Jwfacts-- More Lies But This Time About The Great Crowd

by Recovery 278 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Recovery

  I've yet to cut and paste from a single WT. But jwfacts, tootiredtocare, and many posters in this discussion have copied and pasted on several occassions.

  So as I go to sleep, I want jwfacts to remember the points he has yet to successfully address:

  1. The logical fallacy/double standard displayed when using the WT in your argument

  2. The use of the greek words that form the phrase "great crowd" being ambiguous and used in numerous circumstances, and thus not making an automatic connection of Revelation 7 and 19

  3. The ten common terms listed really not being that common at all.

  4. The context and setting from the very beginning of Revelation 7 and how there is no change in setting. (tried to address but did so erroneously with a strawman of my argument)

  5. How God will spread his tent and dwell with those who are already residing in heaven, before his throne and in his temple.

  And here's just one more for good measure.

  6. Why does Revelation 7 say the immortal, anointed heavenly great crowd "will hunger no more nor thirst anymore, neither will the sun beat down upon them nor any scorching heat.." and "the Lamb...will shepherd them, and will guide them to fountains of waters of life. And God will wipe out every tear from their eyes.” Surely the immortal do not need to be guided to the fountains of waters of life. Tears, hunger, thirst, and scorching heat certainly do not occur to the immortal in heaven. So why does Revelation use these terms?

  I await the cut and paste Biblical interpretation by Ray Franz and maybe a random JWN poster.
• 

  tootired2care

  I've yet to cut and paste from a single WT. But jwfacts, tootiredtocare, and many posters in this discussion have copied and pasted on several occassions.

  No copy and paste here, I just came up with that myself. What I've provided shows that the passage can easily be interpreted more than one way.

  The other thing is you don't get to use other parts of Revelation - by your own assertions your argument is confined to chapter 7; don't try to muddy the waters. Stick to the chapter which is a complete thought [albeit a strange one]. If you can't prove your point without linking to other texts in some wierd interpretation you have failed.
• 

  jam

  regurgitating; The Great Crowd are described as being

  "in the Temple", right? " In Greek the whole phrase is

  ento nao autou ( in his Temple) and occurs exactly so

  at Rev.11:19 where it is the "ark" seen "in heaven."

  Compare the phrase in the LXX at 1 Samuel 3;3 ,

  2 Chronicles 4;7 and Luke1:21.

  The word group NAOS (15x) is always heaven (REV. 3;12

  7;15--11;1,2,19--14;15,17--15;6,8--16;1,17--21;22.

  Any argument to place the Great Crowd in the "courtyard"

  does not work as Rev.11;12 makes it clear that such

  is outside the Temple.
• 

  rather be in hades

  If the water is flowing out from the throne of God and the Lamb, and it can't possibly be talking about heaven

  are you serious? find me a river flowing from a throne on earth...can't possibly be talking about earth...

  do you not see the fallacy in that logic?

  in any case, as much as i admittedly hate the bible, i googled this up and read it.

  verse 9 says the crowd was standing before the throne and the lamb

  verse 11 says that the angels were stading around the throne, etc and that they worshipped god

  1. the crowd was before the throne

  2. the angels were around the throne

  3. the angels fell on their faces and worshipped god

  so clearly, wherever the great crowd was, the throne was and wherever the angels were, the throne was.

  for good measure, wherever the throne was, god also happened to be, unless the angels started worshipping the throne and i think from all those years reading my book of bible stories, we all know god is jealous and doesn't take kindly to people worshipping anything but him.

  conclusion? great crowd is in heaven and what's even funnier is the argument using language.

  i'm not sure what your profession is, but in technical writing (like owner's manuals and repair manuals), language is very important and anyone who has had to teach their grandparents how to record shows on the vcr knows that technical writing is hard to get down right

  so here we have a book that claims to be the technical manual for life itself. the book frm which everyone on earth should base their lives on.

  did god fail tech writing 101? it sure seems that way bc we have 3 major religions that claim to follow parts or all of the book, and we have god only knows how many christian sects with their own differeing viewpoints on how to interpret the instruction manual. i mean, even nutjobs like the westboro baptist idiots think they're following the bible and of course history has shown people are pretty quick to kill in the name of the author of the bible.

  i'm sorry but if the bible is truly inspired and beneficial for teaching, reproving, and setting things straight, then it was inspired by a moron who couldn't get his thoughts into a coherent and cohesive message. at least not one that this planet, as dominated as it is by christian theology, can figure out and interpret correctly.

  as a side point, if you are REALLY following god, and god is infallible, why can't your organization get the facts right? there's never been an organization that's screwed up as many times as yours in modern history when it comes to the bible. no seriously. that's TRUE. count how many end of the world false prophecies the watchtower leadership has thrown out there from the beginning and compare that to the numbers any other organization made.

  from what i remember, there's something like 7 from the jws.

  i don't think any other organization has made more than 3 and managed to stay afloat, of course, some of those groups committed mass suicide at the appointed time so maybe they could have taken the crown but sadly we'll never know.

  but at least the watchtower society is number 1 in something...
• 

  Recovery

  No actually the temple is not always in heaven.

  1 Corinthians 3:16 Do YOU not know that YOU people are God’s temple, and that the spirit of God dwells in YOU? 17 If anyone destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] YOU people are.

  And what do you know, naos is used there. Guess that arguments falls flat on its face.

  No more cut and paste rhetoric from ex JW websites. They aren't well researched.
• 

  King Solomon

  Recovery said:

  Look at how ahead of its time and how scientifically accurate the creation account is, going in the same basic order as scientists say.

  You're shittin' us, right? If by "basic" you actually mean "not at all alike", then sure, I'll agree....

  I mean, you DO understand that the whole "separating light from the dark" that sounds really zen-like and mysterious, but is actually nonsense, utter gobbedly-gook? (we know light is composed of photons: dark is composed of.... Well, nothing. Dark is the an absense of photons. Darkness doesn't exist as a separate discrete element, as it was thought of in ancient times.)

  But you said "creation", so here's only ONE example:

  You DO understand that whales ( " God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind") were claimed to be created on the 5th day,and land animals are claimed to be created on the 6th day?

  Problem: incontrovertible scientific evidence from fossils indicates that whales evolved from LAND mammals that returned to the sea.

  http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/03/4/l_034_05.html

  Only someone who is compleatly (sic) ignant (sic) of science would be able to make the statement you did above, while keeping a straight face.
• 

  jwfacts

  What you are saying about Rev 7 is basesless, so you have not even gone past step one.

  We cannot change settings unless we have ample reason to. Such as John saying 'And I saw in heaven...and look!'. That would be entirely different. I am not saying that just because John does not say he was transferred into heaven every single time that means its taking place on the earth. I am not saying that just because John does not say 'he saw' that means that something is not taking place in heaven.

  Who says we cannot change settings, you? Is that a self taught rule of scholarship? What do you mean we do not have ample reason for the setting to include heaven and earth? The Scriputure clearly discusses both heaven and earth, with the throne in heaven. John does not have to transfer from earth to heaven, he is seeing a vision of both. You reasoning is unbearably simplistic.

  The fact that you are taking it so literally does not make sense either. If John was on earth, he could not see the 4 angels at the four corners of the earth, unless the earth is flat.

  I don't have to address anything. I addressed a question of yours, and you said that if I did you would address my question regarding Jehovah lying about the great crowd in 1919. Over to you.
• 

  tootired2care

  Now that you've been educated on Rev 7, answer this one. How can you reconcile this paradox in Revelation below?

  Here is a wt$ translation of Rev 22:13 that is very misleading. Do you see how someone could very logically interpret this to mean that Jesus and God are the same, and be very well within logic to do so? After all the light gets brighter and this is the last written Revelation given to man.

  Rev 8:1 (NWT)

  "And to the angel of the congregation in Smyr′na write: These are the things that he says, ‘the First and the Last,’ who became dead and came to life [again]"

  I think we can both safely agree that this passage is referring to Jesus who is attributed with being the "First and the last".

  Rev 22:13 (NIV)
  " I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End."Rev 22:13 (NWT)
  " I am the Al′pha and the O?me′ga, the first and the last, the beginning and the end "

  How do you separate "First and the Last" from the Al′pha and the O?me′ga a.k.a Almighty? Go ahead and paste in the wt$ cd-rom bs, i'm sure it will be a really strong argument...LOL.
• 

  Recovery

  Oh yes. Whales evolved from squirrels and monkeys who then jumped into the ocean for some unknown reason and then developed into whales. And by the way your uncle is a monkey, literally.

  Wow jwfacts. i expected more from you. You seem to be more interested in dabbling over words than scriptures. We cant change settings because John didnt say we did. All we can go by is what John wrote down and he is very specific when he changes settings. Your argument about the four corners of the earth is weak and a poor rebuttal.

  Jehovah did not lie about anything. If there were any misnomers, it was mans error, not his. Now yiu still have 5 more posts to address.
• 

  rather be in hades

  i think you need to re-read that again and frankly, i'm not looking on any exjw sites. just read rev7.

  a waste of time imo.

  the throne is where god is

  the angels are where the throne is

  the great crowd is standing before the throne

  it's pretty damn simple really, but again, as i've stated, we already know that the bible is factually inaccurate. the exodus?

  not a single, solitary shred of archaeological evidence that the isrealites were enslaved in egypt.

  not a single shred of archaeological evidence that they wandered the wilderness for 40 years

  no shred of evidence for the great flood, no evidence for any miracles, no evidence for jesus.

  at least not the one in the bible. there might have been a philosopher named jesus, but he definitely wasn't god's only begotten son, birthed from a virgin, who walked on water, healed the sick with some spit and mud, and raised the dead.

  there's NO contemporary accounts of any of this stuff. none. nada.

  think about that. no one during lazarus' day bothered to write down that their buddy who was dead, smelly and rotting was raised back to life when some dude named jesus came around? the romans didn't mention the miracle healer who raised one of their officers' daghter from the dead? they didn't make mention of the miracle worker that was causing all kinds of issues in israel? earliest mentions of jesus came years after he died on some 2x4s. there's just nothing there to prove any of that stuff was real