ALL aspects of 1914 doctrine are now problematic from a Scriptural point of view

[TrueTomHarley]

5 hours ago, Arauna said:

I think the shouting match that Paulus had with Barnabas is a good reason for us to not expect people to be perfect and where ever people are - imperfection is sure to follow - and there is always that EGO to a stronger or lesser degree.

A local brother with a flair for dramatization used to tell of a first century publisher unknowingly calling on a disgruntled former member. 

"You call yourselves Christlike!" the latter accused. "I was there at that meeting between Paulus and Barnabas. You see those two kids over there? They do not fight like I saw your two 'leaders' fight!" 

[Ann O'Maly]

13 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

 

Will you agree that there is such a person called Belibni? Would you agree that this subking was given his title by “Sennacherib”?  Will you agree that he is one of Merodach-Baladan’s grandson?

 

There were many persons called 'Belibni.' But, regarding the 'Belibni' who was made Sennacherib's puppet king over Babylon in 703 BCE, where do you get that he was Merodach-Baladan's grandson, and where do get that he was Nebuchadnezzar I's son? Are you suggesting now that Nebuchadnezzar I was Merodach-Baladan's son? 

[bruceq]

    I am so sorry insider that you have been sour and bitter because of the experience of imperfect men. But this is still Jehovah's Organization and Jesus is the head of the Congregation and that is why we must believe EVERYTHING Jesus as head teaches us including the teachings on 1914 and EVERYTHING else. You must have faith that Jesus is head and not you or any man or woman. If Jehovah's Witnesses is the True Religion then Jesus is head and whatever teaching he allows is truth until HE tells us otherwise. People in Christendom pick and choose what to believe from their human clergy. We cannot just pick and choose weather to believe certain doctrines from our head Christ. He requires exclusive loyalty and devotion not a picky person who thinks they know more than our head Jesus. John 6:68

[Ann O'Maly]

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

BCE - The Greeks figured time by means of four-year periods called Olympiads, starting from the first Olympiad, calculated as beginning in 776 B.C.E.

How was it calculated that the beginning of the Olympiads correspond to 776 BCE?

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

Additionally, they often identified specific years by referring to the term of office of some particular official. More accurate and more sources than the Babylonian chronology. However, evidence will be stronger if one uses  BOTH  - not just one set of evidences!

539 BCE is the most accurate date because not only do the Babylonian sources agree but also when one takes the death of Cyrus (confirmed at 530 BCE from many sources.  + 9 years rule -   gives one 539 BCE for fall of Babylon. (battle of Opis given in same year.... so there are many additional  'indications' that this date is good......

Yes, the regnal years are part of the calculation. But their timelines are hanging mid-air, so-to-speak. So how does one nail down a particular regnal year to a particular BCE year? How is it confirmed Nabonidus' 17th regnal year corresponds to the year 539 BCE?

If only there was some kind of universal clock to be able to synchronize these different floating chronologies. Do you have any ideas on where such a 'clock' could be found and how these two loose ends can be fixed together?

[Ann O'Maly]

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

Don't know who wrote the Wikipedia article about David Rohl you are quoting but it is not accurate.  Rohl's dates are closer to the dates given by the Witnesses.  Most atheists say there is no evidence of the exodus in the bible.  Rohl is of the contention that they are looking in the wrong time-line for it because the evidence is there!   Many of these contentious Egyptian chronologists (Rohl included) say the ancient Egyptian history is out by 200 years and closer to the time of Nebuchadnezzar they are out by 20 years. 

As I said before, Rohl and James both agree with the established neo-Babylonian time-line, which is the one relevant to the 1914 calculation: That means they agree with 605 BCE for the accession of Nebuchadnezzar II and 587 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem.

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

Wouldn’t that be like the kettle calling the pea black, since the same can be attributed to someone maligning others with imperfection with their own bitter criticism?

So, who should be sorry then! The imperfect men or the imperfect MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!

Evil deeds have no excuses!

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, bruceq said:

I am so sorry insider that you have been sour and bitter because of the experience of imperfect men.

I am so sorry @bruceq if you think such experiences would need turn someone sour and bitter. I am happy for all the experiences I've had in the organization, and a few eye-opening experiences can enhance our appreciation. A look at our history might cause some embarrassment now and then, but look what Jehovah has been able to accomplish. We look at the history of God's people in the Scriptures the same way. There is no reason for responding the way you describe. Such things are easily dismissed by those who focus on the more important things. There were legalistic men leading the Jewish religion in Jesus' day, and they bound heavy burdens on people, telling them that they must follow them. But Jesus said to go ahead and do whatever they tell you to do.

• (Matthew 23:3-4) 3 Therefore, all the things they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds, for they say but they do not practice what they say. 4 They bind up heavy loads and put them on the shoulders of men, . . .

We don't "grouse" about such burdens but come to love and respect all our brothers, because none of us expect perfection from each other. Besides, such burdens are to be considered as "nothing" among the true Christian congregation. Activity properly motivated is a joy. Our load is light and we find daily refreshment in spiritual things.

Do you ever see someone read about David and Uriah, and say, "Oh No! Now I'm bitter and sour"? Instead it makes us all the more aware that Jehovah can allow grave imperfections and still love us, and all the injustice that goes on in this life is easily made up for in Jehovah's timetable. Anything happening to us now can be overcome with Jehovah's help. Everything that ever happened to us, happened to us in the past. We should not be so self-centered as to think that we need to carry issues from the past and pretend that we still need to carry them today.

• (Matthew 6:34) . . .So, never be anxious about the next day, for the next day will have its own anxieties. Sufficient for each day is its own badness.

We can certainly LEARN from past problems, and we should. All things can be for our instruction and discipline. If we see lessons in these experiences, we can help others learn from those experiences and lessons.

On your points about doctrine, well that is just a philosophy that works for you. There are certain traditions that are strongly entrenched, and some of these can make the word of God invalid. If you lived in a congregation in the first century and the the body of elders taught that the resurrection had already occurred, you really think you would be obligated to believe it, just because the Bible said that you must be obedient to those taking the lead among you? Following the lead referred to imitating the faith of those whose examples strengthened faith. It meant following the instructions of those who took the lead in good works. When it comes to doctrine, we are required to use our powers of reason, we are required to test it, we are required to question, if we wish to be noble-minded. We have the Bible itself to speak in agreement about, not someone's specific or current interpretation. One of the reasons I bring up past issues with doctrines is so that we can remember the lessons learned. For example, you can replace the date 1914 with the date 1925, since the Governing Body taught that as an undeniable truth, even more sure than 1914. During those years are you really saying it was your obligation to believe and teach and promote 1925, or was it your obligation to "make sure of all things"?

I'm really interested in your answer to that question. Are you willing to respond to it?

 

[bruceq]

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I am so sorry @bruceq if you think such experiences would need turn someone sour and bitter.

I dont and I didnt say that. I try look for good in people not dwell on mistakes.

[bruceq]

39 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

. There were legalistic men leading the Jewish religion in Jesus' day, and they bound heavy burdens on people, telling them that they must follow them. But Jesus said to go ahead and do whatever they tell you to do.

• (Matthew 23:3-4) 3 Therefore, all the things they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds, for they say but they do not practice what they say. 4 They bind up heavy loads and put them on the shoulders of men, . . .

We don't "grouse" about such burdens but come to love and respect all our brothers, because none of us expect perfection from each other. Besides, such burdens are to be considered as "nothing" among the true Christian congregation. Activity properly motivated is a joy. Our load is light and we find daily refreshment in spiritual things.

 

Agree Jesus is head of the Christian  Congregation, not the Jewish one who killed him.

[bruceq]

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

, . . .

On your points about doctrine, well that is just a philosophy that works for you. There are certain traditions that are strongly entrenched, and some of these can make the word of God invalid. If you lived in a congregation in the first century and the the body of elders taught that the resurrection had already occurred, you really think you would be obligated to believe it, just because the Bible said that you must be obedient to those taking the lead among you?

 

Of course since Jesus is the head of the Congregation not you or any of the brothers back then. Try to look at it spritually instead of physical.

[bruceq]

23 hours ago, JW Insider said:

When it comes to doctrine, we are required to use our powers of reason, we are required to test it, we are required to question, if we wish to be noble-minded. We have the Bible itself to speak in agreement about, not someone's specific or current interpretation.

If Jehovah's Witnesses is the true religion then their teachings are true since Jesus is the head of those teachings, not ANY human. Noble - minded means being humble. We should humbly accept that Jesus is in control of the Chariot. When someone starts to learn the "elementary things" {such as 1914] they ask questions to find out why things are TRUE not to ask them in a critical way - that is a sign of elementary thinking - such a person is not humble and is not attracted to the Truth that sets one free from the haughty world of criticism..

Why do you call yourself jw "insider". Don't you think many may take that as a rather haughty name that you have something others do not or as you put it in one of your posts " I have special interpretation".{Col. 2:18,19}.  Quote is :"And I could even defend my special interpretation" taken from thread : 

Matthew 24. Is the INVISIBLE PAROUSIA doctrine based on less likely, special definitions of SIGN, PAROUSIA, CONCLUSION, LIGHTNING, GENERATION, and "GENTILE TIMES"?

 

  On 8/19/2017 at 10:01 AM, JW Insider said:

 

And I could even defend my special interpretation

And where does your "special interpretation" come from? 

[bruceq]

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

 One of the reasons I bring up past issues with doctrines is so that we can remember the lessons learned. For example, you can replace the date 1914 with the date 1925, since the Governing Body taught that as an undeniable truth, even more sure than 1914. During those years are you really saying it was your obligation to believe and teach and promote 1925, or was it your obligation to "make sure of all things"?

I'm really interested in your answer to that question. Are you willing to respond to it?

 

I am willing to obey my LORD and Master Jesus who is the head of the Congregation and all teachings therefore come from him not any man. Imagine picking and choosing what to believe based on your high-minded "make sure that Jesus is right attitude. Of course Jesus is right IF you are a true Christian. https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/which-religion-is-true/  No wonder some left Jesus when he said to eat his flesh and blood. It is not by my authority to question truth. Jehovah has given all authority to Jesus not any man, internet blogger or anyone else. Think spiritual nor physical.(1Co 12:27; Eph 4:15, 16; Col 2:18, 19