Jump to content
The World News Media

Anna

Member
  • Posts

    4,702
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    103

Reputation Activity

  1. Confused
    Anna got a reaction from AllenSmith in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Lol! You Crack me up!
  2. Like
    Anna got a reaction from Arauna in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    @AlanF

  3. Haha
    Anna reacted to James Thomas Rook Jr. in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    I must admit ... I do enjoy the dual edged bladed agenda driven conversions on this topic.
    It reminds me of what author Stephen King said about writing one of his books ... I think it was "The Strand", where he had so many characters running around on the pages he could not keep up with them ... so he wrote in an explosion that wiped most of them out.
    18 pages of debate to support something that may or may not have happened outside the physical Universe 100 or so years ago ... that was, or is invisible, to me (here comes a variation on one of my favorite expressions ...) is like milking a mouse because you need to make five pounds of cheese .... which has already been sold in advance.
    That's a LOT of work !
    So .... what's a simple Barbarian like myself to think with all these arguments and counter-arguments ...
    I think I will make a bucket of popcorn! .... and watch the show!
    Carry on Troops!
  4. Thanks
    Anna reacted to JW Insider in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    The image was a bit small. I have page 208 in text format which generally uses the spacing and line break style of the original, with original spellings:
    ------------------------------------------------------
    [resur-]rection of the dead, and on the triumphant era of blessed-
    ness, which immediately ensues.   I would again impress
    on the mind of the reader, that these events depend upon
    the fulfilment of the chronological periods ; and that as
    the " new heaven and new earth," which are created at
    the second judgment, and at the time of the general resur-  
    rection, necessarily synchronise with Daniel's era of blessed-  
    ness ;  so must the " new heaven and new earth " be con-  
    sidered as succeeding the '' old heaven and old earth," or
    the tyrannical monarchies of the old dispensation.   The  
    times of these monarchies are fixed by the " seven times "
    of the symbolic image, and by the 1335 years of the Mo-
    hammedan Imposture ;  and unless it can be shown that
    erroneous data have been assumed, on which these chro-
    nological periods have been founded, then must it be
    maintained that the forty-five years of Daniel are the
    period of the second judgment ; and, commencing in 1873,
    are attended by the sitting of that judgment, and by the
    general resurrection, the last hour of which terminates
    with the " seven times " of the monarchies, and with the
    1335 Mohammedan years, in 1917.  It may be further ob-
    served, that it is a judgment of the " wicked " only ; be-
    cause the righteous rise first, and attend Christ " at his
    coming."  Death, hell and the sea, and their dead, sub-
    sequently stand in judgment.
         The Saviour himself, speaking of the signs of his se-
    cond coming, foretels all these events ;  and upon that
    memorable occasion, when he predicted the treading down
    of Jerusalem, and " that the Jews should be led captive
    into all nations," during the times of the Gentiles, ob-
    viously refers to the sitting of the second judgment, at
    which he is to appear as the Judge. " Heaven and earth,"
    or the dispensation of the tyrannical empires, which were
    the instruments of the captivity and desolation of his peo-
    ple, he declares " shall pass away,"---the very token of the
    second judgment,--- " but my words shall not pass away."
    Verily I say unto you, " This generation shall not pass
    away till all be fulfilled."  Whatever, therefore, be the [p.209]
    criticisms upon these extraordinary words . . .
    --------------------------------------------------
  5. Thanks
    Anna reacted to JW Insider in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    AlanF, I think that you will be asked to avoid the kind of insulting language and imagery. I am sure that other forums have allowed an escalation of this type to reach greater heights/depths of such. One of the things that has made this particular forum more palatable, according to several people here, myself included, is the fact that all perspectives have been able to come together WITHOUT these rough edges.
     
  6. Thanks
    Anna reacted to The Librarian in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    @Anna I will let the @admin know. 
    I haven't experienced that warning yet though personally.
  7. Like
    Anna reacted to JW Insider in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Apologies to @scholar JW but it's pretty clear that the Watchtower had already given away the answer, back in 1983, which shows clearly that AlanF is correct, as was Ann, Carl Jonsson, and many others:
    *** w83 8/1 p. 20 par. 15 Israel and the “Times of the Gentiles” ***
    15 In the dream that Jehovah God sent to his “servant,” King Nebuchadnezzar, there were “seven times” that were decreed from heaven. How do these connect up with “the times of the Gentiles” or coincide and become identical with them?  
    THUS, EXAMPLES which would only make sense if the connection/link/etc means an "equating."
    *** w98 9/15 p. 15 par. 1 Waiting in “Eager Expectation” ***
    Similarly, a prophecy providentially caused sincere 19th-century Bible students to be in expectation. By linking the “seven times” of Daniel 4:25 with “the times of the Gentiles,” they anticipated that Christ would receive Kingdom power in 1914. *** yb75 p. 37 Part 1—United States of America ***
    Very noteworthy was the striking accuracy with which that book pointed to the end of the Gentile Times, “the appointed times of the nations.” (Luke 21:24) It showed (on pages 83 and 189) that this 2,520-year period, during which Gentile or non-Jewish nations would rule the earth without interference by any kingdom of God, began with the Babylonian overthrow of the kingdom of Judah in the late seventh century B.C.E. and would end in 1914 C.E. Even earlier, however, C. T. Russell wrote an article entitled “Gentile Times: When Do They End?” It was published in the Bible Examiner of October 1876, and therein Russell said: “The seven times will end in A.D. 1914.” He had correctly linked the Gentile Times with the “seven times” mentioned in the book of Daniel. (Dan. 4:16, 23, 25, 32) True to such calculations, 1914 did mark the end of those times and the birth of God’s kingdom in heaven with Christ Jesus as king. Just think of it! Jehovah granted his people that knowledge nearly four decades before those times expired. *** jv chap. 10 p. 134 Growing in Accurate Knowledge of the Truth ***
    As early as 1823, John A. Brown, whose work was published in London, England, calculated the “seven times” of Daniel chapter 4 to be 2,520 years in length. But he did not clearly discern the date with which the prophetic time period began or when it would end. He did, however, connect these “seven times” with the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24. In 1844, E. B. Elliott, a British clergyman, drew attention to 1914 as a possible date for the end of the “seven times” of Daniel, but he also set out an alternate view that pointed to the time of the French Revolution. Robert Seeley, of London, in 1849, handled the matter in a similar manner. At least by 1870, a publication edited by Joseph Seiss and associates and printed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was setting out calculations that pointed to 1914 as a significant date, even though the reasoning it contained was based on chronology that C. T. Russell later rejected. *** w15 6/15 p. 22 par. 12 Live in Harmony With the Model Prayer—Part I ***
    12 When the time approached for God’s Kingdom in the hands of Jesus to start ruling from heaven, Jehovah helped his people to understand the timing of events. In 1876, an article written by Charles Taze Russell was published in the magazine Bible Examiner. That article, “Gentile Times: When Do They End?,” pointed to 1914 as a significant year. The article linked the “seven times” of Daniel’s prophecy with “the appointed times of the nations” spoken of by Jesus.—Dan. 4:16; Luke 21:24. *** w84 4/1 p. 16 par. 4 Heed God’s Prophetic Word for Our Day ***
    4 That year 1914—what of it? Over a century ago, C. T. Russell (who became the first president of the Watch Tower Society) linked the Gentile Times with the “seven times” mentioned in the book of Daniel. (Daniel 4:16, 23, 25, 32; Luke 21:24, Authorized Version) Writing in the Bible Examiner of October 1876, Russell said: “The seven times will end in A.D. 1914.” He also was a joint publisher of the 1877 book Three Worlds, and the Harvest of This World, which showed (on pages 83 and 189) that the 2,520-year period of Gentile world domination without interference by any kingdom of God began with the Babylonian overthrow of the kingdom of Judah in the late seventh century B.C.E. and would end in 1914 C.E. Similarly, the Watch Tower issue of March 1880 stated: “‘The Times of the Gentiles’ extend to 1914, and the heavenly kingdom will not have full sway till then.”  
  8. Haha
    Anna reacted to TrueTomHarley in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
  9. Haha
    Anna reacted to Ann O'Maly in What is the best or most polite thing to say to a Jehovah's Witness so he/she won’t harass me at my doorstep every day?   
    Ask them to please put you on their Do Not Call list. You may get a visit once a year or two just to check you still live there or still don't want to be routinely called on ... excepting any occasional mistakes made by those who were either not told of the DNC or weren't paying attention.
    So to make sure ...
    Put up a sign: 'No religious callers' or 'No Jehovah's Witness proselytizers' or 'JWs beware: Rabid, salivating, two-headed apostate lives here. Knock at your own risk.' ? 
    And JWs don't come to your door every day - c'moooon. 
     
  10. Haha
    Anna reacted to TrueTomHarley in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    I feel privileged as though watching a superhero movie with fantastic heroes and villains converging, ready for combat & settling old grudges once and for all. But what will happen if I get up for popcorn or to use the restroom?
    (wait till @Top Cat O'Malighan reveals his true identity)
    (and just where does the Librarian fit in? What great personage was she back in the day before ruin set in and she gathered some books to start a new persona?)
    (and exactly who is @Ann O'Maly and how did she get her paws on every paper that's ever been printed?)
    (why does @AlanF call @scholar JW Scholar Pretendus and how did Christopher Hitchens become Yoda the wise?)
    (has @JW Insider succeeded beyond his dreams summoning up the spirits, perhaps scaring even himself?)
    (who is Neil Galt?)
    (Am I full of you-know-what?)
  11. Upvote
    Anna got a reaction from b4ucuhear in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    I don't think you can be talking about Gerard Gertoux developing an ego and leaving the truth, because really we have absolutely no proof of that. The only thing that is evident from his own writings is that he believes Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. So I am not sure what you mean by trust. That we can not trust him because of that? As far as I am aware he has never criticized the WT and he has not advertised his research regarding that subject, in fact he has been laying pretty low, and not really wanting to talk about it with anyone.
    Why is that dangerous thinking? Isn't that just stating a fact? I didn't say that we should be complacent, but I do think we should be realistic.
    I think there is a danger though in promising people something that will happen in their life time, and then it not coming true. My best friend, a long time pioneer, left because she lost faith that this is the true religion because of promises that were "without a doubt true" but that never happened and that kept getting explained away. I personally feel it's a little presumptions to claim these things. Then some will say..."well, they were in it for the wrong reason, that's why they left". But what is it we are feeding in people when we put such emphasis on the imminent end? We are doing exactly that, we are encouraging serving Jehovah for the wrong reason. Not because he is a God deserving our exclusive devotion, but because of what we can get out of him very soon. I wonder, did Jesus have in mind attracting people to the Kingdom in such a way? Yes, of course we tell them to "repent" because the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near, yes it is good we are not complacent like other religions, yes it is good we keep a sense of urgency, and yes it is good to keep our hope alive and in front of us, but to make certain claims (or I should say the Slave, we just repeat what they say) which are blatantly erroneous, makes fools of others and us, and can cause people to stumble. Perhaps this is a test. How loyal are we to Jehovah "despite" man's errors. Another good friend of mine, a very zealous faithful sister, is not allowing the errors of man to slow her down, or stumble her. She  waves her hand in dismissal at the new explanation to why Armageddon hasn't come yet, aka the 'overlapping generation'. Pretty much in a similar manner as Br. Herd did in the December broadcast when talking about our "past" understanding of the generation. He seems to think we've finally got it. She thinks it's nonsense. Her motto is; when it comes it comes, in the meantime I am here to do my job. And if I die so what?  Hopefully I will be resurrected. And if not, I won't even care, will I?
    When the Slave admits they've sometimes had wrong expectations, that doesn't mean we have to have those same wrong expectations too, does it?
  12. Haha
    Anna got a reaction from Ann O'Maly in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
  13. Upvote
    Anna got a reaction from Ann O'Maly in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    I don't think you can be talking about Gerard Gertoux developing an ego and leaving the truth, because really we have absolutely no proof of that. The only thing that is evident from his own writings is that he believes Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. So I am not sure what you mean by trust. That we can not trust him because of that? As far as I am aware he has never criticized the WT and he has not advertised his research regarding that subject, in fact he has been laying pretty low, and not really wanting to talk about it with anyone.
    Why is that dangerous thinking? Isn't that just stating a fact? I didn't say that we should be complacent, but I do think we should be realistic.
    I think there is a danger though in promising people something that will happen in their life time, and then it not coming true. My best friend, a long time pioneer, left because she lost faith that this is the true religion because of promises that were "without a doubt true" but that never happened and that kept getting explained away. I personally feel it's a little presumptions to claim these things. Then some will say..."well, they were in it for the wrong reason, that's why they left". But what is it we are feeding in people when we put such emphasis on the imminent end? We are doing exactly that, we are encouraging serving Jehovah for the wrong reason. Not because he is a God deserving our exclusive devotion, but because of what we can get out of him very soon. I wonder, did Jesus have in mind attracting people to the Kingdom in such a way? Yes, of course we tell them to "repent" because the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near, yes it is good we are not complacent like other religions, yes it is good we keep a sense of urgency, and yes it is good to keep our hope alive and in front of us, but to make certain claims (or I should say the Slave, we just repeat what they say) which are blatantly erroneous, makes fools of others and us, and can cause people to stumble. Perhaps this is a test. How loyal are we to Jehovah "despite" man's errors. Another good friend of mine, a very zealous faithful sister, is not allowing the errors of man to slow her down, or stumble her. She  waves her hand in dismissal at the new explanation to why Armageddon hasn't come yet, aka the 'overlapping generation'. Pretty much in a similar manner as Br. Herd did in the December broadcast when talking about our "past" understanding of the generation. He seems to think we've finally got it. She thinks it's nonsense. Her motto is; when it comes it comes, in the meantime I am here to do my job. And if I die so what?  Hopefully I will be resurrected. And if not, I won't even care, will I?
    When the Slave admits they've sometimes had wrong expectations, that doesn't mean we have to have those same wrong expectations too, does it?
  14. Thanks
    Anna got a reaction from JW Insider in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    I don't think you can be talking about Gerard Gertoux developing an ego and leaving the truth, because really we have absolutely no proof of that. The only thing that is evident from his own writings is that he believes Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. So I am not sure what you mean by trust. That we can not trust him because of that? As far as I am aware he has never criticized the WT and he has not advertised his research regarding that subject, in fact he has been laying pretty low, and not really wanting to talk about it with anyone.
    Why is that dangerous thinking? Isn't that just stating a fact? I didn't say that we should be complacent, but I do think we should be realistic.
    I think there is a danger though in promising people something that will happen in their life time, and then it not coming true. My best friend, a long time pioneer, left because she lost faith that this is the true religion because of promises that were "without a doubt true" but that never happened and that kept getting explained away. I personally feel it's a little presumptions to claim these things. Then some will say..."well, they were in it for the wrong reason, that's why they left". But what is it we are feeding in people when we put such emphasis on the imminent end? We are doing exactly that, we are encouraging serving Jehovah for the wrong reason. Not because he is a God deserving our exclusive devotion, but because of what we can get out of him very soon. I wonder, did Jesus have in mind attracting people to the Kingdom in such a way? Yes, of course we tell them to "repent" because the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near, yes it is good we are not complacent like other religions, yes it is good we keep a sense of urgency, and yes it is good to keep our hope alive and in front of us, but to make certain claims (or I should say the Slave, we just repeat what they say) which are blatantly erroneous, makes fools of others and us, and can cause people to stumble. Perhaps this is a test. How loyal are we to Jehovah "despite" man's errors. Another good friend of mine, a very zealous faithful sister, is not allowing the errors of man to slow her down, or stumble her. She  waves her hand in dismissal at the new explanation to why Armageddon hasn't come yet, aka the 'overlapping generation'. Pretty much in a similar manner as Br. Herd did in the December broadcast when talking about our "past" understanding of the generation. He seems to think we've finally got it. She thinks it's nonsense. Her motto is; when it comes it comes, in the meantime I am here to do my job. And if I die so what?  Hopefully I will be resurrected. And if not, I won't even care, will I?
    When the Slave admits they've sometimes had wrong expectations, that doesn't mean we have to have those same wrong expectations too, does it?
  15. Upvote
    Anna reacted to James Thomas Rook Jr. in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    This is where Freedom and sanity, and peace come from .... when you disregard people who have proved they have no credibility whatsoever ... and STOP BEING AFRAID OF DYING. 
    Every living thing that has DNA dies ... and there have never been any exceptions... not one... from a mosquito to  a Brontosaurus ... and we did not exist at all for about 14 BILLION years ... and my guess is no one worried about it.
    We should serve Jehovah because it is the right thing to do .... not because someone is generating artificial panics to get the troops to march faster.
  16. Haha
    Anna got a reaction from James Thomas Rook Jr. in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
  17. Like
    Anna got a reaction from Arauna in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
  18. Upvote
    Anna got a reaction from b4ucuhear in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Hmmmm......I beg to differ. How about we both ask a number of friends a simple question at the KH this Sunday or in a field service group: "do you know how to explain why we believe 1914 and 607?"
    In any case, it looks like you are trying to evade the question by implying that understanding how we come to 1914 (and 607) requires too much time and that one has better things to do (which actually confirms what I said, that most don't really know) and also you are detracting from the question by implying that those who do this, are really just trying to discredit the Slave and score points for themselves on a discussion forum.
    I can't say anything about what was said under another heading, but I do know that the question that arose a number of times was if WT accepts 537, then why does it not accept 587, if both dates are verifiable by the same astronomical/historical l sources.
    I am not here to score points either, (and if anyone is, well then they are to be pitied because what real value does collecting points from complete strangers who have no impact on your real, outside the internet, life have?). I am not trying to prove the Slave are deceivers,  but how would you explain to someone what I posted earlier but you never commented on. It was in answer to your comment:  " Faith is important - but Jehovah knew that us simple folks - we always need small steps to look forward to and he lovingly gave it to us.... and what is more.. the proof of the pudding is the eating....... world events since 1914 has proven that it is a 'reality'...... We will soon be seeing the last prophecies regarding Babylon the great, the call to peace and security...and the 8th king in action.... as a matter of fact - religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak...."  And my reply was:
    "BUT that does not mean the dates and numbers and lengths of periods we simple folks put together are always correct are they? What has happened to the millions that were not supposed to die? (they did). What has happened to the generation that was not supposed to pass away? (they have, practically) What has happened to the children that were not supposed to even finish school in this system? (they did, and they have children of their own). What has happened to the world that can't get any worse? (it did, and still might)".
    Religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak, but there have been many signs before that, that actually turned out NOT to be the sign
    To be fair, this topic here "607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported" really does call for secular,/scholarly knowledge because it is an academic subject.  No matter how noble feelings are, they still have no impact on whether something is true or false. And I cannot somehow connect a date with love for Jehovah, especially if there is a possibility that the date could be completely erroneous.
    I think those people have been paying attention to the signs on the ground. Probably since they first learned about them.
    Indeed, the Amaharets.  And it is a consolation to me that even if we are totally wrong about Christ's enthronement in 1914 and it takes another 2000 years for Armageddon to come, surely Jehovah will look upon us that we, the Amaharets, did our best to follow in the footsteps of Christ, by preaching the Kingdom and by living our life in harmony with God's moral standards. Surely Jehovah will recognize that the majority of Christ's sheep are unable to verify or understand everything the Bible, or what the Slave presents, like the Beoreans were able to. I can't imagine a missionary in Peru being overly concerned about Neo Babylonian chronology. Surely it is sufficient that these ones have verified the fundamental truths. And those who desire and are able to delve deeper into the academic side of this particular issue, and in all honesty find discrepancies with 607, surely they will not be disqualified? Thankfully, Jehovah is the reader of hearts. However, if those who have taken upon themselves the responsibility to disseminate spiritual food to the Amaharets, and they feed falsehood, they will be judged severely, for obvious reasons. So really, we have nothing to be worried about. For the Amaharets and those "academics/scholars" who are pure in heart and motive it's a win win situation isn’t it?


     
  19. Haha
    Anna got a reaction from JW Insider in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Or ME I meant as well, lol. I just realized I made it sound like I was saying you can't comment on posts addressed to me. You should know me better than that 
    Well then, lets blame @TrueTomHarley. Why is he even asking these questions. I think I know why, apparently we are reaching the "lets be silly and post memes and ad hominuuuuums" stage in the discussion...
    It's funny reading your posts with no capitalization on the I.  I don't know if I can take you seriously. It's like trying to listen to someone delivering a somber speech with spinach stuck between their teeth.
  20. Thanks
    Anna got a reaction from JW Insider in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Hmmmm......I beg to differ. How about we both ask a number of friends a simple question at the KH this Sunday or in a field service group: "do you know how to explain why we believe 1914 and 607?"
    In any case, it looks like you are trying to evade the question by implying that understanding how we come to 1914 (and 607) requires too much time and that one has better things to do (which actually confirms what I said, that most don't really know) and also you are detracting from the question by implying that those who do this, are really just trying to discredit the Slave and score points for themselves on a discussion forum.
    I can't say anything about what was said under another heading, but I do know that the question that arose a number of times was if WT accepts 537, then why does it not accept 587, if both dates are verifiable by the same astronomical/historical l sources.
    I am not here to score points either, (and if anyone is, well then they are to be pitied because what real value does collecting points from complete strangers who have no impact on your real, outside the internet, life have?). I am not trying to prove the Slave are deceivers,  but how would you explain to someone what I posted earlier but you never commented on. It was in answer to your comment:  " Faith is important - but Jehovah knew that us simple folks - we always need small steps to look forward to and he lovingly gave it to us.... and what is more.. the proof of the pudding is the eating....... world events since 1914 has proven that it is a 'reality'...... We will soon be seeing the last prophecies regarding Babylon the great, the call to peace and security...and the 8th king in action.... as a matter of fact - religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak...."  And my reply was:
    "BUT that does not mean the dates and numbers and lengths of periods we simple folks put together are always correct are they? What has happened to the millions that were not supposed to die? (they did). What has happened to the generation that was not supposed to pass away? (they have, practically) What has happened to the children that were not supposed to even finish school in this system? (they did, and they have children of their own). What has happened to the world that can't get any worse? (it did, and still might)".
    Religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak, but there have been many signs before that, that actually turned out NOT to be the sign
    To be fair, this topic here "607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported" really does call for secular,/scholarly knowledge because it is an academic subject.  No matter how noble feelings are, they still have no impact on whether something is true or false. And I cannot somehow connect a date with love for Jehovah, especially if there is a possibility that the date could be completely erroneous.
    I think those people have been paying attention to the signs on the ground. Probably since they first learned about them.
    Indeed, the Amaharets.  And it is a consolation to me that even if we are totally wrong about Christ's enthronement in 1914 and it takes another 2000 years for Armageddon to come, surely Jehovah will look upon us that we, the Amaharets, did our best to follow in the footsteps of Christ, by preaching the Kingdom and by living our life in harmony with God's moral standards. Surely Jehovah will recognize that the majority of Christ's sheep are unable to verify or understand everything the Bible, or what the Slave presents, like the Beoreans were able to. I can't imagine a missionary in Peru being overly concerned about Neo Babylonian chronology. Surely it is sufficient that these ones have verified the fundamental truths. And those who desire and are able to delve deeper into the academic side of this particular issue, and in all honesty find discrepancies with 607, surely they will not be disqualified? Thankfully, Jehovah is the reader of hearts. However, if those who have taken upon themselves the responsibility to disseminate spiritual food to the Amaharets, and they feed falsehood, they will be judged severely, for obvious reasons. So really, we have nothing to be worried about. For the Amaharets and those "academics/scholars" who are pure in heart and motive it's a win win situation isn’t it?


     
  21. Haha
    Anna got a reaction from DefenderOTT in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Hmmmm......I beg to differ. How about we both ask a number of friends a simple question at the KH this Sunday or in a field service group: "do you know how to explain why we believe 1914 and 607?"
    In any case, it looks like you are trying to evade the question by implying that understanding how we come to 1914 (and 607) requires too much time and that one has better things to do (which actually confirms what I said, that most don't really know) and also you are detracting from the question by implying that those who do this, are really just trying to discredit the Slave and score points for themselves on a discussion forum.
    I can't say anything about what was said under another heading, but I do know that the question that arose a number of times was if WT accepts 537, then why does it not accept 587, if both dates are verifiable by the same astronomical/historical l sources.
    I am not here to score points either, (and if anyone is, well then they are to be pitied because what real value does collecting points from complete strangers who have no impact on your real, outside the internet, life have?). I am not trying to prove the Slave are deceivers,  but how would you explain to someone what I posted earlier but you never commented on. It was in answer to your comment:  " Faith is important - but Jehovah knew that us simple folks - we always need small steps to look forward to and he lovingly gave it to us.... and what is more.. the proof of the pudding is the eating....... world events since 1914 has proven that it is a 'reality'...... We will soon be seeing the last prophecies regarding Babylon the great, the call to peace and security...and the 8th king in action.... as a matter of fact - religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak...."  And my reply was:
    "BUT that does not mean the dates and numbers and lengths of periods we simple folks put together are always correct are they? What has happened to the millions that were not supposed to die? (they did). What has happened to the generation that was not supposed to pass away? (they have, practically) What has happened to the children that were not supposed to even finish school in this system? (they did, and they have children of their own). What has happened to the world that can't get any worse? (it did, and still might)".
    Religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak, but there have been many signs before that, that actually turned out NOT to be the sign
    To be fair, this topic here "607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported" really does call for secular,/scholarly knowledge because it is an academic subject.  No matter how noble feelings are, they still have no impact on whether something is true or false. And I cannot somehow connect a date with love for Jehovah, especially if there is a possibility that the date could be completely erroneous.
    I think those people have been paying attention to the signs on the ground. Probably since they first learned about them.
    Indeed, the Amaharets.  And it is a consolation to me that even if we are totally wrong about Christ's enthronement in 1914 and it takes another 2000 years for Armageddon to come, surely Jehovah will look upon us that we, the Amaharets, did our best to follow in the footsteps of Christ, by preaching the Kingdom and by living our life in harmony with God's moral standards. Surely Jehovah will recognize that the majority of Christ's sheep are unable to verify or understand everything the Bible, or what the Slave presents, like the Beoreans were able to. I can't imagine a missionary in Peru being overly concerned about Neo Babylonian chronology. Surely it is sufficient that these ones have verified the fundamental truths. And those who desire and are able to delve deeper into the academic side of this particular issue, and in all honesty find discrepancies with 607, surely they will not be disqualified? Thankfully, Jehovah is the reader of hearts. However, if those who have taken upon themselves the responsibility to disseminate spiritual food to the Amaharets, and they feed falsehood, they will be judged severely, for obvious reasons. So really, we have nothing to be worried about. For the Amaharets and those "academics/scholars" who are pure in heart and motive it's a win win situation isn’t it?


     
  22. Like
    Anna got a reaction from Arauna in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Hmmmm......I beg to differ. How about we both ask a number of friends a simple question at the KH this Sunday or in a field service group: "do you know how to explain why we believe 1914 and 607?"
    In any case, it looks like you are trying to evade the question by implying that understanding how we come to 1914 (and 607) requires too much time and that one has better things to do (which actually confirms what I said, that most don't really know) and also you are detracting from the question by implying that those who do this, are really just trying to discredit the Slave and score points for themselves on a discussion forum.
    I can't say anything about what was said under another heading, but I do know that the question that arose a number of times was if WT accepts 537, then why does it not accept 587, if both dates are verifiable by the same astronomical/historical l sources.
    I am not here to score points either, (and if anyone is, well then they are to be pitied because what real value does collecting points from complete strangers who have no impact on your real, outside the internet, life have?). I am not trying to prove the Slave are deceivers,  but how would you explain to someone what I posted earlier but you never commented on. It was in answer to your comment:  " Faith is important - but Jehovah knew that us simple folks - we always need small steps to look forward to and he lovingly gave it to us.... and what is more.. the proof of the pudding is the eating....... world events since 1914 has proven that it is a 'reality'...... We will soon be seeing the last prophecies regarding Babylon the great, the call to peace and security...and the 8th king in action.... as a matter of fact - religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak...."  And my reply was:
    "BUT that does not mean the dates and numbers and lengths of periods we simple folks put together are always correct are they? What has happened to the millions that were not supposed to die? (they did). What has happened to the generation that was not supposed to pass away? (they have, practically) What has happened to the children that were not supposed to even finish school in this system? (they did, and they have children of their own). What has happened to the world that can't get any worse? (it did, and still might)".
    Religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak, but there have been many signs before that, that actually turned out NOT to be the sign
    To be fair, this topic here "607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported" really does call for secular,/scholarly knowledge because it is an academic subject.  No matter how noble feelings are, they still have no impact on whether something is true or false. And I cannot somehow connect a date with love for Jehovah, especially if there is a possibility that the date could be completely erroneous.
    I think those people have been paying attention to the signs on the ground. Probably since they first learned about them.
    Indeed, the Amaharets.  And it is a consolation to me that even if we are totally wrong about Christ's enthronement in 1914 and it takes another 2000 years for Armageddon to come, surely Jehovah will look upon us that we, the Amaharets, did our best to follow in the footsteps of Christ, by preaching the Kingdom and by living our life in harmony with God's moral standards. Surely Jehovah will recognize that the majority of Christ's sheep are unable to verify or understand everything the Bible, or what the Slave presents, like the Beoreans were able to. I can't imagine a missionary in Peru being overly concerned about Neo Babylonian chronology. Surely it is sufficient that these ones have verified the fundamental truths. And those who desire and are able to delve deeper into the academic side of this particular issue, and in all honesty find discrepancies with 607, surely they will not be disqualified? Thankfully, Jehovah is the reader of hearts. However, if those who have taken upon themselves the responsibility to disseminate spiritual food to the Amaharets, and they feed falsehood, they will be judged severely, for obvious reasons. So really, we have nothing to be worried about. For the Amaharets and those "academics/scholars" who are pure in heart and motive it's a win win situation isn’t it?


     
  23. Like
    Anna reacted to DeeDee in Which nations disappear in Armageddon?   
    I had received regular "informal" return visits with two sisters a few years before seeing the book and had been given a JW Bible. Also, I always respected the way JW's knew and used the Bible so thoroughly. And, as I said earlier, I KNEW that the TRUTH would be found IN the Bible [because I had ALWAYS believed that the Bible was truly God's Word and not man's.] So, when I saw that the JW's actually had a book that taught what the Bible REALLY teaches, I started to study. As I started learning what the Bible REALLY says, I quickly learned that "JEHOVAH" truly was God's name! That proved to me that the JW's MUST truly have the truth.
  24. Upvote
    Anna got a reaction from ComfortMyPeople in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Hmmmm......I beg to differ. How about we both ask a number of friends a simple question at the KH this Sunday or in a field service group: "do you know how to explain why we believe 1914 and 607?"
    In any case, it looks like you are trying to evade the question by implying that understanding how we come to 1914 (and 607) requires too much time and that one has better things to do (which actually confirms what I said, that most don't really know) and also you are detracting from the question by implying that those who do this, are really just trying to discredit the Slave and score points for themselves on a discussion forum.
    I can't say anything about what was said under another heading, but I do know that the question that arose a number of times was if WT accepts 537, then why does it not accept 587, if both dates are verifiable by the same astronomical/historical l sources.
    I am not here to score points either, (and if anyone is, well then they are to be pitied because what real value does collecting points from complete strangers who have no impact on your real, outside the internet, life have?). I am not trying to prove the Slave are deceivers,  but how would you explain to someone what I posted earlier but you never commented on. It was in answer to your comment:  " Faith is important - but Jehovah knew that us simple folks - we always need small steps to look forward to and he lovingly gave it to us.... and what is more.. the proof of the pudding is the eating....... world events since 1914 has proven that it is a 'reality'...... We will soon be seeing the last prophecies regarding Babylon the great, the call to peace and security...and the 8th king in action.... as a matter of fact - religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak...."  And my reply was:
    "BUT that does not mean the dates and numbers and lengths of periods we simple folks put together are always correct are they? What has happened to the millions that were not supposed to die? (they did). What has happened to the generation that was not supposed to pass away? (they have, practically) What has happened to the children that were not supposed to even finish school in this system? (they did, and they have children of their own). What has happened to the world that can't get any worse? (it did, and still might)".
    Religions seem to be riding the beast as we speak, but there have been many signs before that, that actually turned out NOT to be the sign
    To be fair, this topic here "607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported" really does call for secular,/scholarly knowledge because it is an academic subject.  No matter how noble feelings are, they still have no impact on whether something is true or false. And I cannot somehow connect a date with love for Jehovah, especially if there is a possibility that the date could be completely erroneous.
    I think those people have been paying attention to the signs on the ground. Probably since they first learned about them.
    Indeed, the Amaharets.  And it is a consolation to me that even if we are totally wrong about Christ's enthronement in 1914 and it takes another 2000 years for Armageddon to come, surely Jehovah will look upon us that we, the Amaharets, did our best to follow in the footsteps of Christ, by preaching the Kingdom and by living our life in harmony with God's moral standards. Surely Jehovah will recognize that the majority of Christ's sheep are unable to verify or understand everything the Bible, or what the Slave presents, like the Beoreans were able to. I can't imagine a missionary in Peru being overly concerned about Neo Babylonian chronology. Surely it is sufficient that these ones have verified the fundamental truths. And those who desire and are able to delve deeper into the academic side of this particular issue, and in all honesty find discrepancies with 607, surely they will not be disqualified? Thankfully, Jehovah is the reader of hearts. However, if those who have taken upon themselves the responsibility to disseminate spiritual food to the Amaharets, and they feed falsehood, they will be judged severely, for obvious reasons. So really, we have nothing to be worried about. For the Amaharets and those "academics/scholars" who are pure in heart and motive it's a win win situation isn’t it?


     
  25. Like
    Anna got a reaction from Ann O'Maly in 607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?   
    Yes I do, but you do realize not everyone has the opportunity to study chronology for themselves, I mean really study. Not only that, but going to original sources for this kind of research is not really encouraged by the Slave.
    Of course we both know that Gerard does not support 607. I assume you are not mentioning that aspect because that would only confirm what I said before; Witnesses are judged by whether they believe in 607 or not. 
    The fact is he WAS a witness at one time but as you say, his present status is uncertain. But why are we doubting his Witness status in the first place? Why does the fact that he does not support 607 automatically change his status from being a brother to maybe not being a brother?
×
×
  • 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.