Posts by Flash

44

144,000 a literal number

by Bonnie_Clyde in

the questions from readers has affirmed that the 144,000 is a literal number.

it states that some numbers in revelation are symbolic and others are literal.

it argues that since the great crowd which is unnumbered is mentioned right after the 144,000, then logically the 144,000 would have to be literal.

Flash

Leolaia

LOL...I didn't think LittleToe was asking for an example of this very thing!

Niether you, LT nor anyone else will determine what form my responces shall come in. The beautiful thing about the Kingdom message in the Bible is that it runs from cover to cover. People that want to discredit the answers they hear by belittling them as 'patchwork quilt,' 'bible hop-scotch' or 'Watchtower proof-texting' must not really want an answer. Your responce below is another example. You just keep 'raising the bar' with endless requests for proof and only within your guidlines....It's been fun. Have a Great Day!

Rather than simply repeating Watchtower proof-texting, can you show from the context how you can identify the "little flock" of Luke 12:32 with the "great crowd" of Revelation and identify the "other sheep" of John 10:16 with the "144,000" of Revelation, and can you similarly show that the "little flock" of Luke is not included in the "great crowd" of Revelation, or show that the "other sheep" of John are not included within the "little flock" of Luke, or show that the "other sheep" of John refers to some other kind of group entirely, and so forth. What I'm trying to point out is that you uncritically accept the Watchtower identifications and categorizations (based on two very different scriptures in John and Luke) and impose it on Revelation to interpret it, without showing what one has to do with the other and whether those identifications are correct in the first place. I believe, along with the vast majority of non-JWs who interpret the Bible (aside from the Mormons, lol), that the "other sheep" in John refer to the Gentiles. Can you show me why this should not be the case?

40

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 10-24-04 WT Study

by blondie in

comments you will not hear at the october 24, 2004 wt study (september 15, 2004 issue)

review comments will be in black and parentheses ().

wt quotes will be in red and quotes "".

Flash

But perhaps they have become forward thinking enough to allow room for a certain amount of individual choice in such matters

Not this side of Armageddon!

44

144,000 a literal number

by Bonnie_Clyde in

the questions from readers has affirmed that the 144,000 is a literal number.

it states that some numbers in revelation are symbolic and others are literal.

it argues that since the great crowd which is unnumbered is mentioned right after the 144,000, then logically the 144,000 would have to be literal.

Flash

LittleToe

Try this on for size, for simplicity (Rev.7):
v4 - hears the number 144,000
v9 - sees those spoken of are a large multitude
v15 - these ones work as priests in the temple of God (heaven)
IMHO they are all the same group of Christians (spiritual Israel).

Simplicity? LT your merging the Great Crowd in with the Anointed. Rev.14:3 and 5:9 are very clear when they say they were "bought from the earth." There are two distinct groups, the 'Little Flock' (Luke 12:32) and the 'Other Sheep' (John 10:16). To the Little Flock Jesus made clear that God had 'approved of giving them the Kingdom.' We know when on earth Jesus preached "the Kingdom of the HEAVENS has drawn near" (Matthew 10:7). He also told us to pray for God's Kingdom to come on the earth (Matthew 6:10), there is a clear distinction made. This is one of the things the WTS has gotten right.

..................................

LT again

Flash:But John 1 has no bearing on the symbolism of the 144,000 of Revelation 7.

Your funny! LOL I think we should shake hands and move on.John 1:29 has EVERYTHING to do with Rev 7:10 and 14:1.

44

144,000 a literal number

by Bonnie_Clyde in

the questions from readers has affirmed that the 144,000 is a literal number.

it states that some numbers in revelation are symbolic and others are literal.

it argues that since the great crowd which is unnumbered is mentioned right after the 144,000, then logically the 144,000 would have to be literal.

Flash

outbutnotdown, you said,

*** w60 6/15 p. 384 Questions from Readers ***
Further, at Revelation 14:1, 3, we read of Jesus Christ as standing upon the mount Zion together with 144,000 others. The 144,000 would logically be as literal as the 1, making a total of 144,001 standing upon the mount.
It akes perfect sense to me!!!!
Brad

When I read this I thought Huh? I did not and do not not see your point. So I answered as I did.

Then you ask me this...

Flash,
You took my two points, made by the WTBTS, which are contradictory, then you separated them and said that they are both true.
What's up with that? I'm honestly dumbfounded.
Brad

What contradiction? What two points? Please make your point clearer.

My best answer to the whole issue is what I said to Narkissos and Leolaia which is,

I don't see it as an inconsistency because it's meaning is contained within the wording in a single sentence.

Yes, Leolaia, the fact they are in the same sentence adds meaning to the number!
How many "Lambs of God" are there??? John 1:29 One, only one and it is of major significance that the two are connected in the same sentance.

This to me is the answer to the question

9

Song "When I'm 64" banned !!

by Gordy in

jw
friends

taken from the mail on sunday.

(english newspaper).

i quote from parts of the item.

Flash

"We wanted to be sensitive but I don't know if the child or parents were actually asked whether they minded or not."

The problem today with being 'sensitive' is that it is one sided.

How about all the people who like the song the way it is don't their 'feelings' matter? Or how about the people who, regardless whether they like the song or not, do not want to be dictated to about what someone else 'feels' is correct???

40

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 10-24-04 WT Study

by blondie in

comments you will not hear at the october 24, 2004 wt study (september 15, 2004 issue)

review comments will be in black and parentheses ().

wt quotes will be in red and quotes "".

Flash

Confucious

I'm starting to get better at laughing at the WTS. I admit, my buttons can still get pushed, its becoming less as time goes on. Thanks in large part to being able to commiserate with others on this site.

44

144,000 a literal number

by Bonnie_Clyde in

the questions from readers has affirmed that the 144,000 is a literal number.

it states that some numbers in revelation are symbolic and others are literal.

it argues that since the great crowd which is unnumbered is mentioned right after the 144,000, then logically the 144,000 would have to be literal.

Flash

Tashawaa

Hey - this is the BEST argument I have ever seen for a literal 144k. Its short, and to the point. I didn't have to sift thru paragraphs of reasoning to see his point (unlike Leolaia who makes my head hurt )

LOL, I'm glad you liked it! I like to be brief. Some posts make my head hurt too!

44

144,000 a literal number

by Bonnie_Clyde in

the questions from readers has affirmed that the 144,000 is a literal number.

it states that some numbers in revelation are symbolic and others are literal.

it argues that since the great crowd which is unnumbered is mentioned right after the 144,000, then logically the 144,000 would have to be literal.

Flash

Narkissos

Flash:
I only tried to highlight a formal inconsistency in your reasoning: you say (1) 144,000 is a literal number because the lamb is literally one (although the figure "one" is actually not in the text, as Leolaia pointed out),

I don't see it as an inconsistency because it's meaning is contained within the wording in a single sentence.

And then you say that (2) in Revelation 7:4ff the number 144,000 is literal and the number 12,000 is symbolic. This time it is not "unreasonable to think that the statement [is] split and be both literal and symbolic." See the problem?

No. It's seems to me the number may have dual significance. I don't see that as an contridiction. Who on earth knows why God chooses the number amounts or the Tribal breakdown or why He attaches meanings to certain symbols or like to use numbers. Right now, I don't, other than to give us a riddle, a puzzel to solve...A brain teaser of importance.

................................................

Leolaia

The argument that the 144,000 number must be literal because the passage mentions the Lamb in the same sentence is weak because a singular noun is just a singular noun -- not a contrasting number; it does not itself demand that any other number mentioned in the same sentence must be literal, especially since the "Lamb" itself is a figurative expression.

If you are arguing literality on the basis of the Lamb being mentioned in the same passage, does that mean that Jesus is literally a lamb? Or would you use a figurative lamb to argue for a literal number of figurative virgins?

Yes, Leolaia, the fact they are in the same sentence adds meaning to the number!

How many "Lambs of God" are there??? John 1:29 One, only one and it is of major significance that the two are connected in the same sentance.

.........................................................

You both may have the last word.

44

144,000 a literal number

by Bonnie_Clyde in

the questions from readers has affirmed that the 144,000 is a literal number.

it states that some numbers in revelation are symbolic and others are literal.

it argues that since the great crowd which is unnumbered is mentioned right after the 144,000, then logically the 144,000 would have to be literal.

Flash

outbutnotdown

Flash,
Can you show me any OTHER SCRIPTURES that show these numbers to be the case, that they are so boldly making a claim about?.
I'm going to assume, no, so, since they are wrong about something that they are so adamant about, would it not make sense that they are wrong about everything they say....... to use the same logic that thye do?:

You would assume right. I can only repeat what I've already said, I believe the GB's came to a logical conclusion on this. I think their right and still makes perfect sense to me.

*** w60 6/15 p. 384 Questions from Readers ***
Further, at Revelation 14:1, 3, we read of Jesus Christ as standing upon the mount Zion together with 144,000 others. The 144,000 would logically be as literal as the 1, making a total of 144,001 standing upon the mount.
It akes perfect sense to me!!!!
Brad

Correct. The total is one hundred and fourty four thousand and one. .

79

What is the true Christian religion / faith?

by evergreen in

i,m going to cut to the chase here .i am not long viewing this website and am fascinated at much of what i have read.currently i attend meetings, but sit there and think of what i now know about the society and its past.i just feel so confused at the moment with religion.. its a bit like who shot jfk ,did man really land on the moon etc .. except it involves all of us( just wish i knew the truth).

the only thing that is keeping me there right now is that all my family are in the "truth" ,,and i cant just stay at home and be shunned which i have recently experienced ( was inactive for a while) .. if i knew beyond any shadow of a doubt that i have found the true faith and discern that it is definately the true faith, i would then make a stand and nothing would stop me .

already i am reading the scriptures without the aid of wt publications and what i am reading is amazing .i am starting to feel that i am now getting closer to god by simply doing this coupled with prayer.. there must be one true faith as there was in the first century.

Flash

Narkissos

I agree with you 100% Heathen! Surprised?
Hey folks... are you sure the door is narrow enough?

I hope to squeak thru last minute!

.....................................................

LittleToe

I notice that most of your cherished beliefs are based on the book of Revelation. That truly isn't a solid foundation for a belief system for the present or future. It's predominantly dream, song and symbol, for which to dogmatically claim a correct interpretation of would be kinda bigoted IMHO .

Not really, remember, Jesus had a lot to say concerning the future of humanity. I think Heathen gave you a good answers.

Also, for #8 its being hashed out here:

144,000 A Literal Number http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/79566/1.ashx

.......................................................

outbutnotdown

"I like your Christ, but I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are not at all like your Christ."

I love this, what a GREAT observation!

...................................................

LittleToe again...

Heathen:And your problem with me offering a counter-opinion would be??
And what's the issue with questioning Flash's reading comprehension?

Your funny! My reading comprehension is very good - thank you.

In Answer:

1. Trinitarians don't believe that the Father is the same person as the Son (unless you're talking about Modalists)

2. A hotly contested scripture, as far as translation and interpretation is concerned

5. Is the "beast "governments, though?

Since your question is directed toward Heathen I'll just respond to these.

1 and 2) Who's talking about Trinitarians? The scriptures are very clear about it, Deuteronomy 6:4, John 20:17 and Colossians 1:15,16

5) Read Daniel chapter 7 and 8. Your reading comprehension is good...right?

.