Moise Racette

It is good to know, you are @Witness and a former member. The bluster comes from none intellectual cartoons and comments by the poster. However, you seem to renege on your assertions by commenting, and indeed wish to only fight, making the poster's comments meaningless by the poster's own standards, thus your ignorance is your own poster. What, did the poster mention, about ridicule? The poster's words no longer have any value. First, learn to understand a chart that is displayed. If a person was 20 in 1914 and lived to be 90, it would bring that generation to 1984. If a person is 20 in 1984 and lives to be 90, then it brings a person to 2054. In the event people don't understand, generations or overlapping generation, posters have no business making up their own assumptions.

If a person is referring to scripture for their advantage, then yes, it's exploitation and a person should be humble. Not all of us are given the same spirit, which is also humbling. That doesn't change the outcome of @Pudgy exploitation of scripture. Why not direct this poster's message to that person. How does the topic fit worldly matters to the poster? While I don't agree with the assessment of, AD2034, all comments should be directed toward that topic to ensure common sense can be applied. However, the spirit of God gives his worshipers the power of discernment Hebrews 5:14 and reasoning Acts 17:1-3, which can also be applied to common sense.

What does, misrepresenting a chart and not understanding its significance have to do with the poster's unwillingness to answer what 1260, 3 1/2 times, 42 months in scripture demonstrate?

I thought @Pudgy suggested attacking the point of view, not the person. Now you ridicule. Make up your minds and stick with reality and your words, or do they really mean nothing. 🤭

This is a misleading statement since all the information comes from scripture. I have not found a church member other than those here that interpret scripture as their own. Once again, without evading the question about 1260, 3 1/2 times, 42 months mentioned in the bible does the poster reject?

Don't misunderstand me, poster. I'm not endorsing the topic about 2034. This is a personal observation being made public. It has no real substance other than, to the poster. Therefore, there is no impression of it coming from the Org. If the poster wishes to include the wt to this topic, then it would be false.

This is a question within a question. Why does the poster refuse to answer the fundamental truth about those numbers and expression in scripture? However, does an Org pick and chose how God conveys his will to man in order for a generation to understand more clearly how events are being fulfilled by man's degradation of its existence?

Then the poster denies their existence in the bible. Are all bibles wrong in the eyes of the poster? Why, then use the bible to base an argument on, if the poster doesn't trust the word of God. My studies include all aspects of spirituality, even Satanism, and Wicca. What more can the poster information be, that I can read, will surpass man's perception of religion and worship? You can forward that information that are the poster's thoughts on the subject that are your own. Not someone else's thoughts.

There are fundamental thoughts when it comes to interpretation. When someone else's thoughts are obscured by misleading them, then, those thoughts lose value to that person, not the reader that has a proper understanding of it. Contrary to the illustrations, there is a pattern of misleading with scripture by the poster.

In accordance with that text, what "philosophy and deceit" presents itself to the poster, when those numbers and expressions are stated in scripture? Doesn't that mean, the poster is discrediting the word of God? What benefit does a viewer have with such condemnation. Yet, it didn't answer, what 1260, 3 1/2 times, 42 months mean to the poster. The book of apocalypse is a direct advisory from God to Humanity. There are several observations contained in that book, of which, its fulfillment will be true. What part of God's word by Johns vision does the poster lack faith on?

Only when the poster starts using it correctly with intelligence.😂

Spiritual deprived, nonintellectual people are usually considered robots. They prove it here every day!

Intellectually speaking, It would seem to some. Therefore, how comments are framed and agreed upon by their emojis, consideration is drawn. Post after post to distract doesn't change the comment, nor it's intent.

The same consideration can be said about the poster. However, What part of 1260, 3 1/2 times, 42 months, etc. listed in scripture mean to the poster? Is the poster suggesting those observations are lies, therefore are deceptive? One can consider how the poster's view of scripture is a direct challenge to the word of God.

Then the poster should be critical of @Pudgy's post instead of mine. You might want to also advise @TrueTomHarley and @Anna of the poster's approval of @Pudgy's false understanding, as a man. However, toward the poster's comment, consider understanding Genesis 3:5, 3:-22, and John 10:34-35. The poster's supporters would benefit the spiritual and intellectual understanding without being misunderstood because of one's comments.

So true. People need intelligence to understand scripture. A comprehension course without making false statements is a good intellectual course.

This statement is true in one sense, yet false in another. God made Noah aware of an "end time" for humanity, without specifically calling it end time. Destruction of humanity and children formed by spirits. That doesn't mean it wasn't end times for the world Noah grew up in and was associated with. 11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. So, never say never unless the poster wishes to call God a liar. That end time is a precursor to this world's next end time. That is why the gospels talk about, in Noah's days. The other alternative is to tell people, the bible is a joke and none of it should be believed. This would of course be contrary to being a Christian believer, and just a person posting and wasting everyone's time. What are the similarities of both. There were survivors back then, just like there will be survivors in the next event. So, it's a matter of conforming to Jesus gospel that started with a proclamation of a future end time that is still being proclaimed by Jesus true followers, and yes! There will be an end time. Matthew 24 has several considerations. One was approximate and the other was future. The approximate already played out.

Therefore, by definition, regardless if it's through man's interpretation or biblical interpretation, it amounts to the same thing. I'm glad the poster can see the assertions apostates bring to any conversation. Let's touch bases with what the poster refers to as, false teachings. Apostates can and have used such methods to blind the public of Christ truth, if only through their own disobedience to the gospel. One cannot be a disciple of Christ and not be disciplined by Christ. When this is presented in public by anyone, then the presenter is considered to be the bearer of that false doctrine, no matter how many bible texts are used. To be clear. Some considered Jesus an apostate for the wrong reason. There are indeed biblical ideological methods to accuse a false prophet or a member that has seen the truth, then reverses course to become an apostate, biblically speaking. The will of God is NOT man-made. 1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Peter 2:20-22, Hebrews 6:4-8. I have been asked many times if Satan can be considered an apostate. The answer according to bible understanding, yes! Once again, are we looking for a specific word, or a condition? Can the question "is there good apostasy and bad apostasy" be answered?

By definition, an apostate is an immoral person. It goes toward the character of a person. Adjective immoral - /ɪmˈɔɹəl/ 1 Deliberately violating accepted principles of right and wrong 2 Not adhering to ethical or moral principles Cheating is immoral The investigation found immoral practices in handling public funds They considered communism immoral Thesaurus Synonym base Antonym moral Attribute morality Derived immorality Similar debauched degenerate degraded disgraceful dissipated dissolute fast libertine profligate riotous scandalous scrofulous shameful shocking wrong See also amoral evil non-moral unchaste unrighteous wicked Something else that hasn't been discussed in the news is, were these two individuals actually baptized publishers or unbaptized publishers (associates). News media don't make that kind of distinction. They just assume, just because a person attends a church, they are dedicated church members. The point is, it's a tragedy regardless of what their motives might have been.

Sorry to inform the poster "witness" the YouTube video is meaningless as it is hearsay. When an immoral person starts a conversation with, "it leads me to believe," that person shouldn't be believed, just like the one who posted the video. These people want to be a YouTube sensation. Famous ignorant posters.

Hmm! What makes you think that person hasn't? Or can it be just another trap. 🤣

The poster needs to understand word definition better. The idea is simple. Use the thought about, betrayal of, and testifies against. Then the poster will find there is a fine line between “false” and “falsely.” Then the word treachery can be applied to the word FALSELY (treachery), not FALSE (Deception). Especially when it comes to man's definition and that of God's intent. Noun treachery - /tɹˈɛʧəɹi/ 1 An act of deliberate betrayal 2 Betrayal of a trust Thesaurus Synonym betrayal perniciousness perfidy treason Hypernym dishonesty disloyalty knavery Hyponym double cross double-cross double-crossing insidiousness sellout Derived treacheries treacherous Etymology From Middle English trechorie tricheriʒe trecchri from Old French trecerie tricherie trecherie from verb tricher trichier from Latin trīcārī present active infinitive of trīcor from trīcae from Proto-Indo-European terkʷ-Attested early 13th century ) שֶׁקֶר109 ×(: שָֽׁקֶר; pl. שְׁקָרִים, sf. שִׁקְרֵיהֶם: — 1. lie, falsehood, deception (in words): d®bar-šeqer Ex 237, ±¢d šeqer Ex 2016; nibb¹° baššeqer Je 531, nišba± laššeqer Lv 524; rû­µ šeqer lying spirit 1K 2222; leµem šeqer bread gained by deception Pr 2017; — 2. lie, falsehood, deception (in act): ±¹´â šeqer b® treat s.one falsely 2S 813 = p¹±al šeqer Ho 71; h¹lak baššeqer Je 2314; — 3. more genl., what is wrong, false, pretended, unreal: teach s.thg false Is 914, idols are false Je 1014; baššeqer in pretense (opp. sincerely) Je 310; — 4. laššeqer in vain 1S 2521; šeqer a lie! = you are evading the qn. 2K 912; šeqer without reason Ps 3519; — 5. ‰¹fal šeqer « ?pl. (pg 383) NAS Deuteronomy 19:18 "And the judges shall investigate thoroughly; and if the witness is a false witness and he has accused his brother falsely, (Deut. 19:18 NAS) <08267> ) שֶׁקֶרsheqer) (1055b( Meaning: deception, disappointment, falsehood Origin: from an unused word Usage: deceit(2), deceitful(3), deceiving(4), deception(3), deceptive(3), false(17), false hope(1), falsehood(19), falsehoods(1), falsely(19), hope(1), lie(14), lies(5), lying(12), lying visions(1), perjury*(1), slander*(1), treacherously(1), useless(m)(1), vain(1), wrongfully(3). Notes: 1 Lit., testified against a Deu 25:1 [Fri] ἄδικος, ον generally characterized by violation of divine law; (1) as doing contrary to what is right, unrighteous, wrong (MT 5.45), opposite δίκαιος (righteous, just); (2) as characterized by disregard for God ungodly, unjust (2P 2.9), opposite εὐσεβής (devout, godly); (3) as characterized by lack of integrity dishonest, untrustworthy (LU 16.10), opposite πιστός (trustworthy, faithful); (4) of things obtained by wrong means unjust, dishonest (LU 16.11); (5) substantivally, of a person not a member of a Christian community unbeliever (1C 6.1) Then the poster will release, it is the poster bearing false witness to any accounts, the poster has NOT, personally experienced.

This just tells me, you don't read posts very well, and just wish to be combative. Read it again. This time, try glasses. You'll find, I was directing my thought about the poster "WITNESS", as a person of interest when it comes to scriptural viewpoints. I don't care about your viewpoints, since you have no real intellectual ones to offer.

Unfortunately, you have no facts to back up your illogical false claims, other than try, to equate them with unsound thoughts. That just means, the poster is not a good debater, just a hater.

True, I want to contribute to scriptural intelligence, not nonsense. I'm glad the poster can see the difference. I'd rather debate "witness" with that poster's views than get caught up in immoral banter. Not only that, but I just wish that poster would stop blaming an Org, and defend that poster's interpretation of scripture from the poster's own viewpoint and logic.