Dmitar

If that's true, then one generation heard Jesus in 33 CE and another generation saw the destruction 37 years later in 70 CE. So you are speaking of two generations in the space of 37 years. This could mean you are thinking of each average generation as short as 18.5 years each, but probably longer, I'm guessing. (18.5+18.5=37)
You might have a point, since there is evidence for a Jewish practice near that time period that suggested 18 years of age for the husband and as young as 13 for the wife.
Marriage took place at a young age for the ancient Jews. Most rabbis proposed 18 as the most appropriate age for men to be married, but it wasn’t uncommon for them to be younger, especially in times of peace. Young women were married almost as soon as they were physically ready, approximately age 13.  http://blog.adw.org/2017/03/marriage-family-time-jesus/
Without birth control, the first child would probably be born when the husband turned 19 and the wife turned 14, giving birth to the next generation. (Oh look, the birth of something around 19&14. That could be significant. Maybe they would have 6 o' 7 kids, too.)
But if each generation could be under 20 years, this would mean there have now been, not TWO, but FIVE generations between 1914 and 2021. (107/20=5.35+) And counting from 1914 and adding Noah's 120 years would be SIX generations, at that rate.
Exactly!! Excellent point!

As that was fictional sage of the ages, Yoda once said, “There is no try, there is only do“.
……. guessing about this, and guessing about that and extrapolating fantasies galore is certainly trying, but it’s better to say “I do not know“ and leave it at that then to be continuously committed to an agenda of being 100% wrong, 100% of the time ……  which is what we have going on now by any rational determination.
People from one end of the Earth to the other end of the Earth, and at least for the last 6000 years or so I’ve had one opinion about how long a generation is. It’s about 100 years and they don’t overlap.
This is reflected in The actuarial tables of  every insurance company in existence, who will insure your life based on the idea that you will be dead in 100 years, with very very few exceptions.  Many will actually pay you the proceeds of your life insurance policy at age 100, because theoretically you are dead  
 That’s the standard definition of a generation and everybody on Earth that’s not of the Governing Body or their adherents knows this to be true, and has known it to be true for the past 6000 years, or so.
You add that to Jesus words to his disciples, and what was in his mind and what was in their mind and you get the same conclusion.
it is very clear that in a horse race, one of the horses is going to win, and although we don’t know which one, the best bet on the strongest or the fastest one.
The rest is up to pure dumb luck.
Were you absolutely refuse to do that you are stuck in a position of entering a cow in a horse race.
1.)  I  know everybody in your little tribe agrees the cow is a racehorse……… but It’s really not.
2.). I know everybody in your little tribe agrees that the  cow is a racehorse……… but It’s really not.
It is an agenda driven fantasy.
 

I don't understand how we could be living together with people we aren't living together with.
If we are dead, and they haven't even been born, how are we "living together?"

*** ka chap. 11 pp. 209-210 par. 55 “Here Is the Bridegroom!” ***
In the year 1943 the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society published the book “The Truth Shall Make You Free.” In its chapter 11, entitled “The Count of Time,” it did away with the insertion of 100 years into the period of the Judges and went according to the oldest and most authentic reading of Acts 13:20, and accepted the spelled-out numbers of the Hebrew Scriptures. This moved forward the end of six thousand years of man’s existence into the decade of the 1970’s. Naturally this did away with the year 1874 C.E. as the date of return of the Lord Jesus Christ and the beginning of his invisible presence or parousia.
 

Where can I find this?

..... how about $2,000?
If I lose, I will pay you in Pudgycoin!, the Digital Currency preferred by the two-dimensional.
If you lose, as you are three dimensional,  U.S. Dollars will be just fine!
I present as evidence.... my photo.

.... and I am sure, BR,  that EVERYBODY ..... without a single exception, will get what they deserve at Armageddon.
But Jehovah is not going to do it because your opinions were slighted on this forum.

As usual BroRando, you have COMPLETELY misunderstood what I said .... BECAUSE ... you never read anything in context, and it appears you are completely unfamiliar with the Society's publication "The Divine Name".  THAT was the context you ignored.
When that happens you draw conclusions that get MORE wrong as the conversation goes on, as the error is not just additive, but multiplied.
.... please go back and re-read what I, and Witness  actually said, instead of your current screwed up perception of what we actually did say.
That is why in the 7th grade they used to teach how to diagram sentences .... a highly valuable tool for determining what a statement is REALLY saying.
Because you got what Witness' statement completely wrong, I am a white Supremacist?
Gimme a break!
( an aside to the 4th wall: Of the 9 billion people on this Earth, not a single one is equal to anyone else ... and that's a fact!)
Whether someone accepts or denies the Holocaust is COMPLETELY irrelevant to accepting or denying the letter J, or other silly premises.
 

ZERO relevance!

You know, I am just a cartoon dog, two dimensional, but your comment BroRando, is a clear example of a one dimensional comment that has absolutely ZERO relevance to what Witness mentioned in the "Divine Name" brochure.
You may as well have stated "Entrails in the middle of the highway can't speak!".

So much for my own clandestine smear operations! I will have to better train my own secretive forces—the CTTHIA.
Okay okay, so I have not yet read Volume I either.
I’ve read that the TV series is instantly soul-draining, that watching it destroys all vestige of humanity. I can’t imagine how you can watch some things and then just go about your daily life mentally unharmed. 
Or am I being old-fartish? I read one shocking review of the show from a source not known for being fuddy-daddy, but after that, nothing but admiration for how well Netflix is doing with its hit series..
“We know what is best for you” and therefore it is democracy? The fact that proclamation of the good news usually goes down in the crossfire of these guys makes this sort of “democracy” unpopular with many, though if it brings material prosperity, it may well be the bees knees in an irreligious world. It’s challenging enough when the Christian organization presents itself as a little too smothering for my preference, let alone a government that does consider itself master of your faith and does not confine itself to exhortation.
As Massimo Introvigne put it, China is democratic. All you need do is change the definition of democracy to see it that way.
https://bitterwinter.org/democracy-according-to-xi-jinping/

You would think so. That makes perfect sense. But there are so many cases in which academics has been purchased so as support whatever is the preferred view. For every case of academics forming the preferred view, there is another in which the preferred view forms academics. See the response I gave you re Pharma and the Brazilian study that has superseded the doctor-patient relationship. Many maintain that the evolution of college and school curricula is another example in which the preferred view molds academics.
To adapt the words of Yakov Smirnoff and satisfy JWI, is this a great [world] or what that can turn soundness of mind on its head? Nor can we look to “academics” for support on the origin of life. Certainly not with regard to any flood. Nor on the utility of blood transfusion. Apparently not with secular dating chronology. And not in what is called social “science,” even gender “science.” Is the foregoing all examples of Jehovah turning the wisdom of the wise into foolishness?
The earthly organization is not blind to academics but it certainly doesn’t allow itself to be shoved around by it, nor even its hand-in-glove “critical thinking” that is all the rage today, which so manifestly can be hijacked by other interests as to be anything but a reliable guide—something to factor in, but no more.
From Day 1 the organization has run experiences to illustrate whatever point they make that will infuriate academic devotees of “critical thinking” and, truth be told, sometimes even some of us. “Consider Danny,” it will say. “He and his wife decided to put God to the test by doing such and such” and it goes on to relate the successful outcome. It’s a single example. What about Sammy and his wife who also did such and such and it turned out horrendously for them? But in fact, as long as you do not claim it as more “proof” than it is, as long as you do not claim it is guaranteed outcome everyone will experience,, I guess you can reason this way. I mean, everyone else does when trying to motivate you into doing something. College recruiters certainly do. So it’s okay. Very few things can be reduced to simple enough terms so that “academics” or “science” or “critical thinking” can be of overriding use.
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2021/11/a-scientist-pours-one-liquid-after-another-upon-a-duck-placed-on-the-table-his-companion-carefully-calibrates-the-results-on.html

Rush died on February 17 of this year. You may have noticed there was a major shift in the space-time continuum, and crazy people, bat-crap crazy people, insane crazy people, beyond the dreams of asylums everywhere, accelerated their take over of the world.

To the extent that the majority of the scientific community is under the influence of big money, they have lost much credibility.
There is a former pharma executive online who states that for every dollar Pharma spends on educating you through drug ads and otherwise, they spend six times that amount “educating” the medical field. There is another Pharma VP who says: “Look, nobody has any money. Government doesn’t. Researchers don’t. Universities don’t. But Pharma has lots of money.” 
“Conduct a study for us,” Pharma says, “here’s tons of money to fund it.” If the results come back favorable to Pharma, they can expect more funding for other studies. If the results come back unfavorable, they will never hear from Pharma again. “No money has changed hands,” the VP says. “No agreements have been entered into. But everyone knows what they must do,’ as he goes on to claim this practice is universal.
The above is said of new drugs. The regulatory hurdles for vaccines, even in normal times, are lower. In abnormal times, such as now, they are lower still. The existing vaccines were ushered in at “warp speed” under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). This US emergency provision can only be done legally if there truly is a emergency—that is, if there is no existing alternative treatment for Covid-19. Thus, it becomes very important to certain parties to demonstrate that existing alternative treatments (read primarily hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin) are no good and/or cause injury.
Yes. Some of them are medical doctors who felt impelled to do something to help their patients. Initially, there was no guidance whatsoever from health agencies upon a Covid-19 diagnosis other than get bed-rest, keep hydrated, and come to the hospital if it gets real bad—by which time it was too late. Most patients put on ventilators died.
So these doctors, mostly on their own & then they shared their results with colleagues, began experimenting with existing drugs to see if any could prevent the hospitalization that usually spelled death. They discovered and then shared with others their 80% or so success rate. One of them shared his regimen with the White House, and this is why when Trump was diagnosed with Covid, he was very soon up and running again.* Another pleaded before Congress—I heard him—that these drugs be made widely available. He stressed that he was not against vaccines, which then were only in the early stages of being developed and rolled out. He was only interested in saving his existing patients in the interim.
These doctors describe how they were aghast that, not only were the drugs not made widely available, but they were targeted for elimination. They describe their bewilderment that studies were undertaken administering these drugs at levels known to be toxic. Of one Brazilian study that came to be heralded as proof that these cheap drugs that had been around forever were dangerous, one of these doctors writes: 
“The Brazilian authors of this study must have known they were treading on dangerous territory by purposely causing many deaths. Coming from a poor area of the country, they may have felt they could get away with sacrificing their patients without local reprisals. They simply gave lethal doses of chloroquine to patients to prove that the drug and its derivative hydroxychloroquine were too dangerous to treat Covid-19”
This is an outrageous charge and these doctors were slow to make it. But a lethal dose is a lethal dose. Malfeasance is clearly demonstrated at many levels. It is assessing the motivation behind the malfeasance that is perilous and causes different docs to come to different conclusions, not always agreeing with each other. A prominent view, however, is that this campaign to discredit the drugs that demonstrably work amounts to mass murder and is the equal of previous genocides. Hundreds of thousands of people died who didn’t have to.
Didn’t many of Hitler’s medical experimenters wind up in South America? Of course, they’d be dead by now, but culture doesn’t die in an overlapping generation. I can’t picture rank and file technicians knowingly administering an experiment that kills people, but I can imagine them simply doing what they’re told, with no suspicions at all as to what their higher ups were concocting. Moreover, JWI I am sure will empathize with how poor people with the wrong skin color make good fodder for forward progress. Aren’t there examples in the US involving blacks and indigenous populations?
Some of the answer to this hinges on what you consider “academic.” The aforementioned doctor who sent his results to the White House and saved Trump also sent those results to certain official sources. These sources rejected the material because it was not a scientific study. “I understand it is not a scientific study,” he said, “it wasn’t intended to be, but it is still data.”
Scientific “studies” like the above Brazilian one are trumping actual data. They are infringing upon what these doctors consider sacred, the doctor-patient relationship. The “studies” have been used to go over the heads of doctors, who prescribe, say—Ivermecitn—and then the pharmacies refuse to fill it. (and in some cases report the doctor). What is “academic” is trampling what is real.
Some of them are widely published prior to going into this area of medical apostasy. I heard one of them say that he holds an advantage over some of his colleagues in that he has been published in some many journals that he will be difficult to take down.
All of them have been taken down, however,  on the mainstream outlets such as Facebook and YouTube. They are reduced to their own websites, where they aggregate breaking developments. How much they are actually reduced is a matter of debate. Most of them are reluctant beacons who never sought to be public figures. Their palpable integrity and manifest good motive draws people to their information. I consider them very credible. I mean, these are not the people who think Sandy Hook was a hoax.
___ * Aaron Rodgers, the quarterback, caused a major brouhaha when it was revealed that his prior claim of being “immunized” didn’t mean he was vaccinated. He was relying on something else, and then he came down with Covid-19. Of course, he missed the next game. But the one after that he led his team to a 17-0 victory. 
Doing my bit for “science,” I pointed out that it would have been 34-0 had he gone the conventional route.
 

Yes you are right.

The majority of the scientific community are basically toeing the line or are genuinely ignorant due to the artfully contrived propaganda and the deliberate blocking of true science being spoken off.
Dont use google or utube…they are useless and tools to the satanic agenda….you have to go to places like… BITCHUTE ….RUMBLE …NEW YOU TUBE … …BRIGHTON…there are many others but I can not keep up with them…..look for the specialists in the field of vaccinations ..science and medicine…
 
A few names to give you a head start….
Geert Vandon Bosch…..this poor man is highly credentialed and a expert on vaccination….he’s also a very brave and principled man….what he foretold would happen has eventuates …my advice would be to watch all of his videos especially his first one …
Dr Robert Malone….one of the creators of the MRNA vaxination pathways…again highly credentialed and brave man.
Prof Delores Cahill…
Dr David Martin….fascinating to listen to….on the patterns and vaccination laws etc…..personally I think he is in the genies category…tho I may not agree with some of his other topics..on this subject he is amazing with his knowledge 
Catherine Austin
Dr Richard Fleming….
Dr Peter Mc Cullough….incredibly brave and highly credentialed in a number of fields ..
Judy Mikovitis….very brave woman…
Dr Mike Yeardon….very highly specialized and very brave man…..as he said..we are standing at the gates of hell!
You will see some of these men just break down and cry..due to the implications this is having on mankind and them being gagged as to getting it out to the population.
You may already know all of these and researched them yourselves….I’m don’t mean to assume you haven’t…sp please don’t be offended …but this is just scratching the surface of the MOST HIGHLY SPECIALIZED EDUCATED SCIENTIST speaking out but are being deliberately silenced and gagged by others working for the dark side…
remember they don’t all agree with each other over every detail …nor do I…but on the main points and basic facts…and science they all are in agreance with…the implications for mankind is terrifying…
Indeed looking at it from a cold hearted unemotional stand..it has been a master stroke ..a undeniable genius act or war strategy  by Satan….
 
 

The idea is that the architecture of the spike virus it itself inflicts damage, enabling it to puncture the cell it infects. If this is true, the antigen the body is coerced  to manufacture through the vaccine also has that spiky shape which tears at surfaces and logjams up. Think of computerized enactments you have seen of how strokes begin, by plaques accumulating and forming blockages. Molecules in the bloodstream flow best if they are ‘smooth.’ The spike protein is anything but.
Remember, it is not a natural shape. It does not occur in nature of its own, but it has been unleashed through gain-of-function research. Therefore, the shape of the antigen, even as it does combat the virus to an extent, is also unnatural.
Understand that I make no claim to be any expert. I’m okay with being corrected. The above I have gleaned through sources I consider trustworthy. 

The idea is that if the archtecture (the spikiness) of the virus in itself inflicts damage, enabling it to puncture cells, so will that of the manufactured antigens. Think along the lines of those computerized enactments of how strokes develop, blood passageways being clogged up by plaque, logjams that occur within the body. Molecules that flow through the body ought be smooth, and the virus, as well as the antigens made to combat it, are anything but. 
The virus itself is not anything naturally occurring, but has been created through ‘gain of function’ research. If this is true, as is alleged with considerable evidence, then the antigens created that fight the virus are just as unnatural, even as they do succeed to some extent in muting it.
Understand, I make no claim to be any expert. I’ve gleaned this from reading sources I consider trustworthy. 

You must not have read the "Divine Name" Brochure printed by your organization.
 
How Is God's Name Pronounced?
The truth is, nobody knows for sure how the name of God was originally pronounced. Why not? Well, the first language used in writing the Bible was Hebrew, and when the Hebrew language was written down, the writers wrote only consonants, not vowels. Hence, when the inspired writers wrote God's name, they naturally did the same thing and wrote only the consonants.
While ancient Hebrew was an everyday spoken language, this presented no problem. The pronunciation of the Name was familiar to the Israelites and when they saw it in writing they supplied the vowels without thinking (just as, for an English reader, the abbreviation "Ltd." represents "Limited" and "bldg." represents "building").
Two things happened to change this situation. First, a superstitious idea arose among the Jews that it was wrong to say the divine name out loud; so when they came to it in their Bible reading they uttered the Hebrew word 'Adho·nai' ("Sovereign Lord"). Further, as time went by, the ancient Hebrew language itself ceased to be spoken in everyday conversation, and in this way the original Hebrew pronunciation of God's name was eventually forgotten.
In order to ensure that the pronunciation of the Hebrew language as a whole would not be lost, Jewish scholars of the second half of the first millennium C.E. invented a system of points to represent the missing vowels, and they placed these around the consonants in the Hebrew Bible. Thus, both vowels and consonants were written down, and the pronunciation as it was at that time was preserved.
When it came to God's name, instead of putting the proper vowel signs around it, in most cases they put other vowel signs to remind the reader that he should say 'Adho·nai'. From this came the spelling Iehouah, and, eventually, Jehovah became the accepted pronunciation of the divine name in English. This retains the essential elements of God's name from the Hebrew original.
Different scholars have different ideas about how the name YHWH was originally pronounced.
In The Mysterious Name of Y.H.W.H., page 74, Dr. M. Reisel said that the "vocalisation of the Tetragrammaton must originally have been Y e HuàH or YaHuàH."
Canon D. D. Williams of Cambridge held that the "evidence indicates, nay almost proves, that Jahwéh was not the true pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton . . . The Name itself was probably JAHÔH."?Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft (Periodical for Old Testament Knowledge), 1936, Volume 54, page 269.
In the glossary of the French Revised Segond Version, page 9, the following comment is made: "The pronunciation Yahvé used in some recent translations is based on a few ancient witnesses, but they are not conclusive. If one takes into account personal names that include the divine name, such as the Hebrew name of the prophet Elijah (Eliyahou) the pronunciation might just as well be Yaho or Yahou."
In 1749 the German Bible scholar Teller told of some different pronunciations of God's name he had read: "Diodorus from Sicily, Macrobius, Clemens Alexandrinus, Saint Jerome and Origenes wrote Jao; the Samaritans, Epiphanius, Theodoretus, Jahe, or Jave; Ludwig Cappel reads Javoh; Drusius, Jahve; Hottinger, Jehva; Mercerus, Jehovah; Castellio, Jovah; and le Clerc, Jawoh, or Javoh."
Thus it is evident that the original pronunciation of God's name is no longer known. Nor is it really important. If it were, then God himself would have made sure that it was preserved for us to use. The important thing is to use God's name according to its conventional pronunciation in our own language.
 
 
It is very hypocritical for you to say that anyone who doesn’t use the name “Jehovah” when speaking of the Almighty God our Father, that they are not showing reverence for Him or Jesus Christ...when no one knows the original pronunciation of God’s name, as your own organization tells us.
 
 

If I thought Jesus was a fraud, why would I continually refer to his teachings?
 

What do you get when you cross Dexter with Hannible Lecter?

????? You are so funny SM. I use Facebook and you say I'm 'absorbed into big tech'.
The internet and social media can be compared to the sea on a calm day.  Now I'm just on the surface in a boat. I'm not going underwater looking for murky stuff. I stay safe because i do not seek out immoral things. Yes if you go deep underwater you will meet up with sharks, and yes sharks sometimes come to the surface, but I'm old enough and wise enough to know not to get involved with the 'sharks'. 
What you mean is, that I do not answer questions the way You want me to answer them. Some of your questions are 'set up' so that they cannot be answered directly. When I do answer your questions you then tell everyone that i'm 'dancing around'. Why do you need to tell everyone else ?  Why do you need to insult me in your comments to other people ? 
On here I say what I think and feel. Surely that is what this forum is for.   I don't go mixing with people out in the 'world' so the situation never arises. 
SM, it seems we will never agree on things. Christian love to you. Have a good day. 

I wouldn't want to be anywhere near you SM. I think you are a dangerous person, maybe violent. I think you have 'issues'.