2034 and its significance...

[Pudgy]

20 hours ago, Pudgy said:

 When a poster posts a post, the post that they post it’s sometimes from another poster who having posted their posts becomes the current  poster.

That’s not an attack, merely an observation.

[TrueTomHarley]

32 minutes ago, Moise Racette said:

I thought @Pudgy suggested attacking the point of view, not the person. Now you ridicule. Make up your minds and stick with reality and your words, or do they really mean nothing. 🤭

Not ridicule, just playfulness. Learn not to take yourself so seriously as I try not to take myself that way.

[Witness]

3 hours ago, Moise Racette said:

I have not found a church member other than those here that interpret scripture as their own.

Look no further.

[Moise Racette]

2 hours ago, Witness said:

Look no further.

What does, misrepresenting a chart and not understanding its significance have to do with the poster's unwillingness to answer what 1260, 3 1/2 times, 42 months in scripture demonstrate? 

[Pudgy]

How was the chart misrepresented? 

( I TRIED to make that question into five parts with three different subjects, but I lost my train of thought……)

[Arauna]

On 1/7/2023 at 11:36 PM, Moise Racette said:

Then the poster should be critical

I was no referring to the poster but to your words that human intelligence is needed to understand the Word of God. I was also not criticizing, just bringing attention to the fact that we should be more humble about the source of our understanding of God's word.  We do not need Jehovah's spirit to understand common sense or science or some worldly matters but I do think that we the help of God to understand the true message of the bible - the sacred secret of the kingdom and everything related to it.

[Moise Racette]

9 hours ago, Arauna said:

I was also not criticizing, just bringing attention to the fact that we should be more humble about the source of our understanding of God's word.

If a person is referring to scripture for their advantage, then yes, it's exploitation and a person should be humble. Not all of us are given the same spirit, which is also humbling.

That doesn't change the outcome of @Pudgy exploitation of scripture. Why not direct this poster's message to that person.

9 hours ago, Arauna said:

We do not need Jehovah's spirit to understand common sense or science or some worldly matters

How does the topic fit worldly matters to the poster? While I don't agree with the assessment of, AD2034, all comments should be directed toward that topic to ensure common sense can be applied. However, the spirit of God gives his worshipers the power of discernment Hebrews 5:14 and reasoning Acts 17:1-3, which can also be applied to common sense.

[Pudgy]

I hardly ever mention scripture, because even those of Jehovah’s Witnesses who have a really good understanding of core beliefs often differ greatly about the peripheral meaning of less emphasized scripture.

it is my considered opinion that all scripture is inspired of God, and if you’re going to interpret it, do it with common sense, and not contradict things that are obviously real.

Interpretations that contradict just plain old common sense, and elementary reasoning and logic, in my opinion start out highly suspect, and upon cross-examination often dissolve into a puff of fluff.

I like to talk about the ideas and principles that scripture expounds upon by direct reference, and by inference.…..always testing to see if it meets the reality test.

“Make sure of all things, hold fast to what is fine …… And kick the rest in the ribs.” (paraphrased)

[Pudgy]

Moise: here is a test for you.

I call it the “Bluster Test”, named after Phineas T. Bluster, the marionette Mayor of Doodyville, home of Howdy Doody, of TV fame in the 1950’s. (reference video on YouTube, if interested …)

You have specifically accused me of “exploitation of scripture”.

The burden of proof is yours. 

Specifically, what scriptures have I exploited, and how does one even “exploit a scripture”?

[Pudgy]

By the way Moise … you never answered my question about “How was the (David Splane) Chart misrepresented?” … another of your baseless accusations.

[Pudgy]

Not defending your accusations with fact is the classic definition of “Blustering”.

[Moise Racette]

32 minutes ago, Pudgy said:

By the way Moise … you never answered my question about “How was the (David Splane) Chart misrepresented.” … another of your baseless accusations.

It is good to know, you are @Witness and a former member. The bluster comes from none intellectual cartoons and comments by the poster. However, you seem to renege on your assertions by commenting, and indeed wish to only fight, making the poster's comments meaningless by the poster's own standards, thus your ignorance is your own poster. What, did the poster mention, about ridicule? The poster's words no longer have any value.

First, learn to understand a chart that is displayed. If a person was 20 in 1914 and lived to be 90, it would bring that generation to 1984. If a person is 20 in 1984 and lives to be 90, then it brings a person to 2054.

In the event people don't understand, generations or overlapping generation, posters have no business making up their own assumptions.