George88

Pudgy, here's your golden opportunity to answer a crucial question: Can Satan actually tell the truth? Instead of deflecting as usual, I hope you'll provide a response this time. Previously, you have made the feeble attempt of distorting Pastor Russell's words and comprehension as an excuse. However, Pastor Russell clearly posed a thought-provoking question during his illustration, which I have shared with you. Can Satan, in any capacity, ever speak the truth? If you didn't grasp his intent, then it's important to address your misconceptions about the subject. It's evident that you have distorted the scripture to fit your own interpretation, regardless of who taught it to you. I choose to reference Jesus' words through Apostle John 8:44, specifically the phrase "because truth is not in him." This indicates that Satan has never spoken the truth from the beginning, as scripture confirms. Do you have any evidence from scripture that demonstrates he speaks the truth without deception? Now is the time for you to back up your words with actions and stop making embarrassing mistakes. I challenge you to answer this straightforward question without using any tricks, lies, or manipulations. Leave out any attempts to twist the truth or divert attention. Your reputation for these tactics is well-known, but I am not interested in seeing any more of your childish and insignificant remarks, especially sad cartoons that only your friends here appreciate.

@Pudgy I'll respond in a new thread. This one is a dead issue. That way you are free to continue your insults and false narratives there.

Can it be the same strange hope you call someone the "D" word? Start making sense of your irrational thoughts. @Miracle Pete pudgy's puppet.

You get away with your insults, @Pudgy because you are an essential member of the original group of incorrigible individuals, not because your lies reveal the truth. Your belief is solely based on your own perception that everything you say is the absolute truth. If that's the case, then it can be argued that Satan is just as truthful as you claim to be.

Don't give it a second thought, BTK. It's all rigged here in their favor. They would rather let a lowlife stand than confront someone speaking the truth. This has always been the case in this biased right-wing news outlet. If they prefer AlanF and his profanity-laced outbursts, why shouldn't they tolerate this lowlife individual? This is just another unfortunate association people should be accustomed to here. It won't change. I recall when someone was banned for using British slang words just to keep a disruptive female user active in this forum. That is precisely what they desire: disenchanted witnesses, the excommunicated, and apostates expressing their perspectives against the Watchtower for their own inquiry. It's like saying, let them voice the very words that concern us, even though God is observing, which adds an ironic touch. It resonates with their well-organized perspectives, and nothing will be altered as long as Satan maintains control over this unreliable news source. It's highly possible that instead of the person you suspect @Pudgy, who goes by the name @Miracle Pete, it will be you who ends up getting banned. This is precisely why he is the first to react and post. What a foolish individual.

In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.

@Pudgy Since you keep mentioning me: While I understand that you may not have a thorough understanding of the law, I feel compelled to clarify a crucial point. Please, allow me to explain that "deferred adjudication" constitutes a felony conviction in any state. If this was indeed your sentence and there are no further actions recommended by the Grand Jury for the prosecutor to pursue, it is important for you to grasp the repercussions of your situation. That does not mean that those charges cannot be dismissed once the court is satisfied with the probation period imposed on an individual, provided that person complies with the conditions established by the probation department without any violations. If you are suggesting that the charges were dropped and that you didn't receive deferred adjudication or any other sentence that didn't include a reduction in charges such as a misdemeanor and the judge didn't need to accept a plea deal, then that changes things. That's a tough sell, if they had electronic proof of the charges. I don't see a Judge dismissing those charges unless that person is racist, and doesn't want to convict due to race. However, it's important to note that your arrest and felony charges will still remain on your record with one acception, it will include in charges, dismissed. Now, if you pleaded not guilty and are waiting trial, it is crucial for you to understand that your behavior here won't do you any favors. Anything you say or do in this context can be used against you in a court of law. Allow those with a legal background and expertise in ethical matters to make those decisions. I have no interest in your questionable history or in you personally. Do not drag me into your dispute. I hereby declare this to be an end to my forced participation caused by Pudgy.

Thank you, JWI, for being honest enough to admit this. If you have access to people's IP addresses, whether they are static, dynamic, or through VPN, and you can see the real IP address and use it to disclose or ban people, then that is a clear violation of FCC rules on privacy. Archived.

Why was I included in your ignorant list, JWI? Did you see me get involved in the argument that I'm unaware of? You need to stop with your fraudulent claims. It seems that Pudgy was challenging BTK to release the information, not the other way around. It appears that Pudgy continued his insults by suggesting that BTK did not know or possess that information and demanded further verification. So, if you are going to blame someone for posted information, blame Pudgy for his relevance attack. Seriously, you all need to stop being hypocrites by trying to make visitors think you are saints here, when you are far from it. You're not the victims here; those you ban are. Therefore, you need to reconsider your erroneous list and ensure that your condemnation is directed at the actual individuals, rather than those mistakenly included on your list. Therefore, I have no problem with you removing those posts nor do I care since you included me in your scam list.

I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else. Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate? Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.

We all have our own unique realities to explore. I found Vic the Parrot's criticisms of the Watchtower on JW.com quite entertaining, until I discovered it was you! lol!

In the era of the Bible Students within the Watchtower, there were numerous beginnings. It is essential to bear in mind that each congregation functioned autonomously, granting the Elders the freedom to assert their own assertions and interpretations. Most people embraced the principles that Pastor Russell was trying to convey. You could argue that what you are experiencing now, they also experienced back then. The key difference is that unity was interpreted differently. Back then it had value where today there is none. To address your inquiry, while I cannot recall the exact details, it is believed to have been either 4129 or 4126. Some groups, however, adopted Ussher's 4004. It is worth mentioning that they have now discarded it and revised it to either 3954 or 3958, although I personally find little interest in this matter. I believe I encountered this information in the book titled "The Time is at Hand," though it may also be referenced in their convention report. Regardless, this is part of their compelling study series 3. Please take a moment to review and confirm the date. I am currently focused on Riblah. The Bible Students who firmly believe that Israel is the prophetic sign of Armageddon have made noteworthy adjustments to their chronology. They have included significant dates such as 1947/8 and 1967/8, as well as more recent dates. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that, according to their calculations, 2024 holds immense importance. The ongoing tension of Iran targeting Israel directly from its own territory amplifies the gravity of the situation. If their trajectory continues, the subsequent captivating event will occur in 2029, rather than as previously speculated, in 2034 by some.

See Tom, it's not that difficult to create different accounts by the same person; you just proved it. lol! The self-downvote is a nice touch. This means you and James have something in common, and proved the concept of a dozen being a cast of thousands is correct.

@JW Insider Your summary is irrelevant, as I do not make any assertions regarding BC/AD other than their usage by scholars and in history, as you yourself have also acknowledged on numerous occasions, thus rendering your point invalid and evasive. The Watchtower leverages external viewpoints, including secular evidence, to substantiate the accuracy of their chronological interpretations. There are numerous approaches to dating events. Personally, I explore various alternative methods that lead to the same conclusion as the Watchtower. However, the most captivating approach is to utilize secular chronology to arrive at the same outcome. By relying solely on secular chronology, the pattern still aligns, albeit with a distinct interpretation of the available data. Nevertheless, the ultimate result remains unchanged. This is why when you get upset, when you are proven wrong, you, Tom, and those with the authority to ban take action, because you like others cannot handle the truth. In this case, your infamous tablet VAT 4956 has become useless in this situation. I do agree with you on one thing: you are not an expert, just like COJ. However, I must admit that this foolish individual was not the first to debate the chronology with the Watchtower and abandon it based on personal beliefs. He simply happened to be the most recent one that's on record.

This person will never give you a direct answer. He's beyond reasoning and only seeks to dodge the truth. The information about the tablet has been available for decades, but I chose to bring it up now to refute previous and current criticisms about the limitations of this tablet. The real issue is that he can no longer rely on this insignificant tablet. It's frustrating how much time has been wasted on accepting falsehoods from others.

Maybe I too should write a book called George vs Apostates but actually mean it.

Are you kidding? That's absolutely the last place where I would ever want to have access. Therefore, my answer is a resounding no! I have no desire whatsoever to be a hypocrite.

@JW InsiderYou should stop calling yourself a Jehovah's Witness, as you are disrespecting Jehovah's organization and God with your apostasy. Your pathetic games don't work with me. Impress your apostate fans at the Closed club. It appears that you effortlessly escape from your deceitful statements and misrepresentations there.

In response to your email, it is important to note that the Watchtower chronology begins at 4026, adhering closely to the numerical indications in scripture. The significant distinction lies in the fact that not everyone begins at 4026; some might commence their chronology at 4004, for instance. Consequently, this creates a noticeable gap between those who employ different starting points for their chronologies. Consider that the new Bible Students have rejected Russell's starting point and instead adjusted it to align with Modern Israel. They have suggested a year around 3954, or something like that, I can't remember, but it seems unfounded. Some of their sects started Criticizing Russell about this matter, and it appears unjustified, as their own knowledge may be limited. Following the Watchtower's guidance is straightforward: align events with their corresponding numerical values. It is important to remember that the Watchtower does not view its chronology as an absolute, unlike secular chronology which seeks to impose its perspective. According to the Watchtower, the pivotal date for the divided kingdom is 997. Look it up in our archives and publications. The Watchtower's chronology will always diverge from conventional chronology due to its distinctive starting point. The organization holds steadfast to the numbers in the Bible, guided by faith in scripture rather than human interpretations. Despite persistent challenges, the unwavering stance of the Watchtower remains unchanged, as it is grounded in divine guidance, not the opinions of anonymous and faithless individuals.

Pete, with what you're shoveling, you must be stuck there or is that your permanent residency, lol!

Tom, remember that after Vic Vomodog or Vic the parrot, I am not easily surprised by unexpected aliases. Despite your efforts to convince people here that you don't have any alternate identities, people should remain skeptical. As far as I know, there are about a dozen people in a cast of thousands. So, I would say to those proxies, give it a rest.

Consider this: if we assume that the tablet dated back to 568 refers to Nebuchadnezzar, and that the king issued an order for Borsippa, a city 12-15 miles from Babylon, then it suggests that King Nebuchadnezzar might have been in his palace giving that order, since logically it would have taken weeks or a month or so for a runner to dispatch such an order from Judah that was for Borsippa in 588/587, as historically suggested, since we can use the same date 588/587 for that event.

This depends, are you as good as Shakespeare? lol!

Which one is yours Tom, Many Miles, Miracle Pete, etc. Get a life Pete. Could it be James Ulterego, lol! This is precisely why I refrain from sharing details of my life in this place, as it often yields nothing but narrow-minded and senseless responses. Yet, Tom gets an upvote from the ignorant. I trust that Pete's imprudent reply has provided you with the necessary clarification, Tom.

Where does criticism of the Watchtower, the Governing Body, and Elders fit in this situation? Does it truly seem reasonable to you? My life story is so rich and complex that it would fill a book. Are you implying that you would like to be my ghostwriter? Hence, it is imperative that we adhere to our Christian principles, as the divine gaze of God expects this from us. Consequently, when an individual employs baseless personal criticism, they themselves become vulnerable to critique, as they fail to uphold the very principle they are being questioned about. So, you don't have a lifetime to hear my life story. lol!