by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
but I also thought that each creative day was 1000 years long
When I was in that sect, I was taught that a creative day was 7,000 years long and Adam was created in 4628 B.C.E.
But then that was when Jehovah's Witnesses were pointing toward 1975 as the end of this system of things.
31 years later . . . . . . .
Fisherman:
A question (off-topic I guess - please humor me):
How come you registered for JWD in February 04 but made no posts at all until this thread? Yet on this and the other thread you're up to 6 posts already!
You've made comments such as:
All of 3w arguments have not been shown to be red herrings and what ifs. For my opinion to be worth anything, I don't have to be able to list concisely exactly what I think shows that the hs does not disprove the 607 date.
Alan, I think that scholar silenced you on your 538 theory.
3W,thank you for this post. Personally, I think that your initial post here is too long. A link to
Standing alone, why is 1914 NOT important or why is the wts wrong about 1914. Also, a respectful call to "scholar" to defend 1914 or to show good reason to believe that 1914 is an important Bible date. There is something wrong here, lets count the money again and see what total we get.
I don't know. The wts explanation of the Gentile times seem so logical. I suppose it is possible, but I also thought that each creative day was 1000 years long and I also believed in the old defintion of generation and the teaching about "all flesh".
What brought you out of your shell? Could it be you know 3W? AlanF has commented to you (without response):
Of course, you won't. You're going to prove that you're fishermanus mentula flaccidus.I'm intrigued.
Ozzie: However, this forum is not a vehicle for publishing your own website or your own publication. If you have a point for discussion, then make it. As you were told by PM, simply C&P voluminous pages from another site is 'not on'.
Really, funny but I didn't see a warning and restrictions placed on dannyhaszard when he copied and pasted on this thread:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/118775/reply.ashx
I'm sure I can provide more examples if you need them to show the double standard being shown by the administration if you like.
Can what diogenes said really be true when he said:
JWD Debating 101
1. Make sure to pepper your comments with insults like idiots, retards, morons, liars. It is also good to alter their screen name with clever little digs like TurdWitness or ThirdWitless.
2. It is not necessary to bring forth actual proof against a particular line of reasoning. Just call it "an ad hominem attack". This way you can say the argument has been refuted and then claim victory.
3. If this JW begins to get the upper hand quickly change the subject. Try challenging him to a new topic of discussion. Things like the genesis creation account, baptismal questions, an 1879 Watchtower article, CTR pyramids, etc. If he doesn't take the bait, proclaim victory.
4. For administrators, it is always effective to turn off or limit their posting privileges and then start bombarding him with questions followed by mocking when he is unable to answer each and every question.
5. If the JW posts parts of an essay or website that had been a collaborative effort, then claim that this JW defender is not acting alone and is sharing his account with multiple JW's. You can even say the JW defender admitted it and keep proclaiming it over and over. Eventually everyone will believe it.
6. Allow apostates to copy and paste entire articles.
But don't allow any JW defender to post even excerpts of their own work.
7. Don't forget to use the word liar as much as possible.
8. If all else fails, start a conspiracy theory. Doesn’t matter how farfetched. Everyone will believe it.
3W, I also dislike these large cuts and paste as I have previously stated. As you probably know most people here are jws or xjws that know what the wts teaches. I don't want to read all this stuff, but if you provide a link I will unless it is just copy and paste from wt lit. I thought that your were going defend or show or discredit with arguments.
"...I put you at oath before God, tell us are you the Christ the son of the living God.." I am, and you will see son son of man comming ..." Did Caiphas see this in 1914 or will he see this"when the son of man is revealed"?
3W:
Do you not see that your post at the start of the thread and the one just above are a violation of Posting Guidelines?
Publicly disputing or arguing about moderator decisions
If you disagree with any action taken then please raise it via email or PM.
Re this:
For administrators, it is always effective to turn off or limit their posting privileges and then start bombarding him with questions followed by mocking when he is unable to answer each and every question.
Then don't waste them! Your accusation is ridiculous for you are the one doing the instigating.
Anyway, as I've said, this thread is still being allowed to run - "honest hearted ones" will be able to judge your actions for themselves.
Here's a point about Jesus' words, 'Jerusalem will be trampled'.
A lot seem to think that this means Jerusalem was not being trampled at the time and that it was all future. But it was being trampled on by the Romans. The words 'will be' in this case did not mean that it hadn't started.
For example, if we were in the middle of the winter and all the trees had lost their leaves and the grass and flowers are all dead and someone ask: When will this end and Spring begin? You could correctly answer them: Its going to get colder and the vegetation will be trampled on until the appointed time of winter is fulfilled. That would not mean that winter hadn't begun yet. It would mean that winter had begun and that it would continue until the appointed time.
So the argument made using 'will be' in this case means nothing.
3W,
Your (the WTS) reasoning is like reading the daily horoscope, your are trying to find todays application by tieing together copious amounts of vague poetic biblical statements.
Now lets look at something that is specific, Watchtower predictive ability. So far they have specifically presented over 30 dates that were later renounced as wrong. Not a single date came to pass as foretold. That is a 100% failure rate.The past provides a 100% guarantee that the current WTS understanding of 1914 is also wrong.
Its a good thing this guideline is not enforced:
please avoid:
1. Insulting, threatening or provoking language
3. Swearing, using hate-speech or making obscene or vulgar comments
This place would be almost empty.
Although I am not an administrator (a thankless job to be sure), I think I could answer the question about why Danny Hazzard can post links without rebuke.
Danny answers direct questions. Thirdwitness, you do not.
Danny posts newsworthy items. Thidwitness, you do not.
The only thing you have in common with Danny is you both have an agenda. Having an agenda you want to discuss is not against forum rules. Posting your agenda and then not discussing it seems to be your problem.
3W:
Its a good thing this guideline is not enforced:please avoid:
1. Insulting, threatening or provoking language3. Swearing, using hate-speech or making obscene or vulgar comments
This place would be almost empty.
Except for you, I s'pose?
