Great and thought provoking question. I figure that there is a nature to reality and variables that affect its balance. Why? It beats me. It is like, how could Satan convince myriads of angels. He must have had some poweful argument or why would they choose to commit suicide. Did Satan desire Eve the same way the angels later on came down to take females. The 144 although kings, are pictured as female, the bride of Christ, and sometime after the marriage, they should produce offspring. At some point in time things should add up giving mental satisfaction and understanding of why things where and are the way they are and make sense of everything.
Fisherman
JoinedPosts by Fisherman
-
45
Why the need for 144000 imperfect humans to Rule with Christ Jesus for 1000 years ? Is he incapable of ruling by himself ?
by smiddy indoes this make any sense whatsoever ?
isnt jesus christ the king ?why the need for 144000 king priests to help him ?.
is he not up for the job?
-
-
-
44
1914 to be abandoned around 2016
by Alfred inthe other day i was doing some research about "1914" for a friend on my wt cd library (spanish) and i found it quite interesting that the number of times "1914" is mentioned in the watchtower magazine during the previous 3 decades has been dropping exponentially as follows.... 1980-1989: mentioned 854 times.
1990-1999: mentioned 492 times.
2000-2009: mentioned 222 times.
-
-
Fisherman
"the number of times "1914" is mentioned in the Watchtower...."
According to WT, Gentile Times end in 1914 and everything else WT teaches about WT organization is based upon 1914. --So 1914 teaching is not going away depending on times.
1914*Sequence of events:
1 End of Gentile times2 Birth of Kingdom3 Parousia44 Horsemen of Apocalypse5 Lat Days6Generation7 Fall of Babylon the Great8 Appointment of Faithful Steward9.Preaching10. END* Events not necessarily listed in sequential order
-
82
the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)
by pleaseresearch inso a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).
-
-
Fisherman
607-70= 537
-
82
the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)
by pleaseresearch inso a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).
-
-
Fisherman
Some people live in a construct where fact is subjective
Which fact?
-
82
the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)
by pleaseresearch inso a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).
-
-
Fisherman
If you accept 539 then you believe the conclusions of others.
539 is a verifiable, historical fact. It is indisputable.
If you accept WT doctrines then you believe the conclusions of others.
Bravo!
Now go back an re-read my first post on this thread. Isn't that what I posted?
-
82
the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)
by pleaseresearch inso a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).
-
-
Fisherman
Yes they have. Repeatedly
No, they haven't.
and you said:............
Yes, I said I was guessing -for the last time.
So - answer my question.
Jan 1st 2018.
Will you post on this forum and be man enough to admit the the JW 1914 doctrine was crap?
For the second and final time on this thread, if my guesses turn out to be wrong, so what, it was only a guess. But show me how if I guess wrong, WT douctrines are invalid.
-
82
the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)
by pleaseresearch inso a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).
-
-
Fisherman
No - that's what the evidence proves.
No it don't. That is an opinion, an interpretaion, a conclusion from the evidence.
Tax receipts.
You believe the conclusions of others but you don't know.
Stop being so angry that others disagree with you.
-
82
the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)
by pleaseresearch inso a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).
-
-
Fisherman
And I guess it still doesn't add up to you.
You can guess too.
-
82
the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)
by pleaseresearch inso a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).
-
-
Fisherman
So - answer my question.Jan 1st 2018.Will you post on this forum and be man enough to admit the the JW 1914 doctrine was crap?
This thread aint about generation. That is another topic. But I already told you that I was posting guesses and my guesses are not wt doctrines. If you don like it, too bad.
If nothing happens in 2017 and my guesses turn out to be wrong; so what? But it would not invalidate WT 's 1914 or Wt's generation or WT's interpretation of 607.
-
82
the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)
by pleaseresearch inso a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).
-
-
Fisherman
the copious amounts of evidence from the Neo Babylonian era does.
That's what you and others think. Cofty already posted that 587 is agreed upon. But, WT interpretation of the Bible does not. And WT views on 607 have not been disproven.