Chioke Lin

( The above comment wasn't aimed at me, but has been before. )
You see, this is what makes the above commenter seem so much like previous partakers of this forum. 
He speaks rubbish and actually makes dishonest accusations. 
Rejecting an English form of a name is not rejecting the one whom that name is, so say, attached to. 
I much prefer the name Yeshua as it is closer to the original Hebrew, whereas the name Jesus is from the Latin which in turn is from the Greek. 
Jesus' real name, Yeshua, evolved over millennia in many cases of transliteration that took it from Yehōshu'a to Iēsous to Jesus.
What Was Jesus’ Real Name?

Bible Scholar "Nehemia Gordon" might shed some new light into the name of God in the New Testament.
https://midwestoutreach.org/2018/02/01/is-gods-name-jehovah/#:~:text=On January 21%2C 2018%2C Bible Scholar Nehemia Gordon,Hebrew name of God was originally pronounced “Yahweh.”
https://religionnews.com/2018/01/25/the-original-hebrew-name-of-god-re-discovered-in-1000-bible-manuscripts/
If you have no problem interacting with scholars, you can email him at, and see what his take is on it. Just remember, scholars don't always see leading questions.
Nehemia Gordon
Bar-Ilan University, Israel
ngordon4@gmail.com
His earliest find with the vowels added, as he claims, are from 894AD, well before the common knowledge of a Monk in 1100AD. 

If this is true, commentator, why continue your hostility if you have peace of mind? Your personal action of down voting facts as described by many bible writers and experts indicate, you only believe what your hate dictates. That's not healthy in any case.
Sorry if the truth hurts your feelings. Perhaps this bible forum isn't suited for your kind of hate. You are making it personal and taking it personally. I to feel that way at times. This is why, I noted that in a previous post, perhaps it's time for me to find a better bible forum.
It appears hate runs both ways and the show here. If that's the case, I don't need Satan to control my life.

I don't get your rationale. You're not blaming God and insist the 1000-year doctrine belongs to an organization, when it belongs in the bible, which in turn belongs to God.
Bible writers wrote, Adam and Eve made a choice of disobedience. How does that inspired word that's in all the bibles, including the KJV, belong to the WT?
We are all imperfect, including you. Should this mean, it's okay to sin? You seem to be at odds with what is written in Matthew 5:48. Why do you believe people should continue to be sinners and disobey God's words as Christians?
I think we are "all" overreaching on this topic. We should stick to the topic at hand.

If this is true, commentator, why continue your hostility if you have peace of mind? Your personal action of down voting facts as described by many bible writers and experts indicate, you only believe what your hate dictates. That's not healthy in any case.
Sorry if the truth hurts your feelings. Perhaps this bible forum isn't suited for your kind of hate. You are making it personal and taking it personally. I to feel that way at times. This is why, I noted that in a previous post, perhaps it's time for me to find a better bible forum.
It appears hate runs both ways and the show here. If that's the case, I don't need Satan to control my life.

We can see, that the Org is not the only one making sense of the bible.
All things in the Bible 2006
Jesus also quoted many of the prophets in his references to the Day of the Lord, emphasizing that he was continuing the well-known tradition. Both Hebrew and Christian apocalyptic literature have references to the Day of the Lord or Judgment Day. As noted, the prophets looked forward to that time when God will come in judgment, the final battle against the forces of evil—“Israel’s final combat with the combined forces of the heathen nations under the leadership of Gog and Magog, barbarian tribes of the North” (Ezek. 38–39). “Assembled for a fierce attack upon Israel in the mountains near Jerusalem, they will suffer a terrible and crushing defeat, and Israel’s land will thenceforth forever remain the seat of God’s kingdom” (Kaufmann Kohler 2004). This final cataclysmic scene of Armageddon will end with the defeat of the heathen nations forever, and God’s kingdom will be established on earth. According to the New Testament writers, the New Jerusalem will be a city that needed no temple, for God himself will dwell in it. p.165
Aside from making a few adjustments to the wording like "Israel" to "Spiritual Israel" and the "barbarian tribes of the north" to "all nations" then we have confidence, the Org is interpreting the bible correctly. 

I find it upbuilding to my faith in YHWH through Yesua that i am disliked by people on both sides.
I have just been in discussion with two homosexuals on facebook. I explained to them God's new world to come and of the coming Judgement time. And i gave them warning of what would happen to those that did not try to serve God properly. I was accused of 'hate crime'. 
And then I come on here and again I'm accused of hate, but this time it's by a JW that pretends to serve God.
I only hate the things that God hates. And if my suggestion of proving points by using scripture is seen as hate OCD, then so be it. 
May you all have peace.  
 
 

We can see, that the Org is not the only one making sense of the bible.
All things in the Bible 2006
Jesus also quoted many of the prophets in his references to the Day of the Lord, emphasizing that he was continuing the well-known tradition. Both Hebrew and Christian apocalyptic literature have references to the Day of the Lord or Judgment Day. As noted, the prophets looked forward to that time when God will come in judgment, the final battle against the forces of evil—“Israel’s final combat with the combined forces of the heathen nations under the leadership of Gog and Magog, barbarian tribes of the North” (Ezek. 38–39). “Assembled for a fierce attack upon Israel in the mountains near Jerusalem, they will suffer a terrible and crushing defeat, and Israel’s land will thenceforth forever remain the seat of God’s kingdom” (Kaufmann Kohler 2004). This final cataclysmic scene of Armageddon will end with the defeat of the heathen nations forever, and God’s kingdom will be established on earth. According to the New Testament writers, the New Jerusalem will be a city that needed no temple, for God himself will dwell in it. p.165
Aside from making a few adjustments to the wording like "Israel" to "Spiritual Israel" and the "barbarian tribes of the north" to "all nations" then we have confidence, the Org is interpreting the bible correctly. 

Commentator. The only thing your list can prove is imperfection that existed in Jesus time. If you look at your list, you will find, plenty of bible proof that many things in your list are actually taken from the bible. While your passion is to condemn a certain Org, you are actually condemning the words of God.
Now, some in your list, are schemes, as you put it, are made by men to discredit the Org. That's not the Org's fault, that is a misleading interpretation from the opposition. 
However, Those are personal views that a bible discussion can do without. 

Being overhanded is a bit much, as you call an impersonal discussion. Bible discussion imply just that, a discussion of the bible. There should be no personal interaction with someone's personality or character. I see, you just made a point clear with another commentator that is opposed to the Org.
If they shouldn't be able to excuse themselves, why should we?

Commentator. The only thing your list can prove is imperfection that existed in Jesus time. If you look at your list, you will find, plenty of bible proof that many things in your list are actually taken from the bible. While your passion is to condemn a certain Org, you are actually condemning the words of God.
Now, some in your list, are schemes, as you put it, are made by men to discredit the Org. That's not the Org's fault, that is a misleading interpretation from the opposition. 
However, Those are personal views that a bible discussion can do without. 

Yes, commentator. That's why I mentioned the KJV, ESV, and NAS on my previous post. They have the same interpretation. The point about these bibles, it confuses the issue in verse 8. There cannot be any conspiracies with the bible's interpretation. That was the reason I posted the lexicon that refutes that understanding. It doesn't mean, the saints in heaven, but the holy ones on earth after they become sinless. They, of course, become God's holy saints on earth. A blemish free temple of God.

Then it's not just the Org to have similar understanding. Once again, the discussion shouldn't be about an individual, but how we prove it to the public. How we arrive with our conclusions. It shouldn't matter if a commentator is an opposer.
20:7-8
20:7-8. John was told what would happen at the conclusion of the thousand years. Satan will be released from the Abyss, his prison, and will make a final attempt to induce nations - called Gog and Magog - to come and battle with him against Christ. Satan's release will produce a worldwide rebellion against the millennial reign of Christ. The armies will be so vast in numbers that they are said to be like the sand on the seashore.
Who are these who will follow Satan? Those who survive the Tribulation will enter the Millennium in their natural bodies, and they will bear children and repopulate the earth (Isa 65:18-25). Under ideal circumstances in which all know about Jesus Christ (cf. Jer 31:33-34), many will outwardly profess faith in Christ without actually placing faith in Him for salvation. The shallowness of their professions will become apparent when Satan is released. The multitudes who follow Satan are evidently those who have never been born again in the millennial kingdom.
(from Bible Knowledge Commentary/Old Testament Copyright © 1983, 2000 Cook All rights reserved.)
Is all this commentary correct? Some of it is, some of it is speculation of the writer. But, what is similar to prove, it's not just the Organization interpreting the bible correctly.
Apparently, you commentators think, I'm refuting your understanding. I'm not. I'm questioning whether it conforms to how the Organization interpretation of the bible. 
 

It doesn't matter who started the discussion. What should matter, how do you prove the points yourself, with the bible without having to rely on the organization's information, since those that oppose the organization will use that information to mislead. So, who else can be linked to the opinions and theories provided?
Can "google" be used effectively? In my experience, it cannot, since there is so much disinformation. We have to look at every possible avenue to prove someone is not representing the best interest of the bible.
Let's look at barns with respect to a topic you have a great passion for, Gog and Magog.
Persia stands in its proper place; but India, under the modifications of Greater and Lesser, is confusedly repeated at different points, while the river Indus is mentioned in the text as the Eastern boundary of Asia. To the North, the castle of Gog and Magog, an Arabian feature, crowns a vast range of mountains, within which, it is said, that the
Tartars had been imprisoned by Alexander the Great. The Caspian appears, with the bordering countries of Georgia, Hyrcania, and Albania; but these features stand nearly at the Northern boundary of the habitable earth.
Africa has a sea to the South, stated, however, to be inaccessible, on account of the intensity of the heat. The European countries stand in their due place, not even excepting Russia and Scandinavia, though some oversights are observable in the manner in which the two are connected together.” pp.654-655
Hasn't the organization mentioned Russia? What is the implication under barns?
Isaiah 25:2. For thou hast made This is supposed to be uttered by the Jews who should return from Babylon, and therefore refers to what would have been seen by them. In their time it would have occurred that God had made of the city an heap. p 649
Of a city, I suppose the whole scope of the passage requires us to understand this of Babylon. There has been, however, a great variety of interpretation of this passage. Grotius supposed that Samaria was intended. Calvin that the word is used collectively, and that various cities are intended. Piscator that Rome, the seat of antichrist, was intended. Jerome says that the Jews generally understand it of Rome. Aben Ezra and Kimchi, however, understand it to refer to many cities which they say will be destroyed in the times of Gog and Magog. Nearly all these opinions may be seen subjected to an examination, and shown to be unfounded, in Vitringa.
How about Godbey Commentary.
8. We see from this verse that Satan’s army, with which he essays to conquer the world, is made up of Gog and Magog. Now let us see who they are. In Noah’s family originated the trinity of races. Ham in Hebrew means black; Shem, red; and Japheth, white. Upon the subsidence of the Flood, Noah divided the world among his three sons, giving Ham Africa, Shem Asia, and Japheth Europe. Gog and Magog are only spoken of in this passage, <011001>Genesis 10th, and <263801>Ezekiel 38th. Gog means king, and Magog means the kingly people; i.e., the nobility. <011001>Genesis 10th notifies us that they are the children of Japheth, the ancestor of all the white people. In <263801>Ezekiel 38th they are elaborately mentioned as resident in Russia.
Is the organization the only Org to suggest Russia? I think not. This is how you prove how the organization is correct and in the right track, regardless if the aggressors believe it or not. The point is, do you believe in the Org and accept the ones that are feeding you, spiritual food at the proper time. That should be the theme for every participant that isn't an opponent.

That is a good start. Remember, you are dealing with an aggressive opponent that doesn't believe a word you say. It should also be noted, their words cannot be trusted, since, as you have mentioned, they lack the spirit of God. Their interest is to teardown the house of spiritual Israel.
Ezekiel 7 has two parts in its context. The hour of doom, 1-13, and the desolation of Israel, 14-27. The opponent commentators have clouded those two components. How do you prove they are wrong with understanding the bible's interpretation? Remember, they don't care about what is written in the organization. In some Bibles interpretation, the context in 14-27 means Idolaters condemned, and 1-13, means Ezekiel's Inaugural vision.
How do you defend what has been clouded by interpretation?

At least 1,000 people were killed and more than 1,500 were injured when an earthquake struck a rural part of eastern Afghanistan early Wednesday. The country has already been suffering through a humanitarian crisis since the Taliban took power almost 10 months ago, which prompted international organizations to withdraw financial support for Afghanistan.

In some aspects of the proof they are offering commentator, both are pretty far off left field. So, two wrongs don't make a right for the bible.
We can say, one is close while the other isn't. I do agree, a good decision can be found by correct understanding of the bible.

I have no idea about anyone else. In my case, I don't find fault condemning your accusation, when the hostility comes from you. Consider your own behavior before you condemn someone else's.
Remember your own word's commentator: "Do as you please. I do not take you seriously anyway"
Another commentator apologized, and then it turned out to be insincere. Just because, people don't see eye to eye on certain things, doesn't mean they should be rude about it. 
In this case, you and, witness are as guilty as those being rude to you. Civility runs both ways. 
I'm new to this discussion forum. Does this mean, I'm not allowed to express my own opinion without being kicked out? I have stated before, if anyone feels, I shouldn't participate, let them be heard. For some reason, I was tagged by a commentator to be someone else, and that accusation continues.
This discussion forum shouldn't be about me or who I am, but what is posted as a topic. 

Okay, thank you. I wasn't aware I was dealing with a subversive cult. I thought this form was for, Christian discussions, not a smearing campaign. 
I don't know who, those people they speak of are, Wally McNasty, Allen, Billy the Kid. Furthermore, I guess those people left a long-lasting impression. 
I thought the insults were coming from my poor English. Now, I understand, it's because of some delusion. Thanks again.
 

Commentator Patiently. You are now a nuisance and hostile to this discussion. I recommend no one pay attention to your ramblings. It's odd that you use the word patiently, when you have none.
You should convey your sentiment of twisting comments to the commentator witness that is twisting the meaning found in the bible.
Owner, is there anyway I can block this commentator?

Okay, thank you. I wasn't aware I was dealing with a subversive cult. I thought this form was for, Christian discussions, not a smearing campaign. 
I don't know who, those people they speak of are, Wally McNasty, Allen, Billy the Kid. Furthermore, I guess those people left a long-lasting impression. 
I thought the insults were coming from my poor English. Now, I understand, it's because of some delusion. Thanks again.
 

@Chioke Lin
Don't pay attention to @Witness or @Patiently waiting for Truth Both are ministers of Satan.  They are easily exposed... They belong to the Pearl Doxey Cult.
@Patiently waiting for Truth falsely accused me of being Billy the Kid / Allen et al. 
“Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the Kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our God!" (Rev 12:10)
Satan will be abyssed during the 1,000 year Reign of Jesus Christ. 

It can easily be seen that this Chioke person twists comments just as he did in previous guises. Billy the Kid / Allen et al. 

Commentator, I have never seen the sign you have seen from Tennessee. I don't believe in guns. But, if you wish, you can post it for amusement.
I would consider that a distraction from a bible discussion. But as another hostile commentator replied, he doesn't take a bible discussion seriously. So, I guess humor can find a place with some, that are not serious.

Please! Please! Please! I'm enjoying this discussion. Can we keep it civil and without distractions?