Oh dear, City Fan. Here come accusation of garbage spewing from your faultfinding mouth. I know it's juvenile. Don't worry about it. It is the only way Schizm knows how to deal with disagreement, attack the person who disagrees.
AuldSoul
AuldSoul
JoinedPosts by AuldSoul
-
6
The 8th King of Daniel 7 etc.
by Schizm inthe horn (see pic below) that the wts believes is the 7th king is actually the 8th king instead--a king that has yet to arise.
absolutely, with regards to the wts's understandings there are refinements that will have to be made.
this (the proper identity of the little horn) is just one of a number of adjustments that the wts will have to make.
-
-
-
53
What about Lamech's "wound"?
by Schizm inwould someone who believes in and respects the bible as having been inspired by god like to attempt an explanation of this account regarding lamech?
why do you think an account such as this is even in the bible to begin with?
was it a physical wound, or a mental wound?.
-
-
AuldSoul
Schizm, you are the best recommendation I could hope for. Thanks.
-
53
What about Lamech's "wound"?
by Schizm inwould someone who believes in and respects the bible as having been inspired by god like to attempt an explanation of this account regarding lamech?
why do you think an account such as this is even in the bible to begin with?
was it a physical wound, or a mental wound?.
-
-
AuldSoul
I disagree with you. Disagreement is not garbage. Propaganda is garbage. Choke on it.
AuldSoul
-
9
EMail response...to pro-JW article...
by upside/down ini sent this response to an email...it was in response to the article here on jwd about "jehovah's roofing service" or something like that... .
anyway...i've recieved a couple of unsolicited witnoid (thanks tetra for that term) emails and this is one of my responses...with their post at the bottom.
i accidentally deleted an even better one...a 77 yr old witnoid "sister" who automatically called me a liar and that it must be my fault that the "brothers" treated me unkindly...as jojoba would never allow that....yeah right!
-
-
AuldSoul
I think they think, after a fashion. I think all JWs have to quickly classify, label, and dismiss all questioners and objectors to keep their doctrine sacrosanct. Any JW who does not do this will eventually leave. It is only a matter of time.
AuldSoul
-
53
What about Lamech's "wound"?
by Schizm inwould someone who believes in and respects the bible as having been inspired by god like to attempt an explanation of this account regarding lamech?
why do you think an account such as this is even in the bible to begin with?
was it a physical wound, or a mental wound?.
-
-
AuldSoul
How old was Lamech when this occurred? You don't know.
Therefore you have no way to determine the relative ages of the others in the account.
Lamech lived to be only 777 years. Let us suppose he was 500 when the events under consideration occurred. Let us further suppose that near the same time the events occurred, one of his wives had given birth to Naamah (which means, ironically, "Pleasant"). That gets one wife mention. Let us suppose one of the wives is 250 and the other wife is a mere 100 years old. Let us futher suppose the young man in question is 55.
Now, can you see the problem with your storyline? A baby Naamah, a young man of 55...
No, you probably don't. But this supposition fits the facts stated just as well as your supposition. Mine is neither more or less probable, as an accurate portrayal of what could have happened, than yours is. Since I can come up with many more scenarios of possible configurations than just this one, including the one you came up with, I have to admit that your scenario is possibly the correct one. However, since it isn't recorded as the correct one, I can't state that your is correct I can only allow for the possibility.
I haven't insulted you here, Schizm. So far you have called me a liar and demeaned my intelligence. I hope you know what a bad Witness that is.
AuldSoul
-
27
New Light! Invisible Armageddon!
by jstalin init is going to be announced that with all the anticipation for the coming of armageddon, we didnt notice the actual event.
thats right, it was an invisible armageddon.
if we take the 70 years of captivity, plus 1914, we get 1984. then we use the people equal hours rule and apply it to the 144,000, using division, and we get 6,000. then we use the hours equal years rule to divide 6,000 by 360 to get 16.66 additional years, add that to 1984, and we get the year 2000 for armageddon!
-
-
AuldSoul
"Invisible Armageddon" already happened. In 1914. Ask any Bible Student in 1923 (after the "Millions Now Living" talk). Doubt they'll try it again.
AuldSoul
-
-
-
AuldSoul
Welcome to you both! The feelings of guilt will pass once you realize that only a few of us are frothing at the mouth.
The freedom to weigh any evidence you wish to consider to determine if it has merit will be a refreshing change, when it sinks in.
AuldSoul
-
12
Itemized List of Revisions in Daniel Book
by Severus inthis is from an email provided by a circuit overseer.
i have added comments and context (from wt cd 2003) in red.. .
"daniel's prophecy".
-
-
AuldSoul
Thanks, Severus!
In my opinion this is the best one:
1st printing: However, the Aramaic equivalent of the word here translated "until" appears in the Aramaic text of Dan 7:25 and there means "during" or "for."
Later editions: However, the cleansing and whitening of God's people as a result of the intrusion from the king of the north was "for the time appointed." HenceThere is only one reason to change this:
Daniel 7:25 And he will speak even words against the Most High, and he will harass continually the holy ones themselves of the Supreme One. And he will intend to change times and law, and they will be given into his hand for a time, and times and half a time.
Someone figured out that it actually means "until," not "during" or "for." So, it is 7:25 that should change, not the other way 'round. But that would mean...
AuldSoul
-
20
Prayer??? Real or just something we fool ourselves with!
by free2beme ini was thinking about this today and i found a interesting thought in my mind that i thought would be worth considering here.
i should start off by saying that i do not think prayers to god are answered, as it is like making a call to a wrong number.
however, i do think you can fool yourself into thinking they are, in the following way.. let's say you pray over and over asking for this and that and that.
-
-
AuldSoul
My prayer is real, silent (unless asked for by someone else), nearly continuous, and never closed with "Amen." I believe God understands that I agree with what I just prayed whether or not I state that to be true.
Am I a fool? Probably.
AuldSoul
-
-
-
AuldSoul
Now, I've gutted fish before IP_SEC. That is not a nice thing to call anyone.
Good one RichieRich!