Posts by IP

13

great tribulation?

by under74 in

i was talking to another ex-witness recently and i brought up "the great tribulation" but she wasn't familiar with this term--i was raised with it.

as i recall (i might be a little cloudy in remembering) i was taught that after armageddon, satan rules for 100 years and this time was "the great tribulation" because jws would be thrown in concentration camps and burned at the stake or something...or maybe it happens right before armageddon?

i'm starting to think this may be one of those false memories...or maybe a regional thing?

IP_SEC

Actually a few years back we got some new light on the trib.

According to the GB, since the trib in 1st century Jerusalem occured in 2 stages so it will be with the Gtrib.

2 stages you ask?? 66 AD romans come and the trib starts *get ready for new light* then the days of the trib were 'cut short' for 'flesh' or christians to be saved when the Romans unexpectedly left. Now enter 70 AD and they return and sack Jeru.Salem.

So in our time the discusting thing will first destroy BTG, this corrisponds to the first 'phase' of the trib on Jerusalem. Then the discusting thing will turn on gods peeps dwelling in security. At this time Michael will stand up and fight for his peeps. The second stage is HARMAGEDDDDDON

I dont think many witnesses have the same idea of the trib *concentration camps and the like* that they had in times past. I think the general idea is from the liturature that if you make it to the second stage you are home free and assured protection by Jehovah... er Mike... Um well anyhow. this is the ref to the new light.

2/15/95 WT Saved Alive Through the Great Tribulation studly article

4

1st Cent Christian POP

by IP_SEC in

im sure there is a thread dealing with this but for some reason i cant search.

mods see the error below.. witnesses claim the 144,000 started to be filled at pentacost 33 a.d. every christian was of that number.

i'm looking for estimates on the size of the christian population between 33 and 100 a.d. i have to believe taking in to consideration the mass baptisms recorded by lukus that there had to be more than 144,000 anointed christians in the 1st century.

IP_SEC

ahh gracias, this helps a lot

4

1st Cent Christian POP

by IP_SEC in

im sure there is a thread dealing with this but for some reason i cant search.

mods see the error below.. witnesses claim the 144,000 started to be filled at pentacost 33 a.d. every christian was of that number.

i'm looking for estimates on the size of the christian population between 33 and 100 a.d. i have to believe taking in to consideration the mass baptisms recorded by lukus that there had to be more than 144,000 anointed christians in the 1st century.

IP_SEC

Hi,

Im sure there is a thread dealing with this but for some reason I cant search. Mods see the error below.

Witnesses claim the 144,000 started to be filled at pentacost 33 A.D. Every Christian was of that number. I'm looking for estimates on the size of the Christian population between 33 and 100 A.D. I have to believe taking in to consideration the mass baptisms recorded by Lukus that there had to be more than 144,000 anointed Christians in the 1st century. Any thoughts?

Here is the error I get if I try to search.

Error

Sorry, an error has occured which has been logged for the attention of the system administrator.

Please use the back button on your browser to return to the previous page.

67

Pivitol Date Stuff

by IP_SEC in

i dont "get" the whole 1914 thing.

the 'prophetic rule'?

day fer a year?

IP_SEC

Well I see now that there really is no discrepancy betwixt the 70 years and 587. That was what always bugged my about the whole 587 thing. I add this to the nonsense of a day for a year being applied for no reason and I see the whole chronology as nonsense. I?ll tell you what too: there are maybe 3 or 4 witnesses (I?m one of them) I know who can explain the society's teaching on how we get 1914. Ask any witness to 'splain it and they cant. Its because it isn?t logical, it makes no sense. Kind of like the question ?Who really is the FDS?? I guarantee you 6 out of 10 witnesses will say the GB. No class its all of the remnant on earth. *Next week* OK class ?who is the FDS?? No its all of the anointed left on earth, the GB are just its representatives. Well I guess lets study the Isaiah I and II books until you guys get it right. *Really? since when does a slave have representatives*

15

Could you help me understand

by IP_SEC in

i guess i have a little problem understanding the abuse issue .

1. because i only just now started looking into it and am overwhelmed by all of the info.

2. because this happened in my congo back in the late 70s and the guy was 'hung'.

IP_SEC

Well I guess upon further reflection I have to amend my reasons as to why I don?t understand the issue. It was because I didn?t want to believe. What a gross misuse of scripture by Jaracz. " We don?t go beyond what is written." Rat bastard sickens me. The legal desk: ?If he says no then walk away from it.? Rat Bastards. Wow police need to use this same reasoning. Officer: Hey guy, did you murder him? Murderer: No way man. Officer: Ok well I guess you?re alright then. You can go free. Poor kids :(***** Thanks for yalls help.

15

Could you help me understand

by IP_SEC in

i guess i have a little problem understanding the abuse issue .

1. because i only just now started looking into it and am overwhelmed by all of the info.

2. because this happened in my congo back in the late 70s and the guy was 'hung'.

IP_SEC

Na back when that came out I thought of it as anti witness propaganda garbage . I'll check it out though.

Thanks

67

Pivitol Date Stuff

by IP_SEC in

i dont "get" the whole 1914 thing.

the 'prophetic rule'?

day fer a year?

IP_SEC

OOO, ack I see now that the Societys equation of 537+70=607 is an over simplification of things. I re-read 607vs587.com again and see that it does address my question clearly. I must have been blind when I read it about 6 months ago. Even seperate Egyptian chronology supports a later date for the destruction. The desolation, the supremicy of Babylon and the destruction of Jerusalem are clearly differant things. Even by Jeremiahs own word the desolation had already begun nearly 20 years before the destruction. And the Society misquoting their boy Flava Jo. He says the destruction occured 50 years before the desolation? I got to check this stuff out for myself.

Its amazing how I could have read that site 6 months ago and be blind to the evidence out of fear of disloyaty to the FDS.

Thanks yall

IPSEC

15

Could you help me understand

by IP_SEC in

i guess i have a little problem understanding the abuse issue .

1. because i only just now started looking into it and am overwhelmed by all of the info.

2. because this happened in my congo back in the late 70s and the guy was 'hung'.

IP_SEC

Whoa! Thanks Big Tex, thats perfect. The very first thread really got to me. It is hypocritical that Catholic children can be trusted but Witness kids are liars. If this ever happens in my hall I WILL tell the authorities whether its the law or not, let them investigate it. They are the professional law, not me. If it is or isnt true let the burden to find out be on the authorities.

Meanwhile be a hiding place for the defenseless.

67

Pivitol Date Stuff

by IP_SEC in

i dont "get" the whole 1914 thing.

the 'prophetic rule'?

day fer a year?

IP_SEC

I dont "get" the whole 1914 thing. The 'prophetic rule'? Day fer a year? Don?t make sense to me.

Anyhow, How do you get around the 537BC + 70 years = 607BC (jer 25:8-12) for the fall of Jerusalem? One thing I have to believe is what the bible says over secular history. Is 537 maybe not the pivotal date it's made out to be? References?

I've been to 607vs587.com but didnt find anything there on my question. I know secular history says the fall was in 587 and the return was 537, but that only gives us 50 years of captivity, not the 70 of the bible.

Muchos Gracias

15

Could you help me understand

by IP_SEC in

i guess i have a little problem understanding the abuse issue .

1. because i only just now started looking into it and am overwhelmed by all of the info.

2. because this happened in my congo back in the late 70s and the guy was 'hung'.

IP_SEC

Hello,

I guess I have a little problem understanding the abuse issue

1. Because I only just now started looking into it and am overwhelmed by all of the info

2. Because this happened in my congo back in the late 70s and the guy was 'hung'. Everyone in the congo knew exactly what he did, he was DFd and he was put in jail for a while after.

Evidently not all congos do this? Is org policy part of the prob? I know if a charge is made we are to call the legal dpt imediately. Is this bad?

Can you put together a concise list of grievances on this subject that I can research myself?

Thanks for helping me with my apostacy!

Sincerely

IPSEC

IP_SEC

Posts by IP_SEC

Error