I was just about to post something similar, Apognophos.
Am I wrong or right please clarify if you know
by Skeptical78 122 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Jeffro
Apognophos:
I think you're wasting your time, Jeffro.
I enjoyed laughing at his stupidity. That can't be a waste of time.
-
EdenOne
It really doesn't matter if 607 B.C.E. or 587 B.C.E. are the historically correct dates for the destruction of Jerusalem in order to determine where the start of the "seven times" is found. In either case, they are irrelevant in the calculations leading to 1914 because:
a) The prophecy of Daniel chapter 4 applies solely to Nabuchadnezzar; therefore, the "seven times" are seven years, the exact time that lasted the insanity of the Babylonian king. Daniel chapter 4 contains in itself the prophecy and the narrative of its fulfillment.
b) The Millerite notion of one day = one year as a "biblical rule" is completely unwarranted to be extrapolated into this prophecy. (7 "times" = 7 lunar years of 360 days = 2520 days = 2520 years). One must wonder how come 7 years become magically broken into days and then magically reconstructed into years again.
c) And even assuming that a) and b) could be true in tandem, something else makes the entire subject laughable: How come 2520 lunar years (years composed of 360 days each) magically become 2520 solar years (years composed of 365,25 days) in the timeline of history? Because 2520 lunar years, when converted to solar years, actually are 2485 years, and nearly 6 months. [2520 x 360 / 365,25 = 2.485,47] So, even if 607 B.C.E. was to be the actual date of the destruction of Jerusalem, the actual duration of the "seven times" would be 2485 years and nearly 6 months [i.e. 2520 lunar years], leading to c. 1879/1880. If the starting date is 587 B.C.E. , then we would arrive at 1899/1900. To ignore the conversion of lunar years to solar years makes the debate around the starting of the "seven times" completely idiotic, and dishonest too, because it would NEVER lead to 1914 anyway.
Now, as for you, billythekid, you accused Jeffro of being a "son of Satan". Yet, you purposedly misrepresent the Bible by ignoring the points above. Interestingly, Satan is portrayed in the Gospels as the one who twists the holy scriptures in order to prove his points. So tell me: who are you proving to be son of?
Eden
-
Spectre
I like how he says we need new light from the old standards of disproving 607 b.c.e.
Sorry, facts are facts, Bro.
Billy, at least you should just say that its a complicated biblical thing or god testing us or something and shove that cognitive dissonance deeper.
-
Jeffro
EdenOne:
a) The prophecy of Daniel chapter 4 applies solely to Nabuchadnezzar; therefore, the "seven times" are seven years, the exact time that lasted the insanity of the Babylonian king. Daniel chapter 4 contains in itself the prophecy and the narrative of its fulfillment.
That is a logical objection to the claims JWs make about Nebuchadnezzar's supposed 'prophetic' dream.
But it's not the most reasonable conclusion. Since the book of Daniel was actually written in the 2nd century BCE, it's entirely probable that the stories were only loosely based on a 'Daniel' living in the 6th & 7th centuries BCE, and it's possible that the character didn't actually exist at all but was merely representative of some of the captives taken by Nebuchadnezzar as a narrative device.
It's more likely that the story about the dream about '7 times' is really a cryptic reference to the 49 (seven times seven) years from the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 587 BCE until Cyrus' decree to rebuild it in 538 BCE. That is much more plausible than a magical man in Babylon revealing a secret dream to Nebuchadnezzar that later came true, without any reliable corroboration whatsoever. This more reasonable conclusion is also consistent with first 7 'weeks' of the '70 weeks' 'prophecy', which apply to same period (despite being later co-opted by Christians with a different starting point), which was the arrival of 'Messiah' (literally 'anointed one'), which Isaiah (more accurately, a later writer under the Isaiah pseudonym) explicitly states was Cyrus.
Whatever the case, neither scenario lends any weight at all to the JW belief.
-
billythekid46
Top of the morning Lass jgnat. Teach was a phrase of endearment, since you call yourself an instructor or facilitator. but perhaps your right, I should call you nonconformist.
As for EdenOne. I have no idea where I misrepresent the bible or what you speak of since I don’t follow the Miller Doctrine but simply meet historical inaccuracy with the aid of Historical accuracy by proving with historical FACTS an answer to the year 607 through ironically the same literatures that Jeffro and many others have used to falsely accused the organization called JW’s portray them as liars, when the lies come within their or own convoluted group for not telling their readers the complete story. Perhaps you’re not aware through my previous post, but I’m and ex-witness that strongly believes if any one is going to debate something within reason, it should always be with the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God. I have read 1000’s of titles on Archeology, History, and theology, many from ex-witnesses and my faith in god, places my discernment in the right order. I do not consider myself infallible as others do, and to answer your question of who I am,
I prove to be Creation of Man. Creation of the most holy high, whom I entrust my life to. It is through him and him alone I quest for truth. I prove as an imperfect man to be many things, but do not hold sacrilegious or blind myself to the truth. As I figuratively called Jeffro the Son of Satan, it is only to remind readers how the only truth belongs to him, and as such perhaps not the Son of Satan but a close ally The False Prophet, by making outlandish claims on the “word of God to be False “as it has come to be known to us as the Bible. A storybook that can be changed on a whim. Such a man is a Heretic, and any mortal believing in such impudence transgresses on the very existence of man by which was started with the disobedience of Creations first pair. Who am I, I am one who brings truth with what the reader can see, as an alternative to blasphemy? Is it my Truth? No and I do not claim such title to it, but humble myself to accept it before God, Yahweh.
But you are correct, the organization that was established in 1931 as the Jw’s of today never believed in making such perditions as well as C.T. Russell’s association within the bible students.
The Universal Peace Federation (UPF) is a global network of individuals and organizations dedicated to building a world of peace centered on universal spiritual and moral values. This coalition is part of (NGO) Non-Governmental Organizations and have nothing to do with any one religious belief other than being unified with the constructs of the United Nation and has no personal gain on what it writes in The New World Encyclopedia, As JEFFRO put it by referring them to some cult called the Moonies, and makes accusation that I don’t know what an NGO is, when he is clearly being defiant with the truth and at this point continues to fabricate, lie, and make false claims in fear he will loose his followers.
This debate was hijacked from the original question on 1914. Someone in this thread made an outlandish claim the bible students made a prediction about 1799. I simply stated that date had nothing to do with the bible students but was a stepping stone in the idealism held by Miller and Adventist movement, and it still is. However I do find that 1799 is an important date. Perhaps not the end of the world but and interesting time. You call this lying, by speaking the truth? But in Jeffro's defense, He don't have publications that I have and are not available on the internet. 1000's of missing pieces just like the Babylonian Chronicles.
At the same time, U.S. president John Adams’ prudence alone prevented a war in 1799 that would have placed the young republic into combat against Napoleon. From Adams’ office in Philadelphia, the first seat of government, it was possible to look out on the streets and witness the great changes wrought by acting on religious vision. He knew that the power of religion could be exercised for good or ill. In general, Adams’ belief was that it had been exercised for ill and he strongly supported the separation of church and state. In this he played a critical role. As soon as the constitution for the new nation was ratified, he immediately criticized it
as incomplete because it had failed to define the protection of human rights. Jefferson and Madison agreed to draft a “Bill of Rights” to correct this oversight. The opening phrase of the first of ten amendments to the constitution ratified December 15, 1791, marks a turning point for church and state. For the first time in any nation’s history freedom of worship was official state policy: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
It had been 265 years since Felix Manz, the first Anabaptist martyr, perished in the “third baptism” under the freezing waters of the Limmat River near Wellenberg, Switzerland. At last the Anabaptist entreaty for the separation of church and state was law. As the nineteenth century dawned, a culture in Europe and North America holding religious, social, political, and scientific world-views unimagined by Luther held world stage. This fulfils Christ’s promise to the church of Philadelphia, “Behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it” (Revelation 3:8). In the next century, economic upheaval from a movement soon to be called the “industrial revolution,” and scientific advances, would provide Christianity with its greatest challenges, and its greatest triumphs. The Adventist Movement The Midnight Cry At midnight there was a cry, Behold, the bridegroom! Come out to meet him—Matthew 25:6, ASV
The Aftermath of Disappointment
Following the 1843-1844 disappointments, Storrs continued to preach the advent without dates. He drifted into an extreme position during the 1860s with the group known as Life and Advent Union. It was analogous to the unsaved non-resurrection position of Christadelphians. In later autobiographical sketches he recounts his encounter with books of the English writer Henry Dunn about the ransom doctrine and the restitution of all things. One book was titled The Destiny ofthe Human Race . He then reactivated The Bible Examiner in 1871 (after a lapse of about eight years) and reworked it to incorporate the thoughts of the ransom for
all and restitution of all things. The masthead verse was 1 Timothy 2:5,6. His conclusion: the plan of God extended beyond the few faithful to the entire human race. The Abrahamic promise applied to all men during a soon-to-come earthly kingdom. The general concept of God having a plan was popular among contemporary
Advent Christian writers like I. C. Welcome and Clarkson Gould in their The Plan of Redemption of 1867. But Storrs incorporated much more of the “wider hope” than they would allow. On the other hand he avoided the modernism and speculation rampant among Universalists in their great social tolerances. God provided reasonable provision for mankind’s recovery unlike Universalism’s belief in unconditional salvation.
George Storrs’ Bible Examiner would soon cease publication at his death in 1879. The pastor contributed a few short items as early as 1877 to those pages. The mature Nelson Barbour and John H. Paton were early collaborators in sorting through the prophetic charts. Barbour’s Herald of the Morning (John Paton and Pastor Russell were assistant editors) reawakened hopes in many advent believers that the return of Christ was here (though originally set at 1873). It also presented similar thoughts to those of Storrs about restitution. Thoughts about a harvest separation also renewed an earlier Millerite call to separate from that Christianity
which was merely nominal and sinful. In the early period they faced opposition from their parent movement, the Second Advent Church, publishers of The World’s Crisis . Later, many early collaborators in turn would set off in their own directions, including Nelson Barbour, John Paton, A. P. Adams, and A. D. Jones. By then young Pastor Russell was well under way in his publishing efforts of Zion’s Watch Tower and the Millennial Dawn studies.
-
Jeffro
Oh. He's still here.
-
Terry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiLq5UWNIuA
I would ask you watch this for a reason.
It demonstates in an opposite approach: how the Watch Tower constructs their own ever-changing "truth" about End Times.
I don't suggest you watch the sermon to learn some universal secret or to get you to become black and join the Pastor's church.
I found this YouTube video priceless to my own comprehension of how scripture can be deconstructed in yet another way.
Out of the 40,000 Christian denominations--all those different and differing Jesus Christs are being taught and interpreted.
AND NONE OF THEM MATCH the others!
-
EdenOne
Can you clarify exactly what you mean by this??
But you are correct, the organization that was established in 1931 as the Jw’s of today never believed in making such perditions as well as C.T. Russell’s association within the bible students.
I frankly fail to follow your reasoning at this point.
Eden
-
OUTLAW
Who am I, I am one who brings truth with what the reader can see, as an alternative to blasphemy?.....billythekid46
....
..........................................................................................................................................
...OUTLAW
...OUTLAW