Jump to content
The World News Media

Gnosis Pithos

Member
  • Posts

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Confused
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to James Thomas Rook Jr. in ALL aspects of 1914 doctrine are now problematic from a Scriptural point of view   
    And worst of all, assuming honest mistakes (Hahahahahaa),
    there is NEVER an apology ... just MORE clouds, MORE smoke, and mirrors.
    ... and of course ... blaming the uninvolved.
  2. Like
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to TrueTomHarley in Matthew 24. Is the INVISIBLE PAROUSIA doctrine based on less likely, special definitions of SIGN, PAROUSIA, CONCLUSION, LIGHTNING, GENERATION, and "GENTILE TIMES"?   
    Yes. 
    And the apostle Peter declares that “the end of all things has drawn close.” (1 Peter 4:7) When the Jewish system of things effectively ends with the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, that is not the end he had in mind. Nevertheless, he probably drops to his knees and thanks God that he was not among those at the Jerusalem Hyatt for celebrations just then. He doesn’t grouse about being misled by whomever that 70 CE was not the big one. It was big enough. When they tell him they were just tacking, he doesn't complain about it.
  3. Like
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to Arauna in Matthew 24. Is the INVISIBLE PAROUSIA doctrine based on less likely, special definitions of SIGN, PAROUSIA, CONCLUSION, LIGHTNING, GENERATION, and "GENTILE TIMES"?   
    Some people here think we are not worthy 'sparring' partners.  I studied all this years ago- I can give you the date of the Fall of Nineveh 612 BCE after the fall of Ashur without looking it up on the internet.
    As I said before, the secular dates are not set in stone because the Assyrian dates are set to correlate with Egyptian dates. The dynasty of Babylon FOLLOWED the Assyrian kings who controlled the region before the Babylonians and hence the Babylonian dates have to follow on the Assyrian dates .....and their dates are not 100% accurate - it is only Archeologist opinions. ..... so people on this forum  are continually referring to dates that are in line with current secular thought which are NOT 100% accurate no matter how hard you insist on it.
    If you are an engineer and you look for the root cause of the problem one does not go searching around the middle - one works back from where the problem started.  I satisfied myself a long time ago that the organization has it right (give a year or two)...... because the ULTIMATE proof after all is in the signs on the ground - in 1914.  NO ONE CAN SPAR ABOUT A BETTER DATE THAN 1914 ON THE GROUND!  So what is the use of 'sparring' about any other SECULAR dates for the fall of Babylon when it brings you to a date in our time when NOTHING significant happened on the ground after 1914, until WW2 - and WW2 was a continuation of what happened in WW1.
    It is just an exercise of self gratification and having someone to 'spar' with because some people spar with the 'slave' all the time!
    The Babylonians went into exile for 70 years because they did not observe the Sabbath years in which the land was to lay fallow - for no other reasons- we all know that.
     
  4. Haha
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to Anna in Governing Body: Does it show loyalty or disloyalty to question the GB?   
    This is getting scary. Now Allen Smith is the VIRGINIAN!!!!
  5. Downvote
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to James Thomas Rook Jr. in Matthew 24. Is the INVISIBLE PAROUSIA doctrine based on less likely, special definitions of SIGN, PAROUSIA, CONCLUSION, LIGHTNING, GENERATION, and "GENTILE TIMES"?   
    You cannot imagine how liberating it is to watch with disinterest as a pontificate piles sticks around your ankles to burn you at the stake, and not be combustible.
  6. Confused
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to Anna in Matthew 24. Is the INVISIBLE PAROUSIA doctrine based on less likely, special definitions of SIGN, PAROUSIA, CONCLUSION, LIGHTNING, GENERATION, and "GENTILE TIMES"?   
    But be careful you don't get worn down, because Allen Smith and several of his alter egos will find scriptures that condemn this very thing, and beat you over the head with them
  7. Confused
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to James Thomas Rook Jr. in Matthew 24. Is the INVISIBLE PAROUSIA doctrine based on less likely, special definitions of SIGN, PAROUSIA, CONCLUSION, LIGHTNING, GENERATION, and "GENTILE TIMES"?   
    I have tried to follow this thread from beginning to end ... but I am 70 now, and very tired of bickering over the meaning of Nebuchadnezzar's image  toes, etc.
    If I sat down and wrote out EVERYTHING that we need do to please God, and achieve salvation through Christ, I strongly suspect I could get it ALL on two pages.  Everything else would be background reading ... and WOULD NOT MATTER AT ALL.
    I have been beaten up by pontificating experts for over 50 YEARS, and I in my Barbarian perceptions have been right MORE than the "pontiffs" ... by a considerable margin. 
    I am sick to my very soul of having to carry around these burdensome bags of sand, and hear MILLIONS of words about Justice, and love, and MERCY ... and see NONE of it practiced ... only the machinations of policy wonks.
    I quit  the best job I ever had, in the Congo, in 1974, to be home with my parents, and my brother and two sisters when Armageddon was supposed to occur in 1975. 
    I did not believe it, but talks at Circuit and District Assemblies, Special Talks at the Kingdom Halls, and at Civic Centers in Virginia, and everyone I knew KNOWING that it would all be over by 1975, wore me down.  I began to reason ... "How could I be right, when EVERYONE else is proclaiming the END of this System in 1975?".
    I don't care about how many Angels can dance on the head of a pin .... ANYMORE
    I am going to live my life the best I know how, and let the theorists consume each other.
    If I am wrong .... OF COURSE I will have to "pay the price"
    If "they" are wrong .. . I STILL have to "pay the price", and they pay NO PRICE WHATSOEVER.
    But.. please,  carry on ... this thread IS interesting reading .... perhaps because I am a compulsive reader.
  8. Confused
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to Anna in Governing Body: Does it show loyalty or disloyalty to question the GB?   
    And yet there have been mistakes. This cannot be because GOD gave wrong insight can it? So it must be that GOD gives holy spirit, but it is up to the individual whether he actually follows it or not to get the correct insight!
  9. Confused
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to Anna in Governing Body: Does it show loyalty or disloyalty to question the GB?   
    I'm afraid JWI will find it difficult to find a good enough "sparring partner" who has enough knowledge on the subject to be able to stick to the issue at hand without resorting to attacks on the person's intentions instead of sticking to the subject. Facts and truth are facts and truth no matter who presents it. If we are not able to defend our view in a scholarly and scientific way, presenting counter evidence using available archeological material, then why even get involved in a discussion such as this?  I know I can't. I just don't have enough time to devote to research that is necessary to be able to argue with anything that JWI has touched on regarding the secular aspect relating to Bible chronology. In fact I don't even have much time to research the scriptures pertaining to this subject, never mind Babylonian astronomical diaries and such.  But I have been able to see some valid scriptural arguments being presented by JWI and I think it's OK to say "well, your reasoning might just be right". Is it going to change anything about how I view Jehovah, Jesus or our brotherhood? NO.
    I am very well aware that casting doubts on 1914 automatically disqualifies 1919 and the appointment of the faithful slave. I am very well aware that a different interpretation regarding parousia, the sign, Generation etc. will automatically call into question whether we are really living in the last days. So what? I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist over it. Does that change our commission to preach? It shouldn't because aren't we all hoping that Jehovah is going to step in and bring relief to mankind, whenever that may be? To preach about God's Kingdom which will do just that, it is our commission, and we don't stop until the Kingdom is ruling over the earth. Should any of this change our attitude and view of those who are in "charge" and call themselves the faithful slave? I don't see why it should. Someone has to be in charge, we can't all be chiefs. So far, this arrangement has worked pretty well. There are many more arguments I could go into, but I don't think that's necessary. All I know is that those who have left Jehovah's organization, (or if you just want to call it Jehovah's Witnesses) and still believe in God, they have reverted back/or adopted most of Christendoms ideas. That tells me a lot and enough to convince me that we are the true religion, with all our flaws and imperfections.
  10. Confused
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to Anna in Governing Body: Does it show loyalty or disloyalty to question the GB?   
    In order to be able to answer that I would have to know what you mean by "They get there “direction” from God himself". Do you mean that Jehovah directly communicates with them through some supernatural way, or that they get their direction from His own word, the Bible? If it's the latter, then all true Christians get their direction from that source.
  11. Downvote
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to James Thomas Rook Jr. in LIVE BLOG: Jehovah's Witnesses Appeal Russian Supreme Court Ruling   
    My observations of reality the way reality REALLY IS may be callous, but today with the final appeal of the Russian Federation Supreme Court ... they proved to be accurate.
    ... being right covers a multitude of sins .... but only among reality based, rational people.
    As a man who has never claimed to be anything but a self-assessed Barbarian, with no spiritual qualifications whatsoever ... your quoting that Scripture seems to have absolutely no relevance whatsoever to anything I have ever stated.
    If you would please, correct me with a (or some) specific example(s) of a teaching of God's Spirit that I have NOT accepted.
    It should be clear and unambiguous, and REAL.
    Opinion is  ... um ... irrelevant.
     
  12. Sad
    Gnosis Pithos reacted to David Normand in Does the Bible Condemn Gambling? – ♠️♣️♥️♦️?♦️♥️♣️♠️   
    This is not true. Apparently somebody was sleeping at the latest regional convention when they specifically stated that there is nothing wrong with going to a medical professional for mental problems. They explicitly stated that some people have physical problems due to imperfection and seeding medical help is appropriate. 
×
×
  • 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.