On 4/1/2016 at 3:03 AM, Jay Witness said:

Is there good support for our use of this [607] year archaeologically and historically speaking?

The short answer is an emphatic 'No!' As has been demonstrated in this thread, there isn't good support for this date biblically either.

On 4/17/2016 at 2:21 PM, JW Insider said:

Your statement that 537 is more viable than 587 is not correct. In fact, accepting 537 for a Jewish restoration on their own land can only be done if you are also accepting 587 as the date for the destruction of Jerusalem. 587 is still part of the same chronology as 537.

Also, accepting 537 for a Jewish restoration on their own land relies on nothing more than the Org's speculation about when Cyrus gave his decree. 

*** it-1 p. 417 Captivity ***
Early in 537 B.C.E., Persian King Cyrus II issued a decree permitting the captives to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple. (2Ch 36:20, 21; Ezr 1:1-4) 

*** it-1 pp. 568-569 Cyrus ***
In view of the Bible record, Cyrus’ decree freeing the Jews to return to Jerusalem likely was made late in the year 538 or early in 537 B.C.E. This would allow time for the Jewish exiles to prepare to move out of Babylon and make the long trek to Judah and Jerusalem (a trip that could take about four months according to Ezr 7:9) and yet be settled “in their cities” in Judah by “the seventh month” (Tishri) of the year 537 B.C.E. (Ezr 3:1, 6) This marked the end of the prophesied 70 years of Judah’s desolation that began in the same month, Tishri, of 607 B.C.E.—2Ki 25:22-26; 2Ch 36:20, 21.

The reasoning behind the assumption that Cyrus gave his decree in the latter part of his first year goes like this:

*** it-1 p. 800 Ezra, Book of ***
Cyrus’ decree must have been issued late in 538 B.C.E. or early in 537 for two reasons. The desolation had to last until the 70th year ended, and the released Israelites would not be expected to travel in the winter rainy season, as would have been the case if the decree had been made a few months earlier. Likely it was issued in the early spring of 537 B.C.E. in order to give the Jews a chance to travel during the dry season, arrive in Jerusalem, and set up the altar on the first day of the seventh month (Tishri) of the year 537 B.C.E., September 29 according to the Gregorian calendar.—Ezr 3:2-6.

IOW, the decree had to have been given then because of the (flawed) interpretation that 70 years must pass from Jerusalem's destruction to the Jews' repatriation. The reasoning is circular and includes a straw man (i.e. Jews not traveling in the winter rainy season). The alternative that Cyrus might have given permission early in his first year, if reckoned from Nisan 538, which would mean the captives traveled during the summer season and been back in their homeland by Tishri 538, is completely missed. Another possibility is that Ezra counted Cyrus' first year as his accession year, in which case, he had from October 539 to March/April 538 to issue the decree with the captives settled in their towns also by Fall 538. Naturally, a 538 repatriation doesn't fit neatly with the Org's preferred chronological scheme, so the Org. won't consider it.

Anyway, the date of 597 BCE is a pivotal date for the siege and surrender of Jerusalem. Both the Bible and Babylonian Chronicles mention it. If one accepts 539 BCE as a true date, which derives from other dates pinpointed astronomically, one can't monkey about with the other key dates from that period since they are also astronomically nailed down from the same corpus of Babylonian texts.

On 4/17/2016 at 2:21 PM, JW Insider said:

So these texts that supposedly "completely upset" previous conclusions  hadn't actually changed a thing.

Some the overlapping tablets referred to in the 2011 WT were either print errors in the (source) publication and were amended long ago, or have damaged and unclear figures which have long been known about. 

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But in the meantime, it's as if you are just playing a game that relies on some obfuscation and vague attacks on people who present standard forms of archaeological evidence.

You have far more patience with him than I have, JW Insider! 

On 4/4/2016 at 4:53 PM, Manuel Boyet Enicola said:

They were disfellowed primarily for not submitting to theocratic order.  Consider Miriam (Moses' sister), Dathan, Abiram and Koreh.  They all had valid reasons for their complaints. But they took matters into their own hands rather than wait on Jehovah; thus they were punished.  What Jehovah seeks is a humble and repentant heart with a waiting attitude.

*** w70 1/15 p. 38 Which Comes First—Your Church or God? ***

Notice that worship in “truth” is a must! It is therefore impossible to worship God acceptably without a deep love of the truth. The true Christian religion must be founded on the truth, not on traditions, creeds, dogmas and articles of faith that are often hard to understand because they defy all the faculties of reasoning with which God created us. Now what is the Christian standard for measuring truth? Is it not the Bible? So if there should prove to be contradiction between the tenets of a church that claims to be Christian and the plain statement of truth found in the Holy Scriptures, which should come first in your worship—your church or God’s Word, the Bible? What will be your answer if you sincerely desire to be “the kind of worshipper the Father wants” [referring to John 4:21-24]? 
 

When people of other religions stand up for what is objectively right or what they believe is right, JWs applaud them. E.g.

*** w05 9/1 pp. 25-26 Mennonites Search for Bible Truth ***

Facing Trials for the Truth
A few days later, the church elders came to the home of Johann’s family with an ultimatum for the interested ones: “We heard that Jehovah’s Witnesses visited you. You must forbid them to return, and unless you hand over their literature to be burned, you face expulsion.” They had had just one Bible study with the Witnesses, so this presented a formidable test.

“We cannot do as you ask,” replied one of the family heads. “Those people came to teach us the Bible.” How did the elders react? They expelled them for studying the Bible! This was a cruel blow indeed. The cart belonging to the colony cheese factory passed by the home of one family without collecting their milk, denying them their only source of income. One family head was dismissed from his job. Another was turned away from buying supplies at the colony store, and his ten-year-old daughter was expelled from school. Neighbors surrounded one home to take away the wife of one of the young men, asserting that she could not live with her expelled husband. Despite all of this, the families who studied the Bible did not give up their search for the truth.

How can you be sure that Jehovah wasn't using a congregation member to correct the Org. or elders? There are plenty of esteemed Bible examples who did just that and bucked against so-called 'theocratic order.'

See this post: http://forum.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/5074-selection-to-heaven/?do=findComment&comment=8030

NEWSFLASH:

"...  it appears that we cannot set a specific date for when the calling of Christians to the heavenly hope ends." - http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2007327

On 4/9/2016 at 1:01 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

Just time and place

Explain?

On 4/9/2016 at 1:01 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

Just does. Not a problem for me as it makes sense. I don't expect everyone else to see it.

Oh dear. 

On 4/9/2016 at 1:01 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

But your analogy relies on the statement "I'm in bed asleep". The dream you describe could be experienced anywhere, even on a bench at New York Aquarium!

Nevertheless, where does my dream place the grandchildren? Not at New York Aquarium. And there are no grandchildren in reality. So whether I have fallen asleep in my bed, at the Aquarium or on top of the Empire State Building, it doesn't alter the fact that my dream puts my dream grandchildren in a dream ocean, just as John's vision puts his visionary 'great crowd' in a visionary heavenly court with the other visionary heavenly characters.

On 4/9/2016 at 1:01 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

But what I understand is that the "great crowd" described at Rev 7:14 as surviving "the great tribulation", do so here on planet earth and their experience of "no tears" is similar to that described at Rev.21:3-4 as occurring amongst  "mankind" who are, very much, creatures of planet earth.  .

Yes, the 'great crowd' has come out of the 'great tribulation' so John sees them as a victorious, POST-tribulation group enjoying eternal peace and heavenly favor.

The 144,000 are from among mankind too (Rev. 14:3, 4), so how does citing Rev. 21 help you with Rev. 7? Don't the 144,000 experience 'no tears' too?

You may have no personal problem with symbolic numbers adding up to literal ones, or a two-tier salvation concept, but it doesn't mean they're harmonious with Bible teaching. 

On 4/9/2016 at 1:01 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

Even before I became aware of Jehovah's Witnesses, my Bible reading told me that heaven was no place for me.

Then I recommend becoming acquainted with more mainstream Christian doctrine which teaches that heaven is only the intermediate state - not the final one. 

Take a look at this, for example: http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1710844,00.html

On 4/11/2016 at 8:23 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

As a synonym for "necessarily" is "undoubted", this could be written as "it does not undoubtedly mean". This to me means that you are saying that the evidence is not conclusive as to whether there is a connection between paganism and Easter customs. 

I'm saying that people see symbols and meanings in similar things. It doesn't necessarily mean that those artefacts or analogies and symbolisms are wrong. Pagans believed the stars were manifestations of the gods. Jesus ('a god') calls himself 'the bright morning star' in Revelation. Is it wrong to associate Jesus with the planet Venus, then? Pagans sometimes found religious meaning in cross shapes (e.g. the ankh which meant life). Ezekiel had a vision where a 'man' put a mark (literally a tau or cross shape) on the foreheads of those who would be spared death. Is it wrong for Bible believers to associate cross shapes with salvation? Do you get my point?

On 4/11/2016 at 8:23 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

This further suggestion on  http://www.koshabq.org/2012/03/09/celebrating-eostre/  is relevant for me, 

"This Ostarâ, like the AS. Eástre, must in the heathen religion have denoted a higher being, whose worship was so firmly rooted, that the christian teachers tolerated the name, and applied it to one of their own grandest anniversaries."

Is your argument that, due to a linguistic quirk of how the English language developed so that an ancient Germanic goddess's name was retained for a Christian festival, the whole Christian festival is now bad?

How do you cope with using month and day names in the Gregorian calendar? 

Why do you need someone to decide for you, Eoin?

John, are you saying that a child who has made a mistake or acted out should have expressions of affection, wider familial contact, conversation and all friendship withdrawn from him long term? 

Seeing as we are indeed talking about a minor, do you not think that such actions would be considered abusive and psychologically damaging? 

Is it right to punish a child's misdemeanors in the same way as one might punish an adult's misdemeanors?

On 3/30/2016 at 4:57 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

Where? When? What?

Yep, that's my question. What changed? Where, when ... and how ... if the inspired biblical canon closed nearly 2000 years ago?

On 3/30/2016 at 4:57 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

There are other literal elements of this chapter: God; the Lamb (although this is a symbolic reference).

But how does a figurative 12 times a figurative 12,000 equal a literal 144,000?

On 3/30/2016 at 4:57 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

Not convinced they have to be in the same location as God. Being before God's throne does not require this literally. Standing before God or Christ can denote having their approval regardless of location (Comp Lu. 21:36; Ps.5:5,7).

Jehovah can stand by his servants without literally coming to the earth. Ps.109:31.

But contextually, if John was seeing everything in vision unfold from the perspective of heaven - the 'God's eye' view (Rev. 4f.), the 'great crowd' are in the same location as the Lamb, 4 living creatures, 24 elders and angels. To illustrate:  

I'm in bed asleep. I'm dreaming. In my dream I'm standing on a tropical beach. I see the palms swaying in the breeze and feel the warm sun on my face. Hearing excited shrieks, I turn and see my grandchildren ... in reality I don't yet have grandchildren so I sense this is an idealized representation of a desired future ... I see my grandchildren splashing about in the ocean, laughing because some fishes are tickling their legs. Further in the background, I see dolphins frantically racing each other.

Am I really on a tropical beach? No, I'm sleeping in my bed.

In reality, where are my grandchildren? In reality, they don't exist.

But in my dream, where am I? On a tropical beach.

In my dream, where are the fishes and dolphins? In the ocean.

In my dream, where are my grandkids? At New York Aquarium.

Huh? 

No that's incorrect. In my dream my grandkids are in the ocean with the fishes and dolphins.

Applying this to Rev. 7 now:

In vision, where is John? In heaven.

In vision, where are the 24 elders, angels and four living creatures? They are around the throne which is in heaven (Rev. 4:2,4,6; 7:11).

In vision, where is the great crowd? On earth.

Huh?

No that's incorrect. In vision, the great crowd is where the elders, angels and four living creatures are - before the throne and in front of the Lamb who is also in heaven (Rev. 7:9; 5:6).

The point. Within the confines of the vision, there is no warrant to say the 'great crowd' is anywhere else - just like there is no warrant to say my grandchildren are anywhere other than where my dream put them. 

On 3/30/2016 at 0:53 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

However, the basic notion of a connection between ancient paganism and Easter and it's customs is not so easily dismissed.

For example, the points made in the lengthy article on the KoSH website would need a thorough refutation to accomplish that.

 http://www.koshabq.org/2012/03/09/celebrating-eostre/

"While the idea of the Easter Bunny does appear to have originated in Germany, and while, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, Karl Simrock argued that 'the rabbit is a pagan symbol and has always been an emblem of fertility' in his Handbuch der deutschen Mythologie, there does not seem to be any evidence specifically linking the goddess to most modern customs". -   http://www.koshabq.org/2012/03/09/celebrating-eostre/

Humans find symbolisms, analogies and patterns in everything. It's part of our psychological make-up. (Typological interpretations of the Bible, anyone?) Jesus is the 'light of the world' shining in the darkness, hence perhaps one of the factors why his coming into the world is celebrated and finds meaning in the Northern Hemisphere winter. Jesus' resurrection in spring can be likened, on some levels, to new life and the hopes we see in the cycles of nature. 

Because 'pagans' and Christians find symbolic meanings in similar objects, it doesn't necessarily mean using those same objects as symbols is wrong.

17 hours ago, Jay Witness said:

Immortality is different than eternal life.

How?

20 hours ago, Samuel Livingsotone said:

According to some scholars, such as Dr. Tony Nugent, teacher of Theology and Religious Studies at Seattle University, and Presbyterian minister, the Easter story comes from the Sumerian legend of Damuzi (Tammuz) and his wife Inanna (Ishtar)

Dr. Nugent's reference to "the Easter story" is the story about Jesus' death and resurrection and he's paralleling it with the story about the death and resurrection of Tammuz. Tammuz, however, was ritually mourned in the month named after him which fell around the time of the summer solstice, not the spring equinox. Cp. Ezekiel 8:14-15.

There are lots of death-resurrection stories about deities in religions and folklore. They are often tied to the changing seasons and agriculture, etc.

Easter is not etymologically or religiously connected with Ishtar and Mesopotamian religion. It has a different history.

The 'Easter' that Christians celebrate originates from Jewish Passover and the superlative 'Passover Lamb' that was Jesus.

3 hours ago, Samuel Livingsotone said:

Easter gets its name and traditions from the worship of the fertility god Ishtar (Near East) or Eostre (German).

(Not this old bunkum again.)

No.

It.

Doesn't.

Quote

 

On 3/24/2016 at 2:56 PM, AnonymousBrother said:

 

On 3/24/2016 at 2:56 PM, AnonymousBrother said:

So, while verse 7 might perhaps maybe by some odd minuscule chance, yet which is not actively supported by that list of scholars I gave you, be targeting exclusively Docetism, ...

Please review this post: 

http://forum.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/916-reinstatement-no2/?do=findComment&comment=2120

Out of the 11 scholars you named,

• 6 supported my view; 
• 1 did not support my view;
• the rest are invalid as they didn't offer comment one way or the other.

On 3/24/2016 at 2:56 PM, AnonymousBrother said:

 ... verses 9~11 do not.

On 3/13/2016 at 0:52 PM, Ann O'Maly said:

But 2 John 9-11 follows on from 2 John 7's warning about Docetic heresy, doesn't it?

6 hours ago, Joe Smith said:

Are you sure this is just not the work of the mentally diseased brothers??

Well, whoever put the article on the jwdotorg must have had the GB's OK and today it still headlines the Newsroom section, so you tell me.  

Sainsbury's apologises after a customer was told he could not have black pudding in his Full English breakfast because the Jehovah's Witness chef would not prepare it

• Alan MacKay told he could not enjoy black pudding at Nottingham store
• He was offered a full refund and instead made his own breakfast at home
• Supermarket giant said its chef had no issue serving bloodied sausage 
• Chef took object to dish as Jehovah's Witness believe blood is sacrosanct 

By Alex Matthews For Mailonline

Published: 09:16, 24 March 2016 | Updated: 15:56, 24 March 2016

Sainsbury's has been forced to apologise after its Jehovah's Witness chef refused to serve a customer black pudding with his Full English breakfast.

Alan MacKay was stunned when he was told he could not enjoy the staple, made up of animal fat, blood and oatmeal, with his meal at the branch in Arnold, Nottingham.

 

After receiving his incomplete dish the former police officer was told the black pudding would not be served because it was against the religious beliefs of the chef to do so.

 

Missing: This is the Full English Alan MacKay should have received while dining at Sainsbury's in Nottingham

Jehovah’s Witness regard blood as sacrosanct and if an animal hasn’t been bled to their standards they won’t eat it. 

 

Mr MacKay, who had popped into the store after dropping his wife off at work at 9am, said:  'I know it sounds trivial, but it's the principal behind it that's ridiculous.

'If she refuses to cook black pudding because of her religion, what is she doing working in a kitchen that sells it? She shouldn't be employed if she won't cook the menu.

 

'I was really looking forward to my black pudding. You get a good breakfast in there.

'But when I went into the cafe to order my black pudding, like as I have done before, I went away hungry. I was really cheesed off.

'I came home and had my breakfast at 11.30am. I had crumpets, a poached egg and beans. I didn't buy black pudding because it's quite fatty so I only have it once a week or so.

'Sainsbury's does a wonderful black pudding, so that's why I was so disappointed. It's one of the few big stores that sells black pudding. Morrison's doesn't.'

 

 Mistake: A spokeswoman said Mr MacKay was forced to go without due to a mix up between the kitchen team

Mr MacKay said he was 'cheesed off' when he was not served his full meal at this Sainsbury's cafe because it usually serves up 'wonderful black pudding'

Mr MacKay was offered a refund by Sainsbury's who explained the error was down to a mix up between the kitchen team on duty.

A spokeswoman said a member of staff had misunderstood that the chef had asked them to prepare the black pudding, not that black pudding could not be served.

'We have apologised to the customer for the misunderstanding.' she added. 

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS BELIEFS: APART FROM MAINSTREAM CHRISTIANITY

Jehovah's Witnesses are a worldwide brotherhood amounting to over eight million members.

Jehovah's say that as Jesus Christ did not limit his kingdom to a certain part of the world, they do not allow themselves to be attached to a country, ethnicity or political belief system.

Members believe that the bible was inspired by God or 'Jehovah' and is completely historically accurate. As a result, if a theory clashes with the bible they believe it to be wrong.

Jehovah's do believe in Jesus, but they think he died on a stake rather than a cross. This is because of the Greek word used for cross in the bible which translates to 'stake' or 'tree'.

Members say that when someone dies their existence stops completely and as a result they do not believe in Hell. Their other reasoning for this is that God would not want to punish humans for eternity.

Members do not accept blood transfusions because they believe God has forbidden this in the bible (In particular making reference Genesis 9:3-4 and Acts 15:19-21).

Jehovah's say that God believes blood represents life, so out of respect and obedience they do not tamper with it.

Source: Jehovah’s Witnesses

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3507433/Sainsbury-s-apologises-customer-told-not-black-pudding-English-breakfast-Jehovah-s-Witness-chef-not-prepare-it.html#ixzz43qzjk9F2 
 

14 hours ago, Nicole said:

But the government was not satisfied with this and threw him in jail anyway

As far as I can remember from what I've read, there was considerably more to the charges than unpalatable content in the 'Finished Mystery' book. Some senior WT officials had been trying to influence active servicemen to disobey their superiors. That is sedition. It's noteworthy that, for a long time, the Society claimed the charges were false and that they were later fully exonerated in court. This wasn't true, as court documents bore out. The Society officials were never exonerated. The charges were simply dropped because the war had ended and no further action against the Society was taken. Over the last decade, the publications have partially corrected the wording.

*** re (1988 ed.) p. 32  6 Unlocking a Sacred Secret ***

"Early in 1918 the Kingdom activity of Jehovah's people met with great opposition. It was a time of testing earth wide, and fearful ones were sifted out. In May 1918 Christendom's clergy instigated the imprisonment of officials of the Watch Tower Society, but nine months later these were released. Later, they were completely exonerated of the false charges against them."

*** km 9/06 p. 3 Adjustments for the Book Revelation—Its Grand Climax At Hand! ***

"p. 32, box, replace first paragraph with: 
... ... Early in 1918 the Kingdom activity of Jehovah’s people met with great opposition. It was a time of testing earth wide, and fearful ones were sifted out. In May 1918 Christendom’s clergy instigated the imprisonment of officials of the Watch Tower Society, but nine months later these were released. Later, the false charges against them were dropped."

9 hours ago, AnonymousBrother said:

I have done what I said I would. Showed you many references do not support your assertions of exclusivity (BTW, "not mentioning" is *not* the same as "supporting" your position, as much as you would like otherwise).

Stop trying to bend this around. You made the claim that 'most scholars disagreed' with the idea that John was targeting the Docetic heresies in 2 John. I asked you to support your claim. You could not. 'Not mentioning' does not support your assertion about disagreement either. Only one on your list expressed a disagreement. Shall we move on from this dead horse now?

And regarding heretics in the ever-changing JW organization: today's heresy can be tomorrow's truth. Besides, the majority of those disfellowshipped are guilty of some sexual sin. Where does this fit with 2 John's warning about not greeting false teachers?

This makes me feel very uncomfortable. There was the animation where Sophia decided to forego her ice cream and put money in the contribution box instead; then there was the praise given by one of the GB on JW Broadcasting to one little girl who sent in cash with a card and photo; and now the concept of children donating to the Org. is further embedded with this little puzzle activity.

Question: If a charity produced a TV commercial, show or website which was specifically designed to influence young children to donate their pocket money to their cause, would you as parents, carers or objective observers think this was appropriate targeting? 

3 hours ago, Epiraima said:

HI ann your post doesn't really answer my question. I was looking for a list of current teachings affected by our new understanding of the Babylonish Captivity. For example, how does it afect our understanding of the 2 Witnesses of Revelation 11?

I know it doesn't exactly answer your question - I could only think of an observation and didn't want to leave your post hanging.

The core difficulty is the 1914/1919 eschatology that colors every JW interpretation of Revelation.

Babylonian captivity was punishment for the unfaithfulness and disobedience of God's people.

The old JW understanding of the captivity to Babylon the Great incorporated the idea of punishment:

*** w55 12/1 p. 722 par. 17 Avoidance Inside the Cities of Refuge ***

"The original part of this remnant passed through the years of World War I, during which they became captive to the Babylonish world because they came under the fear of men in high station and their course of action was not altogether clean from this world, not entirely neutral toward the mortal combats of this world. How much of bloodguiltiness Jehovah at his temple judged to be upon them, we do not definitely know. But after he released them from their captivity to Babylon in 1919 they repented of any measure of sin in any respect, confessed their guilt and endeavored to clean up their worship of him under his guidance by Christ. Moreover, since then, and particularly down to 1931, thousands who were definitely tainted with bloodguilt heard the message of the Kingdom and of the coming Armageddon and they began to flee to the antitypical city of refuge. They repented and turned to God for mercy. With faith in his High Priest Jesus Christ they gave themselves in full dedication to God to do his will ever afterward and to remain strictly within his merciful provisions to be safeguarded against the executing of all the bloodguilty at Armageddon."

*** kj chap. 11 p. 207 par. 33 Disappointment in Store for Overconfident Ones ***

"These dedicated worshipers, anointed with Jehovah’s spirit, were brought into a Babylonish captivity and exile during the world war of 1914-1918 and underwent a severe disciplining then."

With the biblical captivity and the previous JW modern-day application, punishment only lasted for a short time - less than a standard lifespan for the former, and a few months for the latter. I cannot see a chatisement-deliverance component in the new modern day interpretation. Perhaps this is because it's hard for a single generation to learn a 1900-year-long lesson? 
 

Whole section of my post was lost.

Will redo below.

20 hours ago, JWTheologian said:

The only thing you dismantled was how WRONG you are and have been for MANY years

As I said, anybody can read this thread and the Christmas one and decide for themselves whether your blustering claims had any credible support. 

21 hours ago, JWTheologian said:

Is it the Org, or you puffed up with pride? It seems you have forgotten ALL the Encyclopedia and book references I used to illustrate how wrong you were. That’s how you trend this reverse psychology manifestation technique.

Again, the link to the thread has been provided so readers can make up their own minds on how our exchange went down. If you remember, I checked and dismantled your encyclopedia and book references one-by-one. Your choices were so cuckoo that you even included a reference about Easter customs and one about the summertime Spanish bull running festival to support your assertions about Saturnalia! 

21 hours ago, JWTheologian said:

And now you have just proven another point when disassociated people as yourself find a need to show how wrong the WTS got its dates and time wrong, when all the time it was the original poster that got it wrong. Anyone can misrepresent the WTS literature, and its intended purpose. How about linking the thread that disproved your theory on Saturnalia that was DELETED by TheWorldNewsMedia in your behalf. So people can have the ACTUAL FACTS. Lol

Mysteriously deleted threads where you 'proved' I was wrong about Saturnalia? Hmm. It must be a diabolical conspiracy.  The only thread where I had a lengthy discussion with you about it was the one already linked to.

Other Christmas threads I commented on were here:

http://www.jw-archive.org/post/71038126433/some-interesting-material-from-the-december-15

http://www.jw-archive.org/post/135925203268/nimrod-linked-to-santa-claus-nimrod-was-first

18 minutes ago, gfnslave said:

Thank you for your input. I appreciate your use of Scripture to interpret Scripture. It seems a generation is not as long as some think.

What do you make of the current idea about 2 groups of anointed overlapping with one another which comprises one generation?

Oh and when I said,

This would be a fruitful research project for you, Sarah. 

I meant to put your name as you were the OP. Should worn my reading glasses.