Jump to content
The World News Media

JW Insider

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by JW Insider

  1. So true in many countries. That's part of what I meant when I said that ... It seems they've found weasel-words to show that something might look like idolatry but it technically does not fall under their definition of idolatry. This is so different from the words the Bible uses such as "abstain" from idolatry, or "flee" from idolatry, or "guard yourselves" from idols. There's no room left for staying that close to idolatry but using technical definitions to claim it's not.
    • Hello guest!
    This was big scandalous news, especially among Catholic conservatives, but barely had time to get noticed before the pandemic drowned out the discussion. To touch on the original topic, native religions in Brazil have historically been persecuted with adherents being killed, massacred, and tortured.
  2. Even the Devil can be right once in a while. Massimo Introvigne is already on jw.org in half a dozen places.
  3. Yes. I think that you have hit upon the reason that the quote about peace and security was considered "Satanic." It was haughty in the sense of being far too optimistic and ambitious. Perhaps the words "supremely" and "vision" also give it a religious sense. "In+ these+ Goals+ and+ targets,+ we+ are+ setting+ out+ a+ supremely+ ambitious+ and+ transformational+ vision.+ We+ envisage+ a+ world+ free+ of+ poverty,+ hunger,+ disease+ and+ want,+ where+all+life+can+thrive.+" Of course, we know from the context that we are likely trying to read into it things that just aren't there, if we
  4. I think you are mostly right. And I was only trying to show how unreasonable the results could be if this was taken seriously. However, I doubt that Arauna is alone in a similar line of thinking that there must be something diabolical even in quotes like the following that she found in the UN documents: To this exact quote, you may have notice that she responded to it by saying: "SOUNDS LIKE THEY WANT TO BRING PEACE AND SECURITY ! SATANS VERSION OF JEHOVAH'S GOVERNMENT. See below where they talk of peace and security linked with sustainable development." So, this type of thi
  5. *** w20 November pp. 14-15 Take Courage—Jehovah Is Your Helper *** HELP FROM INDIVIDUALS IN AUTHORITY ... 13 What help do we receive? When it is in harmony with his purpose, Jehovah may use his powerful holy spirit to cause people in authority to do what he desires. King Solomon wrote: “A king’s heart is like streams of water in Jehovah’s hand. He directs it wherever He pleases.” (Prov. 21:1) What does this proverb mean? Humans can dig a canal to divert the water of a stream in a direction that fits their plans. Similarly, Jehovah can use his spirit to divert the thoughts of rulers in a
  6. I don't think the scripture meant that we need to pray out any particular persons or schemes, only that the men in high positions who make decisions that might affect us, and our preaching work, will make decisions that result in the kind of peace and security that have a net positive effect. There's something to that, I agree. We get the necessary peace when they stay out of our way. But the verse can mean a range of things to different persons in different circumstances. Some get more specific in their prayers than others. I think we could even pray that someone comes up with a vacci
  7. No. I never saw any evidence provided by the UN with respect to this man from Ethiopia. I never saw any evidence from you either. Just a claim with no evidence. Your assumption and judgment are both wrong in this case. Perhaps you have been watching for a longer time, and perhaps, as you say, you don't have the kind of time to watch. But I get the impression that your sources are not from watching the UN anyway, but they come from conspiratorial, racist, lying and/or biased sources. I like to look at the viability of as many sources as I can, and I agree that this can be very t
  8. By the way, the evidence indicates that this is nothing more than an outrageous lie. I think we should be careful is not to slander people just because some propagandist or conspiracy theorist or even racists made some claims that were so easily debunked. The evidence was already presented under another topic. In the case of the leader of WHO, evidence showed that the slander was most likely both politically and racially motivated. The fact that you included this without any evidence puts a cloud of suspicion over everything else you have claimed without evidence. I hope everyone who
  9. I noticed that even with all that quoting from Agenda 2030, you found absolutely nothing that supported any of the conspiratorial fear-mongering that is so prevalent all over the Internet. I'm glad you finally looked it over, however. In the past you said: "Just read the documents." So I did. I've learned not to give so much credence to propaganda and conspiracy theories. It reveals that there has been, not just a lot of conjecture, but a lot of outright lying from those who tried to make us believe that those conspiracies are actually to be found somewhere in the UN documents. Th
  10. Some of the subjects that came up under this topic have been moved to a new topic. Arauna didn't actually start that topic or name it, but this forum assigns a new topic to the person who made the earliest post in that topic, and the earliest one I moved there was hers.
  11. A previous topic that had already gone on for about 40 pages was quickly turning into a place to discuss the many different things we see going on in 2020: Covid19 lockdown and the expectations for the near future because of it. Covid19 leading to food shortages, turned into a discussion about Christian food distribution (my fault) that turned into a discussion of who are Christ's brothers. and, as the usual end-times sub-topics: the UN and various claims regarding the UN, some of which seem conspiratorial. the "disgusting thing" (abomination of desol
  12. Come to think of it, I get those too. It's just that I made up an email address to start my account here that I haven't checked in 5 years. Oh no. A pop culture reference that I don't get. Am I going to have to go back and read the posts I skipped that were among you, scholarJW, and AlanF? I'll assume the song was "Saturday Night's Alright For Fighting." Or was it: Daniel Daniel is having a dream to explain He can see King Neb is quite like, a man who going insane Oh and I can see Daniel praying on high Looks like God's with Daniel, but that King Neb lost seven time
  13. Yes, I think you are about right. It means 609BCE (Watchtower 629 BC), based on the other items from Allen Smith in the post: It started with the death of King Josiah and ended with the toppling of the Ottoman Empire in 1914AD The time of the Gentile began with the loss of King Josiah. This is borne out by the Watchtower's chronology in the Insight book: *** it-1 p. 205 Assyria *** the death of King Josiah of Judah (c. 629 B.C.E.). *** it-1 p. 418 Carchemish *** King Josiah of Judah unwisely tried to turn the Egyptian forces back at Megiddo and was killed in the a
  14. I did just show you a couple posts back, where the Watchtower always moves this first deportation from 625 to 618 (Watchtower chronology), which is 605 to 598 BCE. If you think this benefits me, you'll have to explain how. Forget AlanF. I doubt he even agrees with me on all these points. If he does, I don't really care. And I surely didn't invite him here, nor did I invite ScholarJW, but I'm sure both of them could easily have used bot searches to flag them whenever 587 or 607 gets mentioned here. I've seen ScholarJW's name pop up almost immediately in the "Recently Browsing" box when the
  15. I have no trouble searching the archives, even deleted posts, because I have copies locally in Microsoft OneNote. I sometimes find problems with the local search function here, but they come up instantly in OneNote. When I quote from them however, you can't pay attention to phrases like "Edited 5 hours ago by allensmith28." That's because those time stamps are often from several years ago. Since you have said so many of the same things that Allen Smith said, perhaps you can explain the belief that the Gentile Times actually begins in the time of Josiah (rather than Zedekiah) which was nea
  16. I see that you didn't explain why the Watchtower also rejects this "FIRST deportation" you are promoting as important for some reason. Nor have you explained why it is important yet. Are you saying that perhaps the reason the Watchtower rejects your "first deportation" will change because something recently seen, "has made past arguments null and void" including our own?
  17. Previously you had made this point even clearer when you said this under another topic. (I'll highlight the main point.) The best and most accurate book I have ever seen on this topic as it relates to the Watchtower's view is "Gentile Times Reconsidered" by Carl Olof Jonsson. I'm sure you know that he was a Witness, and he was disfellowshipped for sharing his research. However, I think it still stands as the best explanation of the issues, and the most accurate book related to the trouble the Watchtower Society has with the historical and archaeological side of these issues. I me
  18. This would normally be a side point, but you keep saying things that make it look this early deportation is something new, like saying above that "theologians are just beginning to see" this, so I'm highlighting just a few of the places in your statements where this point is made. I find this odd for three reasons: REASON #1 It isn't true. I pointed out before that everyone accepts that the Bible speaks of [at least] three, just by reading Jeremiah 52:28-30 alone. But you pointed out that you weren't counting that last one that Jeremiah mentioned, and were
  19. OK. Good. I got it so far. (Regarding the two that past scholars and historians have given the most attention to: 598 and 587. (That's 618 and 607 in Watchtower chronology.) I do notice that you put emphasis on the term "past" scholars and historians, as if the emphasis on the earliest deportation around 605 (=625 WT) is really something new, but I'll get back to that later. Perhaps my wording was unclear, because I think we are actually agreeing here. Just as you correctly quoted me, I said, "Instead of including that one [in 568/7] as the FOURTH, you mention a different set of T
  20. Ruh-roh! I came back to see AlanF in the fray. I expected to have to wade through pages and pages of insults flying in all directions. Oh, well. Everyone is welcome. But please, let's keep this to a discussion of the chronology of the Neo-Babylonian period, and that can include the 70 years, and even the 490 years. Let's not deal with Watchtower related issues about 1914, except for those that came through the 606/536/607/539/537 ideas. And let's please leave Darwin out of it, unless you want to start a new topic. Would be nice to see a lot less insults hurled around, even though a few wi
  21. I'll summarize a portion of what you said so far, and can assume you agree that you are being understood correctly in this post, unless you point out anything that is being misunderstood. You made it clear that you think that most scholars/theologians focus on just these next TWO deportations. We'll call them: "Jehoiachin" Neb 7th (598 BCE/618 WT BCE) "Zedekiah" Neb 18th (587 BCE/607 WT BCE). Jeremiah reports these two along with a third in Jeremiah 52:28-30, that occurred about 5 years later: "Nebuzaradan" Neb 23rd (582 BCE/602 WT BCE For reference, we'l
  22. There are no Neo-Babylonian king lists that give long reigns beyond a normal person's lifespan. Besides, I never mentioned any king lists. You were responding to the following statement I had made: "Neo-Babylonian period is validated in full through several different and independent lines of evidence that confirm each other."
  23. I said: And you said: I'm saying that there is no proof of your claim that "this date is doctored to be in line with Egyptian chronology." The dates for all the kings of Neo-Babylonian period are set in stone, and all of them are evidenced equally. The evidence for Cyrus is no better than that of Nebuchadnezzar. If you claim one is doctored, then you are claiming that they all are doctored. But we have no evidence that any of them are doctored. (Some persons here will know that when it comes to the sheer number of pieces of evidence, and even a couple of additional types o
  • 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.