Posts by thirdwitness

1380

The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness in

think about this: if seven times mean only 7 years then daniel could have simply said 7 years.

why does daniel specifically use the word 'times' rather than years?

as we have already shown daniel used the word for 7 times instead of 7 years.

thirdwitness

And don't worry, Auldsoul, I will be exposing you comments as false AGAIN very soon.

1380

The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness in

think about this: if seven times mean only 7 years then daniel could have simply said 7 years.

why does daniel specifically use the word 'times' rather than years?

as we have already shown daniel used the word for 7 times instead of 7 years.

AlanF's latest comments are mostly just rhetoric. First, I will quote his statements that have no value as they are not supported by anything other than because he says so and we are supposed to believe it because he is the all wise all knowing guru of the DB.

Readers will note once again the circularity of thirdwitness' arguments: "Since the presence is invisible, no one can see it. No one actually saw this presence beginning in 1914. Therefore, the parousia is invisible".

Translation: You have to blind yourself to the Bible and look at what the Watchtower Society claims about the Bible.

Translation: When you look at the Bible through Watchtower-colored glasses, you willingly become blinded to bullpucky, but it takes a lot of work to blind yourself that far.

You certainly have a problem with spelling. I think that you ought to run your posts by some of your more astute colleagues, such as the one who described my "website" as "retarted". LOL!

Then at last he admits that JWs just might be right about Christ's parousia being invisible. Thanks for the frank admission.

AlanF says: No one is claiming that "every eye will literally see Jesus". What posters such as I and AuldSoul are saying is nothing more or less than what the Bible itself says: Jesus' coming would be extremely visible in whatever unspecified manner the Bible writers meant -- if they consciously meant anything at all. If the Bible writers intended that "visible" meant literally, then so be it. If they intended that "visible" meant "in the sense that everyone would understand that Jesus had appeared in no uncertain terms to begin direct rule of the world", then so be it.

Then AlanF makes another blunder: Readers will note that the above-quoted passage from Daniel (7:13,14) gives no indication whatsoever as to when the supposed prophecies were to be fulfilled. Therefore, it is pure speculation to apply a specific fulfillment to these "prophecies".

Yes the Bible does tell when Christ's gains rulership as recorded at Daniel 7. It is the time of the last world power, the small horn that becomes great. No speculation needed at all.

All you're doing is arguing that Jesus will never again be personally visible on earth, in the sense of his human body being observable or a ghostly manifestation being visible, such as whatever seems to have appeared to such people as the doubting Thomas who is claimed to have put his fingers into Jesus' spear wound. This is not an issue here.

Thanks for another admission that JWs are right that Christ's parousia is invisible. Take note lurkers. Even one of the foremost apostates has been forced to admit this because to argue against it would show his Bible ignorance.

When lightning flashes, no one with normal senses can fail to see it. Therefore, the parousia, or the coming of the Son of man, will be visible to everyone with normal senses.

Of course. Anyone who has discerning powers can see Christ's invisible presence is here. That is exactly why Jesus gave a sign. So that his presence could be discerned. But you do not have such discerning powers. You make silly arguments about earthquakes when the evidence clearly shows that Jesus words, There will be great earthquakes in one place after another is now being fulfilled since 1914. 16,000 per year killed after 1914. 2000 killed per year before 1914. And even though the wars since 1914 have killed about as many as all the wars between the 1st century and 1914 you refuse to see the sign. 1 million per year killed on average in wars since 1914. 50 thousand killed per year before 1914. You and others like you have closed your eyes to Christ's presence and have missed the sign. Too bad for you.

Bottom line: Revelation 1:7 is connected with 1914 only in the fertile imaginations of Watchtower writers.

Once again you are off to see the wizard. Another misrepresentation of what JWs believe. We do not believe that Revelation 1:7 is talking about 1914 as I pointed out clearly in my previous post. This is a typical apostate ploy. To misrepresent what JWs believe and then attack that strawman.

You have now done this several times:

You said JWs believe that Noah preached to the 'entire' world. We have never said that.

You said JWs believe parousia only means the stay after his arrival even saying the 96 WT lied. We believe parousia means his arrival and subsequent presence and I pointed that out in several WTs.

And now you say in WT writer's minds Revelation 1:7 is about 1914. Its not. Its about the destruction of those who don't obey the good news.

You are so fond of calling people liars. It is now time that you call yourself a liar since everyone else can see that you are such.

: Revelation 1:7 corresponds to Matthew 24:30 And then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in lamentation, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

A fair conclusion that is entirely in harmony with all of my arguments.

Great so you agree that JWs are right that Christ's presence is invisible and that he will destroy the wicked at Armageddon. Then why do you teach Christendom's vomit?

For the people who know something of Jehovah's Witnesses, almost all reject them as a cult that should be rejected on general grounds,

Now there's a real eye opener. This really proves a lot. How foolish of me. Of course since the majority rejects JWs they can't be right. Lets throw in the garbage what Jesus said when he said, Broad and spacious is the road leading to destruction and many are the ones finding it. But narrow is the road and cramped the gate leading to life and few are the ones finding it. Here's a statement for you: For the people who knew something of Christians in the first century, almost all reject them as a cult that should be rejected on general grounds,.. Your reasoning is overwhelming. How could anyone ever doubt what you say?

39

Earthquakes and rumors of war or whatever ;o)

by Hellrider in

i was so inspired by the ridicolousness of thirdwitnoid in that other thread ("the gentile times reconsidered again...but this time i am using the bible"), in which he actually dared bring up the old "increase in earthquakes"-fairytale from the wt and asleep.

it really had nothing to do in that thread, which was about 607 vs 587 (oh no, not that again.... datelocationdeathsmagnitude.

jan. 23, 1556. shansi, china .

thirdwitness

When a person makes a list of the greatest earthquakes do they put on the list some earthquake in the middle of nowhere that might have registered a 10 on the richter scale but did no damage to civilization. Of course not. I don't think Jesus had in mind an in depth study of quakes and their magnitudes throughout history to determine if great quakes were in one place after another. I believe he had in mind that to the normal person looking at world events it would be evident that earthquakes would do more damage in terms of destruction and loss of life than previously. And they have.

39

Earthquakes and rumors of war or whatever ;o)

by Hellrider in

i was so inspired by the ridicolousness of thirdwitnoid in that other thread ("the gentile times reconsidered again...but this time i am using the bible"), in which he actually dared bring up the old "increase in earthquakes"-fairytale from the wt and asleep.

it really had nothing to do in that thread, which was about 607 vs 587 (oh no, not that again.... datelocationdeathsmagnitude.

jan. 23, 1556. shansi, china .

thirdwitness

Jesus said there would be great earthquakes in one place after another. The more damage an earthquake does and the more people it kills the greater the earthquake. All your reasoning about there being more people on the earth is bogus. Jesus probably knew that.

Which is worse? A plane crash that kills all 10 people on board, 100 percent? Or a plane crash that kills 999 out of 1000--less than 100 percent? The answer is obvious. You can twist statistics all you want to try to support you view. The fact is that Jesus said that there would be great earthquakes in one place after another. There are. And the earthquakes since 1914 have killed more people on average per year than before 1914, a lot more.

Jesus was right. JWs are right.

39

Earthquakes and rumors of war or whatever ;o)

by Hellrider in

i was so inspired by the ridicolousness of thirdwitnoid in that other thread ("the gentile times reconsidered again...but this time i am using the bible"), in which he actually dared bring up the old "increase in earthquakes"-fairytale from the wt and asleep.

it really had nothing to do in that thread, which was about 607 vs 587 (oh no, not that again.... datelocationdeathsmagnitude.

jan. 23, 1556. shansi, china .

thirdwitness

It doesn't matter the reason why more people die from earthquakes. Jesus probably knew that there would be more people alive on earth when he said, 'There will be great earthquakes in one place after another.' The fact is that there are great earthquakes in one place after another. If there were earthquakes occuring in uninhabited places all over the world right now reaching 10 on the richter scale but killing no one would you consider that to be fulfilling Jesus' words? I don't think so.

Even using the biased figures presented above there are over 16,000 per year dying from earthquakes since 1914 as compared to 2000 per year before 1914. The earthquakes are indeed greater than ever before as regards the toll on human life. I know most of you don't want that to be true because you want JWs to be wrong. But sorry. JWs are right and it would probably be good to face up to the facts.

1380

The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness in

think about this: if seven times mean only 7 years then daniel could have simply said 7 years.

why does daniel specifically use the word 'times' rather than years?

as we have already shown daniel used the word for 7 times instead of 7 years.

thirdwitness

AlanF just said: Is it that you don't believe the account of the flood or you believe that Jehovah is an unjust God?

Both.

First, no earthwide flood has occurred in the past 600 million years, much less the past six thousand.

Second, a God who is as capricious as the Old Testament describes is obviously an ancient tribal myth, just as surely as are the gods of the Sumerian, Assyrians, Canaanites, Greeks, Romans, Norse and everyone else. A god who would kill everyone on the planet without warning, along with all animal life, can at best be described as capricious, and at worst as a monster.

Now, how many want this guy trying to teach you what the Bible says? Please raise your hand. I don't even know why AlanF even bothers trying to explain or argue what the Bible says at all. He don't even believe what he's saying anyway. And it is obvious from his last few inaccurate posts where he misapplies and misreads scriptures that he really does not know at all what the Bible teaches about Christ's parousia.

39

Earthquakes and rumors of war or whatever ;o)

by Hellrider in

i was so inspired by the ridicolousness of thirdwitnoid in that other thread ("the gentile times reconsidered again...but this time i am using the bible"), in which he actually dared bring up the old "increase in earthquakes"-fairytale from the wt and asleep.

it really had nothing to do in that thread, which was about 607 vs 587 (oh no, not that again.... datelocationdeathsmagnitude.

jan. 23, 1556. shansi, china .

thirdwitness

Ok, I will use your greatly exaggerated figures for earthquakes before 1914 and your under exaggerated figures for after 1914. What do we find.

Pre1914--4 million deaths.

Post1914 1.5 million deaths.

Pre1914--A little over 2000 deaths per year.

Post1914--over 16,000 deaths per year.

So even using your figures earthquakes have effected more people since 1914 than ever before. Jesus was right after all. And so are JWs.

Now since most will say, 'No fair. Not all earthquakes are recorded before 1900". Lets just for no reason double your figure for earthquake deaths before 1914 to 8 million. (which is really a ridiculous thing to do as you have already exaggerated the figure but just for arguments sake lets do it.)

Now what do we have:

Pre1914--8 million (exaggerated) deaths.

Post1914 1.5 million deaths.

Pre1914--A little over 4000 (exaggerated) deaths per year.

Post1914--over 16,000 deaths per year.

Wow, Jesus and JWs are still right even at that.

By the way, here are some of your exaggerations:

1201, upper Egypt: 1.100 000 deaths. Very unsubstantiated.

1737, India, Calcutta: 300 000 deaths. A typhoon, not an earthquake.

1976 China 255,000. Some estimate 655,000 deaths. I bet if this was before 1914 you would have used the larger figure.

Now lets just put that whole 'JWs are wrong about earthquakes' theory to rest.

1380

The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness in

think about this: if seven times mean only 7 years then daniel could have simply said 7 years.

why does daniel specifically use the word 'times' rather than years?

as we have already shown daniel used the word for 7 times instead of 7 years.

thirdwitness

Another misapplication of scripture.

AlanF said: First, let's look at the full text of Luke 17:20-35:

Luke 17:20-24: 20 "But on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming, he answered them and said: "The kingdom of God is not coming with striking observableness, 21 neither will people be saying, ‘See here!’ or, ‘There!’ For, look! the kingdom of God is in your midst." 22 Then he said to the disciples: "Days will come when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of man but you will not see it. 23 And people will say to you, ‘See there!’ or, ‘See here!’ Do not go out or chase after them. 24 For even as the lightning, by its flashing, shines from one part under heaven to another part under heaven, so the Son of man will be."

So at first, everything having to do with the kingdom of God would be unnoticed by everyone -- even by the disciples -- but when the Son of man finally came, it would be as noticeable as lightning which strikes without warning and can be visible in the entire sky. This theme of the coming of the Son of man being without warning and coming in the midst of unknowing people is then emphasized:

You are only partly right. You are right that the kingdom of God would largely go unnoticed and this of course supports the beliefs of JWs. But Jesus is also telling his disciples that he would not return visibly in his kingdom. Jesus proves that when he says: The kingdom of God is not coming with striking observableness,. So when people say 'See here or There' do not believe them for Jesus is not returning visibly for people to literally see. That is why Jesus then said the kingdom of God is in your midst. He as the ruler of the kingdom was now there visibly in their midst for all to see but it would not be that way long nor would it ever be that way again.

That is why Jesus then said: "Days will come when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of man but you will not see it. 23 And people will say to you, ‘See there!’ or, ‘See here!’ Do not go out or chase after them. After Jesus had gone to heaven the apostles would desire to see him again but they would not see him again because he was not coming back visibly to be in their midst again. The kingdom with Christ as king would not to be set up literally and visibly on the earth. So don't believe anyone who says the Christ is visibly over here somewhere.

It would be like a flash of lightning that lighted up the sky when the Son of man really returned in his kingdom for anyone who wanted to see. That is exactly why Jesus gave the sign of his parousia, so that those with discerning powers would recognize his invisible arrival in kingdom power, not a physical arrival.

1380

The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness in

think about this: if seven times mean only 7 years then daniel could have simply said 7 years.

why does daniel specifically use the word 'times' rather than years?

as we have already shown daniel used the word for 7 times instead of 7 years.

thirdwitness

AlanF way back on page 53 reasoned: The reason for the inconsistency is as follows: The question "when will these things happen?" is common to all three passages. Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7 then pose the question, "what will be the sign that all these things are about to happen?" Applying this understanding to Matthew 24:3 immediately allows us to rephrase the 2nd question in the NWT: "what will be the sign that your presence and the conclusion of the system of things are about to take place?" But his means that the "sign" must occur in advance of the "presence" -- and this contradicts the Watchtower Society's doctrine that this "presence" began in 1914 and that the "sign" takes place beginning in 1914 and ending at "the great tribulation", whenever that might be. But the proper understanding, that Christ's coming has nothing to do with 1914, results in complete consistency: "what will be the sign that your coming and the conclusion of the system of things are about to take place?"

Naturally, I don't expect that thirdwitless will even understand the above points, much less attempt to debunk them.

Well here is the debunking.

You have once again misread and misapplied scriptures. (What a shock.)

A reading of the sentences before both Luke 21:7 and Mark 13:4 will show this beyond a doubt.

Luke 21: 6 he (Jesus) said: “As for these things that YOU are beholding, the days will come in which not a stone upon a stone will be left here and not be thrown down.” 7 Then they questioned him, saying: “Teacher, when will these things actually be, and what will be the sign when these things are destined to occur?”

Mark 13: 2 However, Jesus said to him: “Do you behold these great buildings? By no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.” 3 And as he was sitting on the Mount of Olives with the temple in view, Peter and James and John and Andrew began to ask him privately: 4 “Tell us, When will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are destined to come to a conclusion?”

First take note of the subject that the disciples were questioning him about: the temple being destroyed. Now the question becomes obvious in both accounts. what will be the sign when these things are destined to occur? or what will be the sign when all these things are destined to come to a conclusion? What things? The things to do with the destruction of the holy place. That is the questions posed in both Luke 21:7 and Mark 13:4. Jesus took that opportunity to tell them about what things would happen during the conclusion of the Jewish system of things before the literal temple was destroyed as well as what things would happen during the parousia of Christ, the conclusion of the final system of things, up to the Great Tribulation and Armageddon.

So when AlanF reasoned: Applying this understanding to Matthew 24:3 immediately allows us to rephrase the 2nd question in the NWT: "what will be the sign that your presence and the conclusion of the system of things are about to take place?" But this means that the "sign" must occur in advance of the "presence"

He is wrong.

Rephrasing, or in other words, twisting Matthew 24 to suit your purpose is a misapplication of the questions and is not needed because Matthew 24 is not the exact same question that is recorded in Luke or Mark. Putting the accounts together then we see that the disciples ask several questions: Tell us, when will these things actually be, and what will be the sign when the temple's destruction is to occur, what will be the sign of your parousia, and what will be the sign of the conclusion of the system of things?

The events foretold that make up the sign was given to show his disciples when Christ's presence had arrived, when the conclusion of the system would take place, when the holy place was about to be destroyed (both literally and symbolically), and yes when Christ's coming at Armageddon was near.

Once again AlanF tries to make something so simple so complicated.

1380

The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness in

think about this: if seven times mean only 7 years then daniel could have simply said 7 years.

why does daniel specifically use the word 'times' rather than years?

as we have already shown daniel used the word for 7 times instead of 7 years.

thirdwitness

Zico said: I've never understood how the Noah's ark story was fair

AlanF said: How could a just God kill an entire world of people without warning them?

Is it that you don't believe the account of the flood or you believe that Jehovah is an unjust God?