Â
we will be among those gathered "from the four corners of the earth"? |
Â
Dear Srecko, if you read and understand half of what I wrote, you will understand that there is no need for me to answer a single word.
The scriptures are all and anyone who, if he wishes, can meditate on these scriptures.
The people of God are one and only one who brings the name of Jehovah and preaches "the good news of the Kingdom" throughout the earth.
I only know one.
Talking to who's angry or wanting to have the last word is not useful to me.
Everyone should make their own evaluations - John 17:17
I want to make my contribution to this conversation only because of those who have said "to abandon this religion".
I claim to be one of the few who is allowed to rediscover some "absolute truths" as I rediscover, in honest conscience, some doctrines (only a few) and practically all the official prophecies (practically all) of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Some may think that I am "an apostate" for this reason but it is not. Jehovah will judge - Romans 14:10
That being said I would like to answer those who say "leave this religion".
My question is: to go where?
Should we go to religions who have taught abominations like the hell of fire, the trinity, the mother of God, innate immortality of the human soul, predestination, limbo, purgatory, and so on?
We should associate with those religions that have erased the Name of God from the Bible and their adoration by stupid controversy "do we know the exact pronunciation"?
Should we associate with those religions that have massacred millions of innocent people in wars of religion, crusades, inquisitions, witch-robbers? Those who have invented and used the most ingenious torture machines that history has known?
Or should we be "atheists" as if the mistakes of a religion fall on God?
Or does this talk show that a religion is the same as the other?
Dears Mathew9969 and Witness I would like to illustrate a simple and clear point.
Any Watchtower errors do not make false religion a little bit more truth.
As I wrote at the beginning, I enumerated many things about Jehovah's Witness's official intent.
By the way, I question 1914 (which is still unaltered) so you can imagine what I think of 1975, the method to get there, and the conclusion that that date would have led to Armageddon.
I know that there have been errors (too many) and that certain statements have been more serious than those which are now being sought to make them believe.
On the other hand these mistakes are scientifically magnified to try to prove that we are a "false religion".
Generally these polemic sites are very good at finding the "right writing" to try to prove that they are right or that "there is no truth".
In their desire to "find the doctrinal or prophetic error," however, escapes a profound truth to them.
What was the people who were evicted and who was disciplined by Jehovah in biblical history?
Was Israel or Egypt?
From whom did the "false prophets" come from Israel or from Nineveh?
What is the difference between "discipline" and "destruction"?
The people of God, in history, have evaded many times and for various reasons.
However, discipline is always served for a purpose: to be brought back with mercy - Joel 3: 19-21
I would like to ask this question.
When Jeremiah, Isaiah, Joel, or other prophets saw the people of God turn away, what did they do?
They said, "This is not the people of God"?
They said, "Now I'm going to see if there is a better religion in Babylon or Egypt"?
Israel was no longer the people of God?
The man of iniquity (Christianity) will not be brought back with mercy because it is the work of the devil. is a lie that will be eliminated.
God's people, on the other hand, will be disciplined and brought back with mercy.
How can I know that this people, despite the mistakes, is the people of God?
As I wrote at the beginning, it is the fundamental doctrines (which Christianity has rejected).
we pay attention to this scripture: "And the dragon was angry with the woman, and went to war against the remnant of her seed, who keep the commandments of God and have the duty of bearing witness to Jesus" - Revelation 12 : 17
What is the only people who bear witness to Jesus and do it globally?
Are they Christianity?
Absolutely no.
Let's be objective.
I would be very careful before saying "leave this religion".
We would make a much greater sin.
Through the study of the prophecies, some have realized that Jehovah is about to come to a strict discipline against his own people.
This does not teach the "governing body" (indeed, they say purification took place in 1919),
This affirmation puts me in opposition to many of my brothers.
it is indisputable that many brothers are not capable of being questioned,
it is indisputable that, for many brothers, if you say something "against the official channel" you are automatically an apostate.
Unfortunately, it is also indisputable that some brothers have idolized some people or even buildings or websites - Matthew 15: 3-10
For these reasons, and for other reasons too, Jehovah's discipline will come to you - Joel 1: 5, 6
The discipline will surely be hard and for many brothers it will be a surprise.
However the people leading and sanctifying the name of God (Jehovah), who preached in all the inhabited earth and speaks of the Kingdom of God bears witness to Jesus, what will be the people who will be saved at Armageddon.
During the discipline of Jehovah many "fake brothers" will no longer exist. Probably there will not be anyone who has idolized men above the Word of God.
We can not know how many will be, how many will remain.
One thing, however, is certain.
Christianity with its lies will not be "restored with mercy" but simply destroyed - 2 Thessalonians 2: 8
So I encourage both parties to make sure of everything - 1 Thessalonians 5:21
This is not a football game.
Both parties may have the humility to understand what God's will is and do everything possible to save their lives.
We are searching the scriptures carefully? |
We will recognize the man of lawlessness to its final revelation? |
we will be among those gathered "from the four corners of the earth"? |
We will recognize the "two olive trees" when they begin to preach? |
Who is the woman called Evil that ruins the whole earth, and that is native to the land of Shinar? |
I have to apologize for my English who is not good.
While using the translator, the translation is inaccurate and the speech becomes confusing.
From what you write I seem to understand that you have explained the meaning of the phrase "to be buried with Christ" but I have not discussed this.
I do not argue that "being buried with Christ" has a profound meaning and many implications. I agree with this.
I have written that "buried with Christ" is not literally, is not it?
I wrote that Paul is using a symbolic language that needs to be understood and therefore even when he says "whoever is dead has been absolved of his sin" we must make an effort to understand what he meant.
If we go on reading Paul's talk, he understands that he is saying that since we have accepted the truth, we are all dead with sin.
We are dead "in relation to sin" and this means that we renounced our previous life (made of carnal desires, lusts, etc.).
In practice, he says: "If we prove to have died in relation to sin (ie not sinning more) by demonstrating that we appreciate the free gift of Christ, then we are absolved in relation to sin."
this is the "novelty of life" he was talking about.
If we understand the words of Paul, all the words that say that the judged on the Day of Judgment (as Jesus' words concerning Tire and Sidon, or when he spoke against the scribes and the Pharisees) are clear, and it is also clear why Paul said that Jehovah would have asked "Alexander the coppersmith" for the sufferings that he had brought to him.
Also one thing must be clear.
The belief that "death erases sins" collides with the doctrine of Christ's redemption.
Is death to erase sin, or is the blood of Christ? - compare Revelation 7:14
Note also the beautiful contrast that Paul does: "For the wages sin pays is death, but the gift which God gives is everlasting life + by Christ Jesus our Lord" - Romans 6:23
Eternal life is only obtained through the forgiveness (or deletion) of sins. We agree on this, is not it? - compare John 5:24
If death erases sin, then the Lord is not dead for our sins - 2 Corinthians 5:15
Does the Bible contradict?
For these and for other reasons (there are many scriptures that make us realize that death does not erase sins) Paul's speech is well understood. Paul's words must be read in their context.
I want it clear that all this discourse does not have the purpose of "cast a shadow" on the people of Jehovah.
Even though it sounds strange, I'm a witness to Jehovah and I firmly believe that this is the truth.
However, they are not of those who think that there are no mistakes and that a doctrine should not be revisited.
Ultimately, the truth is only the Word of God - John 17:17
P.S.
The writing says that the rest of the dead did not come to life "until the time when" the thousand years were not over.
We can discuss whether "coming to life" means reaching eternal life, or merely being resurrected.
Of course, the question is whether Revelation has been written in chronological order or not.
If we read Revelation in chronological order, then the answer is clear: there is no resurrection in the Millennial Kingdom of Christ but only the survivors of Armageddon.
At the end of the thousand years (and only at the end) death and ades return the dead and are therefore judged.
I am certain that if we reflect carefully on the seven seals (which are sequential) on the seven trumpets (which are sequential and in fact, the Apostle Paul calls the "last trumpet" that trumpet concerning the resurrection - I Corinthians 15:53, Revelation 11:15 ) and the "seven bowls of the worm" which are also sequential, we can understand that the Book of Revelation is written in chronological order.
I tell you that men will render an account+ on Judgment Day for every unprofitable saying that they speak" - Matthew 12:36
"They speak" is to the present, that is to say, "that they have said now in this life".
This means that men will realize in the day of judgment (or in the future) of the profane words that have been said now in this life.
I do not know how it translates into English, but the meaning is clear and are two distinct times.
Alexander the coppersmith did me a great deal of harm. Jehovah* will repay him according to his deeds - 2 Timothy 4:14
The coppersmith caused many pains to Paul and Jehovah "he will ask for account" in the future, or on the day of judgment - Romans 14:10
Those who have no preconceptions do not seek articulated explanations.
The message is clear
When we have to discuss the 1914, we really like the Bereans? Or are we "Berean" only when we must refute the doctrines of Christianity? |
Yes, I agree with you that, JW Insider, there are many ways to understand that between paurusia and synteleia passes for a certain amount of time and that is not the same thing.
There are many scriptures that make this and not only Revelation (however Revelation should be more than enough).
Obviously I disagree on 1914 and not even on the concept of "overlapping generation" but this is another matter.
Beyond the interpretations, the Bible makes it clear that the seventh trumpet is really "the seventh", that sounds after the sixth, fifth, and so on.
To skim any doubt and every interpretation, we see that Paul identifies the last trumpet (that is, that concerning spiritual resurrection) as "the last" - 1 Corinthians 15:52
So if the last trumpet is really the last one, how is this sound in 1914 while the sixth plays in 1922, the fifth in 1919 and so on?
There are a thousand ways to refute the current official chronology and Revelation is one of these thousand
11 hours ago, Noble Berean said:@JW Insider in all seriousness, is there any clear, scriptural evidence for a two-part presence?
If you want to ask if the presence of Christ is one thing and the destruction of the satanic system is another (different also for times of fulfillment) the answer is yes.
The "kingdom of the world" becomes the kingdom of God and of Christ at the sound of the seventh trumpet (an event you can read in Revelation 11:15).
Obviously, if this event is related to the seventh trumpet (that is, at the last one), it is evident that before then other six trumpets (all related to the will of God) have been played.
So the presence of Christ is before his "coming", or his coming to destroy the world of Satan.
After the sound of the seventh trumpet, many things still happen (all things described in chapter 11 and beginning of chapter 19) so it is understood that although the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of Christ, the world still has time to "act" before destruction (for example, with the persecution of God's people, as Daniel 7:25 says).
So the presence of Christ (paurusia) and his arrival as a ruler, if we simply read the Revelation text without conditioning, we understand that there are two distinct things over time.
The underlying problem, if anything, is the date chosen for the "presence" and also the difference of time that would pass from the established of the Kingdom of God and the destruction of the satanic system.
I'm sorry to go against the official teaching, but both Revelation and Daniel make it clear that since the establishment of the Kingdom of God until the Armageddon War, have passed little more than three and a half years (and they are also the "short time" to Satan and not 100 years or more)
An even more interesting question should be: if the man of illegality is the clergy of Christianity, it should be the main part of Babylon the Great, is not it?
How is the man of iniquity destroyed by the spirit of the mouth of Christ (hence directly from Christ) while Babylon the Great is destroyed by the United Nations? Writing says that God (not Christ) will put in the hearts of these kings to carry out his thinking of destroying Babylon the Great.
It puts the thought (God, not Christ) but God does not destroy it directly.
Instead, the man of iniquity will be destroyed by the spirit of the mouth of Christ
Think if they were all wrong ;-)
You have been eloquent in your explanation.
You will agree with me that some intentions may affect the understanding of some words or the implications of certain affirmations.
Doing a simple and banal example.
If a Catholic is convinced that "all good people go to heaven" he will not understand the concept of earthly resurrection. For him it will not make sense. You agree on this, is not it?
It is not possible to understand certain words or certain prophecies if we do not have the courage to come back to some of the beliefs that are underlying or affect certain prophecies.
For example, when it was believed that Gog of Magog was Satan, it was not possible to understand how it was possible for him to be "eaten by birds" or that he would be buried in the earth.
it is possible that we do not understand how to harmonize the words of the Lord simply because we take for certain (indisputable) certain doctrines that we find unmanageable?
When someone asks us if "TODAY" Jesus knows the day and the hour, what do we answer?
We answer "It is reasonable to believe that TODAY he knows it"
Are you sure there is a contradiction?
We pretended (for imagination) to know that the Revelation book is written in chronological order (unlike what has been taught).
We pretended to know the two witnesses dressed in sack and ask them "Do you know the day and the hour?"
What would they say, presumably?
"Yes, because from the day when we are killed will pass only three and a half years" - compares Revelation 11: 7, 15 with 1 Corinthians 15:52 then Revelation 13: 5
The point is: the fact that Jesus said that no one knew the day and the hour meant that no one would NEVER know the day and the hour?
Another question.
Jesus said "this generation will not go any way" (we forget everything we have been told about generation and we simply imagine a "generation") yet he said, in the same speech, "no one knows the day and the hour." How is it possible?
Is not this a contradiction?
It is not a contradiction only if I do not know the start date from which to count the eventual generation.
Example.
Suppose someone says "Since the king of the north will suppress the preaching work, it will take 10 years."
Someone asks, "When will it happen?"
"I do not know why I do not know when the king of the north will give up the constant sacrifice."
So we have to determine if the Lord said that we would never understand the day and time (or the time span) or simply that up to a certain point in the story (or event) could not have been found the day and the day and hour.
This only serves for reasoning.
However, the Lord also said that he would come "as a thief," and that he does not understand the times "not our work," so it is right to be cautious.
Apart from right prudence, however, this does not mean that we should not study and try to understand (unless "time" at least "the event")
Unfortunately I am not able to explain effectively in English because I believe I have the scriptural basis that many things that happened in the first century are merely a model or preview of what will happen in the near future.
Even the prophecies considered now fulfilled must have a last final fulfillment in our days (see, for example, Zechariah 4: 10-14 with Revelation 11: 1-4)
Unfortunately I'm not good at English.
In any case only by comparing the scriptures (and not the ideas of the scholars) will come to understand the harmony of the message and the fact that Revelation is a canonical book and concerns future events
Just for clarity. Daniel's book is included in books inspired by the old rabbis. The distinction is that not everyone is included among the prophetic books (and this may be due to some dislike of Daniel for some of his statements).
This book, however, was quoted by the Lord himself, so that if all the rabbis were to say that Daniel is not a canon, the Lord Jesus Christ would prove that they are wrong.
The two witnessed sackcloths "come" to Moses and Elijah because of their message of judgment.
For this reason we can find many similarities with Moses and Elijah and not just with the number of days.
It should be noted, moreover, that the description of the preaching of these two witnesses, and also what follows, also resembles much to the life and ministry of Jesus.
Let me give you all the opportunity to look for similarities and ask yourself why
The words of Zechariah unique to the past? |
The body of Moses could become an idol? |
I have made an article explaining how to do a biblical search and I did not insult or offend anyone.
You have started to say that I am an apostate, a deceiver, one who wants to put "confusion", a false prophet, deceptive etc. etc.
All right.
This shows how deep your knowledge of the Bible and how deep is your love for God - Matthew 5:11; 12:36, 37;
I'm also used to this and I expect a lot more for the future - John 16: 1, 2
P.S. But was not I the presumptuous? Are not you that you understand everything?
Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.
"Nourishing Spiritual Food"?
in Topics
Posted
In fact, dear TrueTomharley,
my observations do not intend to exalt themselves above what is still the people of God.
Each of us will be disciplined and this also includes me.
Those who are sure to be standing will not let them fall.
Many things I have understood only by the people of Jehovah and his researches.
So you do not have to believe that I have written these things because I feel more enlightened or smarter.
However, "telling the truth" also means admit that we are wrong with some things and that it is about to get a discipline.
This is in harmony with the Scriptures.