Jump to content
The World News Media

Pudgy

Member
  • Posts

    4,676
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    93

Reputation Activity

  1. Downvote
    Pudgy got a reaction from Alphonse in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    ANYONE ….
    …. can look out their window and see … 360°, that God’s Kingdom by Christ - using the defining criteria in the Bible, does not yet exist.
    ANYONE.

  2. Upvote
  3. Haha
  4. Haha
  5. Upvote
  6. Haha
  7. Haha
    Pudgy got a reaction from Srecko Sostar in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    ….. and on a related note:

  8. Haha
  9. Haha
    Pudgy reacted to JW Insider in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    No one saw that coming!! LOL.
  10. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to JW Insider in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    Yes. I criticized your post. I would not have criticized it if it wasn't completely wrong though. I have agreed and upvoted several of your posts that were correct. But I will never avoid that question. Ever. No matter how many times you pretend that I have. That's why I have always answered it directly multiple times, even though you've been repeating the same question so many times, and repeating the false claim that I avoided it so many times. 
    OK. That's good. That probably wasn't a dodge. Except that you have never explained why you sometimes imply that 607 is the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar and sometimes you imply that it is the 8th year of Nebuchadnezzar. It can't be both the 8th and the 19th. Sometimes it seems that you are trying to be clever in that you never write 19/18 or 19th/18th but you always write 19/8th, and then highlight that Nebuchadnezzar may have completed the destruction of the temple in what the Babylonian Chronicles call his 8th year, and continually point out that the 19th year of the Babylonian Chronicles is missing. You have strongly implied, if not stated, that you think the Temple was destroyed in his 8th year. [You asked why he wouldn't complete the destruction in that year if even Wiseman says it was a possible year that we could say Jerusalem "fell" - along with 587.]  (You also often imply that perhaps this was the 19th year of ANOTHER Nebuchadnezzar, perhaps another person associated more directly with Nabopolassar's time.) Since you have not yet been clear about this, I assume it's because you don't want to be clear, and I won't push the issue. 
    I think that instead of clarifying, you sometimes prefer to laugh derisively at all those who aren't able to figure out exactly what you are hiding. 
    And, I think everyone would be happy to see that so-called "careful analysis of the tablet data." 
    No you're not. You are falsely pretending that you are still waiting even though I have said multiple times that Jerusalem is not mentioned in any tablet related to Nebuchadnezzar other than the known, existing, non-missing portion of the Babylonian Chronicles. But I'll be happy to say it again with specific reference to VAT 4956: The destruction of Jerusalem is definitely not mentioned in VAT 4956. And yes, I know, you are "still waiting."
     
     
  11. Upvote
    Pudgy got a reaction from xero in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    ….. and on a related note:

  12. Upvote
  13. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to JW Insider in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    The reason why BTK59/George88 couldn't find any evidence to support this is because it doesn't exist. 
  14. Sad
    Pudgy reacted to JW Insider in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    To find Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year if you only knew that his 37th year was 568, you would KNOW that his 18th year was 587 BCE. The only reason that Furuli proposed that VAT 4956  was 20 years earlier 588 was so that his 18th year would be 607, also 20 years earler than 587. So it's a circular argument above. And it has nothing to do with "cycles." 
    Here is a very similar circular argument I actually heard at a mid-week Book Study several years ago.
    Question: "How do we know that 1914 is the year Christ's presence began." Answer: "Because if you count forward 2,520 years from 607 you get 1914." Another hand goes up.
    Answer: "Not only that, but if you count backwards 2,520 years from 1914 you get 607." The conductor nodded agreeably and said, that's right, that's another way to prove it. 
     
  15. Like
    Pudgy reacted to George88 in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    I like it as well since we can apply it to just about anyone here, especially Pudgy, lol!
  16. Like
    Pudgy reacted to xero in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    I'm not above throwing some unwarranted shade either.
  17. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to xero in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    I think people who trouble themselves to own or run sites have the same kind of character that people who "start new religions" have. I don't know or care about anyone's history. To me talk about people is what tiny-minded people do. <patting my own back>Whereas the smart ones spend their time on the issues</end patting my own back>
    So have you looked at the Korean guy's site yet?
  18. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to xero in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    When I see ad hominems I see a weakness. I like that. It lets me know when people have sh*tty arguments.
  19. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to JW Insider in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    *** w56 12/15 p. 755 par. 11 Telling the Good News from Day to Day ***
    At the start of the great tribulation upon Satan’s organization in 1914 all such people felt merely the “beginning of pangs of distress,” 
    *** w51 3/15 p. 164 Time Better than Money ***
    When Christ was enthroned, in 1914, great tribulation was started against Satan and his wicked world organization. If it had then proceeded to completion, no flesh would have been saved. But for the sake of human flesh that tribulation was shortened or cut short, to allow a period of time for men to take in and give out knowledge of the established heavenly kingdom,
    *** ws13 7/15 pp. 3-4 par. 3 “Tell Us, When Will These Things Be?” ***
    In the past, we thought that the great tribulation began in 1914 when World War I started. We thought that Jehovah “cut short” those days in 1918 when the war ended so that the remaining anointed ones on earth could preach the good news to all nations. (Matthew 24:21, 22) After that preaching work would be completed, we expected that Satan’s world would be destroyed. So we thought that there were three parts to the great tribulation. It would begin in 1914, it would be interrupted in 1918, . . .
    The "Armageddon" error was fixed many years before the "Great Tribulation" part was fixed.
    And for good measure, it should also be added that the 1914 doctrine was NOT to show the start of Christ's reign in Heaven. For about 40 years after the 1914 doctrine was "established," Christ's reign in Heaven had started in 1878. These ideas were repeated into the 1930's, and parts of it into the 1940's. 1878 was still considered a valid prophetic date during the first Tuesday night Book Studies I ever remember attending. We still studied "Let Your Name Be Sanctified" when I was 7 years old. All this was well after 1914. It was just a few years after the famous 1922 Cedar Point convention when the WTS dropped the first hints that the new date for Christ's reign might change to 1914.
     In 1878 God’s favor was withdrawn from the nominal systems. From that time on . . . . Do you believe it? Do you believe that the King of glory is present, and has been since 1874? Do you believe that during that time he has conducted his harvest work? Do you believe that he has had during that time a faithful and wise servant through whom he directed his work and the feeding of the household of faith? Do you believe that the Lord is now in his temple, judging the nations of earth? Do you believe that the King of glory has begun his reign? Then back to the field, . . .  This is the day of all days. Behold, the King reigns! You are his publicity agents. Therefore advertise, advertise, advertise, the King and his kingdom. 
  20. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to xero in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    I could give a rip about the character or motivations of anyone involved in questions of fact. I do find really, really annoying and unhelpful all this sort of meaningless chatter. It's like some stupid, stupid squirrels chasing each other around the trunk of a tree, dashing across the street and getting squished because they kept their eyes on the wrong nut.
  21. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to xero in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    @George88I understand that the Babylonians would extend their fist against the sky they were looking at, and a "cubit" was the width of the fist when viewed against the sky.
  22. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to JW Insider in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    You keep implying that the 1914 doctrine is there to prove that the GT, Big A had begun then, and God's Kingdom has already been "established" -- that the doctrine claims all this has already occurred. 
    Originally, the doctrine was there to prove that 1914 was part of Armageddon and the start of the Great Tribulation. But that part was dropped many years ago.
    <bloviation> ** begins
    However, I'll give you the part of about God's Kingdom:
    *** w22 July p. 3 The Kingdom Is in Place! ***
    . . . a prophecy that helps us discern when the Kingdom was established, . . . Read Daniel 4:10-17. The “seven times” represent a period of 2,520 years. That time period began in 607 B.C.E. when the Babylonians removed the last king from Jehovah’s throne in Jerusalem. It ended in 1914 C.E. when Jehovah enthroned Jesus—“the one who has the legal right”—as King of God’s Kingdom.—Ezek. 21:25-27.
    Even here, the Watchtower plays with some nuanced semantics between the expression "established" and "fully established." There is even a sense given that the old Russellites were wrong for believing that the kingdom would be "fully established' in 1914, although it's a bit ambiguous as to whether they were right or not:
    *** w84 4/15 p. 3 1914—A Focal Point ***
    The March 1880 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence described two events of earthshaking importance that were looked forward to as due to happen in 1914: “‘The Times of the Gentiles’ extend to 1914, and the heavenly kingdom will not have full sway till then.” Hence, many Bible Students expected God’s Kingdom to be fully established in that year.

    *** w84 12/1 p. 16 par. 7 Keep Ready! ***
    Thus, although he would be ‘present’ and his Kingdom would already have been established, both he and his Kingdom would still have to “come” 
     
     Up until about 1975, the Watchtower always made the bold claim that the Kingdom had already been "fully established." It was about then, that the phrase was only used ambiguously, which I remember once caused a minor problem in the translation departments when they were translating a booklet. I think it was called "One World, One Government Under God's Kingdom," or something like that. The publications started saying "established" in 1914 but only "fully established" when the new heavens and new earth were here, and that became the explanation for the "Lord's prayer" question that came up fairly often: "Should we still pray for God's kingdom to come since it came in 1914?" 
    That issue was sort of resolved in the awkward wording of a new song that came out in 2014:
    *** sjj song 22 The Kingdom Is in Place—Let It Come! ***
    The Kingdom Is in Place—Let It Come!
    BTW, I couldn't find the wording of that particular 1975 booklet in the Watchtower Library, but I found something quite similar which shows the kind of verb tense ambiguity they were going for. It's similar to the 1984 quote above:
    *** w70 10/15 p. 629 par. 17 The Kingdom of Salvation Available Today ***
    Former kings, emperors, presidents, governors and dictators on being resurrected may not expect to take over automatically and resume ruling over their onetime subjects or fellow citizens. The old system of things under the Satanic “god of this system of things” is no longer in operation. God’s new system of things under his Messianic kingdom of the heavens is fully established over all the earth. Of necessity, it will have organization of all those on earth . . . 
    Note that it looks like (1970) the Watchtower was still saying it was already "fully established" but it's couched in a discussion of the near future, because the previous sentence says: "The old system of things . . . is no longer in operation." 
    In previous decades, it was just claimed outright that it was already "fully established" in 1914:
    *** w60 1/1 p. 29 par. 9 Part 29—“Your Will Be Done on Earth” ***
    . . . In that year [1914] the kingdom of God was to be fully established in the heavens to see that His will should be done on earth. 
    *** w51 10/1 p. 583 “Happy Are the Eyes That Behold” ***
    Our eyes are far more blessed than even theirs, because we can see by the fulfillment of Bible prophecy that Jehovah’s royal government by his Christ is now fully established
    </bloviation> ** ends
  23. Upvote
    Pudgy got a reaction from ComfortMyPeople in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    Despite my initial resolve not to be interested in Babylonian Astronomy, clay tablets, and conflicting dates circa 500bce to 600 bce, I find myself fascinated that You Guys find it of sufficient interest to pour over it in such detail. Perhaps there is something here that I am missing.
    A rough analogy, I suppose would be like Quantum Physics, which I find fascinating, but unknowable, and can only be guessed at by trying to visualize what an esoteric equation is really representing in reality. Also far beyond my ability to comprehend, but at least I can see a practical use for quantum studies. 
    Nowadays you need a good understanding of Quantum  Physics to understand Astronomy, or solid state electronics, or even how light behaves. This has PRACTICAL applications, such as Smart Phones, GPS, FTL communications, etc. We use this each and every day in contemporary society.
    The people back in Babylonian times have been dead for 2600 and more years, and what they wrote in clay mud with sticks is not relevant anymore.
    I can see enjoying knowing, so there is that, but if the subtext of all of this research is to be able to prove that the Great Tribulation, and Armageddon, and God’s Kingdom established has already occurred … it’s a complete waste of time.
    You can stand in the street and look around and see those things have not yet happened.
    You know, Jonah was super ticked off that he did all that work, hardship and danger, and God changed his mind about Nineveh.
    At least he didn’t try to convince people they had been destroyed invisibly.
     
  24. Upvote
    Pudgy got a reaction from Srecko Sostar in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    Despite my initial resolve not to be interested in Babylonian Astronomy, clay tablets, and conflicting dates circa 500bce to 600 bce, I find myself fascinated that You Guys find it of sufficient interest to pour over it in such detail. Perhaps there is something here that I am missing.
    A rough analogy, I suppose would be like Quantum Physics, which I find fascinating, but unknowable, and can only be guessed at by trying to visualize what an esoteric equation is really representing in reality. Also far beyond my ability to comprehend, but at least I can see a practical use for quantum studies. 
    Nowadays you need a good understanding of Quantum  Physics to understand Astronomy, or solid state electronics, or even how light behaves. This has PRACTICAL applications, such as Smart Phones, GPS, FTL communications, etc. We use this each and every day in contemporary society.
    The people back in Babylonian times have been dead for 2600 and more years, and what they wrote in clay mud with sticks is not relevant anymore.
    I can see enjoying knowing, so there is that, but if the subtext of all of this research is to be able to prove that the Great Tribulation, and Armageddon, and God’s Kingdom established has already occurred … it’s a complete waste of time.
    You can stand in the street and look around and see those things have not yet happened.
    You know, Jonah was super ticked off that he did all that work, hardship and danger, and God changed his mind about Nineveh.
    At least he didn’t try to convince people they had been destroyed invisibly.
     
  25. Upvote
    Pudgy reacted to xero in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    @George88Well for the longest time they thought the Bible was wrong about Belshazzar being the last King of Babylon, so it wouldn't surprise me if the so-called "authorities" are wrong about other things.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.