thirdwitness,
I would appreciate a response to my explanation of Daniel 4.
Look at my posts. I am only using the bible. Not extra-interpretation.
Up for the challenge?
steve
The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible
by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
cabasilas
For those who want it on a silver platter. Sorry. Thats not how Jehovah works. The Bible was written in such a way to discern to intentions of the heart. For those not truely wanting to know. They give up and quit. For those wanting to know the truth, they dig into God's word. That is why Jesus spoke in illustrations. He could have plainly told everything so that everyone today could understand but it was his intention to cull out those not really interested, those who did not care to dig deep and learn more.
In other words, the interpretation you're proposing cannot be plainly extrapolated from the Bible. You have still not come up with ONE verse that plainly says the tree dream had any other application than to Nebuchadnezzar. Your interpretation is not based on the Bible but is read into the Bible.
-
Hellrider
Thirdwitnoid promises answers in his post nr.235, answers to the questions raised about why the "day for a year-rule" should be applied to the seven times. Then what the comes up with as an answer, is this:
If a day for a year is not applied then that means that the 7 times lasted from 607 to 600. Did a ruler of God's Kingdom come forth then? Logical reasoning will lead a person to believe that the day for a year rule must apply otherwise the prophecy is meaningless. We have as an example the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel chapter 9. The day for a year rule must apply in Daniel chapter 9 or the prophecy is meaningless and is of no value.
...which is pretty much exactly what he wrote in his initial post (start of thread), the very issue that the "apostates" have raised criticism, points and arguments against. In his reply to all those arguments and questions, what does he do? He simply copy-pastes the same shit one more time! So basically, what he does, is "answer" arguments to his initial "argument" by simply repeating the first "argument"!
Like I have said before, Thirdwitnoid is not here to discuss anything at all. He is here to preach! That is something quite different than what this board was intended for. Preaching on a discussion board (as in repeating ad nauseum/ brainwashing) is, in my opinion, the same as trolling. I realise that the reason why the admins are allowing him to do this, is because of freedom and speech and all. I respect that, but trolling (as in copy-pasting propaganda without being willing to discuss the content of the propaganda), does not fall under the principle of free-speech. Kick him out.
-
AlanF
saki2fifty said:
: I guess this is you, and your bio?
It's me, but it's not what I had in mind. The link you posted contains a thumbnail sketch. What I had in mind can be found in this post:
A JW Biography of AlanF http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/9/86609/1.ashx
AlanF
-
AuldSoul
Hellrider, it is more than just freedom of speech. It is important for saki2fifty and others to see that thirdwitness repeatedly refuses to directly respond to the questions that they themselves cannot answer. It is important for saki2fifty to witness that thirdwitness directly contradicts himself and the BIble by his interpretation (the same interpretation as that of the Watchtower Society). It is important for lurkers to witness the Watchtower Society illogic in action, in order to begin to recognize the same patterns of illogic and rampant premature conclusions in other doctrinal discussions.
In other words, it is important for others to see how to question a doctrine logically.
(NWT) Romans 12:1,2
Consequently I entreat YOU by the compassions of God, brothers, to present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason. And quit being fashioned after this system of things, but be transformed by making YOUR mind over, that YOU may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.In the New World Translation, Romans 12:1, 2 translates the Greek word logiken (from logikos, i.e. "logic") into "power of reason". Worship without logic is devoid of rationale, devoid of reason, devoid of the mind (whole mind or otherwise) and is unacceptable worship.
The Greek word dokimazein is translated "prove" which means an active subjection to throrough examination by testing or rational challenge. In context with making over the mind and acceptable worship being worship that includes logic, the means for testing is clear. thirdwitness fails to demonstrate power of reason, he would change his current doctrine to any that the Watchtower Society imposed as accurate.
Fisherman is not convinced that is a wise course. I would not be surprised if Fisherman's hesitancy is largely due to (or at least greatly reinforced by) what he has witnessed here.
saki2fifty is watching from the sidelines while siding with what he knows best (and shouldn't be faulted for doing so, in my opinion, a natural response) yet he seems to be truly weighing and evaluating what is written here, nonetheless. It should be noted that he is not subject to the authority of Jehovah's Witnesses and has therefore not experienced the full weight of the burdensome rules and consciences of others bearing down on his back, suffocating original thought and individual expression, to the same degree as have many of us posting here. Also, saki2fifty does not seem to lump all apostates together the way many active JWs do, he appears to interact with each individual as an individual, whereas thirdwitness frequently treats with posters here as one collective hive mind of some sort, a single opponent with many heads.
It is important for people to notice and learn to identify what it is they are actually seeing from thirdwitness, even if it does spark a surge of cognitive dissonance. I hope saki2fifty and other lurkers do not "bow out" of the discussions. I hope they stay and read and participate despite the fact that much of what they write may not be well received. But then, my objective in posting here is not to win an argument. My objective in posting here is to shine light into a very dark place (the Watchtower Society), so that people can clearly see what they have been stumbling around amongst.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul -
-
Big Tex
saki2fifty is watching from the sidelines while siding with what he knows best
And yet, while he admits this area is not his forte (nor is it mine), he owes it to himself to not only read every line of every post but to re-read until he understands the points being made. Otherwise, with all due respect, he is allowing fear of the unknown to dictate his spirituality.
Chris
-
Auchmull
Did anybody else notice that my social invite got totally ignored (from what I can tell). How rude!
I'm pretty sure he offered to take you to see Superman...
The only question that I have noticed not being answered (and I started to do some pretty shallow skimming toward the end) is about the October 1914/ WWI starting before Satan arrived (except for one post, suggesting he got an eviction notice...) This does seem like a good question and I'd like to know if there is any argument relating to it.
Thanks.
-
thirdwitness
Auldsoul I think I pretty much debunked your 70 weeks is really translated 70 weeks of years and a day for a year is not needed but here is a little more debunking.
Genesis 29:27 "Complete the week of this one, and we will give you the other also for the service which you shall serve with me for another (Shabuwa`)seven years (Shaneh)." Shaneh is the word for 'years'.
If shabuwa means seven years then why was it necessary for the writer to also use the word 'shaneh' which is translated years? It should have just read 'for another shabuwa' and thats it, if shabuwa means 1 week of years or 7 years. This is further proof that the 70 shabuwa or weeks of Daniel 9 must apply the day for a year if it is to be interpreted properly.
-