i have been told by a jw that 36ce ends daniels 70 week prophecy, how do they work this out?.
i know the starting point is 455bce, but could someone elaborate?
the guy has stated it as matter of fact, it sort of smells like the 1914 prophecy to me, but may be i'm wrong.. paul.
Its somewhat different than the 1914 one as the 70 weeks prophecy isnt dependant on the day for a year principle. Bible commentries state this. The 70 weeks is the final biblical prophecy. Some people beleive the last week in this prophecy isnt fulfilled until the end of time.
The day year principle shouldnt be used in the 1914 prophecy because the word day isnt in the verse at all. The day year is not used consistently in every case in predictive prophecy.
i have used my "bible research skills" for a new purpose....to find the winner of the melbourne cup horse race on the 4th of nov our public holiday for horse racing!
i have never gambled but me and the wife are going to the race and laying down a bet.
my research and tips from experts has lead me to this conclusion:.
thanks for the tip 007 I have no idea who to bet on at this time so Im trusting youre judgement. It also a holiday here in canberra for the melbourne cup event. Goes to show us aussies take horse racing seriously.
i thought after recently reading the bible i would put up for disussion some recent scriptures up which for me show that jesus never viewed himself as god and anyone listening would also see it this way too.. first mark 10 :17-20.
17as jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him.
"good teacher," he asked, "what must i do to inherit eternal life?
Arianism is a beleif from the 4th century by a priest of Alexandria named Arius who first made the claim that Jesus was a created being. So Arianism in the history of the christian church is a Johnny come lately.
The Adventists in the 19th century also were for the most part Arian. The new church being made up of members from the christian connection. The Adventists smartened up their beleifs about 1900 and accepted the trinity doctrine with some members being left behind and still holding to Arianism.
As a result the beleif that Jesus is Michael the Archangel was retained but Adventists understand it is a title as God is head of the anglels.
Renaii there is nothing original about the WT beleifs.
i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.
there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.
You have said that there are many versions of the trinity doctrine. In fact the trinity doctrine was formulated 1600 years ago and has not changed. You may be confusing it with Modalism ,Monackism Arianism or something else. Also what does the cross have to do with the trinity doctrine. Teh mormons dont beleive the trinity doctrine but they beleive christ died on the cross. I dont get youre connection with this.
i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.
there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.
Dear Renaii,
Im confused by some of the things you have said.
i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.
there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.
In many catholic countries the birth of John the baptist is celebrated 6months before xmas on about the 25th of June and after. Remember that John was 6 months older than Jesus. In the Philippines around that time you are likely to get a bucket of water thrown over you and celebrations are held for at least a week in each village. A Hermana is chosen to run the celebrations and is in charge of events culminating in feeding the poor that live outside the village.
Barry
i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.
there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.
May I also mantion the new testamant isnt a book of rules. I dont find in its pages rules on how to baptise. Early christians actually dunked beleivers three times in th ename of the Father Son and Holy Spirit. There is no instructions on not celebrating birthdays either.
In fact the new testament is largly a book of stories and letters from the early church. It is a reaction away from the very legalistic jewish religion.
i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.
there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.
Dear Reniaa, The type of thinking you have is still WT thinking. There are other organisations that have the same type of thinking eg. My ex wifes Mum was a communist and would consistently say people escaping from the workers paradice were only criminals or sex maniacs escaping to get more sex. Thats just how communists brains are wired.
I am an SDA and they are very devout but they have birthdays and celebrate xmas. Some penticostals dont have xmas but its just the way they have been wired and what the group think is.
I once saw a demonstration on the TV where actors would vow and declare something was black when it was really white in front of a subject and the person would start to question things that would be obvious to anyone on the outside.
although i'm pretty much an atheist, i still like reading the bible.
it's an amazing literary masterwork to say the least.. my question is, after discovering that the new world translation of the wts was poorly translated and altered in ways designed to support their various peculiar doctrines (see john 1:1, etc.
), what bible translation are you all the most fond of?.
Im suprised how popular the KJV is on this thread. Ive just bought a KJV for my fathers 80th birthday tomorrow. It has large print and a reference margin and will be perfect for him as he still sometime takes the sermon at church.
i had 2 nice ladies come to the door this morning.
i played it very cool as long as i could, asking "dumb" questions like what ever happened to your 1914 generation teaching?
i knew it could only go so far and sure enough they began to smell a dirtyratcat.
In the old days the witnesses had a reputation for putting their foot in the door so the householder couldnt close the door.
Ive never seen anyone writing about that here but with many non JWs it was well known.
