The timing of Jesus' 2nd Coming

[Ann O'Maly]

7 hours ago, Arauna said:

They created the zodiac - the cult of which spread thru-out the earth (zodiac comes from the first Babylonian empire -

The 1st Babylonian empire was 2nd millennium BCE - circa 1830 - 1531 BCE.

The concept of the zodiac as we know it developed much later from the neo-Assyrian and neo-Babylonian periods onwards.

7 hours ago, Arauna said:

arabic is the closest language to ancient Akkadian

Akkadian is a Semitic language which means it is closely related to both Arabic and Hebrew.

[Arauna]

The Sumerian language was not Semitic but Akkadian slowly replaced it.  Akkadian is the ancient form of the Semitic language - like old English.  It was the lingua franca so it stayed stable and did not change much - scribes all learnt Akkadian. The Amarna tablets found in Egypt (time of Joseph) was in Akkadian (if I remember correctly) - it was still the diplomatic language about 200 years before the exodus.  Back then, as you say - they could all understand each other  - but dialects were already forming. Arabic changed less over time as scholars of Akkadian today say that Arabic is closer to it.  Daniel learnt Akkadian at the court of Nebuchadnezzar and used some words in Akkadian in the book of Daniel and the writing on the wall also had some Akkadian words in it

Babylon grew out of the Sumerian culture which had writing, the zodiac, the wheel, complicated mathematics (360 degree circle, 60 minutes in hour etc.) - and cities which quickly became city-states with a priest-king.   In the time of Nimrod they built many cities and some are mentioned in the bible: Genesis 10:  He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; that is why it is said, “Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord.” ¹⁰ The first centers of his kingdom were Babylon, Uruk, Akkad and Kalneh, in^[a] Shinar.^{[b] 11} From that land he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir,^[c] Calah ¹² and Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah—which is the great city. Shinar was the southern part and Assyria more to the north. These districts were always at war and fighting with each other...

If one looks at ancient Bible history one sees that it is spot-on, especially when one looks at the movement of nations and related languages... For example, if one studies the ancient Indian language (Sanskrit - it is related to Persian - and Persian and Greek are related to Indo-European languages).  These are all from the son of Noah - Japheth.  Sanskrit has some Latin and German words in it.... interesting ..... The ancient Harappa culture ( next to the Indus valley) has remarkable similarities to the ancient Babylonian religion and culture.

To come back to Nimrod - those days there were tremendous number of lions and the king had to show his power by hunting lions to protect the people.  Nimrod was a brave hunter but later started hunting people when he built an empire and went to war and built more cities.  They built walls and irrigation and there was diversification of jobs: priests, potters, etc - jobs one finds in cities.

Until the time of Nebuchadnezzar the kings fought lions to show their virility.  I went to look at the stone reliefs in the British museum when I lived near London - these people knew lions very well because the depictions are excellent - beautiful sculpting.  Look up on internet the pictures of the lions being killed in ancient Assyria (Nineveh was burnt - but when archeologists discovered the city they cut off the reliefs  from the walls and brought them to London.  Many were lost in the river during transportation.)

Scholars give varied dates for some of these kingdoms... I always remember that 200 years is a very long time....More than 10 generations - even more if they married young.   Large new nations can be formed in this time - especially when there are wars and movement of peoples.  And in warfare the enemy was usually carried away when they lost the battle.

The Bible puts the time of Nimrod at the time of Eber's son Peleg (an great ancestor of Abraham) and it says the "world was divided" in the time of Peleg.  He was born about 100 years after the flood and the Bible does not say how old he was when the division came.... (Eber also refers to people living to the west of the Euphrates and later came to mean the "Hebrews".)  Some were following Jehovah and some were following Nimrod.....Nimrod started false worship away from Jehovah and built a tower  as part of this worship.  Nimrod was not his real name but it is a title which means "opposer of Jehovah".  The bible refers to Shem as the forefather of all the sons of Eber.

I am writing from memory - but if you find it interesting you can go and look for yourself.  It is a pity that one cannot visit these places now.  Even in the time of Sadam Hussain one had to be careful to go there and get special permission... now it is ISIS territory.  My husband always promised to take me there ..... but I will never go there now...too dangerous.

I feel sad that scholars look at the Bible with so much skepticism because it really is all there... and accurate.

Of course - the scholar's dates vary - because it is so far back in antiquity-  but as more translations of the period are being done - our understanding of how they lived shows that they were very cultured.  

I can understand why Jehovah told Abraham to leave the city with so much Moon-worship going on.  It was not long after Abraham left Ur, it was overrun by the enemy and practically destroyed... interesting history when one brings secular and Biblical history together.

But somehow there are links between the two (secular and Biblical history) and the legends before the flood influenced stories that became prevalent after the flood.  Just like today some people choose their own form of religion and some choose to follow the instructions of Jehovah.

I love to read about - agriculture!   And Jehovah told them to 'spread out'  but Nimrod built and empire and he became powerful.  Jehovah did not want them to reach a standard of living (maybe the industrialization) we have today which is rapidly developing because the barriers of language is disappearing and technology is shared...... There is an interesting phrase in the Bible to this effect when one reads it......  It was not yet time for God to send Jesus because a family genealogy had not yet been established through which the true messiah would appear to be able to recognize him without a doubt and Abraham was not yet born..... so what is my point?

Well - today our global warming is caused not so much by car emissions but by methane!    Most scientists are mum about the large quantities of methane that is produced by mass farming of pigs, cattle, chickens etc.  Do some research and you will find out....that cities cause people to bundle up in one place and mass farming is needed - especially with an escalation of the populace.   Diversified agriculture and animal husbandry - small farming structures which are organic, this replenishes the earth and is the best way of farming. Jehovah did not like the cities but wanted them to spread out!

Jehovah forced them to scatter in the time of Nimrod because the earth would much sooner have reached the bad point it has reached now... with the future of the earth in jeopardy.  Mankind's methods of mass farming to sustain millions of people in cities... are rapidly contributing to the trashing of the earth. Cities can be nasty places.  There are always a criminal element and ghettos!

This is why I like looking at the timeline of the "project" that Jehovah is following..... and he only intervenes when his short-term(milestones) are in jeopardy - so as to reach the final goal at his predetermined time.  He is the perfect timekeeper!  Mankind chose independence from God and this will play out right to the end!

Hope I did not ramble too much.  This is not for debate but just for interest sake - to think about...

 

 

 

 

[Ann O'Maly]

16 hours ago, Arauna said:

Daniel learnt Akkadian at the court of Nebuchadnezzar and used some words in Akkadian in the book of Daniel and the writing on the wall also had some Akkadian words in it

The book of Daniel was written in Hebrew and Aramaic. The writing on the wall was Aramaic.

Quote

Nimrod was a brave hunter but later started hunting people when he built an empire and went to war and built more cities. 

This is just one of the many embellishments on the Genesis account that built up post-exile. This particular one about Nimrod hunting people seems to come from the Targum of Jerusalem (or Pseudo-Jonathan). The same source also contains a story about Nimrod casting Abraham into a fiery furnace because he wouldn't commit idolatry, but the flames did not hurt him (sound familiar?).

Quote

My husband always promised to take me there ..... but I will never go there now...too dangerous.

And many of those carefully and long-preserved sites have been vandalized or obliterated by Daesh thugs, sadly.
 

[Ann O'Maly]

10 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Exactly, it’s supposed to be viewed as a prophetic year. That why the assertion that a 360 year is not possible is FALSE! Just proven by simple mathematics.

Please show me, with your 'simple mathematics' how 360 days can convert into 360 365.25-day years, as is necessary when multiplied by 7, to get to the year 1914.

[Arauna]

Gen 10:  Cush became father to Nimʹrod. He was the first to become a mighty one on the earth. ⁹  He became a mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah. That is why there is a saying: “Just like Nimʹrod, a mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah.” ¹⁰  The beginning of his kingdom was* Baʹbel,+ Eʹrech,+ Acʹcad, and Calʹneh, in the land of Shiʹnar.+ ¹¹  From that land he went into As·syrʹi·a+ and built Ninʹe·veh,+ Re·hoʹboth-Ir, Caʹlah, ¹²  and Reʹsen, between Ninʹe·veh and Caʹlah: This is the great city.*

Gen 11:

They now said: “Come! Let us build a city for ourselves and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a celebrated name for ourselves, so that we will not be scattered over the entire face of the earth.”+ ⁵  Then Jehovah went down to see the city and the tower that the sons of men had built. ⁶  Jehovah then said: “Look! They are one people with one language,+ and this is what they have started to do. Now there is nothing that they may have in mind to do that will be impossible for them. ⁷  Come! Let us+ go down there and confuse their language in order that they may not understand one another’s language.” ⁸  So Jehovah scattered them from there over the entire face of the earth,+ and they gradually left off building the city. ⁹  That is why it was named Baʹbel,*+ because there Jehovah confused the language of all the earth, and Jehovah scattered them from there over the entire face of the earth.

Question:   Read the above. Why would a hunter of animals become such a great opposer of Jehovah. Especially since we know that the Assyrian tradition of killing was to sow 'terror' in the hearts of people when they conquered them.  (like ISIS is doing now).

And why would the building of a tower be so bad?   It was because it had a 'temple' on the top of the tower as part of false worship.  There are many other examples of these kind of ziggurats all over the world. 

While I read Josephus and old historians - the bible has proven absolutely accurate in its description of conditions. .And the above stories that you mentioned - they are  -  'traditions of people.'  It was not inspired by faithful people who were loyal to God and they would not have added to the Hebrew scriptures if they were faithful. Jesus himself said to the Jewish leaders that they teach "traditions" of men.   Ezra compiled the Hebrew scriptures in early 5th century BCE and if one reads only these books one finds that there is one solid theme going throughout these books like a golden thread... 

Pity you always try to refute the Bible with writings of false prophets.....  people like Balaam..  Your loyalties seem to go to the falsehoods and not reading the authentic scriptures inspired by Jah. Moses wrote the book of Genesis in 1513BCE... so this was almost a 1000 years before the  Jewish "traditions" came along " post-exile" as you call it.

Ann, I did not say Daniel was written in Akkadian - I said there was a few Akkadian words smattered in Daniel.... which actually proves that Daniel wrote this book in his own lifetime.... apart from many other proofs.  Aramaic (also a Semitic language)  was already taking over as a world language and the new writing script was becoming popular.  Because Daniel lived to such an old age he had learnt Akkadian at the court of Nebuchadnezzar while he was young, at a time when this tradition was still strong.  Just like today we have changing times and generation gaps.

 

[JW Insider]

On 8/30/2016 at 1:36 PM, Arauna said:

So from the above one can see that Jesus would be ruling amidst his enemies before he 'stands up' to bring destruction to the wicked on the earth.  This is also a related subject.

I don't know if you were aware, but you just referenced an excellent example of doctrine that highlights the issues when a Bible teaching conflicts with tradition. There was a time, for about 7 years, when this very innocuous-sounding statement of yours could have resulted in your being questioned about your loyalty and even about apostasy.

Scripturally, what you said above is a perfectly correct statement. But a brother in the Writing Dept worded it almost the exact same way back in 1979 and there was a discussion about whether this very wording could be considered correct or if it was related to the brewing "apostasy." It was "voted" to be incorrect for reasons I will try to explain below. 

Basically, we had been teaching that Jesus already stood up in 1914 and it was argued that it would be confusing to say that he will stand up again. Of course this has since changed, but we had the same types of contradictions with several other points of doctrine that have also changed, some very recently. The "stand up" doctrine was thought to be tied up with these others.

Some of our teachings referring to different events associated with the "presence" and/or events associated with the "coming/appearance/manifestation" have also changed in just the last 3 to 5 years. The re-interpretation is usually associated with some of the events associated with Jesus' "coming" that we still taught had occurred beginning (and sometimes ending) in the period from 1914 to 1919. Now we teach that some of these events should only be associated with the timing surrounding the great tribulation and Armageddon. (One of the recently updated teachings now reaches back to the first century.) One of the major teachings that changed more recently, and affects this discussion, was about the "rapture" of 1 Thess 4:16,17. This "rapture" is now explained to be more in line with Christendom's view although without the use of the specific word "rapture" due to its additional false connotations about a return of Jesus "in the flesh." Prior to this, that passage was explained not strictly as the resurrection of the deceased anointed in 1918, although that was always included. It was explained in very different way:

• *** w64 7/1 p. 415 Questions From Readers ***  He issued from his throne a “commanding call, with an archangel’s voice,” to his followers on earth. Christ Jesus is Michael the archangel, in charge of the holy angels at his presence . . . . So Christ, the archangel, uttered the loud command for his people to wake up out of the dust from the spiritually dead, sleeping condition they were in in 1918, in fear and captivity to Babylon the Great, and to become alive with activity, and this they did starting in 1919. This was accompanied by the sound of God’s “trumpet,” and so it takes place during the time of the trumpetlike proclamation that the great King has taken his throne. They were “caught away” by being “snatched away” or delivered from bondage to Babylon the Great and her political paramours and brought into a free theocratic organization under the invisible Lord. . . . To “meet the Lord in the air” would not mean for the surviving remnant on earth to go to heaven . . . . So ‘meeting the Lord in the air’ would mean their coming to know that the spirit Lord, Jesus Christ, is in authority in the air since ousting Satan from heaven.

This was the same explanation of 1 Thess in the 1958 Daniel Book (yw), which also taught that the 3.5 times ran from "the first half of November, 1914 and to end on May 7, 1918." Currently, we have even dropped the teaching that this first resurrection of the anointed had to have occurred in the spring of 1918, and have even allowed -- in writing -- for the possibility that it hasn't happened yet, and could happen as late as the time of the great tribulation.

So back to the point about what you said above, and why it was voted to be wrong. A set of articles including the 1958 green Daniel book had already explained that he only stood up in 1914 and this standing up for his people referred to the early portion of the tribulation that ran from about 1914 to 1919. It seemed proper to say that this "early tribulation" was interrupted (for the sake of the chosen ones) and therefore it might seem proper to say that Jesus would surely "stand up" again in the future, against his enemies, or at least in "some sense."

In 1967, we would still have worded what you said above like what follows, with no reference to a future time for "standing up":

• *** w69 5/15 p. 307 par. 21 Crushing All Nations in Our Day by God’s Kingdom ***  That means that Michael becomes king in heaven. Michael stands up to reign during the conflict between “the king of the north” and “the king of the south.” Hence, he stands up in the midst of his own enemies.

In 1969, we came close to allowing for a future standing up, but stuck with 1914 to 1918 as the primary time:

• *** w69 5/15 pp. 307-308 pars. 21-24 Crushing All Nations in Our Day by God’s Kingdom ***  So after a period of waiting Michael or the Lord Jesus Christ stands up, Daniel explaining that this expression “stand up” means to take up power and begin reigning as king. In 1914, Jesus Christ was glorified in heaven at God’s right hand . . .  Michael’s standing up to reign in the midst of his enemies and to go subduing in their midst calls for a war, the like of which there has never been before, a time of trouble more distressing than anything previous. This must be so, not just because the war that flamed up in 1914 was earth wide, but because this trouble on earth will surpass even the Noachian flood.—Matt. 24:21-39.  This has also been a time of affliction for Jehovah’s holy people, especially in 1918, when they were worn out by persecution and their preaching work was practically silenced by the war-maddened nations. . . . History shows that since May and June of 1918, when there was a dashing of the power of Jehovah’s people to pieces, God’s people have not been crushed again. . . . still Jehovah’s people are not crushed, neither will they be crushed by the impending attack of Gog of Magog, because back there in 1918 the crushing of Jehovah’s people reached its climax, never to be repeated with success.

The part that refers to the future great tribulation appears to be directly connected with Michael standing up, but the actual doctrine was still that the events of 1918 were so important that it was the standing up at that time that 'once for all time' already covered for the future great tribulation. That's the meaning of the last sentence in the 1969 quote above.

So in 1974, the Watchtower answers a related question that asks the Watchtower to pin down explicitly whether this time of standing up is at the time of the "great tribulation." The answer was YES!

• *** w74 3/15 p. 192 Questions From Readers ***  "The time of “distress” spoken of in the prophecy of Daniel is therefore evidently the same as the “great tribulation” that will bring the entire wicked system of things to its end."

1974 was a time that the Writing Department was given a lot of freedom. New ideas had come out of the Aid Book research, and permission was given to just go ahead and allow some doctrinal items to change based on what seemed to be obvious scriptural reasoning (porneia, elder arrangement, etc.). But the idea of a future "standing up" of Jesus was encroaching on a well-crafted, intricate set of teachings that might seem to unravel if a time setting was changed.

In 1976, the new, 1974 position was re-stated fairly clearly in support of the change:

• *** w76 2/1 pp. 94-95 An Age-Old Conflict About to End ***   When World War II ended, the Communist bloc of nations, the “king of the north,” dominated 18 percent of earth’s land area, which had 7 percent of the world’s population. But what is the situation today? Thirty-five percent of the world’s population, occupying over a quarter of earth’s land area, has come under the control of the Communist “king of the north.” How will this conflict finally end? Will the “king of the north” gain more and more control, finally taking over the domain of the “king of the south”? No. . . . Daniel 12:1 tells us: “During that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of your people. And there will certainly occur a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time. . . . The “time of distress” here referred to will be a “great tribulation” that will bring an end to all human rule, including that of the “king of the north” and the “king of the south.”

So, at this point, your statement above was on solid ground. But by late 1978 and 1979, the Writing Dept was beginning to deal with questions about 1914 that were coming in, not just from Sweden, but from all over the world. The question came up fairly openly whether the whole idea should be researched again, but this was squashed. Fred Franz even suggested that admitting that you thought 1914 was wrong should result in disfellowshipping, even if the brother or sister never mentioned it to anyone except their elders or admitted as much in a question to the Service Department. Even though the two different brothers who wrote the 1974 and 1976 articles were both strong 1914 supporters, they were questioned about their loyalty. A correction had to be made, and it was made in the February 15, 1979 Watchtower based on a question that came, not from the outside, but was worded by the person who wrote both the question and the answer himself.

• *** w79 2/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***   Daniel 12:1 places Michael’s ‘standing up’ as coming before an unprecedented time of distress. Has Michael already ‘stood up,’ or will that occur just before the “great tribulation”?   The indications are that Michael has already ‘stood up.’ Jehovah’s Witnesses have often shown from the Bible and its fulfillment in history that Jesus’ period of ‘sitting’ ended during the raging of World War I in the autumn of 1914 C.E. Then it was time for him to “stand up” or accept Kiengdom rulrship in heaven . . . See “Your Will Be Done on Earth” (1958), pp. 220-307.

Behind the scenes, the real problem was that some members of the Writing Dept and even several members of the Governing Body (including Lyman Swingle who was in charge of the Writing Dept at the time) were beginning to understand that going after little items like this was like "going after a fly with a sledgehammer" to use the words of LS.

The QFR sounded OK and reasonable, and I think most of the brothers hadn't even noticed that we had gone back to the 1958 book. But that recommended section of the "yw" book (on Daniel) leads right into ideas of wild speculation that the younger members of Writing were hoping to change: like, Jehovah sending cosmic rays to manipulate the minds of the kings of the north and king of the south to lead them to mutual slaughter, and speculation that Jehovah was going to use anti-matter, and discussing sunspots and how the idea of detonating a nuclear bomb on the moon was part of the "fearful signs" in the heavens. In fact, those very pages from "yw" were included in the next discussion of Daniel 12:1:

• *** w85 7/1 p. 28 par. 20 Triumphing in “the Final Part of the Days” ***    The determining factor is stated at Daniel 12:1: “And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of your people.” This Michael is Jesus Christ, who ‘stood up’ in his Kingdom in 1914, promptly to eject Satan from the heavens. . . . For details, see the book “Your Will Be Done on Earth,” published in 1958 by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., pages 220-323.

[edited to add that I am attaching an image of page 322, to show what I meant about teh speculation regarding manipulating the minds of kings with cosmic rays, bombing the moon, flying saucers, etc. Note the questions at the bottom of the page, too.]

A return back to the 1974-1979 and also what is now the current teaching was introduced carefully again in 1986, but it was not discussed in the general body of the article. Initially, it was just buried in a parenthetical phrase and a request that the reader use discernment:

• *** w86 11/1 p. 4 Are We Living in “the Time of the End”? ***   (Compare Matthew 24:3, 15, 21 with Daniel 11:31; 12:1, 4.) By doing this, Jesus showed that he did not consider Daniel’s “Old Testament” words to be out of date or insignificant. Neither should we.  Notice the similarity in the words of Daniel and those of Jesus as set out above. Then ask yourself, ‘Were they not speaking about the same thing?’

At this point, it would raise no eyebrows, not even from a proofreader/researcher who could catch a subtle doctrinal shift. That's because we would still use Daniel 12:1 generically to refer to a time of tribulation after Jesus stood up, and therefore associated loosely with the entire time period from 1914 to the GT. But the brother asked for a graphical typesetting "call-out" to highlight the parallels between Daniel and Jesus and asked that it be put at the top of the page so that the words "as set out above" would draw a reader to it.  What he asked for would have been considered "apostasy" by some just a year earlier, was when he asked for a graphical call-out, a very subtle italicization of several words, and he wanted to include the words "will stand up" as part of the italicized phrase even though nothing on the Matthew side of the call-out provided a parallel to those words. You can see it in the italicization in the WT-Lib CD, but should look it up in the printed bound volume to see exactly what I mean.

At any rate, the new teaching with the explicit clarification text came in less than a year:

• *** w87 7/1 pp. 18-20 pars. 10-17 Michael the Great Prince Stands Up ***    But now the angel says that Michael is going to act in a particular way. Using the word ‘stand’ twice, he says: “And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of your people.” (Daniel 12:1) What does it mean that Jesus ‘stands up’? And how can he “stand up” if he is already “standing in behalf of [Daniel’s] people”? . . . . Thus, Jesus has been “standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel’s] people” all throughout these last days.—Daniel 12:1.  Michael ‘Stands Up’ . . . So how is it that Jesus, who is already “standing,” ‘stands up’ at that time? (Daniel 12:1) In that his rulership enters a new phase, as it were. It is time for him to act in an outstanding way to save ‘Daniel’s people’ from annihilation at the hands of human governments. (Ezekiel 38:18, 19) The “time” referred to here is evidently “the time of the end” of the king of the north and the king of the south, when the king of the north threatens the spiritual estate of God’s people. (Daniel 11:40-45) Before this time, Jesus’ rulership has been taken seriously only by his faithful earthly subjects. (Psalm 2:2, 3) Now, though, it is time for “the revelation of the Lord Jesus,” when everyone will be forced to recognize his kingship. (2 Thessalonians 1:7, 8) This will involve the destruction of all opposing forces, followed by the Thousand Year Reign of Jesus and his corulers, when the Kingdom will be the only government over mankind.—Revelation 19:19-21; 20:4. . . . In agreement with this, the angel says that when Michael stands up, “there will certainly occur a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time.” (Daniel 12:1; compare Matthew 24:21.) It will be a time for the destruction of the wicked and salvation for the faithful. . . .  It will be a time of distress indeed. Jesus will end the long history of human warfare when he ‘stands up’ to remove the human powers that are responsible.—Psalm 46:9; 1 Corinthians 15:25.

This has been repeated several times since 1987, with a shift away from the idea that Jesus "stood up" in 1914. The teaching now no longer has Daniel 12:1 mean that Jesus "stood up" in 1914 but that he was already "standing in behalf of his people" since 1914. We have now exactly swapped the meaning of the timing of when he is "standing" and when he "stands up" during this time period of already standing:

• *** w15 5/15 p. 30 par. 3 Questions From Readers *** What occurs next as a result of this final attack? Daniel tells us: “During that time Michael [Jesus Christ] will stand up [at Armageddon], the great prince who is standing [since 1914] in behalf of your people.

In summary, what you said above would have been WRONG from 1958 through about 1974. Then it would have been OK from 1974 to about 1978. Then, in front of certain people, it could have gotten you into trouble as potential APOSTASY from 1979 to about 1985. Then from at least 1986 until now it's the CORRECT teaching again.

 

[Ann O'Maly]

4 hours ago, Arauna said:

Why would a hunter of animals become such a great opposer of Jehovah.

The WT publications answer as follows:

*** w03 6/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
This does not authorize the wanton killing of animals for sport. At Genesis 10:9, the Bible describes Nimrod as “a mighty hunter.” But the same verse says that this put him “in opposition to Jehovah.”

*** g83 5/22 p. 11 The Hunter’s Role in the Wild Kingdom ***
Shortly after the Flood, a notorious man of those days, Nimrod, began to distinguish himself as an outdoor sportsman. He became “a mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah.” (Genesis 10:8, 9) He evidently violated the God-entrusted stewardship over the animals by wantonly killing them. Others followed his lead, and soon the sport caught on in a big way. Hunting became the sport of kings.

On the matter of 'wanton killing of animals for sport' and how distasteful that was/is, I'd tend to agree. Humankind is supposed to be a good custodian of land and life.

Quote

And why would the building of a tower be so bad?

As you quoted, the suggestion was that the tower was to reach the top of the heavens, i.e. reaching God's domain. They wanted to unify, becoming powerful and renowned as if divine.

Quote

And the above stories that you mentioned - they are  -  'traditions of people.' ...

... Pity you always try to refute the Bible with writings of false prophets.....  people like Balaam..  Your loyalties seem to go to the falsehoods and not reading the authentic scriptures inspired by Jah. Moses wrote the book of Genesis in 1513BCE... so this was almost a 1000 years before the  Jewish "traditions" came along " post-exile" as you call it.

Funny you related the extra-biblical myths about Nimrod ... considering you were so dismissive of the calendrical information contained in Jubilees and Enoch.

Quote

Ann, I did not say Daniel was written in Akkadian - 

Correct.

Quote

I said there was a few Akkadian words smattered in Daniel.... ... which actually proves that Daniel wrote this book in his own lifetime.... apart from many other proofs.

Yes, you said Daniel "used some words in Akkadian in the book of Daniel and the writing on the wall also had some Akkadian words in it." But the book was written in Hebrew and Aramaic, and the writing on the wall was in Aramaic. So what do you mean?
 

[JW Insider]

On 8/30/2016 at 1:31 PM, Arauna said:

. . .  for more on where the witnesses get the dates 607BCE and 1914CE read the insight on the scriptures. The insight on the scriptures also quotes from secular sources and you can go and check out the 'secular sources' by going to any good library or a reliable internet archive/ library. Most secular dates are not set in stone either but they give a good indication of the time period.

I'm not sure exactly which portions of the "Insight" book you meant, but there is very little about 1914 in the book, so I will comment on those passages first. Here is primary passage about 1914:

• *** it-1 p. 135 Appointed Times of the Nations ***     It is a historical fact worth noting that, on the basis of the points and evidence above presented, the March 1880 edition of the Watch Tower magazine identified the year 1914 as the time for the close of “the appointed times of the nations” (and the end of the lease of power granted the Gentile rulers). This was some 34 years before the arrival of that year and the momentous events it initiated. In the August 30, 1914, edition of The World, a leading New York newspaper at that time, a feature article in the paper’s Sunday magazine section commented on this as follows: “The terrific war outbreak in Europe has fulfilled an extraordinary prophecy. For a quarter of a century past, through preachers and through press, the ‘International Bible Students’ . . . have been proclaiming to the world that the Day of Wrath prophesied in the Bible would dawn in 1914.”

The first sentence is false. I'm not saying it's dishonest. It's just wrong. The information about the March 1880 Watch Tower is wrong, and the quote from the newspaper, "The World," is wrong. Chronology is easily seen to breed dishonesty if one looks closely at the works of Harold Camping, Ellen G White, etc. But I will give the benefit of the doubt to the person responsible for adding some 1914 information to this part of Insight book.

The reason it's wrong is that 1914 was not determined "on the basis of the points and evidence above presented." That issue of the Watch Tower does indeed reference the points and evidence it used to determine 1914, and it did not include anything about the "seven times" of Nebuchadnezzar, nor even mention Daniel 4. It used a method wherein references to Israel were "doubled" so that, for example, the same Watchtower says:

• "... we have shown the double character of Zion -- Jewish and Christian -- and that same period, from now to 1914 is devoted in God's plan to the restoration of the Old and glorification of the New. . . . The parallels of the two Dispensations seem to indicate that Christ was due as King, or in the kingly office, in the spring of 1878. . . . The Anglo-Turkish treaty is . . . visible evidence that 'he whose right it is' had come. Ezek 21:27.  When the crown was removed the nation fell, why then should not the restoration of the nation be taken as the official presence of the King? . . . "The Times of the Gentiles" extend to 1914 and the heavenly kingdom will not have full sway till then. . . "

In fact, we no longer use those "points and evidence" found in the 1880 Watch Tower. We now reject them as false. Yet, the Insight book refers only to Nebuchadnezzar's dream and experience. The 1880 Watch Tower does not. If it did, it could not have reached the year 1878 as the time when "he whose right it is' had come. Naturally, this same verse had been quoted in the Insight book in support of pointing to 1914, not 1878.

References to the 1880 Watch Tower do not include the page number. The same is true when this same point is made in the book Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy:

• *** dp chap. 15 p. 261 par. 9 The Rival Kings Enter the 20th Century ***   As far back as March 1880, the Watch Tower magazine linked the rule of God’s Kingdom with the ending of “the appointed times of the nations,” or “the times of the Gentiles.” (King James Version)

So if we look it up, we might even get a hint about why there is no direct quote this time:

• [March 1880 Watch Tower, p.2,3]  ". . . [W]e believe the seventh trumpet will continue to sound until the year 1914, which includes, between now and then, the day of wrath and angry nations, which is the period, not only of restoration of the earthly Jerusalem, but of reward to the church, or the up building and glorification of the heavenly Jerusalem"

This is just the opposite of what we believe now. The day of wrath and angry nations would END in 1914, not begin. The restoration of earthly Jerusalem would be complete before the end of the year 1914. We no longer believe any of the prophecies were concerned about earthly Israeli or Palestinian Jerusalem. We no longer believe the church would be resurrected before 1914. In 1880, the primary concern of the Watch Tower was predicting that the "rapture" would occur in 1881. Russell did not even believe that "the church" would be on the earth in 1914.

Notice the words, again, as they are quoted from "The World" (a newspaper that the Society had been paying money):

• “The terrific war outbreak in Europe has fulfilled an extraordinary prophecy. For a quarter of a century past, through preachers and through press, the ‘International Bible Students’ . . . have been proclaiming to the world that the Day of Wrath prophesied in the Bible would dawn in 1914.”

"The World," was a newspaper known for sensationalism to sell papers. It was paid to carry Russell's sermons, and this had become controversial, so at least some of the editors would have known something about Russell. But the quote is absolutely false. Note what the Watch Tower had actually said about the "day of wrath."

• We have no doubt that Zion as used in scripture is double, aside from its being the name of a literal mountain. . . . We believe such prophecies apply primarily to the building up of the old Jerusalem, by restoration, and in a higher sense, to the building up of the New Jerusalem by glorification, and that both will be accomplished in one and the same day, i.e. "the day of wrath," or the 37 years on which we have entered reaching to A.D. 1914. . . . To build up Zion implies a process, and so far as relates to the earthly Jerusalem, includes the restoration of the Jewish nation of Israel according to the flesh, in all its parts; and we believe in its application to the Gospel church, the same must be true. That from 1878 to 1914 is the last half of the last trump, has often been shown, and also that this is the period during which Jerusalem is to be restored. "The last, or seventh trumpet covers the day of wrath... " [italics in original, bolding and underlining highlights added.]

 

The "Day of Wrath" would not "dawn" in 1914. It would "dawn" 37 years earlier and end in 1914. This is, of course, why the Watch Tower had said the following in the  July 15, 1894 issue:

 

• We see no reason for changing the figures- nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe God's dates, not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble.

Imagine the uproar if someone on a forum like this made a claim by misrepresenting the original words of the Watchtower, or if, in the event they could not find a direct quote to make their point, they resorted to the use of another source that made a false statement about our beliefs. Yet, this quote from "The World" gets repeated many times in our publications. It's ironic that we need "the world" to try to build up our reputation so that we can make claims that aren't even true. But that has always been the nature of predictions based on "chronology." Time is it's worst enemy.

[Arauna]

Thanks Allen - sometimes I do use my words carelessly.... must do better... Of course I agree that Daniel still had to ask Jehovah for the meaning...  as it was a cryptic message (can one compare it to a riddle?) .  I found some of the points very informing.  I have also been thinking about the King of the north lately as this must now take place in this time ...  I have re-read some of the scriptures and I am an avid watcher of world events to try and spot where things are going ... and all of us have our own private speculations, I'm sure.

Today's Watchtower was very good in explaining the "lulling of the nations to sleep regarding the end to be suddenly upon them.   At the same, I do see the 3 frogs of revelation 16 (propaganda) very busy at present and it seems that people are being put against each other and talk of violence is becoming second nature to people.  All false religion is gearing up for violence in some way or another... and it is only Jehovah's people who will be determined not to be part of the world and not be tricked into getting involved with its issues which are becoming so polarized.

As you rightly said - Jehovah can read the heart and if we think independently of him we must be careful ..... because our lives depend on being in synchronization with Him....and this is the fallacy of man ..... that we trust ourselves to much and do not wait on Jehovah.  Our patience and waiting attitude is a sign of maturity!

[Arauna]

Ann - if I judged you on everything you said as a teenager I guess you would be red-faced right now.  Our organization was in its infancy when these things were written - yet you always go back to these things to try to prove some points. I have said so many times before that we have moved on since then.... Why repeat the same behavior and hope for different results - unless you want to stay in the same track!!!

You are like someone who has only one  track to one city only..... to find something to criticize you always go back to this....

Also - I clicked on some of your links - it seems you are always going to Wikipedia to get your information.... this is not good as we all are aware that there is some good info there - but it is not always reliable.

[JW Insider]

On 8/30/2016 at 1:31 PM, Arauna said:

For the calculations of the prophecies read the appendix of "What does the bible really teach" and for more on where the witnesses get the dates 607BCE and 1914CE read the insight on the scriptures. The insight on the scriptures also quotes from secular sources and you can go and check out the 'secular sources' by going to any good library or a reliable internet archive/ library.

The Insight book gives a lot more space to the Neo-Babylonian period than any other. This is because our publications put very little specific importance on any chronological dates except 607 BCE and 1914 CE. (455 BCE is also considered specifically important.) We use other dates like 4026 BCE, 2370 BCE, 1513 BCE, 740 BCE, 2 BC, 29 CE, 33 CE and 70 CE, only as reference points for important events, not because those specific dates make a difference. If we consistently used 4006 BCE as the date of creation, 2350 BCE for the flood, 1493 BCE for the law covenant, etc., etc., then we would merely get used to those dates and nothing would change for us doctrinally.

Evidence of this is the number of times that the numbers matching these dates are used in our publications. Here are the number of times the Watchtower has used the following "dates" since as early as 1950, including all Watchtower and book references, as indicated by the 2015 WT LIB CD

• 4026   -- 35 times
• 2370  --  66 times
• 1513 -- 288 times
• 740  --  184  times
• 607 --  1,241 times
• [541 --   54 times]
• 539  --   384 times
• 537  --   609 times
• 455  --   187 times
• [1912 -- 217 times]
• 1914 -- 5,442 times

To see how many of these 1914 (and other) references might just be random page numbers or coincidental uses of the date, we can check similar dates like 1913 (219 times) and 1912 (217 times). At any rate, we can see that 607 and 1914 are the most important dates of all in the Watchtower publications, and this is the same reason that 539 and 537 get higher than usual numbers, too. Note that the unrelated and uneventful 541 is only used 54 times. One might get the impression that the most important reason to include a chronology section in the Insight book is in support of 607.

Since there is not time, space, and I assume, very little interest in seeing me rehash the dozens of problems with the 607 date, I will only summarize. Besides this subject has been handled by others who know a lot more than I do about the subject

I have looked at all the related secular sources that were quoted by the Insight book, however, and these were fascinating and revealing. But again, I'll hold back from getting into details. I'll just mention some of the quotes I found most interesting:

• *** it-1 p. 448 Chronology ***     Bible Chronology and Secular History.   Concern is often expressed over the need to try to “harmonize” or “reconcile” the Biblical account with the chronology found in ancient secular records

This is a true statement in general. And sometimes secular history and chronology is worthless, even purposely inaccurate. Although in the study of 587 vs 607, both of these dates are SECULAR DATES, just like 539. Yet one of them is a better match to harmonize with both the secular and the Biblical records, and that is 587 BCE, not 607 (for the destruction of Jerusalem). I've given some of the Biblical reasons elsewhere, so I won't repeat them. In fact there is so much evidence for this date, and it harmonizes so well with the Biblical history, that it's one of those cases where we would normally use it to show how accurate the Bible account is, just as we would do for archaeological finds supporting the fall of Jericho, or Jeremiah's scribe, Baruch, etc. This is probably the only case where the Bible and secular archaeology and chronology harmonize with so much evidence where we spend our time denigrating the secular evidence instead of using it to promote faith in the Bible's accuracy.

And sadly, we can't make good use of it, because we have an inherited tradition that requires us to dismiss literally THOUSANDS of pieces of evidence. I know it sounds harsh, but our methods of dismissal are often so ridiculous that we get caught by readers who have no interest one way or another in the "controversy" but who immediately notice what must appear to be the same as "dishonesty." They probably don't realize that our willingness to grasp at straws and specious reasoning is because it has been set up as a battle between the Bible's accuracy and secular history. Most Witnesses have never looked at the details because when we do, we can no longer honestly see it in that same light. It becomes a simple matter of trying to maintain a tradition that won't fit the Bible evidence, and secondarily, won't fit the secular evidence either, because both sources agree in this case. 

• *** it-1 pp. 448-449 Chronology ***  What is known from secular sources of these ancient nations has been laboriously pieced together from bits of information obtained from monuments and tablets or from the later writings of the so-called classical historiographers of the Greek and Roman period. While archaeologists have recovered tens of thousands of clay tablets bearing Assyro-Babylonian cuneiform inscriptions, as well as large numbers of papyrus scrolls from Egypt, the vast majority of these are religious texts or business documents consisting of contracts, bills of sale, deeds, and similar matter. The considerably smaller number of historical writings of the pagan nations, preserved either in the form of tablets, cylinders, steles, or monumental inscriptions, consist chiefly of material glorifying their emperors and recounting their military campaigns in grandiose terms.

The highlighted sentence leaves out the fact that these tens of thousands of clay tablets from the era of the Neo-Babylonian period in question are DATED documents. They give us a complete picture of the period of Neo-Babylonian kings from before Nebuchadnezzar until after Cyrus. On average, there are over 100 documents for each and every year. The Watchtower publications claim that there must be 20 years not represented, in order for 607 to be right and 587 to be wrong. But we have no idea what years would be missing. The claim of 20 "missing years" is worthless, however, because we also have documents for the beginning and ending years of each of the kings, along with documents that cut across the time from one king to the next. You can even figure out, not just the year, but exactly which month most of the kings died and the next king took over. And the "banking" documents also provide a line of "bank presidents" that perfectly interlocks and is matched against the same kings of Babylon as an independent method of double-checking them. In addition, there are other cylinders, tablets, astronomical diaries and contemporary inscriptions that independently confirm the accuracy of the secular banking and contract records. And then there is the fact that "king lists" were kept for many years throughout this era so that one could accurately point to specific dates across periods of hundreds of years. This would be the only way that the astronomers and astrologers could have learned to predict eclipses, and planetary movements, and certain solar/lunar cycles. These lists had to be kept accurately or else those attempts would have failed. Yet, they were very successful -- especially through this Neo-Babylonian period. And the most well-known of those "king lists" -- even the ones repeated and copied and known from hundreds of years later -- are now found to exactly match the more recently discovered tablets that confirm them.

Most of the Chronology article in Insight is geared toward dismissing the accuracy of the secular documents, especially those related to the Neo-Babylonian period. This is of course a necessary point to try to dismiss the fact that all of the evidence points to 587 and none of it points to 607. Yet, it is not even necessary to discuss these various issues because it doesn't matter. The Watchtower accepts these same sources, because otherwise we could not get to the 539 accepted secular date which is then used as a key to create the 607 date from a specious interpretation (which is therefore both non-secular, and non-Biblical). Everything said, which is intended to dismiss and denigrate the record for 587, is exactly the same evidence that would force the Watchtower publications to dismiss the 539 date. But the 539 date is still accepted by the Watchtower publications, and therefore all the talk against the secular dating issues and problems are meaningless to the argument. Here's an example:

• *** it-1 pp. 449-450 Chronology ***   Anyone approaching the study of ancient history for the first time must be impressed by the positive way modern historians date events which took place thousands of years ago. In the course of further study this wonder will, if anything, increase. For as we examine the sources of ancient history we see how scanty, inaccurate, or downright false, the records were even at the time they were first written. And poor as they originally were, they are poorer still as they have come down to us: half destroyed by the tooth of time or by the carelessness and rough usage of men.” He further describes the framework of chronological history as “a purely hypothetical structure, and one which threatens to come apart at every joint.”—The Secret of the Hittites, 1956, pp. 133, 134.

What is left out of the Insight book here is the fact that even the writers who make such statements about portions of ancient historical records, are well aware -- and admit -- that the Neo-Babylonian period is in a completely different category. It's not clear, therefore, that the writers of the Insight book really wanted you to look up the original sources they used for some of these quotes. Their own sources would have undermined the point that was being made by using very selective quotes that avoided the admission that we have excellent documentation and evidence for period of time that we are supposed to question.

More than that, however, the primary point of the above quote from 1956, is to dismiss the "positive way" that dates are presented as if unquestioned and unquestionable. But most historical books actually admit where such dates are questionable. The Watchtower publications are quite different, however, in that they are one of the worst offenders in the use of dates (like 607 BCE) that never include a caveat that this date is questioned, questionable, and that there is no secular or Biblical evidence for the date. Most Witnesses are not aware that we also arbitrarily add 20 years to the dates of the Judean and Israelite kings without explaining that we do this in order for 1914 to work.

It's easy to understand why some of the comments in response to the problems of 607 and 1914 will focus on the idea of "independent thinking" and "ego" or "pride." It's sad, but there isn't a lot I can do about that and still give what I believe is a clear defense of the Bible. I think we have a responsibility to give a defense of our faith and hope, and for me, this is part of it. I honestly believe that we inherited the whole idea of our chronology from the independent thinking of Nelson Barbour and some of the prior chronologists who came out of the Millerite Second Advent movement (primarily). This doesn't mean that Russell was a Second Adventist, by the way, but this particular influence did come from them, and Russell readily admitted that it ultimately came from "Father Miller" (which is how Russell sometimes published William Miller's name in the Watch Tower.)

Some of the issues related to false claims and honesty also give me the impression that pride is bound up in the continual repetition of some of the claims that have been "called out" and reported back to the Watchtower as false as early as the 1950's and 1960's. "COJ" was not the first person to point out the flaws and false claims in our chronology doctrines. 

[Ann O'Maly]

21 hours ago, Arauna said:

Ann - if I judged you on everything you said as a teenager I guess you would be red-faced right now.  Our organization was in its infancy when these things were written - yet you always go back to these things to try to prove some points. I have said so many times before that we have moved on since then.... Why repeat the same behavior and hope for different results - unless you want to stay in the same track!!!

You are like someone who has only one  track to one city only..... to find something to criticize you always go back to this....

Also - I clicked on some of your links - it seems you are always going to Wikipedia to get your information.... this is not good as we all are aware that there is some good info there - but it is not always reliable.

Arauna, in the whole of this thread, I have linked to Wikipedia only once and it was for Allen's edification. 

I also haven't cited an old Watchtower publication in ages - the last ones were part of an exchange with Allen who was disputing some history about the organization's early teachings.

As to the most recent posts here, I've been too busy to really catch up.

So I have no idea what you mean about 'teenagers' and 'infant organizations' and 'moving on' and my 'same behavior,' etc.