Pudgy

Of course 1866 was important in the defeat of the Confederate States of America.
What significance does that have in Bible prophesy?
Nothing whatsoever.

Of course 1866 was important in the defeat of the Confederate States of America.
What significance does that have in Bible prophesy?
Nothing whatsoever.

AND, while we wait for the New System, instead of paying some Sky Pilot good money for fake news, use that same money to buy pork chops, rub them on your clothes, lay flat on the floor, and have someone pour onto you a box full of puppies.
…….. close enough.

True. I used your number. Makes me wonder what date you thought your number would lead you? You might be able to see your mistake for yourself if you could answer that. Where did you think your 653 date would lead? 
 
It just means that either you can't see it yet, or if you can, you prefer to pretend that you can't see it so that you don't have to admit a mistake. You would probably get a better understanding of Brown's theory if you would try to answer any of the questions that have been raised. For example, try these three questions that can now be put in a simple YES or NO format:
1. Did John A Brown EVER say that the Gentile Times were of a length different from 1,260? Yes or No. 2. Did John A Brown EVER say that the Gentile Times were 2,520 years in length? Yes or No. 3. Did John A Brown EVER say that the Gentile Times would end in 1917? Yes or No. If you think the answer is YES to any question, then simply quote the reference.
I suspect that you know the answer but will dodge the question and, if past is prologue, you might even claim that I'm the one dodging the question. Still, they are simple questions, and if you can't or won't answer, people can just make a note of that and move on. Perhaps more serious persons would be interested in the topic.

Not sure, but this kind of reasoning remember me to another person very tidy [not sure if this is a correct word] you used to have long talks with him

Yes. I don't think anyone else (who has watched multiple-page discussions with him) really doubts that they know him from previous accounts. But not me.  I won't make a big deal about that any more. I told him I wouldn't. He has just as much right to post as anyone, under whatever account name he chooses. It's not like he's really fooling anyone anyway.

I have a very simple test to determine whether or not Moise Racette’s pseudo analysis is correct or not.
I just look out the window.
Reality is what it is.
…. and the fact remains that everyone in the history of the human race that is trying to interpret these prophecies has been wrong, and there’s no exception.
 

I have a very simple test to determine whether or not Moise Racette’s pseudo analysis is correct or not.
I just look out the window.
Reality is what it is.
…. and the fact remains that everyone in the history of the human race that is trying to interpret these prophecies has been wrong, and there’s no exception.
 

I have a very simple test to determine whether or not Moise Racette’s pseudo analysis is correct or not.
I just look out the window.
Reality is what it is.
…. and the fact remains that everyone in the history of the human race that is trying to interpret these prophecies has been wrong, and there’s no exception.
 

"That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach".
Aldous Huxley

More or less what I expected you to say based on past experience in this type of a discussion. Reminds me of a scene from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnie_the_Pooh_and_the_Blustery_Day
OK, if there's a 1 to 2 year "play" then why do you prefer 1865 then? Are you able to answer that question, at least?
Why would this be about the United States?
What game?

42

The points  I get from all of this discussion is that in the last two millennium, EVERYONE HAS ALWAYS BEEN WRONG.
And there have been NO exceptions.

It should be since it was John Aquila Brown that talked about the gentile times. Therefore, the abolitionist John Brown has no relevance in prophecy, other than smearing the name of God. So, yes! its funny.

Yep. That's a big part of the point I was hoping to make.
J A Brown was likely a strong influence directly or indirectly on William Miller who accepted the 1844 date. Miller was very influential on Nelson Barbour who had been a Second Adventist follower of Miller, and Barbour was the one who added 1873 and 1914 to Miller's mix, similar to how J A Brown had previously added 1873 and 1917. And Barbour was obviously very influential on C T Russell who admits that he learned his chronology from Barbour. And of course, Rutherford and Franz learned it from Russell. 
J A Brown is therefore clearly a part of our own JW history. Which reminds me:
George Santayana: “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Karl Marx: "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce." (Romans 15:3, 4) . . .“The reproaches of those reproaching you have fallen upon me.” 4 For all the things that were written beforehand were written for our instruction,. . .

The points  I get from all of this discussion is that in the last two millennium, EVERYONE HAS ALWAYS BEEN WRONG.
And there have been NO exceptions.

The points  I get from all of this discussion is that in the last two millennium, EVERYONE HAS ALWAYS BEEN WRONG.
And there have been NO exceptions.

See?

Why? What happened in 1866?
 
2520 - 604 (+1) = 1917
2520 - 653 (+1) = 1866

Yes, you make an erred assumption in behave of my post. I never indicated John A Brown mentioned 1914CE. His understanding was on the gentile times. I mentioned 1914CE as a perceived understanding to the end of the gentile times, which is 1914CE. So, me mentioning John A Brown and 1914CE is inconsequential to your post.
If you are to play with words, play with them correctly, thanks. 
Also, why would anyone want to discuss how people that deny with impunity 1914CE here, when they will never be convinced nor will they ever convince others of that denial.

Although J A Brown did mention 1917CE, which is more inline with the Jewish perception of Prophecy with the Balfour Declaration. 
Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during the First World War
So, anyone viewing the prophetic signs "correctly" can go either or.
From the rise of the four monarchies, commencing 604 A.C., to their final dissolution, there will be a grand week of years, or 2520 years, and will terminate, January 1, 1917.
How he arrived at, 1917 is to be considered. It should have started in 653AC.
 

Not nearly as interesting as Bullwinkle the Moose pulling a rinocerus out of a hat, but then again, it was the wrong hat.

There is nothing good that can be said about the abolitionist John Brown. He profaned the name of God and used his misunderstanding of scripture to justify his murderous rampage.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/63389806-john-brown
That doesn't mean he was wrong about 1914CE

Now that's funny!!

If you knew the results of experiments, they would not be experiments!