has established that Ezekiel 38: 8 refers to the pre-armageddon situation? "Final Part of Days" can mean "the last years of the satanic system" or "the last years of the millennial kingdom". To understand the correct thing we have to read this sentence in its context. Few verses before, in Ezekiel 37: 26-28, it reads "And surely I will conclude with them a peace agreement: a pact of indefinite duration is that which shall be with them: and surely I will set them up, and multiply them, and put in the middle and my tabernacle will be truly upon them, and surely their God will become, and they will become my people. And nations will have to know that I, Jehovah, sanctify Israel when my sanctuary will be in their midst indefinitely. " Also in the context of Ezekiel chapter 38 it is not said "The Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said this: 'You are the same as I spoke in the days before by the hand of my servants the prophets of Israel, who prophesied in those days-years- how much to make you come to them? '"- Ezekiel 38:17 What does "I spoke in the days before by the hand of my servants"? We want to say that up to verse 8 speaks of the pre-armageddon situation and from verse 9 onwards speaks of the post-armageddon situation? Is not this a forcing? The speech is simple and straightforward. The time continues and the subject is the same. Revelation 21: 4 says that "past things have passed" and this is not in contradiction with what we are saying. In fact, the situation described in Revelation 21: 4 is next to what is described in Revelation 20: 7-10 Indeed in Revelation 20: 9 Gog of Magog is destroyed. After this event there is the resurrection (Revelation 20: 12-14). Eventually, after the destruction of Gog of Magog and the resurrection, Revelation 21: 4 says "The former things are past." As for the next explanation, you will see that all the explanation has no reason to exist if you acknowledge the correct order of events. I agree that we must prepare ourselves. I agree with the Psalms you mentioned and that the wicked will be eliminated. I agree with Apocalypse 19: 17-21 saying that the military nations and those who support them will be destroyed (and this obviously does not prove that all nations will be destroyed but some nations will be granted a "prolongation of days" after Armageddon - Daniel 7:12) I fully confident that Jehovah is the right judge just like His Son. I am fully confident that justice will only exist in the New World. In practice, I have complete confidence in the scriptures you mentioned. However, the intentions of Armageddon (as the destroyer of all nations) and the identity of Gog of Magog and also the period of resurrection (which would take place during the millennium) is wrong. Armageddon will save some nations, resurrection will take place at the end of the millennium (not during the millennium) and Gog of Magog are not "our rebel brothers" but spared by the nations that after a thousand years will try to attack the people of God. Some intentions are simply wrong and it is no surprise or scandalization. Even the Israelites of the past, at times, have fed misguided mischiefs at the will of Jehovah.
  2. Who is Gog of Magog?

    Chapter 38 of Ezekiel: Who is Gog of Magog? If you've read the article entitled "What nations disappear at Armageddon?", Regardless of whether you've shared or not , you pretend not to have read it. Obviously at the end of this article, if you consider it useful, you can go and take it back. Although that article had to deal with, inevitably, the identity of Gog of Magog, I found it necessary to resume the topic being discussed among many brothers also because the last change of understanding. We all know what the officer says understanding, is not it? Gog of Magog is a coalition of nations (not Satan) who organize to attack the people of God. In reference to the Millennial Kingdom of Christ, Gog of Magog "check" again to attack the "healthy part" of God's people. That is to say that these people, before being identified as Gog of Magog, would our surviving brothers Armageddon (or their offspring) but, they decide to rebel against Jehovah God by attacking the party faithful after a thousand years of peace and prosperity, of His people. We must honestly admit that this case has puzzled some 'everyone from the beginning because it really seems absurd that after a thousand years of peace and happiness, someone should organize to recreate the same terrible conditions existing in the pre-Armageddon world. Incidentally Revelation speaks not just "someone" but says it will be "as the sand of the sea"! Now, whatever interpretation we wanted to give the expression "the sand of the sea", it can not give some idea of the four cats disorganized. They seem to be really great people. With this in mind, let's discuss chapter 38 of Ezekiel to see if it can give us interesting details about this subject and if there is the possibility of having to revise some of our beliefs. Who is Gog of Magog? " After many days you will pay attention to you. In the final part of the years you will come to the village [of people] brought back from the sword, gathered out of many peoples, to the mountains of Israel, which have been continuously a devastated place; yes, [a country] which was taken from the peoples, [where] they have dwelt safely, all of them - Ezekiel 38: 8 Why Almighty God should say, to His own people, the people whom He considered worthy to survive Armageddon, "After many years you will pay attention"? The writing also says ... "Will you come to the village [of people] brought back from the sword, gathered out of many peoples" ... But if these are the inhabitants of the "new world", are not also the people who were "brought back from the sword, gathered out of many peoples"? So, speaking of this people the same verse adds, "have lived safely, everyone." Why is this distinction made if during the millennial reign there will be peace and security in every corner of the earth? During the Millennial Kingdom, well after Armageddon, they do not dwell all safe? Gog of Magog, perhaps, has not dwelt safe until then? And you will be forced to rise. You will be like a storm. You will be like clouds to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many peoples with you " '- Ezekiel 38: 9 The verse says that will rise "to cover the land." Again we have to ask ... " What country?" During the Millennial Reign of Christ the world will still be divided into nations and countries? By the way, talking of "legions", we see a people organized and military invoice ; certainly not a bunch of people disorganized and improvised. The Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: 'And it must occur in that day that things will go up in the heart, and certainly will devise a malicious design; and you say, "I shall go up against the land of open countryside. I will go to those who do not bother, that dwell safely, all dwelling without walls, and do not have even bar and doors "- Ezekiel 38:10, 11 "I shall go up against the land of open country". What is the land of the open country? There are other countries that do not qualify as open country, or helpless? And why any other "countries" should bother to defend himself during the Millennial Kingdom? "I will go to those who do not bother, that dwell safely, all dwelling without walls, and do not have even bar and doors." So these people, to make these considerations, not dwelled safe? He had a few walls? He had bars and doors? And why a country should have walls, bars and doors if there are no wars, nor weapons, nor thieves or other criminals? Why you should equip the bars and doors if everyone will love intensely, with sincere and loyal love as brothers under one Father? It will be to take great spoil and to do much prey, to turn your hand on inhabited places devastated again and on a people gathered from the nations, [a people] who accumulates wealth and property, [those] who dwell at the center of the earth - Ezekiel 38:12 Let us assume that at some point towards the end of the Millennial Kingdom, reborn greed, desire for conquest and pride after a thousand years of oblivion. Who would be the "little people gathered from the nations"? If Armageddon has destroyed all the nations of the world , all those who now find themselves living in the Millennial Kingdom and then survived, are they not all those "collected by the nations"? But the scripture says that there is a people who organize to prey upon another people: a people gathered from the nations. Therefore prophesy, son of man, and you must say to Gog: 'The Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: "In that day, when my people Israel shall dwell safely, not [it] you know? - Ezekiel 38:14 This writing could leave to guess why Gog of Magog, until yesterday, was identified as Satan. Here Jehovah clearly identifies himself as the God of Israel ... but in the Millennial Kingdom should not be all "Israel"? In writing this Gog is clearly seen in opposition to Israel and then identify it as Satan seemed the sensible thing. Obviously it is "sensible" if we take for granted that at Armageddon are destroyed all the nations of the world, so all unbelievers and rebels. Simply stated: If the post-Armageddon world we live only deserving persons, the one who can get in opposition to God's people is Satan. Obviously this understanding seemed to coincide things but, as he was also treated in a more or less recent Tower Guard, created some really absurd paradoxes as we shall see later. And certainly you will be from your place, from the remotest parts of the north, you and many peoples with you, all mounted on horses, a great congregation, yes, a number of military forces - Ezekiel 38:15 "Several military forces"? Military improvise or made after a period of training? Previously, the verses 4:05, we read that these are all dressed "with perfect taste" and that "large shield and small shield". This leaves just understand that we are talking about a fully equipped and trained people for the war! Even assuming that these verses refer to the previous Gog Magog (what in life before Armageddon), describe this people, in verse 15, as a congregation of many military forces, suggests that they are not just newbies. So the logical question should be ... "Where you are trained, if they are all good of the Millennial Kingdom ? What weapons? For how long?" "And for sure will come up against My people Israel, like clouds to cover the land. It will happen in the final part of the days, and I will bring you against My land, that the nations may know Me when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes, or Gog "- Ezekiel 38:16 Again Jehovah identifies His people, Israel, making a contrast Gog of Magog. It also understands that this distinction is not born at a time when some of the people decide to attack another, but that Israel has existed for a number of years and lives with these other peoples or nations. Not only Jehovah himself says he will be sanctified among the nations. Which countries? Maybe the same ones that Satan will mislead when it comes out of the abyss? - Revelation 20: 2, 3 Reading Ezekiel 38: 17-20 we find other interesting details. In particular, we can isolate the point where it is said that "the mountains will actually be killed and the steep ways will have to fall, and even every wall will fall to the ground." We might ask what to depict these mountains and who, until the end of the Millennial Kingdom, still possess defensive walls that will fall to the ground. " ' And certainly I will call against him in all my mountainous region a sword,' it is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. 'The sword of each is against his own brother - Ezekiel 38:21 And even then we should ask where they took swords and where they forged these peaceful brothers, inhabitants of the New World. And certainly I will enter into judgment with him with pestilence and with blood; and I will rain a downpour flood and hailstones, fire and brimstone upon him and upon his bands, and upon the many peoples that are with him. And certainly I magnify myself, and sanctify myself and make myself known before the eyes of many nations; and they will know that I am Jehovah '- Ezekiel 38:22, 23 The people taken from every nation at the end of the great tribulation, having seen, among other things, the destruction of any nation in opposition to Jehovah, they did not already know who is Jehovah? - Hebrews 8:11, 12 Reading just what it says, it does not seem that there is something that does not come back with our current understanding? In chapter 39 of Ezekiel you will find other interesting details. These details have forced the CD to revise the interpretation that Gog of Magog was Satan and is a fair reflection. How can, in fact, Satan, be given as food to the birds of prey? - Ezekiel 39: 4 How you can have a burial place on earth? - Ezekiel 39:11 Identify Gog of Magog as a "coalition of nations" is correct because you just simply read what is written without seeking hidden meanings - Ezekiel 38:15 However simply say that it is a coalition of nations opens up other questions, if you do not have the courage to review other fundamental interpretations. One of these is to understand that, while the wild beast, and all united in their fight against the Lamb will be destroyed at Armageddon, some nations will be allowed to continue to exist - Compare Daniel 7:11, 12 This means that after Armageddon , will remain something of the old world and there is a scriptural reason for this to happen. This makes it very easy to see how it is possible that during the Millennial Kingdom happen something like that. It makes us understand many other things such as when people will rush en mass, on their own initiative, to the mountain of Jehovah, "to the house of Jacob" - Isaiah 2: 2-4 It fully understand the meaning and order of the events described in 1 Corinthians 15:25 and many other things. From this brief examination we could see how it changes our visual horizon if only we strive to read the Scriptures without preconceptions. For understanding current attacking us are created forcer and really irreconcilable contradictions but allowing Scripture to flow freely will form a logical and coherent scenario. We can also see how, who has a prejudice, can not comprehend the obvious and we have seen many times in our preaching work. How many times we happened to listen to abstruse and philosophical arguments to say what the Scripture that says, maybe to prove doctrines such as the Trinity, hellfire, or things like that? Ahead of certain scriptural somersaults maybe we said ... "But how can you say such things! How can you not understand! Yet it is so clear!" The answer is often, prejudice and the inability to call into question their own beliefs. Obviously it is very easy to apply it to others. A little 'more difficult to apply it to ourselves. The possibility exists that we are becoming the modern Pharisees? And 'possible, pay for what we know, we have become the harder we get back on topic? Let's think about meditating on the history of Israel.
  3. Does death really erase sins?

    "Romans 6:23) For the wages that sin pays is death, but the gift that God gives is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6: 6, 7). . 7 For whoever is dead, he has been absolved of his sin. Death takes away the sins we have before death" False. Writing simply says that sin leads to death. Death is a just reward. Stop. If you remain in death then sin is paid. This is where we are talking about resurrection and the point is to understand if the resurrection (that is, it has not remained in death) must respond to sins. "(Acts 24:15) And I have hope in God, who hope for these men also to look to the future, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unjust" This writing implies that surely the right judge will assess the causes and attenuants of each individual. This means that the sinner will not automatically end in death and it is not excluded that there may be a period of probative time to expiate sin - compare Matthew 5:26 On the contrary, if there is a resurrection of the just and the unjust, it means that the "unjust" are unjust because of what they did when they were alive. Obviously writing does not say that they are "unjust" because of the tendencies they would once have resurrected. "We will not be resurrected perfectly - in the right bodies - we will have the same attitude and tendencies but we will have a new beginning or in some cases be honest a first chance to learn what is right." This is logical but being just or unjust has nothing to do with the tendencies. You're just or unfair because of what you do. They are recognized as just or unjust because of what has been done (not because of the tendencies) and not because of what you "could do". "There will be a great crowd that will survive without dying that it will also be imperfect yet (Ap 7: 13-15,17) Lamb will guide them to eternal life " Correct. But these are already considered "righteous" because they have washed their clothes in the blood of the Lamb. This scripture has no title in determining whether sinners (the unrighteous) once resurrected have to answer their own mistakes or not. "(Revelation 20: 12-15) 12 "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing in front of the throne, and flowing open, but another scroll was opened, it is the roll of life. things written in rolls according to their works " This is another script that is just the opposite of what you want to support. Writing says that either the dead were judged by "written things" or by things that have already been written. Time is in the past. I do not know how it comes in English but in my native language and text the meaning is "things written" and there is no script "the dead will be judged by the things that will be written" (ie in the future after the resurrection). "End of the Millennium Satan will be left out of his "well" to test restored humanity. See Acts 20: 7" The intent of this writing starts from another wrong assumption. The wrong assumption is that Armageddon destroys all humanity and that no nation is saved. Instead, the Bible explains that Armghedon will destroy the wild beast and his armies; in practice, the satanic system. Will all humanity be destroyed? Daniel 7:11, 12 says, "I continued to look at that, because of the sound of the great words the horn spoke; I kept looking until the beast was killed and his body was destroyed and was given to the burning fire. But as far as the rest of the beasts were concerned, their domains were removed, and they were granted a prolongation of life for a time and a season " I already know what the Governing Body says about these scriptures so it is useless to repeat them. However, we try to reason. Who is killing the beast? Is Christ, right? When was this beast killed? It's happened in the past? No. Who has the authority to cast "burning fire"? One person? Another kingdom? No, only Christ or Jehovah. It's not true? Well, the writing says that "the beast was killed and his body was destroyed and was given to the fiery fire (to Armageddon, right?) But as for the rest of the beasts, their domains were removed, and granted them a prolongation of life for a time and a season. " As you rightly wrote, Satan must be untied from the abyss and needs to "mislead the nations at the four corners of the earth" but there is a problem. During the Millennium reign will there be other nations? Will the world be divided into nations? Until recently "Gog of Magog", according to the Governing Body, was "Satan the Devil" and after one hundred years they realized that it was "a little strange" that Satan was devoured by birds and had a tomb here on earth. Now he says Magog's Gog is a coalition of nations (and that's right) but the problem is ... which nations? Will there be still nations (and therefore political divisions) during the Millennial Kingdom? The difficulty of understanding Gog's identity comes from the difficulty of understanding who will be destroyed by Armageddon. Be careful of this writing. "(1 Corinthians 15:25, 26) For he must reign until God puts all the enemies under his feet.26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing" This writing also shows that there is a problem with the present intent. If Christ has to rule "until God places all the enemies under his feet" and the Armageddon destroys all the rest of the world, then Christ should return the Kingdom at the end of Armageddon in fact 1 Corinthians 15; 27 says "But when all things they will be subjected, then the Son himself will submit to Him who has subjected Him all things, that God may be all things to all. " It is clear that there are still enemies during the Millennial Kingdom. Who are these enemies? Just "the nations at the four corners of the earth" - Revelation 20:7 Gog of Magog have never become our brothers. When Gog of Magog will be destroyed, then "all enemies will be placed under the feet of Christ" and at the end Christ returns the Kingdom to his Father, Jehovah. Magog's Gog will be destroyed and in the end there is still a last enemy to be eliminated: death. Death is eliminated during the resurrection which, in fact, takes place at the end of the millennium and not during the millennium. If death was eliminated at the beginning of the millennium, then it would not be "the last enemy." (but "last enemy it's Gog) Revelation 20: 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the end of the 1,000 years). "Until the end" it is not difficult to understand if we are free of the preconceptions. I have no interest in commenting on the explanation of the Governing Body. Only the Bible explains herself. If you have considered "absurd" that Armageddon does not destroy the whole world (as we have always believed), I invite you to read the article on this link and compare the Scriptures. Surely you will be able to assess whether the subject is supported by the Scriptures (that is, from the Bible) or whether they are personal ideas.
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
    You can translate in your language from homepage Regards greetings
  4. What does a person have to do to survive Armageddon?

    Try to evaluate this "inspired expression". If it does not happen, it's false. Soon the preaching work will be suppressed, first in Russia and then all over the world. The war that is about to burst (because it is about to burst) will lead to the victory of the northern king (which is currently Russia). The suppression of the preaching work will reach the whole world and the king of the north will "succeed." The Governing Body does not say this, is not it? Indeed, he said that "Jehovah's Witnesses have resisted all persecutions and will stand still now" (referring to the situation in Russia). If the Governing Body is right, then there is nothing to worry about (but we hope it does not happen again as in 1914 or 1975). If, on the contrary, the people of God are made up of spiritual drunks, then they will have to wake up through Jehovah's "strange work". Keep looking at what's happening - Joel 1: 5-8 Alternatively, to change, you could really study the Bible and understand what to do (without idolizing people above the Bible). "What does a person have to do to survive Armageddon?" You could study the Bible without preconceptions. Perhaps even the last "stupid" is able to understand it if sincerely asks God to help - Matthew 11:25
  5. What does a person have to do to survive Armageddon?

    Regardless of the fact that I do not share much of the Governing Body's explanation, when did the time for Jerusalem's destruction approach them, they did not have to stand up and go? Did not they have to do something practical and immediately even if they were old and sick? From what little I understood (little: I used the translator) would not it have been enough that they had faith in Jehovah? Since Jehovah is Almighty and can protect His people in any circumstance, Christians of the first century could also decide not to leave Jerusalem, no? Obviously there are many other things to say. The instructions come from the Word of God (and will not come from a divine inspiration) so it is important to study the Bible to understand what we must do when approaching the Armageddon War. But many of us believe they have understood everything and are not allowed to discuss or look. They wait for instructions from others.
  6. Message to the modern spiritual drunkards

    "Delay, and be stunned; be blinded, and be blinded. They are intoxicated, but not with wine; they moved unsteadily, but not because of intoxicating liquor" - Isaiah 29: 9 The so-called "masters of the Law" despised the common people and certainly does not put to argue with the first passing on the Word of God. Indeed, anyone who tried, even indirectly, would run the serious dangers - compares John 9: 30-34 Apart from a few happy exceptions, they were the ones who had "sat in Moses' seat" and therefore thought to possess the Truth - Matthew 23: 1 According to their traditions and their own interpretation of the Scriptures , only they were allowed to understand and explain the Word of God. We can imagine that if a hypothetical Israelite had asked, "What does the Scripture say about this?" He would receive a reply like, "What do the Pharisees? Did you ask one of them?". Let us, in our small way, to immerse ourselves in the environment and in the period. When the Lord Jesus Christ began his work of witnessing clashed many times with these "teachers of the Law." It is true that the Lord had a great authority and was certainly the wisest person ever existed, but if we focus on this means that we have not understood the point. Is coming "northern." Who is awake enough to notice? The Lord, in his speeches, he often used the expression "it is written" - compare Matthew 4: 4, 7, 10; 11:10; 21:13; 26:24, 31; Mark 7: 6; 9:12, 13; Luke 10:26; 20:17; 22:37; 00:46; John 6:45; 8:17; 10:34 And 'indisputable that the Lord, because of your position, could boast of the freedom for which it was not required to comply with all the precepts of the Law nor the human tradition - compare Matthew 12: 8; 17:25, 26 We also know that Jesus came to fulfill the Law that could, rightfully, add or specify commands to those already written in the law, in fact, many times he said, "but I tell you" - Compare Matthew 5:27, 28 Christians, in fact, thanks to the One who delivered them, do not live under the Law. However, every time he said "it is written" was like saying "I say so, says the Word of God" - compares John 5:31, 32 So to understand the point, let's try for a moment to forget that Jesus was the Son of God. Imagine that the last of the Israelites, perhaps even the poorest and the worst, in any of his speeches clearly said "it is written" in the likeness of the Lord. Would it matter? - 2 Corinthians 3: 4, 5 Of course we should see if the references are correct, and even if the explanation of a particular writing is correct because this person would certainly not the Son of God , and would not even inspired. It could be wrong, as happens to all human beings. Definitely could not afford to add one point to what is written, let alone say a kind of "sentence but I tell you ..." - compares Galatians 1: 8, 9 Surely his words should be examined in the light of the Scriptures as certain people are allowed to do even with Paul - Acts 17:11 Having established that what was said by the last of the Israelites actually "written", would change something if he were the poorest, the worst and maybe even the least intelligent of the nation? - 1 Samuel 16: 7 In the choir each of us would answer "Do not change anything ... because it is the Word of God that counts." But it would be just words. We try to make an honest self-criticism. When the Bible speaks of judgment, punishment and reprimands always apply other. This blog has reconsidered many interpretations and the article entitled "We are staggering like drunks?" He has highlighted the logical reasons and Scriptural that what Joel wrote against backsliding Israel, may not apply to Christendom. Obviously the article has tried to show that the punishment he is about to fall on the people of God and not on Christianity is something written. In practice it is written. What should a Christian, especially those who have positions of responsibility but without exception, to see "if this is so"? The answer should be simple enough. You should take the Bible and seek references and applications carefully assessing if the argument presented is correct or has errors. After all, as we said, there might be too large errors. This little blog has never claimed divine inspiration; on the contrary, it is born in order to "pay attention to the prophecy." As we saw in "the last Jew", he might well have misapplied the Scriptures. In good faith (and this will only know the Almighty God) you may have simply wrong. What should a Christian in this regard? - Acts 18:26 You should always refute through the scriptures and received, all together, to a better understanding of the Truth - Ephesians 4: 11-13 This would demonstrate love and genuine interest in the truth. He would demonstrate even love for the one who is wrong - Galatians 6: 1 But what happens in reality? It happens that "you are not the Faithful and Discreet Slave" and then you are not allowed to study the Bible on your own (or better: you are allowed to study the Bible on your own until you go against the official intention). You are not "guided by the Holy Spirit" so you can not truly understand God's Word - Proverbs 2: 1-6; 2 Corinthians 13: 5; 1 Thessalonians 5:21 We are the People of God and that is enough, no? - Isaiah 28:15 In our minds we are all of Tyndale or Bruno as well as in elementary school we were all Galilei once learned of vulgar ignorance of the church. The reality, though, could be quite different - compares John 16: 2; Matthew 7:22, 23 We cringe reading of narrow-mindedness and arrogance of the scribes and Pharisees, but, apparently, history repeats itself - compares Romans 2:21 and Hebrews 3: 16-19 If we had not become the modern scribes and Pharisees (including those who are simply afraid of exposing themselves, like Nicodemus) we would not have any fear of deepening certain teachings. Even if these teachings were the supreme organ. If the apostle Paul could be contested (at least potentially), who is "the faithful and discreet slave," which also acknowledged that not be the faithful and discreet slave until Christ will not come as executioner? * (See footnote) If the Bereans had found "something wrong" in the words of Paul, it would be called "Only he can understand and explain the scriptures and then just accept it" or they contested with the Scriptures themselves? And the apostle Paul, unlike anyone else, was really inspired. But today if you compare the scriptures and bring out something that goes against the official understanding you are not considered a noble mind and do not get some praise. On the contrary, the risks of being "out of the synagogue." Equally significant is the attitude of the individual brothers, "aware" included, which reinforce this policy with their laxity. Some of these even cite Tyndale as a symbol of their "battle" ... unless But really learn who he was and understand what Tyndale challenged. Maybe Tyndale challenged the "bureaucracy" of the church, individuals and not the official teachings? Well they look, some conscious, from discussing Tyndale challenged various official beliefs including the fact that Christ was not God, and other important things. Today, modern Tyndale (those who believe themselves such) discuss reforms on "contributions", the lack of transparency of the sales of the buildings, on the single "theocratic cowboys" ... Woe to discuss a formal understanding. Moreover, as we said, we are the others to have to do research and determine what to believe. A teacher of the Law may also say something that is not written but everyone else, not teachers of the Law, will not be heard even if what they say is written - Matthew 15: 3 Perhaps it would be useful to reflect that, although those who have become masters will receive a more severe judgment, judgment will always be individual - Romans 14:10 Try to wake up, drunkards. Do not worry about who writes what. If you had love for the Word of God you would care to see if what has been written is really written - Amos 3: 2; John 17:17 Footnote: See the study articles in The Watchtower of July 15, 2013
  7. "Come gestire il burn-out" es una despertad del 2014 (el título está en italiano)
  8. Следующее обсуждение будет иметь только цель определения «маленький рог». Все за пределами своей простой идентификации (что он будет делать, в какое время, как связано с другими событиями) не рассматривалась. Это будет сделано в следующей статье. В статье, следует помнить, хотя цитировать Писание, чтобы поддержать мнение представил, она представляет личные взгляды автора. И коза, со своей стороны, дала себе большие арии до крайности; но как только он был сильным, то сломился большой рог, и вместо него росли драматически четыре, обращенные на четыре ветра небесных. 9 И от одного из них появился еще один рог, маленький, и это было здорово на юг и восток и к Decoration. 10 И он продолжал быть большим, пока небесное воинство, так что он упал на земле часть армии и звезда, и растоптал. 11 И они дали большие арии принцу армии, и он был снят [жертва] непрерывно, и он был брошен вниз установившимся местом своего святилища. 12 И постепенно он получил военные себя, наряду с [жертвами] непрерывно, из-за согрешения; и он продолжал бросать истину на землю, и действовал и имел успех - Даниил 8: 8-12 Свидетели Иеговы Все хорошо знают, кто козел, как несколько стихов позже приходит ясно сказал, «волосатый козел [это] царь Греции» - Даниил 8:21 Свидетели Иеговы Все (или почти все) также знают много подробностей о Александра Македонского (маленький рог, который стал большой), разделение его царства и т.д. В 9-м стихе главы 8, однако, Даниил видит другой рог. Там более говорить о Алессандре Магна и эта часть видения выполняется через некоторое время после раздела царства Греции. Что дальше? Мы понимаем, что мы читаем об этом роге. В то же время мы видим, что он говорит о подчиненном в этом роге. Вы можете найти информацию в книге «Обратите внимание на пророчество Даниила!» на страницах 137-144 (итальянское издание книги). Выделим некоторые высказывания упомянутой книги. Мы будем делать это не для критического духа, а просто оценить, насколько могут быть и другие возможности. В основном, когда Библия просто оставляет ключи, то логично думать, что это происходит так, что люди могут попытаться снова и снова, пока не пришли к логическому выводу - Сравнить Притчи 2: 1-5 В противном случае он будет использовать ясный язык, несомненно, как это произошло в случае Киры покоритель вас знали имя двухсот лет назад. В этом случае, как и в случае Вавилона Великого, мы получим тождество субъекта с учетом совпадают ли ключи с тем, что мы знаем. В книге говорится, что «в 55 г. до н.э., Джулио Чезаре вторгся командует отгрузки Britannia, но не удалось установить постоянное поселение». «Тогда», продолжает «в 122 н.э., император Адриан начал строить вал из уст Тайн в Солвей-Бей, который ознаменовал северную границу Римской империи. В начале пятого века римские легионы покинули" остров ". Таким образом, очевидно, что Римская империя, после более чем 170 лет поселения (от 55 г. до н.э. до 122 н.э.), еще не в состоянии полностью покорить Англию, в отличие от того, что произошло с большей частью Европы. Не только. В книге в частности, говорится, что «в начале пятого века, римские легионы покинули остров.» Таким образом, мы должны спросить, что на самом деле в Риме с тех пор, но, вероятно, как мы увидим, это не принципиальный момент. Есть и другие проблемы, конечно, существенные с библейской точки зрения. Несомненно, Англия была «небольшой рог», который вырос во многих отношениях, однако, написание ясно говорит, что этот маленький рог бы сбил трех королей. Что такое объяснение раба? Существует говорить о поражении Испании в морской атаке знаменитого «Армада» во главе, в 1588 году, Филипп II. Это трудно определить , является ли поражение в бою может быть эквивалентно поражению царства (написание говорит , что эти рога выкорчевали ... понятие, кажется, указывают на нечто большее , чем бой шли плохо ) , но на самом деле это большой морской бой cosituì потери, а также большое унижение для Испании. Поэтому manziona Франции и это говорит о том, что «в течение восемнадцатого века, англичане и французы столкнулись в Северной Америке и Индии, пока он не был подписан Договор о Париже в 1763 году В этом трактате Уильям B Уиллкокс писал, что» санкционирован новое позиция Великобритании в качестве крупной европейской державы в мире за пределами Европы «» Опять же, мы можем сказать , что Англия была лучше ... но на самом деле сорвал рога? Но как насчет Голландии, упоминаются как второй рог вырванным из Англии? Книга говорит, что ... «В семнадцатом веке голландцы владели большой торговый флот в мире. Англия, однако, расширяя свои колониальные владения закончилась превалировать над царством.» Так что это не говоря уже о какой-либо войны или сражения, но просто коммерческое превосходство. Если это сомнительно крупное сражение на самом деле может «сорвать рог», что о торговой войне? Это кажется довольно вынужденную концепцию, потому что, в истории человечества, многие царства были превышены (даже измельченный) с экономической точки зрения / бизнеса и, конечно, Англия, со всеми ее колониями по всему миру, может «похвастаться «уплощение многих других глобальных предприятий. Если мы делаем поиск по Голландии, в самом деле, мы не будем читать о завоеваниях саксов и франками, но никогда британцев. Также в книге Даниила, когда он упоминает «сломать рог» или «рог», это относится к войне, так что военное завоевание королевства или смерть государя. В этом смысле она не соответствует ни одному из трех «сражений», упомянутых за исключением, возможно, победы, которая получила гораздо позже в 1815 г. против Наполеона. Давайте помнить слова ангела, даже в книге, об этой власти: ангел сказал Даниилу , что четвертый зверь, или четвертое царство " будет пожирать всю землю . (Daniel 7:23) Существует еще одна трудность, и Писанию. Если англо-американской империя является продолжением древнего Рима, объясняет ту же книга комментирует на огромном изображении (глава 2), как же он идентифицируется как король на юг? Древний Рим, в самом деле, был царь северный . Все цари статуи Даниила 2 могут быть идентифицированы как «царь северный»; вполне возможно, что последний король (ноги) царь на юге? Следует полагать, что корни северного царя родились бы королем на юг? Если да, то для какой цели или какую пользу было бы создать эти различия? Это не было бы достаточно, и яснее, говоря, что различные народы будут воевать в течение нескольких столетий? В том, что служил для поиска поиска для ощупью, чтобы понять, что царь или царство был бы королем на юге или на севере, если они взаимозаменяемы? Это приводит к еще большей проблемой. По словам Даниила последнее столкновение заканчивается с королем победы северной и в самом деле, после Даниила 11:40, что упоминает эту битву, больше нет никакого упоминания короля на юге и даже победитель короля просто говорит, что «должны быть направлены его конец «- Daniel 11:45 всегда Говоря о царь, как говорят, «восстать против Владыки владык восстанет, но будет сокрушен без рук» - Даниил 8:25 Все это находится в гармонии со счетом Откровения, который упоминается один доминирующей силой, последнее, он будет бороться с Агнцем - Откровение 13: 2; 19: 19-21 В целом Откровения, по крайней мере, из главы 9 и далее, не говорится о двух противоборствующих держав, но одна доминирующая сила сатаны, чтобы быть «престол его, его власть и великую власть» - Откровение 13: 2 Этот зверь, как пишет Даниил, «пожирать всю землю», - Daniel 7:23; Откровение 13: 7. На данный момент мы столкнулись с непреодолимой проблемой. Или англо-американская власть на самом деле король севера (а затем соответствовали часть слов Даниила и Откровения) или небольшой рог , который стал очень велик не может быть Англия, ни англо-американской империи. Давайте попробуем взглянуть на другую политическую тему, а также исходить из логического предположения и Писания. После поражения последнего короля, третий, мы говорим о заседании суда, чтобы удалить это правило и уничтожить - Даниил 7: 24-26 Есть другие вышеупомянутые войны человека или другие доминирующий короля в то же время. Так что, если этот рог становится последним правящим королем, мы должны предположить , что по крайней мере , последний из трех царей, король юга на самом деле , до сих пор жив. Если нет, мы бы сейчас в полной великой скорби или под суд Армагеддона. Цари падшие, полезные для идентификации этого маленького рога выросли, они могут быть не более двух. Мы начинаем поиски этого рога не теряя из вида царя севера. Если бы мы имели уверенность, кто воплощается, на протяжении веков, царь севера, мы не должны идти «вслепую», чтобы увидеть, как много маленьких царств возвысились и считать упавшего короля папское кандидата для каждой нации. Мы должны найти народ , который обоснованно может идентифицировать себя как короли на севере и в то же время, воплощающий описаны другие возможности. Краткое зеркало из этих двух групп, соответственно, на страницах 228 и 246 указанной книги. Последние два короля назвать Германская империя (в царе северных тканей) и англо-американской империя (в царе южных тканей). Вы заметите, что одна из причин, почему Германия идентифицируется как «царя севера» является тот факт, что он находится в союзе с Италией, историей этой страны Древнего Рима, а также связей с Священной Римской империи. Другое указание является то, что Вильгельм I принял титул Kaiser (Цезарь). Допуская, что нацистская Германия была король севера, мы должны спросить, кто принял на себя эту роль после войны. В конце концов, как мы видели из предыдущих королей или императоров, два противника всегда взошел. Ответ может быть проще, чем мы могли себе представить. До сих пор мы восстановили личность своих царей или из - за из родословной или из оккупированных территорий . Когда личность два цари изменений (см глава четырнадцать) весь вопрос играются на территории Сирии. Сирия изображает король Северного Египта в то время как царь юга. Тем не менее, с вмешательством Рима, между двумя претендентами, Антиох IV (Сирийская) следует отказаться от своих претензий на Египет. Это положило конец соперничеству между двумя царями. Можно сказать, что король на севере в то время уже не существует (но было бы лучше сказать, что она не видна). Менее чем через сто лет после того, как Сирия стала римской провинцией. E «по этой причине мы можем определить Рим в качестве царя севера: политической / географической связи. Можно сказать, что король на севере (равно как и его конкурент) является вненационального объект, который перемещается из страны в страну, но в каждом движении, всегда начинается с того места, где она была. Так что это не имеет значения , что нация, родословная, этнической принадлежности или культуры , в которой он закончится этот вопрос , но считает только свою последнюю ногу (и ограничить отметку он оставил в этом заключительном этапе). Кроме того , от того, что мы видели до сих пор, царь севера никогда не станет королем на юге и наоборот , даже если часть и завоеванные территории могут быть разделены на обоих. P tarting из этого предположения, мы открываем книгу «Обратите внимание на пророчество Даниила!» на странице 257 (Глава пятнадцатая). На этой фотографии вы можете четко видеть победитель последней великой войны, которая привела к поражению нацистской Германии или старому королю севера. Вы видите, что премьер-министр Великобритании Уинстон Черчилль (тогда часть короля на юге), Франклин D Русвелт (президент США, который также является королем на юге) и Иосиф Сталин (которого король?). О нацистской Германии была разделена между ними? Первоначально, в августе 1945 года, он е у делится на четыре части: на юго-западе Франции, Великобритании на северо - западе, на юге СССР и США к востоку. С одной из этих империй родились бы царь северного, но ... Великобритания и Соединенные Штаты, в части южного царя, не могли изменить свою личность. Единственные два варианта остались так Франция и Россия. Однако Наполеона Франция может сыграть роль короля Юга, когда нанес смертельный удар Священной Римской империи в 1805 году. Те, кто остался, тогда? Сталинская Россия, конечно. Кроме того, возможно, мало кто знает, что выход России слово «царь», так же, как на немецком языке кайзера, означает Цезарь * (см примечание). Последний русский царь Николай II, был свергнут в 1917 году и до сих пор мы говорили о разделении Германии прошло уже почти тридцать лет спустя, но интересно отметить, как «возможный кандидат» эта империя за роль короля на севере (а также ' ясно римский отпечаток). Россия, в непропорциональном росте, также включена некоторые страны, которые первоначально были римские колониями. Мы роем, следовательно, в истории России, чтобы увидеть, если он соответствует описанию, данному в Библии. Не запутаться: любой нации вы играете роль царя севера в наши дни, он не должен идентифицировать себя в качестве таковых в зачаточном состоянии (главное, что не является частью южного царя). На самом деле, до начала Второй мировой войны король севера не представлен гитлеровской Германии. Ключи к личности этого царя, который в последний момент будет играть король на севере , могут быть намного старше. Точно так же как с объяснением книги упоминается, что указует на Англию в качестве небольшого рога, только много лет спустя он был «растет много» (с альянсом США) , но упомянул баталию полезны для идентификации (Испания, Голландия, Франция) имела место , когда он был еще мал (то есть, Соединенные Штаты не вступали в этих конфликтах). Проще говоря: мы находим, что народ победило два царей, произрастающих много, который присутствует в наши дни, и становится царем на север из-за территориями завоеванных в последней войне. Обитаемый с древних времен, в 1 - м тысячелетия до нашей эры на территории России была домом для породы населения, другого языка и культуры, среди которых возникло в первую очередь скифы и сарматы. Между 3 - м и 9 - м века нашей эры пришла к земле готов, с гуннами , а затем рядом ведомых населений , которые поселились в основном в Украине и прилегающие регионы. Важный поворотный момент наступил во второй половине 9 - го века, когда Скандинавское население, варяги, также называется Русь (отсюда и название Россия), с Рюрика основали первое ядро российского государства вокруг Новгородской области HTTP: / /www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/storia-della-russia_%28Enciclopedia-dei-ragazzi%29/ Рождение этого небольшого поселения, Рюрик, можно считать небольшим рогом. Что-то действительно незначительны. Гораздо более ничтожным, чем он мог бы считать Англию во время римских завоеваний. Если бы мы должны были двигаться шестьсот лет до Великого княжества Московии под руководством Ивана III (1462-1505), никто не мог отрицать, что, поскольку этот рог вырос в действительно непропорциональной. Эта империя продолжала расширяться в геометрической прогрессии, пока она не достигнет площади более 17 миллионов квадратных chilomteri! Русь Рюрик основана в девятом веке. Сегодня более 17 миллионов квадратных км Можно спорить о внутренних войнах, как совокупности его время нелинейного ... никогда не возражает. Единственное, что имеет значение для того, чтобы определить, является непропорциональным ростом. Возражение, что многие страны бывшего Советского Союза, не могут быть идентифицированы как рога, потому что они разделены империями оригинала становится независимым (пятнадцать государства постсоветские) не является действительным. Даже англо-американская империя рассматривается как единая власть, но Великобритания и Соединенные Штаты были суверенными и независимыми друг от друга. Что и сколько царей этот рог победил? Конечно, первый был Наполеон. В связи с этим, мы читаем ... Потери Великой армии в России были катастрофические и необратимые оказали влияние на военный баланс в Европе; по словам Джорджес Лефевр Наполеона было около 400 000 умершим или безвестно отсутствующим и 100.000 заключенных [3] ; Дэвид Г. Чандлер говорит о 370000 погибших или пропавших без вести и 200.000 заключенных, в том числе 48 генералов и 3000 офицеров; в дополнение к человеческим жертвам, катастрофическим были также материальные потери , понесенные армией; Французские привезли из России только 250 орудий, русские утверждали, что захватили 925; Это было также очень серьезной потерей для Франции более чем 200000 лошадей, лишенной кавалерию наполеоновский средств , чтобы вернуться к исходной мощности в следующих военных кампаниях (...) О причинах катастрофы Великой армии Наполеона в 29 - м бюллетеня , а затем Мемориал Святого Елены привез гибель своего бизнеса почти исключительно к русской ранней зимней погоде , что ослабило бы войско и трансформировал российскую кампанию в катастрофе [204 ] . Эта традиционная интерпретация была снята свидетелями и ранними французскими историками; Филипп-Поль де Сегюры , участие и первое большое историческое предприятие, объяснила катастрофу оттенить шаткое здоровье Наполеона, который будет отвлекать внимание от деятельности и разрешения, а также ссылаясь на внешние факторы , такие как судьба; отсутствие удачи [221]
      Hello guest!
    Это правда, что официально Наполеон потерпел поражение при Ватерлоо в „седьмой коалиции“, но то, что случилось бы, если император еще все его генералы и его наиболее влиятельных людей? Поскольку история не сделано с МФС и Буц, мы не можем знать, но очень тяжелый поражение, что французы потерпели в России (и цифры говорят сами за себя), не могло не повлиять отрицательно на судьбу. Многие историки согласны с тем, что Россия была настоящим победителем войны. Опять же , трудно быть категоричным о том, кто на самом деле разорвал Роге , но , безусловно , поражение он потерпел армии Наполеона в России отдаленно не сравнима с тем, что произошло с испанской Армады в 1588 Кроме того, эта битва ставит под угрозу судьбу война и падение самой Франции, которая не может быть сказана Испания. Кто мог быть вторым? Только Адольф Гитлер, последний царь севера в порядке времени. Сталинградская битва, которая началась летом 1942 года с продвижением войск « оси до Дона и Волги, закончилась зимой 1943 года, после ряда драматических и кровавых фаз, с уничтожения 6 - й немецкой армии Он оставался в окружении в Сталинграде и с уничтожением большинства других немецких и осями сил , участвующих в южной части стратегического восточного фронта. Эта длинная и гигантская битва, описанная некоторыми историками как «наиболее важным из всей Второй мировой войны», [12] отмечено первое крупное военно-политическое поражение немецкого нациста и ее союзников и сателлитов, а также начало " передовой советский запад , который положит конец спустя два года с завоеванием здания Рейхстага и самоубийства Гитлера в бункере рейхсканцелярии во время битвы Берлин . [13]
      Hello guest!
    Здесь также потери в плане человеческих жизней поистине удивительно. Ни один серьезный историк не может отрицать важнейшую роль, которую Россия играет в разгроме нацистской Германии. Все условия для того, чтобы определить последний царь севера, были выполнены. Он должен был родиться как маленький рог. Он стал огромным. Он должен идентифицировать себя как король на север. Он должен был вырывать три рога. Кто третий король? Это будет царь на юг, так как Писание предвещает. А « , то это даст вам большие арии„до небесного воинства, так что будет падать на земле часть армии и звезда“... топтать истинное поклонение и истинные христианин . После третьей победы не будет больше королей и империй, способных бороться с ним, и именно в этот момент, что он «будет пожирать всю землю», - Daniel 7:23; Откровение 13: 4 Это также вмешивается в этот момент, что князь князей, не разрушающих его „не рука“. Существует, по сути, самая последняя деталь, мы можем сказать, условие, которое имело бы соблюдать, но это ясно из других писаний. Этот король начнет подавлять ежедневную жертву, или проповедническую работу на своей территории - Даниил 11:31 Он также показывает, что это исключение, так как во время войны была бы «затоплен и вторглось,» он будет распространен на другие страны (но вполне возможно, что этот запрет распространения еще до войны). Последние последние события с участием наших братьев в России ... не кажется сильным признаком , позволяющий идентифицировать небольшой рог? Сноска * Законная маточная и правовая преемственность Римской империи продолжается с Иваном III, (по некоторому потомку Друза Германика, римский император) супруга Зоя Палеолога, племянницы и наследника престола последнего византийского императора (г Римской империи " Восток). Исторические ссылки на углубление
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
  9. Let those who are asking questions

    " When you see a cloud rising in western places, you immediately say: 'It is the time', and it happens. And when you see a south wind blowing, you say, 'There will be a heat wave,' and it happens. Hypocrites, you know to examine the appearance of earth and sky, but why do not you know look at this particular time? "- Luke 12: 54-56 From the first article in this blog wanted to distance itself clearly from all those sites and polemical blogs created solely as a safety valve and cast a shadow on the governing body or the people of God as a whole. Many of these, though not all, are the expression of the frustration of some for losing certain positions, visibility and below. We do not reveal any mystery by asserting that some are puffed up with pride thinking of always being right and being invested supreme authority - 1 Timothy 3: 6 We do not even say nothing strange if we say that some people, seeing recognized their merits, real or perceived, on the job or elsewhere, have seen in the "theocratic assignments" a kind of redemption. One way to demonstrate the "worth something" - Psalm 18:27; Proverbs 6:16, 17 For this and other reasons, when some have seen the collapse of all their "dreams of glory," they thought to start a smear campaign against God's people and also have the pass to do anything - 2 Peter 2:22 Apart from these, you have to recognize or admit the possibility that there are people who have opened sites or blogs contentious because they suffered real injustice or clashing sincerely from a scriptural point of view - John 9:34; Revelation 2: 4, 20 If anyone re-discuss openly the "doctrine" of 1914, for example, would sooner or later expelled from the congregation if they did not fit immediately into the ranks. It would be presumptuous to think that the reflections made in this blog on the 1914, as well as on other subjects, are not already been done by others. Although humanly speaking the author of this blog is close to all those who have been expelled not for a repeated offense but because of his own conscience on biblical themes, none of us has the authority to denigrate, insult or alienate others by the people which, net of all faults and limitations , it is still God's people. That each of us to reflect seriously on the words of the Lord when he said what we find in Matthew 18: 6 So, as much as depends on us and as long as Jehovah will show us clearly something else, no one let the people of God because if within the His People there will be severe discipline (also because of those who were unjustly expelled - compares Giovanni 16: 2), outside of His People there will be something else. Of course, situations may arise in which we listen to our conscience - Romans 14: 5 To avoid this sad event, we are encouraged to be "cautious as serpents" also to our brothers - Matthew 10:16; 24:10 For the moment we can share many things with our brothers including the preaching work, attendance at meetings, etc., without necessarily having to collide on the 1914 or Babylon the Great. So, reiterating the concept, regardless of the GB and errors of God's people as a whole, a blog or website for purely polemical can not be considered a viable option for those who love God and sincerely studying His Word. We should also ask ourselves "What gave me" a site after reading an article that mentioned what is wrong and even make it a novel is the easiest thing in the world * (see footnote). This introduction was necessary to explain the following article because the reasons could be easily misunderstood. As we saw from the very first articles, though this blog is dedicated to the prophecy, it was not possible to treat the prophecy without touching some doctrines associated with them. The Word of God has such a strong internal consistency that is not reasonable to believe that he could explain the prophecies of Revelation (and other prophetic books) without touching the doctrine of the resurrection (which will happen at the end of the millennium and not during), the order chronological or not the book, the "doctrine" of 1914, the seven days of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar and so on. For this reason you will find after not purely prophetic that was inevitable anyway to deal hope to understand something more about the prophecies. This highlights one of the reasons why some will never understand the prophecies in spite of the efforts: the inability or unwillingness to renegotiate certain doctrines that are upstream. On the same principle we must necessarily realize that you can not move forward in the understanding of the times in which we live and those who arrive without touching the sensitive topic of "governing body" or "quality of spiritual food." This has already been done, more or less soft, in several previous post (see for example the article entitled "Restoration of true worship. Dress clean for the High Priest"). At least with regard to the current understanding, the prophecies do understand that the "light" to lead the people of God (which is clearly not the Bible or it may not be less - Psalm 119: 105) will turn off for a certain period of time and this will serve to lay bare the depth of our relationship with Jehovah - compares Isaiah 28:16 So it does not be surprised if before then that the light begins to fade. Many of us have noticed that certain topics are not touched for years and that on certain issues it is more elusive than before. In return, all the paper work which involves legalism for appointments, discipline, legal protections and various committees have greatly strengthened - Psalm 127: 1, 2 So the following article is of course a critical and will be targeted to the specific material , but everything will be done remembering who we are (Romans 3:23, 24; 1 Corinthians 4: 7) with the sole purpose of reflecting as part of prophecy is already fulfilled before our eyes - 1 Corinthians 14: 8, 9 The reader is invited not necessarily share the article but at least compare the scriptures mentioned and to consider whether the arguments are brought forward with logic. The following article will cover part of the Watchtower in October 2017. The article is titled "Visions of Zechariah: because there concern?" A vision does not understand something more of a command or a need? Since the beginning, we can focus on the questions listed in the first paragraph. Why Jehovah gave to the prophet visions so unusual? In what situation were the Israelites at that time? What do we learn today from those visions? The questions are certainly deep and detailed so that we isolate some notable points to see how we have tried to give an answer. After a brief explanation of the background and necessary (paragraph two), " Jehovah assured them that would help them restore the true worship" (paragraph three). Let us pause a moment and reflect on these words. He took for themselves, without knowing anything of Zechariah, the book and the time in which it was written, one would think that the theme that will be developed will focus precisely on how Jehovah will restore true worship. Doing disquisitions on whether past or future fulfillment of these words, should not talk about this? Among other things paragraph confirms that this will be the sixth and seventh vision and this would appear to suggest that these visions reveal details on how Jehovah will do this. Besides a vision should include something more of a command; the same ten commandments and all the Mosaic law did not need a vision that was dictated and that the Israelites understood the requirements of the Most Almighty and moral norms that should have respect. Instead the following paragraphs, although the steering wheel scroll vision written in front and behind is "very special", they say that "God will punish whoever steals and among Christians there is no place for any kind of theft." Zechariah really needed a vision to understand that God does not tolerate the theft? Apart from that, as we have said, it seems strange that a vision is limited to this, but the question we should ask is ... "Zacharias did not know that Jehovah does not tolerate the theft?" - Compare Exodus 20:15; Leviticus 19:11, 13; Proverbs 11: 1; 20:23 It 's unusual for a prophet of Jehovah but also the rest of the people had to remember a need so obvious, present even in the most primitive human legal systems. It would not be sufficient to read "the book of the law" as in the past it was done and how the law itself provided? Until the end of paragraph seven, there is not the slightest indication that this vision can have a deeper explanation and that can be applied particularly in the future. The subsequent paragraphs remain the same "conservative" line. We should not swear falsely, and the promises made to Jehovah - compares Leviticus 19:12; Numbers 30: 2; Ecclesiastes 5: 5, 6 The next vision is even more interesting. Even the arrival city has no prophetic significance? From the subtitle "The evil is put in its proper place," we can see how the vision that perhaps leaves Zaccaria "horrified" with all its details, it "makes it clear that Jehovah will never tolerate any form of evil within his people and will ensure that it is eliminated quickly. " Then women with wings stork carrying away the mingled with evil in the land of Shinar, underline this aspect. Why they choose Sinar and not Nineveh, for example? Because "Israelites them have thought that Sinar was the place where relegate Evil. Zechariah and his contemporaries Jews, in fact, they could confirm that Babylon wickedness was widespread." Again the vision of the container, the evil woman, women with wings stork and the country of destination have no special meaning, much less prophetic. It must be said that if we had dealt with this issue even thirty years ago, maybe someone would begin to calculate the distance between Jerusalem and Sinar to find some correspondence with some meeting or resolution modern or past. This article is definitely more conservative than those of a few years ago ** (see note below) but it really is prudent that we see in this article, or something else? We try to be very objective without hiring a team cheer attitude. Do we really think that Zacharias had seven visions in such a special time, to learn that Jehovah does not tolerate theft, falsehood and evil? Do we really think that the restoration-of true worship has nothing to do with our days? If we had started from chapter four instead to section five, we would not perhaps have inevitably head towards Revelation? - compares Zechariah 4: 2, 3 and Revelation 11: 4 Zechariah chapter four he not also speaks of the restoration-of true worship, just as do the five chapters and six? If Zechariah and Revelation are connected, even if only in part, we would not have had to reflect on the identity of this "evil woman" which, incidentally, is transported in the most important city of Babylon that "to his own place"? We said that the article is not intended as a criticism for its own sake so that everyone will have to make their own assessments in the light of the scriptures. Certainly, as we have seen in the articles entitled "We are staggering like drunks?" and "Approaching Storm", we can understand "how far we are" the discipline of Jehovah, and also understand the reasons why he decides have to discipline there meditating on these aspects. If they make a reason all those who believe that the withdrawal of the books "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy" and "The Revelation Its Grand Climax" was the prelude to a new version with "new light." Indeed, there is to be afraid to imagine the explanations that may be. However, those who really pay attention to the prophetic word, they have no reason to be discouraged or be upset. If the light of a certain guide goes out, we have a guide that will never disappoint - Isaiah 40: 8 It 'important and urgent than ever, particularly in view of what will happen, become independent in our research and sharpen our power of reason - Romans 12: 1 We must also realize the responsibility that entails some knowledge. We must help not those who have become critical for bias and with whom you can not think and even those who can not and do not intend to call into question every truth imposed from above - Matthew 15: 6 We must help those who can still asking questions that do not come from the organization or even close their eyes to what is going to happen. We do not know to what extent the people of God will reshaped , but up to the revelation of the two witnesses in sackcloth this will continue to be the people of God and in any case, whatever happens, let us cling tightly to the Word of God that is the only truth - John 17:17 Recalling the words of Jesus quoted at the beginning of this article, and keeping in mind that we are nobody and we have one thousandth of its authority , make sure not to become like those who were part of God's people and that they were recognized as authorities but at the same time, could not understand "their particular time." We do not seek excuses why everyone has a Bible and the basic knowledge to deepen the arguments. Let us not be too full of us, basking in our safety thinking that others will pay. We could wake up in a really unwanted. How would we feel if the Lord said, " You're a hypocrite" ? - compares Amos 3: 2 Footnotes. * This also applies to all those sites that say they are prophetic but are merely interpreting the past Jehovah's judgments to the people of God. This is also a fairly easy game. ** Just take a look at the book, no longer in publication "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy" where virtually any number of days in the prophetic book were applied to assemblies, resolutions and publications.
  10. We are now very close to the great tribulation! A brother of the betel was concluding his speech when he made the following comment: " Be intensely busy with the word of God," I would like listening very carefully. We who are in Betel we are privileged to work with the faithful and discreet slave and with the body of directors and I wish know you how he feels the body of directors about the time we live now in this system of things. The faithful slave feels that it is already happened to the Matthew 24:14 prophecy: "quest for good news the kingdom's be preached in all the inhabited earth." What does the party later this word? He says that ... then the end will come. He knew you that there are only three countries in the world where there are no Jehovah's Witnesses? ONLY 3 countries! Somalia, North Korea and Afghanistan ... This does not mean that there does not reach the in our literature to but just that there are not Jehovah's Witnesses. I had mentioned earlier to some friends and they wanted to know why there are no Jehovah's Witnesses in these countries. I 'll tell you the reason. Jehovah does not send his people to any place where he knows that van there! * (See footnote) But in these three countries the good news have already been published (I guess it refers to the fact that literature is still available). Matthew 14, Luke 21, Mark 13, as well as Revelation 6: these words are ending (?) So what is the biblical prophecy that still has to fulfill? You know what? The read for you. See Revelation 17: 15-17 - (read the prophecy) The faithful slave is waiting for the day Jehovah will put this thought into their hearts. This is the next prophecy that must be fulfilled. For those who know what it means, this will cause the great tribulation. Once this is fulfilled , the door will be closed (in a spiritual sense). Whatever thing you did, you can not go back. "I could have done this or that if I had more time." Now is the time! How will you spend the time you stay? For what are you working or are you committed ? - in higher education? - you are struggling to get more money and material goods? - you are engaged in the distractions of the world? Or are you undertake to favor the kingdom.? We do things urgently, we try to be quick! (Story running on facebook between of various witnesses of Jehovah accounts) I want to point out that the aforementioned text is the translation of the translation of a translation and then of specific phrases may have been distorted sense. Apart from that, however, the general sense of the discourse is clear. Assuming that they are not the ravings of some overzealous brother (which still brings out what they believe, more or less openly, many Jehovah's Witnesses), the meaning is as follows. The prophecies have almost all been fulfilled. The preaching was completed. We are just waiting for the fall of Babylon the Great. Our expectations are really in harmony with God's Word? That's it? Some brother more in later years and with a good memory will recall that statements like these (views from different angles) have already been made in the past. Without wishing to be too argumentative, beyond the past mistakes, it is clear that sooner or later you have to get to the point where it will begin the great tribulation, will fall Babylon the Great, and you will enter the Millennial Kingdom. The fact we were wrong in the past, more than once, this in itself does not prove that you're wrong again. Could it really be so and definitely not wrong to keep alive the sense of urgency - compare Matthew 24:42; Revelation 16:15 Beyond, however, the "hint" that each of us can have, the only thing we should do is search the scriptures to try to understand "what extent we are old" in reference to biblical prophecy. It is true: if we take the writing of Matthew 24:14 and we make an analysis of the presence of our brothers in the world, probably we would come to the same conclusion of the aforesaid brother in the introduction of this article (always assuming that the report is credible). The question, however, end here? Being such an important subject, it would be no need to also examine other scriptures to see if you dial a credible framework or if "something is not right"? Moreover, as the same "slave" has admitted, they are not inspired and therefore we would like to build on something more than a simple "I want you to know how you feel the governing body about the time we live in." The Bible is not "imperfect spiritual food", does not lend itself to corrections or rewards, does not change with time and definitely do not mind - John 17:17; Romans 3: 4; James 1:17; Titus 1: 2 Obviously you are not suggesting that the interpretations of this blog are infallible; far from it. You simply want to emphasize that the Bible is always to have the last word and so we must look for answers there, not in our desires or people that we value - Matthew 4: 4 Some do not even accept the possibility that even those who are taking the lead can go wrong (as if they were human beings). For some to question the statement "slave" is an indication of lack of respect and submission but this is a myopic view of the situation. We know that many times the people of God fed wrong expectations about the future and about the will of God - compares Isaiah 28: 14-19 They were the people of God but this, in itself, did not guarantee the protection and the priests themselves, more often, showed a complete ignorance of the Scriptures - John 3:10 This also happened with good intentions and the best people - compares 1 Samuel 16: 7 Considering the biblical past, trying to see what the Bible says to beyond the proclamation and to everyone who comes , is not it the best? - 1 Thessalonians 5:21; Romans 15: 4; 2 Timothy 3:16, 17 The Lord Jesus Christ himself, the one who was the wisest of all men , and that he could speak of his own initiative, not perhaps did the same? - Matthew 4: 4-10 Questioning certain statements (not for bias, of course) is not a lack of respect towards the index "slave"; on the contrary, it shows profound respect for the one true authority of God's Word - Psalm 31: 5; Acts 17:11 Let us examine the claim that the prophecies would almost all be fulfilled, and we just have to wait the fall of Babylon the Great. The officer says that understanding God's Kingdom was established in heaven in 1914, by 1918 the heavens were purified, in 1919 the heavenly resurrection began (as well as the purification of the people of God) and so on. Perhaps there is some error in this generalization also because of the constant "adjustments" (adjustments that change the periods of a few months, ever the concepts) but roughly this is what you believe. These topics will not be discussed again in this article. Those who wish can go see the following links
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
    In this article you will see just how the logic and writing can corroborate or invalidate these ideas. The official explanation identifies the slaughtered head of death Revelation 13: 3 as the Anglo-American empire. It is true that the book that lists this explanation (the Revelation Its Grand Climax) has now been withdrawn but there is nothing new on the horizon that, until there is a different explanation, this is the ultimate understanding accepted. As we saw this explanation is problematic because the Anglo-American empire, according to official explanations, is the "king of the South" described in the Bible book of Daniel. However in Daniel is the king of the north to win the last war, and so it is obvious that something is not right - Daniel 11: 40-45 Of course we can not say that Daniel and Revelation contradict, does not it? To focus with Daniel Revelation there are only two possibilities. Or the Anglo-American empire is actually the king of the north ** (see note below) or head slaughtered to death that you see in Revelation can not be the Anglo-American empire. Does not it seem logical reasoning? How can the Anglo-American empire (and be the king of the south) if Daniele does understand that the last ruling king, or what will be defeated by Michele, is the king of the north? In Revelation we do not see another political power that defeats the beast that ascends from the sea. After the Great War (which can also have multiple stages), do not talk about other human wars in Revelation, right? - 1 Thessalonians 5: 3 The last war we are talking about and who participates in this beast is against the God Almighty - Revelation 16: 10-14, 16 The conclusion is logical. Apart from the fact that the end will come when the preaching has reached "all the inhabited earth" before this you will see the clash between the king of the north and the king of the south. And must win the king of the north, of course. In the last World War he has probably won the king of the north as well as to assert that "we just have to wait over the fall of Babylon the Great"? Absolutely no. The last king of the north was the Third Reich and, during the battle against the king of the south (the Anglo-American empire, in fact) it came out defeated. This is a prophecy that still has not been fulfilled and it is more than enough to establish that it is not enough that the preaching arrivals in these last three remaining countries. Among other things, the writing of Matthew 24:14 does not give any basis for determining how long the good news has to take place in a given country in order to receive adequate testimony. If tomorrow our brothers they come in those nations and begin to preach ... how much time would pass until God considered adequate and sufficiently complete that testimony? The answer is simple: we do not know . However, although that has yet to burst the war between the king of the north and king of the south, it is conceivable that in the meantime there are other prophecies that have to be fulfilled or are being fulfilled, is not it? As we have seen in several previous articles before the war should emerge a certain persecution of brothers (you have tribulation, but is not yet the great tribulation ) because the king of the north must start to suppress the daily sacrifice (the preaching work ) until you get to completely suppress it - see Daniel 8: 10-12, 24, 25 In our recent past, the preaching work was perhaps suppressed completely, which it did by means of the king of the north? According to the prophecy, and this must be done only during the last years of the scheme of things it must have a last impulse - compares Revelation 10:11; 14: 6, 7 E 'at this point that the preaching work will reach the ends of the earth, and this will happen very quickly - Zechariah 4: 6 The total suppression of preaching did not happen even during the Second World War and certainly did not happen in all countries; Also this leaves well understand that it is a prophecy to come. There is much more to say but the above should be sufficient, even for those who disagree with the explanations of this blog, to reflect that the Great, "you can not expect only the fall of" Babylon. Who has respect for the Bible itself to be shaped by it. Of course what has been said does not want to show that the end will come "who knows when." In contrast, recent international events suggest that we are far ahead in the end time (see the article entitled "We are in the end time" at the following link ...
      Hello guest!
    ...) All the events described above will occur in a very short time so when we can really begin to come to "raise high head" - Luke 21:28 Those who have lifted up their heads in 1914 all died with a stiff neck but when these things begin to take place (such as the war between the king of the north and king of the south) we can do it peacefully because of this incident until the actual fall of Babylon the Great (which will not be the world empire of false religion ) will spend a maximum of ten years. So us ensure that our expectations are in harmony with the Word of God not to be disappointed - Isaiah 28:16 Us ensure that our expectations are in harmony with the Word of God to be prepared for what's to come and not discouraged - 2 Peter 1:19; Proverbs 24:10 Us ensure that our expectations are in harmony with the Word of God, ultimately, for our lives - Matthew 7:24, 25 The Bible traces the path. It will not lead to disappointment. Footnote. * The translation was not very clear. ** From previous articles we saw that the Anglo-American empire is indeed the king of the south.
  11. The following discussion will only have the objective of identifying "the little horn". Everything outside its mere identification (what it will do, what time, how is linked with other events) was not considered. This will be done in a future article. The article, it should be remembered, though cite Scripture to support the view presented, it represents the personal views of the author. And the goat, for its part, gave himself great airs to the extreme; but as soon as he was strong, the great horn was broken, and instead of it there grew dramatically four, toward the four winds of heaven. 9 And from one of them appeared another horn, small, and it was great toward the south and the east and toward the Decoration. 10 And he continued to be great until the army of heaven, so that he dropped to the ground part of the army and of the stars, and trampled. 11 And they gave great arias to the Prince of the army, and he was taken off the [sacrifice] continuous, and he was thrown down the established place of his sanctuary. 12 And gradually it was given a military itself, along with the [sacrifice] continuously, because of transgression; and he continued to throw truth to the ground, and acted and had success - Daniel 8: 8-12 All Jehovah's Witnesses are well aware who the goat as a few verses later comes clearly said "the hairy he-goat [is] the king of Greece" - Daniel 8:21 All Jehovah's Witnesses (or almost all) also know many details about Alexander the Great (the little horn that became large), the division of his kingdom etc. In verse 9 of chapter 8, however, Daniel sees another horn. There is more talking about Alessandro Magno and this part of the vision is fulfilled some time after the partition of the kingdom of Greece. What next? We will understand what we read about this horn. Meanwhile we see what it says about the slave in this horn. You can find the information in the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy!" at pages 137-144 (Italian edition of the book). We isolate some statements of the said book. We will do this not for critical spirit but simply to assess whether there may be other possibilities. Basically when the Bible simply leaves clues, it is logical to think that this happens so that people can try again and again until you come to the logical conclusion - Compare Proverbs 2: 1-5 Otherwise it would use clear language, unmistakably, as happened in the case of Cyrus the conqueror of you even knew the name of two hundred years earlier. In this case, as in the case of Babylon the Great, we get the identity of the subject considering whether the clues coincide with what we know. The book says that "in 55 BCE, Giulio Cesare invaded in command of a shipment Britannia but failed to establish a permanent settlement". "Then," continues "in 122 CE, Emperor Hadrian began to build a rampart from the mouth of the Tyne to the Solway Bay, which marked the northern boundary of the Roman Empire. At the beginning of the fifth century the Roman legions left the ' island". So it is clear that the Roman Empire, after over 170 years of settlement (from 55 BCE to 122 CE), was not yet able to completely conquer Britain, unlike what happened to much of Europe. Not only. The book specifically says that "in the early fifth century, the Roman legions left the island." So we should ask what was really in Rome from then on but probably, as we shall see, this is not a fundamental point. There are other problems, certainly significant from a biblical point of view. Undoubtedly England was "a little horn" which grew in many respects, however, the writing clearly says that this little horn would have brought down three kings. What is the slave's explanation? There is talk of Spain's defeat in the naval attack of the famous "armada" led, in 1588, by Philip II. It 'difficult to determine whether a defeat in battle can be equivalent to the defeat of a kingdom (the writing says that these horns were uprooted ... concept that seems to indicate something more than a battle went badly ) but in fact this great naval battle cosituì loss as well as a great humiliation for Spain. Therefore it mantions France and it is said that "during the eighteenth century, British and French faced in North America and India, until it was signed the Treaty of Paris in 1763. In this treatise William B. Willcox wrote that" sanctioned the new Britain's position as a major European power in the world outside Europe "." Again we can say that England had the better ... but really tore the horn? But what about Holland, mentioned as second horn ripped from England? The book says ... "In the seventeenth century the Dutch possessed the largest merchant marine in the world. England, however, extending its colonial possessions ended prevail over the kingdom." So it does not mention any war or battle but simply commercial supremacy. If it is questionable whether a major battle can actually "pluck a horn", what about a trade war? It seems a rather forced concept because, in human history, many kingdoms were exceeded (even crushed) from an economic / business perspective and certainly England, with all its colonies around the world, can "boast "flattening of many other global businesses. If we do a search on Holland, in fact, we will read of conquests by the Saxons and Franks but never of the British. Also throughout the book of Daniel, when he mentions the "break the horn" or "horns", it refers to the war, so the military conquest of the kingdom or the death of the sovereign. In this sense it does not fit any of the three "battles" mentioned except, perhaps, the victory that gained much later in 1815 against Napoleon. Let us keep in mind the words of the angel, even in the book, about this power: the angel told Daniel that the fourth beast, or fourth kingdom ' would devour the whole earth '. (Daniel 7:23) There is another difficulty and is scriptural. If the Anglo-American empire is an extension of ancient Rome, explains the same book commenting on the immense image (Chapter 2), how come it is identified as the king of the south? Ancient Rome, in fact, was the king of the north . All the kings of Daniel's statue 2 can be identified as "king of the north"; it is possible that the last king (feet) is the king of the south? We should assume that the roots of the king of the north would have been born king of the south? If so, for what purpose or what benefit it would be to create these distinctions? It would not be enough, and clearer, saying that various nations will be at war for several centuries? In what is served to search the search for groped to understand what king or kingdom would have been the king of the south or the north if they were interchangeable? This leads to an even bigger problem. According to Daniel the last clash ends with the king of the north win and in fact, after Daniel 11:40 that mentions this battle, there is no longer any mention of the king of the south and even the king's winner says simply that "should be sent to its end "- Daniel 11:45 always Speaking of the king is said to "rise against the Prince of princes, but he shall be broken without hand" - Daniel 8:25 All this is in harmony with the account of Revelation which mentions a single dominant power, the last, it will fight against the Lamb - Revelation 13: 2; 19: 19-21 In the whole of Revelation, at least from Chapter 9 onwards, no mention of two antagonistic powers, but a single dominant power by Satan to be "his throne, his power and great authority" - Revelation 13: 2 This beast, just as Daniel writes, "devour the whole earth" - Daniel 7:23; Revelation 13: 7. At this point we are faced with an insurmountable problem. Or the Anglo-American power is actually the king of the north (and then matches a part of the words of Daniel and Revelation) or the little horn which became very great can not be England, nor the Anglo-American empire. Let's try to look for another political subject and also start from a logical assumption and scriptural. After the defeat of the last king, third, we talk of the Court sitting to remove this rule and destroy - Daniel 7: 24-26 There are mentioned other human wars or other dominant king in the meantime. So if this horn becomes the last ruling king, we must assume that at least the last of the three kings, the king of the south in fact , is still alive. If not we would be now in full the great tribulation or under the judgment of Armageddon. The kings fallen, useful to identify this little horn soared, they can be at most two. We begin the search for this horn is not losing sight of the king of the north. If we had the certainty of one who incarnates, over the centuries, the king of the north, we would not need to go "blind" to see how many small kingdoms have become great and to count the fallen King papal candidate for each nation. We have to find a nation that reasonably may identify themselves as kings of the north and at the same time, embodies the other features described. The summary mirror of these two groups are, respectively, on pages 228 and 246 of the mentioned book. The last two kings mentioned are the German Empire (in the king of the north cloths) and the Anglo-American empire (in the king of the south cloths). You will notice that one of the reasons why Germany is identified as "king of the north" is the fact that it is allied with Italy, that nation's history of ancient Rome, as well as links with the Holy Roman Empire. The other indication is that William I assumed the title of Kaiser (Caesar). Admitting that Nazi Germany was the king of the north we must ask who has assumed that role after the war. After all, as we saw from the previous kings or emperors, the two antagonists have always risen. The answer may be simpler than we have ever imagined. So far we have rebuilt the identity of their kings or because of bloodline or because of the occupied territories . When the identity of the two kings changes (see chapter fourteen) the whole question is played on the territory of Syria. Syria depicts King of the North while Egypt the king of the south. However, with the intervention of Rome between the two contenders, Antiochus IV (Syrian) should abandon its claims on Egypt. This puts an end to the rivalry between the two kings. We can say that the king of the north at that time no longer exist (but it would be better to say that it is not visible). Less than a hundred years after Syria became a Roman province. E 'for this reason that we are able to identify Rome as king of the north: the political / geographical connection. You could say that the king of the north (as well as his rival) is an extra-national entity that moves from country to country but, at every move, always starts from the last position where it was. So it does not matter what the nation, the bloodline, ethnicity or culture in which it will end this subject but only counts its last leg (and to limit the mark it has left in this final stage). Also, from what we've seen so far, the king of the north never becomes the king of the south and vice versa even if part and the conquered territories may be shared by both. P tarting from this assumption, we open the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy!" on page 257 (Chapter Fifteen). In this photo you can clearly see the winners of the last great war that led to the defeat of Nazi Germany, or the old king of the north. You see the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill (then part of the king of the south), Franklin D. Roosvelt (president of the United States, which is also the king of the south) and Iosif Stalin (whom King?). About Nazi Germany was divided between these? Initially, in August 1945, it f u divided into four parts: south-west France, British in the northwest, south American and Soviet east. From one of these empires would have been born king of the north, but ... Britain and the United States, in the part of the king of the south, could not change his identity. The only two options remained so France and Russia. However Napoleon's France may have played the role of king of the South when dealt a deathblow to the Holy Roman Empire in 1805. Those who remained, then? Stalin's Russia, of course. Also perhaps few know that the yield Russian word "czar", just like in German kaiser, means Caesar * (see footnote). The last Russian tsar, Nicholas II, was deposed in 1917 and so far we have talked about the division of Germany took place almost thirty years later but it is interesting to note how "candidabile" this empire for his role as king of the north (as well as the ' clear Roman imprint). Russia, in its disproportionate growth, has also incorporated some nations that were originally Roman colonies. We dig, therefore, in the history of Russia to see if it matches the description given by the Bible. Do not get confused: any nation you play the role of the king of the north in our days, it does not have to identify themselves as such in its infancy (the important thing is that is not part of the king of the south). In fact, until the Second World War the king of the north is represented by Hitler's Germany. The clues to the identity of this king, who at the last moment will play the king of the north , may be much older. Exactly as with the explanation of the book mentioned, which points to England as the little horn, only many years later it was "growing a lot" (with the US alliance) but mentioned battles useful for identification (Spain, Holland, France) took place when it was still small (ie, the United States did not enter in these conflicts). Put simply: we find a nation that defeated two kings, which grows a lot, which is present in our day and that becomes the king of the north because of the territory conquered in the last war. Inhabited since ancient times, in the 1st millennium BC the territory of Russia was home to breed populations, different language and culture, among which emerged in the first place the Scythians and Sarmatians. Between 3rd and 9th century AD came to the land of the Goths, the Huns and then a series of slave populations who settled mainly in Ukraine and surrounding regions. An important turning point came in the second half of the 9th century, when a Scandinavian population, the Varangians, also called Rus (hence the name Russia), with Rurik founded the first nucleus of the Russian state around the Novgorod region http: / /www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/storia-della-russia_%28Enciclopedia-dei-ragazzi%29/ The birth of this small settlement, Rjurik, could be considered the little horn. Something really insignificant. Much more insignificant than he could be considered the England at the time of the Roman conquests. If we were to move six hundred years up to the Grand Duchy of Muscovy under the guidance of Ivan III (1462-1505), no one could deny that since this horn grew up in a truly disproportionate. This empire continued to expand exponentially until it reaches an area of over 17 million square chilomteri! The Rus' Rurik founded in the ninth century. Today more than 17 million square km One could quibble about the internal wars, how to aggregate, its time nonlinear ... never mind. The only thing that matters, in order to identify, is its disproportionate growth. The objection that many nations of the former Soviet Union can not be identified as the horn because they are divided by the empire Original becoming independent (fifteen states are post-Soviet) are not valid. Even the Anglo-American empire is considered as a single power but Britain and the United States were sovereign and independent of each other. Which and how many kings this horn defeated? Surely the first was Napoleon. In this regard, we read ... The losses of the Grand Army in Russia were catastrophic and irreversible had an influence on the military balance in Europe; according to Georges Lefebvre Napoleon had about 400,000 dead or missing and 100,000 prisoners [3] ; David G. Chandler speaks of 370,000 dead or missing and 200,000 prisoners, including 48 generals and 3,000 officers; in addition to the human losses, disastrous were also the material losses suffered by the army; French brought back from Russia only 250 guns, the Russians claimed to have captured 925; It was also very serious loss for the French more than 200,000 horses that deprived the cavalry napolenica the means to return to the original power in the next war campaigns (...) On the causes of the catastrophe of the Great Army, Napoleon in the 29th Bulletin and then the Memorial of St. Helena brought back the ruin of his business almost exclusively to Russian early winter weather that would have weakened the troops and transformed the Russian campaign in disaster [204 ] . This traditional interpretation was filmed by witnesses and by early French historians; Philippe-Paul de Segur , participatory and first great historical enterprise, explained the catastrophe also highlighting the precarious health of Napoleon, which would detract from the activity and resolution, and referring to external factors such as destiny; the lack of luck [221]
      Hello guest!
    It 'true that officially Napoleon was defeated at Waterloo by the "seventh coalition" but what would have happened if the emperor had still had all his generals and his most powerful men? Since the story is not made with ifs and buts, we can not know but very heavy defeat that the French suffered in Russia (and the numbers speak for themselves) could not but adversely affect the fortunes. Many historians agree that Russia was the real winner of the war. Again it is difficult to be categorical about who actually ripped through the Horn but surely the defeat he suffered Napoleon's army in Russia is not remotely comparable to what happened the Spanish Armada in 1588. Also this battle jeopardized the fate of war and the fall of France itself, which can not be said of Spain. Who could be the second? Just Adolf Hitler, the last king of the north in order of time. The battle of Stalingrad, which began in summer 1942 with the advance of the troops of the ' axis to the Don and Volga, ended in the winter of 1943, after a series of dramatic and bloody phases, with the annihilation of the 6th German Army He remained surrounded in Stalingrad and with the destruction of most of the other German and Axis forces engaged in the southern part of the strategic eastern front. This long and gigantic battle, described by some historians as "the most important of the entire Second World War", [12] marked the first major military-political defeat of German Nazi and its allies and satellites, as well as the beginning of ' advanced Soviet westward that would end two years later with the conquest of the Reichstag building and the suicide of Hitler in the bunker of the Chancellery during the battle of Berlin . [13]
      Hello guest!
    Here, too, the losses in terms of human lives are truly amazing. No serious historian can deny the crucial role that Russia played in the defeat of Nazi Germany. All conditions in order to identify the last king of the north, have been met. He had to be born as a little horn. He had become enormous. He must identify himself as king of the north. He had to pluck up three horns. Who is the third king? It will be the king of the south, as the Scriptures foretell. And 'then that will give you great arias "until the army of heaven, so that will fall to the ground part of the army and of the stars" ... trampling true worship and true Christians . After this third win there will be no more kings and empires able to fight him and it is at this point that he "will devour the whole earth" - Daniel 7:23; Revelation 13: 4 It 'also intervene at this point that the Prince of princes who will destroy him "no hand". There is, in fact, a very last detail, we can say the condition, which would have to comply but it is clear from other scriptures. This king would begin to suppress the daily sacrifice, or the preaching work in its territory - Daniel 11:31 It also shows that this deletion, as during the war would have "flooded and invaded," it would be extended to other countries (but it is possible that this proscription from spreading even before the war). The last recent events involving our brothers in Russia ... do not seem a strong indication enabling identification of the little horn? Footnote * The legitimate royal and legal continuity of the Roman Empire continues with Ivan III, (according to some descendant of Drusus Germanicus, Roman emperor) spouse of Zoe Paleologa, niece and heir to the throne of the last Byzantine emperor (d Roman Empire ' Orient). Historical references to deepen
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
  12. The beast that Daniel saw in vision

    "After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible and unusually strong. And it had teeth of iron, big ones. It devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped what was left with his feet. And it was something different from all the [other] beasts that were before it, and had ten horns "- Daniel 7: 7 "I beheld then because of the sound of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld till the beast was slain and his body was destroyed and it was given to the burning fire "- Daniel 7:11 This treatment has the objective to correctly identify not only the beast of Daniel's vision but also the period of prophecy in connection with his murder. This will be a fundamental prophecy. Err the reference period, as was the case within Christianity, inevitably leads to straining and inconsistencies. What some say about this beast and how it should interest us personally? Since the dreadful and terrible beast makes its appearance after the leopard-like beast (Daniel 7: 6), which we know to be the Macedonian o greco empire, it must be the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire, in fact, as we have seen in several previous articles, takes the place of Greece on the world stage. Since we do not see other animals that was, it concludes Roma to be "killed" and this creates a domino effect on many subsequent interpretations. The prophecy would end the fall of Rome (Roma whom?), The Son of man of whom we read in the following verses is vested with the authority in the first century (see footnotes) and the book of Revelation, written before 70 EV, actually speak of the destruction of Jerusalem in the first century and so on. As a result of the fact that everything would be fulfilled by the fall of the Roman Empire, the beasts that you give a "life extension" for a time and a season, would the nations of today. I have simplified: there would be many other things but this is enough to understand how such an interpretation can change much our view of things. Leaving aside the various contradictions and unanswered questions that this interpretation creates, we must see if there is really a credible supporting them with scriptures. As we have done so far, the only reliable modus operandi is the comparison of records and respect for the authority of God's Word. Let us first of all that the prophet's attention is captured by this beast and in particular by its horns - Daniel 7: 8 This is a key aspect of the vision. We have already discussed the meaning of the horns in a previous article but now we will see it from another point of view. We take as an example the Macedonian Empire because there is more than ever useful to acquire the right key to the vision. We know that this empire represented by the goat, when he was in command of Alessandro Magno, was depicted with a "notable horn" - Daniel 8: 5 After the death of Alessandro Magno, when the empire was divided among four of his generals, the same goat is described as having "four horns" - Daniel 8: 8 We can see immediately a strangeness . The original empire is actually divided into four smaller empires and yet there is always only one goat. Why? Why do not you see four different beasts? Let's keep in mind these questions to answer later. Now let's speculate. If the goat, described by Daniel had been shot down in the time that he had "the great horn", what period of time would refer the vision and what territory would understand? The answer is simple. If the goat was shot down at the time of the great horn, this would take place during the rule of Alessandro Magno (between 356 and 323 BCE) on the only his vast empire. If the goat in Daniel, however, was shot down in the time when he had four horns, what period and what territory would embrace? The answer becomes more interesting. In this case, the empire is divided into four and see the goat fall would mean the defeat of all four generals and their occupied territories. In the vision, however, he would fall one beast. From these considerations we understand that the beast represents an empire, but the horns are the powers that share or compete for the domain or the territory of that empire - Compare Revelation 17:12; Daniel 11:39 These horns can be allied, as in the case Medo-Persian empire, but they can also fight against each other as seen for example in Daniel 7: 8 When an empire is divided, because it is seen as other horns on the beast itself and not as the beasts? Evidently because they emphasize from original empire. The horns present in the same beast tells us that all those powers have arisen from the same original empire. Having all the same origin, we could say that are "unrelated" to each other. The Medes and the Persians, in fact, had many differences but also many things in common. With this in mind, we can begin to understand the meaning of the vision of the fourth and final beast seen by Daniel. As we explained in another article, previous empires are seen "hornless" because they do not have power or are not dominant in the vision of the reference time . Understanding the vision reference time is very important. This allows us to establish that at the time that Daniel has the vision, the dreadful and terrible beast is already divided into various powers. What does this mean? The empire is rising after the Macedonian Roma and on this there is very little to discuss as confirmed by the dream of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar - Daniel 2:39, 40 So the first part of the hypothesis is correct: the beast that Daniel sees is Rome. That said, however, we must focus on the horns as did Daniel himself. If the beast has ten horns, in harmony with what we have seen so far, it follows that the original Empire (Roma) is already divided into an unknown number of powers. This, by itself, drop the hypothesis that Rome has to be "killed" as well as the time in which it would fulfill the prophecy. From these ten horns, at some point in history, check yet another horn that is what speaks great things (Daniel 7:11); what is the time in which the animal is killed . In Rome there is only the origin. In simple words the prophecy is saying that the latter horn, whatever the time of fulfillment, is one of the many powers born of ancient Rome. This beast is the final, there are no other - Daniel 7:17 So, since we should not expect the appearance of other animals, it is clear that his killing is done in the end time. This king is the same which is discussed below and "grandiose words" that pronounces we can find in Daniel 11: 36-38 From the point of view of God, since this king will become an object of worship for many people, it pronunciation "grand words", that is exaggerated and completely out of place for a human being or human military power - Compare Revelation 13: 3-6 Intending to correct the vision we need not climb over backwards in an attempt to demonstrate that there is talk of two kings and two different times because the similarities are obvious. Obvious for those who read the scriptures without trying to defend, at all costs, his own idea. This means that what you read in the following verses, which the Son of man who is given dominion, authority and kingdom, is fulfilled in the end time. This also leads us to realize what it is actually killing the beast and the fact that being thrown "into the burning fire." This expression can only bring our minds to the "lake of fire" reported at Revelation 19:20 The lake of fire is a place from which there is no return and therefore you would expect, if this had happened in Rome, that there was no longer any trace of this empire. Instead Europe and much of Asia and Africa is full of Roman remains, aqueducts from the statues the ancient buildings. This does not give precisely the idea that was thrown into the "burning fire", is not it? Instead of the last dominant empire on earth, as described in Revelation, it says that the whole beast will be cast into the lake of fire. Besides, this is an action that can only make the Almighty God and His Son Christ, not an invading empire. Unless speculate that the fall of Rome intervened personally God, there is no way to "harmonize" this expression. Rome, in fact, never really died and was never really replaced. The social fabric is wore out, and this allowed many people simply "get" and divide it but was never really defeated in battle. He fell under his vices and under its own weight. The vision speaks of the beast that is not killed except in time when this remarkable horn appears. As we saw in the previous article, this horn is the last king of the north on the world stage, namely Russia. It goes without saying that this explanation, as we have already seen, a wonderful window opens in verse 12. The explanation that would apply all this to the fall of Rome, can not explain why, between kingdoms currently present (those to which a prolongation of life in our days) still exists Rome and even all the nations would be allowed that were exclusively owned by Rome. If Rome is burned in the blazing fire and the other allows himself a "life extension", should exist Iran (Persia), Iraq (Babylon) and Greece ... but should not exist Italy (the when Rome is still the capital), should not exist France nor Germany nor Spain and so on. Instead it appears that this extension of life a little 'at all is granted. If instead the beast is killed at Armageddon, it is clear that the other animals are given a life extension for "a time and a season" after the judgment of Armageddon. This allowed us to sensibly understand how he can "check" this Gog of Magog full Millennial Kingdom. We just carefully observe, then, that world events, without being distracted by explanations forced and unscriptural, as we await the fulfillment of the angel's following words recorded in Daniel 7:18: "But the saints of the Supreme receive the kingdom, and take possession of indefinitely kingdom, even indefinitely to times indefinite '- see also Revelation 20: 4 Footnotes * This interpretation asserts that the Son of man receives the kingdom in the first century to the fact that Jerusalem was under Roman rule (cf. Matthew 28:18), but obviously does not explain why, according to the order written by Daniel, this does not happen the fall of Rome. Reading Daniel 7: 11-14 we understand that the enthronement of the Son of Man takes place after the killing of this beast and, therefore, the enthronement could not take place in the first century since, at that time, Rome was well far from being "killed." That if we do not play the usual chronological order is not in the book. However, it should be argued that when considering the order of the beasts as chronological (ie the order of the appearance of empires is chronologically Correctly or ) can not be determined in an arbitrary way that the next part is not written chronologically. What it is written in chronological order it is also evident from the words of Daniel that says, more than once, "I continued watching ..." - Daniel 7: 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13 The writing of Matthew 28:18 does not prove that he began to reign in the first century (if not on the Christian congregation) because there is a difference between taking power legally and take it effectively. If Christ had taken power in effect in the first century, it would mean that the world would no longer be ruled by Satan since then. But sixty years after these words of the Lord, the apostolo Giovanni said "the whole world lies in the power of the wicked" - 1 John 5:19 ** You do not even understand the "what Rome" would be talking about the prophecy since this empire was split in two in 395 EV The beast can not be considered "killed" at the time of his division. The Eastern Empire fell in 476 EV while that of the West in 1453 with the fall of Constantinople. The beast can not be considered to be "killed" in 476 since a portion of it continued to exist and therefore in theory of Christ the enthronement event would occur after 1453. However even 1453 can be considered the date of the beast dsell'uccisione for the reasons spiegat the in this article. *** On the same line of this false interpretation of "Babylon the Great" Roma would be that would be killed (it is not clear by whom) to his downfall. To support this hypothesis is often referred to "the seven hills of Rome" and many flights of fancy to determine who would be the seven most important king of Rome - compares Revelation 17: 9 **** "Finally," but not really seen that the inconsistencies are many, you can not explain for what reason the writing says "there are four kings that will rise from the earth" (Daniel 7:17) meaning it clear that there would have been only the most four kings , not one more. The explanation would like the angel speaks to Daniel, the four powers, but that would not have all the powers that would arise on earth. The vision, in short, get to a certain point but not to the time of the end - Look instead Daniel 7:18
  13. "Nourishing Spiritual Food"?

    I have nothing to add and this conversation is closed. Everyone should make their own assessment. Every now and then I will write articles that I consider important in the light of the Scriptures. Anyone who wants can read and compare with the Bible. Anyone who does not want to, wishes for everything
  14. "Nourishing Spiritual Food"?

    You too can not be objective. the watch tower is the instrument and not the ultimate end of worship. The tool is useful for achieving a goal (in this case, understanding the Bible). If the instrument becomes worshiped then we can no longer understand it. The Bible encourages digging and looking personally - Proverbs 2: 1-5 Biblical prophecy makes us understand that God will punish his people for being idolatrous. This may be true or it may be false. How can we do it to understand it? Studying the Bible. The Bible is the only authority (try to re-establish it: the Bible is the only authority). This instrument (the watchtower) has abided by the Bible many times, but sometimes it has used personalities and human ideas above the Bible (1975 is an example and there are others). Who should I obey? To the Bible. Now you will say, "The Bible says we must listen to some men" I say, "No, it is not so" How can we establish it? Studying the Bible. Prophecy says that a certain "guide" will become dead because some have put people above the Word of God. This may be true or it may be false. How can we establish it? Studying the Bible. You are convinced that you should not "discuss" the intentions of certain people, is not it? I tell you that the Bible, and only the Bible, has the last word. You might find that the Bible teaches some things you do not expect. What can I tell you? Wait and see what's happening - Joel 1: 1-8
  15. "Nourishing Spiritual Food"?

    Dear TrueTomHareley, I think you did not understand the point or maybe I did not explain it well. Humility is well accepted and, as you rightly said, it is appreciated that the GB has admitted some mistakes. The problem I have highlighted is that some have become idolaters, if you can not question an understanding, even if you do it with the scriptures, it means that you consider certain people above the Word of God. Instead, since they admit that they are not inspired (and this is to be praised), you should also be able to discuss some doctrines and prophecies. Instead, among the brothers there is the mentality that "you can not do it" because only the others have the permission of God. Only others can have the understanding of the Word of God and if you say that it is not true and assert that it is not scriptural, it is a risk of dissociation. For example, the GB says that the discipline we are talking about has already happened in 1919 but if I say "it is not true" and I try to argue in the light of the scriptures, what is my risk? If you talk about so many things, what's the risk? This is one of the reasons why we will be disciplined (not the only reason) because we have not paid attention to the Word of God. There have been personalities and there are still. I know the GB encourages you to study and meditate but you can not say anything that goes against their intentions even if they have changed it dozens of times. This is a fact. A person who wants to argue on certain intentions does not necessarily want to create a sect or a division. A person who recovers the intentions of 1914 is not necessarily an apostate. If I, in conscience, understood through the Bible that certain prophecies were badly interpreted (and I would like to remember that understanding a prophecy can mean death) what should I do? The Bible, to give you an example, predicted that the preaching work would be suppressed by the king of the north (Russia) but the GB never said anything. So should I be silent? The Bible has foreseen that the prohibition will extend throughout the inhabited land (and hence the hopes of Brother Sanderson are miserable) and so I, who is right or wrong, should I be silent? We must pay attention to the Bible, not to the people. This also applies to those who "can not be questioned" My total loyalty goes to the Word of God, not to a group of people or even to a building. No one wants to insult or degrade anyone, but each of us should be adult enough and mature to study God's Word personally and also admit the possibility that some things that have been taught are wrong. and these "some things" can also be vital things