i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
Then it has nothing to do with the question I asked.
I don’t know what you mean. I was responding to your implication about the faith of German Bible Students when they realized or if they realized as you assert that they didn’t have to go through all of that and when the end didn’t come when expected. I’ve implied that it more than a JW belief struggle with government
I'm afraid you're going to have to do a little homework..
I don’t know what is your point here.
the bible records miracles such as resurrections, angels, prophecy and destructive acts of god to mention a few.
are these all a pack of lies?
how do you explain them?
You seem incapable of following a simple, rational argument. Carry on
You are not arbitrator but only an advocate. The straw man you reference has zero effect on the Bible miracles.
the bible records miracles such as resurrections, angels, prophecy and destructive acts of god to mention a few.
are these all a pack of lies?
how do you explain them?
Arguing with you is like playing chess with a pigeon
Kill the chess player and think you win?
Red herring argument. The subject of discussion is the Bible.
the bible records miracles such as resurrections, angels, prophecy and destructive acts of god to mention a few.
are these all a pack of lies?
how do you explain them?
Cofty, immaterial. The subject is the Bible miracles.
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
They were not members of the great crowd. They were not even prospective members of the great crowd.
Nobody is until they come out of the gt.
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
f you believe that view expressed in that quote has been adjusted and there is some other basis (Other than a chronological understanding of a generation) to identify "prospective" members of the great crowd today, then I would appreciate a reference or two.
I remember discussing this with you on another thread. Obviously, being an actual member of the great crowd depends on surviving the GT. It is also obvious that the WT previously taught a deadline for GT connected to 1935. The point is that those 1935ers died and were not members of the Great Crowd because they died and did nit survive the gt.
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
don't think you're coming to grips with the question. Anointed Christians were willing to endure the horrors of the arena for the crown of heavenly life.
That’s not what I’m pointing out. It shockingly came to that horror but Jesus had said he would come quickly and when he didn’t, they didn’t forget about the evidence although his return did not realize. When beliefs and interpretations about 1914 turned out to be equivocation everything else that was known to be true was not struck down.
How would you explain *.*
Should I resort to winning an argument, or to fallacy; Like an apologist or a defense lawyer. I think you are implying a weakening resolve to the harkening to no blood transfusions. What you seem to be implying about the Brethren in Germany during mustache’s reign is that their death was negligent and could have been avoided. And the explanation is: “I’ve eaten, Ive wiped my mouth and said, I’ve done nothing wrong. Our intention was good although it needless resulted in human deaths, now let’s move on.” Decisions that have resulted in innocent lives with no accountability. I think that is what you are saying? But is that truly the case and an honest representation of what happened?
i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.
instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .
they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .
The great crowd comes out of (i.e. survives) the great tribulation and those people did not even live to see it.
How does that debunk 1914? And how does mistaken interpretations of the Bible by JW falsify the Bible or disqualify JW as God’s agency?
How would you explain to a survivor of Auschwitz that what they were told in 1935 was wrong?
In Rev, Jesus told the congregations back then that he was coming quickly but they died and he never showed up. When they were faced with persecution and death did they suffer from amnesia? And how about Peter and the other Apostles, did they lose faith? JW don't need WT to validate the reality of their relationship with God and the conviction that the promises about eternal life are true whether or not WT interpretations about timing are mistaken. The 1935 was a flash of light nevertheless because it clarified the two destinies.
the bible records miracles such as resurrections, angels, prophecy and destructive acts of god to mention a few.
are these all a pack of lies?
how do you explain them?
Yes of course he did. At least lots of people say he did.
Names, dates, locations.
You equate the Bible with this guy. They are not the same.
Millions are convinced that Joe Smith was given the book of Mormon, Billions believe that M0hammed was given the Kor€n but how does this have any effect whatsoever on the validity of the Bible even if those beliefs are not true? The internal substance of the Bible substantiates it as credible.
the bible records miracles such as resurrections, angels, prophecy and destructive acts of god to mention a few.
are these all a pack of lies?
how do you explain them?
Are the thousands of witnesses to Sai Baba's miracles mistaken?
Red herring argument, cofty.
More than testimony from the product user needed to validated. Did he resurrect anybody?
