The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Fisherman

  AS:

  I agree that doctrine makes 1914 significant to the wts because they pivot on that year and such doctrines as presently explained would not seem posible without 1914, and that is why it is not possible for wts teaching to back away from the date at present. I perceive though that many jws publicly accept the date but privately feel that there seems to be something wrong and everyone is waiting to see what the wts is going to do about the 1914 teaching,some jws still hanging on to the hope of a paradise earth in connection with 1914. From your explanation, it seems that the only thing keeping the date alive are the doctrines it supports.

  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.
• 

  AuldSoul

  Barry: In predictive prophecy the year day principle is not used if it looks silly.

  I submit that it looks silly in any usage beyond those occasions when the immediate context itself demands its usage. I further submit that your explanation of when to use it reduces it from a rule or principle to a mere convenient abstraction that can be utilized whenever it doesn't "look silly" to use it. Whether or not a given usage looks silly is entirely subjective, and one can hardly refer to something subjective as a principle or a rule.

  For instance, the usage regarding the 1,260 days only seem silly unless the thousand years is actually a thousand "prophetic years" of years, which would be 360,000 years. Then we'd have plenty of time to insert the 1,260 days (1,260 years) of Revelation 12. It is the very act of arbitrary application based on subjective human perception of concepts like "seems too long" as a basis for non-use that makes me know for certain this "day for a year" is neither a principle nor a rule. Not for SDA, not for JW, and not in the Bible.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  barry

  Numbers and Ezekial dont teach the year day principle and the bible doesnt need it for any interpretation.
• 

  ozziepost

  AlanF has it quite correct when he says:

  thirdwitless wrote:

  : I personally wrote this. Will the administrator delete it because it proves 607 to 1914 really was the Gentile 7 Times? We shall see.

  What a devious moron you are! You're devious because you think to imply that your previous cut & pastes were deleted because they actually proved something. You were told the reason: large cut & pastes of anything are not welcome -- they are viewed as trolling. You're a moron because you actually seem to think that posters won't see your lying implication.

  Hellrider:

  ...and as usual, Thirdwitnoid do NOT respond to points made. He refuses to answer arguments and points that he does NOT have an answer for (such as my post). He just brushes it off like it`s nothing, although we all KNOW that our arguments have killed off his WTS-theories. And posters who post but do not respond to arguments raised and points made, are TROLLLLLLS! So people should just ignore him. The "points" in his post has allready been refuted, and he has come up with no counterarguments. TROLL TROLL TROLL

  I agree.

  AuldSoul:

  Yes. And his motive could not be more straightforward. Rankings on search engines. What better possible way for him to get a boost in rankings than to have thousands of ex-JWs and JWs clicking the link from hundreds or thousands of different IP addresses and different countries from dozens of sites. I clicked on one of his links. Saw what it was. I figured out what he was doing immediately and haven't tried another of his links.

  I strongly recommend not boosting his rankings.

  Wise words.

  3W: This thread has been allowed to run as it shows lurkers and doubters alike the extremes to which some dub supporters will go to spread their points of view and then when challenged by more able posters those teachings are shown to be the baseless conjectures of human imaginations that they are. You are doing the apostate™ cause a great service!

  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'. So, no more, eh?
• 

  AuldSoul

  Barry,

  100% agreed. Outside of application to the specific judgment prophecies wherein "a day for a year" is stipulated, the usage is completely unnecessary.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  willyloman

  This is a bit like picking up the daily newspaper and finding a story on page one that jumps to six or seven inside pages, all written by the Flat Earth Society purporting to "prove" the earth is not round. Who's going to read it? The theory is already thoroughly debunked.
• 

  AuldSoul

  willyloman: Who's going to read it? The theory is already thoroughly debunked.

  In your analogy, other flat-earthers would read it, which is why it is due a reasoned and logical response for fair comparison.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  The Watchtower interprets this vision with pretend persecution it suffered during world war two. And, took those dates as LITERAL 2300 days. Thirdwitness just doesn't know his JDub history enough to see a connection and their stunning presumptuousness.

  ThirdWitness: Seems to me that the Society is arbritary in how it picks and chooses which times are literal days and which are years.

  Am I correct in understanding how you responded to Steve and AuldSoul's query about this? Your argument is basically "cuz it won't work out otherwise".
• 

  Big Tex

  3W: This thread has been allowed to run as it shows lurkers and doubters alike the extremes to which some dub supporters will go to spread their points of view and then when challenged by more able posters those teachings are shown to be the baseless conjectures of human imaginations that they are. You are doing the apostate™ cause a great service!

  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'. So, no more, eh?

  Spot on Ozzie.

  Like most Witnesses, this person(s) either cannot or will not answer legitimate, honest, scholarly objections to somewhat convuluted ideas.

  I've found it very intersesting that this person(s) refuses to answer certain questions and seems to insist on pointing toward huge cut and pastes.

  Sorry but not interested. Either defend the idea yourself or begone.
• 

  Fisherman

  Does anyone have a reference in support of the statement in the book "GTR" which says that rashi erroneosly applyed the Gentiles times. Oloff does not support this statement in his book.

  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". Perhaps, the wts is right about 1914 but I cannot bet my life on it. I am not sure about 1914. I am not convinced.