check out public libraries or school libraries.
diamondiiz
JoinedPosts by diamondiiz
-
10
Encyclopedia Britannica 1987 edition or World Book 1987 Encyclopedia
by binadub indoes anyone have--or know anyone who has--a 1987 edition of the encyclopedia britannica or 1987 world book encyclopedia?.
researcher on a book need to verify watchtower references in those volumes.
if anyone knows a source, i'll get with you on an email address.. thanks,.
-
-
-
26
generation overlap
by diamondiiz indoes it appear that the feb 15, 2008 was setting jws for a future generation change?.
can we calculate the length of this generation?.
the word generation usually refers to people of various ages whose lives overlap during a particular time period or event.
-
-
diamondiiz
Does it appear that the Feb 15, 2008 was setting jws for a future generation change?
Can We Calculate the Length of “This Generation”?
The word “generation” usually refers to people of various ages whose lives overlap during a particular time period or event. For example, Exodus 1:6 tells us: “Eventually Joseph died, and also all his brothers and all that generation.” Joseph and his brothers varied in age, but they shared a common experience during the same time period. Included in “that generation” were some of Joseph’s brothers who were born before him. Some of these outlived Joseph. (Gen. 50:24) Others of “that generation,” such as Benjamin, were born after Joseph was born and may have lived on after he died.
So when the term “generation” is used with reference to people living at a particular time, the exact length of that time cannot be stated except that it does have an end and would not be excessively long. Therefore, by using the term “this generation,” as recorded at Matthew 24:34, Jesus did not give his disciples a formula to enable them to determine when “the last days” would end. Rather, Jesus went on to emphasize that they would not know “that day and hour.” - feb15, 2008 p21-25 -
18
wife awakening
by diamondiiz inmy wife was reading a few bits of coc and she read most of gentile times reconsidered and she says she's not buying the dates anymore and i can tell she knows it's not the truth.
she is starting to feel depressed about it and is feeling "hollow" on the inside.
she said that you can't argue all the evidence that points to 586/7bc for jerusalem's destruction and you can't separate dates from wts dogma - she finally is getting it :) historians are making stuff up to cover up 607bc.
-
-
diamondiiz
Thanks everyone. I've been quite outspoken about wts and it annoyed the hell out of her. I had both COC and GTR laying around and when the generation study was coming up I gave her the COC and told her to read the chapter on generation. As I was at work she seemed to be curious and started to read a little bit of COC and some how ended up reading GTR and here I am with a wife not believing in 607 and the wts dates and loosing her belief in nonsense. So what the future holds I'm not 100% sure but she sounded like she'll fade after the convention which she made plans to attend with her sister. I just hope that she sticks with it and keeps researching wts. If she fades and I hope she does I will make sure the elders don't sucker her into a kh for a "chat." This was a huge step for her to admit so I have my fingers crossed that she doesn't get intimidated to going back. Her entire family is in but her mother is moderate but I don't know if she will say anything to any of her family or will keep it to herself. Either way, I'm quite happy at present. :)
-
18
wife awakening
by diamondiiz inmy wife was reading a few bits of coc and she read most of gentile times reconsidered and she says she's not buying the dates anymore and i can tell she knows it's not the truth.
she is starting to feel depressed about it and is feeling "hollow" on the inside.
she said that you can't argue all the evidence that points to 586/7bc for jerusalem's destruction and you can't separate dates from wts dogma - she finally is getting it :) historians are making stuff up to cover up 607bc.
-
-
diamondiiz
My wife was reading a few bits of COC and she read most of Gentile Times Reconsidered and she says she's not buying the dates anymore and I can tell she knows it's not the truth. She is starting to feel depressed about it and is feeling "hollow" on the inside. She said that you can't argue all the evidence that points to 586/7BC for Jerusalem's destruction and you can't separate dates from wts dogma - she finally is getting it :) Historians are making stuff up to cover up 607BC. She's going to this crap of a convention but that might be the last of it as she made plans to attend with her sister but she most likely will fade after that :) I feel so relieved!!!!! I doubt she's be as bitter as me about it as it's not her personality but I just hope she doesn't get too depressed. It feels so good to see someone set themselved free of this cult.
-
113
Library Visit # 2: 607 BCE vs. 587 BCE - With Pictures!
by mentallyfree31 inapproximately five weeks ago, i visited the local library and searched every book i could find that discusses the destruction of jerusalem in ancient times.
if you didn't see that thread, you can find it here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/192813/1/607-b-c-e-a-trip-to-the-local-library-with-pictures.
the results were conclusive: all secular sources agree that jerusalem was destroyed in 587/586 bce.
-
-
diamondiiz
Here is a site with some info on Neo Babylonian kings and archeaological evidence but check out the uruk list, not really for AIW but others who may find it interesting as AIW doesn't seem to get it anyways.
If I have more time later I will find more sites with archeaological artifacts showing Babylonian king history and such.
-
113
Library Visit # 2: 607 BCE vs. 587 BCE - With Pictures!
by mentallyfree31 inapproximately five weeks ago, i visited the local library and searched every book i could find that discusses the destruction of jerusalem in ancient times.
if you didn't see that thread, you can find it here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/192813/1/607-b-c-e-a-trip-to-the-local-library-with-pictures.
the results were conclusive: all secular sources agree that jerusalem was destroyed in 587/586 bce.
-
-
diamondiiz
Before I speak anymore about this, anyone challenging this prophecy is going to have to tell me something about themselves.
Don't change the topic and show us the Neo Babylonian king chronology from 539 down to 607 with proof. When you do, we can answer if we believe in god, santa clause or a toothfairy. If you want to know what we believe in, you can start a new topic. Right now we're discussing 607 BC and a fall of Jerusalem so show us your scholarly evidence for 607BC. After all, the entire world teached 586/7 as Jerusalem's fall so you and wts are making claims that have no merit without proof. If you show us a tablet for Babylon's fall to Cyrus in 539BC, that's fine but we're not talking about the fall of Babylon but Jerusalem so 539BC maybe the first part of your claim as the fall of babylon and we agree with this piece of information so now continue showing us the next pieces of archeaological evidence for establishing Babylonian chronology leading to the destruction of Jerusalem in 607BC.
And
“It was in B.C. 606, that God’s kingdom ended, the diadem was removed, and all the earth given up to the Gentiles. 2520 years from B.C. 606, will end in A.D. 1914.” —The Three Worlds, published in 1877, page 83.
This is very deceptive quote by itself. Typical WTS garbage! This type of nonsense will work on wts followers not with us who know the true history. The Three Worlds may have said that 1914 was the end of the gentile times and none of us argue this point. Lets see what the FULL quote is from where the above was taken
The seventy years captivity ended in the fitst year of Cyrus,
which was B.C. 536. They therefore commenced seventy years
before, or B.C. 606. Hence, it was in B. C. 606, that God's
kingdom ended, the diadem was removed, and all the earth given
up to the Gentilea. 2520 years from B. C. 606, will end in A.
D. 1914, or forty years from 1874; and this forty years upon
which we have now entered is to be such " a time of trouble as
never was since there was a nation." And during this forty
years, the kingdom of God is to be set up. (but not in the
flesh, "the natural first and afterwards the spiritual)," the Jews
are to be restored, the Gentile kingdoms broken in pieces " like
a potter's vessle," and the kingdoms of thia world become
the kingdoms of our Lord and his Christ, and the judgment age
introduced. -
113
Library Visit # 2: 607 BCE vs. 587 BCE - With Pictures!
by mentallyfree31 inapproximately five weeks ago, i visited the local library and searched every book i could find that discusses the destruction of jerusalem in ancient times.
if you didn't see that thread, you can find it here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/192813/1/607-b-c-e-a-trip-to-the-local-library-with-pictures.
the results were conclusive: all secular sources agree that jerusalem was destroyed in 587/586 bce.
-
-
diamondiiz
AIW - first of all, you haven't showed proof of anything other than that Cyrus conquesred Babylon in 539BC. I don't deny that nor does any other historian. The arguement isn't about when and if Babylon fell in 539BC. WTS' claim is that Jerusalem fell in 607BC to which there is no proof in archeaology. One set of artifacts pointing to Cyrus victory are accepted by WTS and yet all the other artifacts pointing to 586/7 destruction of Jerusalem are ignored and downplayed. Artifacts which specify lunar eclipses so important in Babylonian culture are totally ignored by wts, and these artifacts show which year of Neo Babylonian king the particular events occurred. Specific eclipses agree with today's astronomical calculations. These artifacts prove that 607BC is not the year of Jerusalem and wts is wrong. Historians don't calculate events by subtracting or adding random numbers to make up historical dates. If you want to show me your math I would love to see it, show me the reigns of babylonian kings, with their lengths of rule and the applicale archeaological evidence and we'll see how you achieve 607BC. The verse used for 70 years doesn't even specify that Jerusalem will be laid desolate for 70 years as the verse speaks of nations and not a nation. Thousands of artifacts pointing to what historians belief today cannot be dismissed just because WTS doesn't want to belief it but reallity shows that the historical evidence on Neo Babylonian kings is clear.
In 1800s when Barbour pulled 606 out of his ass, he was dead wrong as other crazies also tried to come up with a date for Jesus' return according to 7 times. Some used 604, the accesion year of Nebuchadnezzar and some used 587 as the start of the gentile times as it was the known date for the fall of Jerusalem, others used other dates. If I remember correctly Barbour thought Babylon fell in 538bc thus 606BC was assumed by Barbour as the fall of Jerusalem. Barbour and thus Russell believed there was a 0 year and their calculations ended up with 1914 for the end of the gentile times. Then, WTS discovered there was no year 0, they also learned that Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539BC, they changed the 606 to 607 and 606 just became part of WTS' bogus history. I might dig up info on manuscripts which point to Neo babylonian periods and maybe post them here for your research, but seeing what and how you write, it most likely is a waste of my time as any intelligent person would see that 607BC is not the date for Jerusalem's fall from just a small research into the history. All the evidence can be easily researched on the net or your library or you can visit your nearest Museum (not car museum ) . But AIW seems to only accept wts writings as authority on everything, from biblical interpretations to historical events, archeaology and prophesy. With this cult mentality it probably benefits AIW and the likes to stay within their cult suroundings.
-
113
Library Visit # 2: 607 BCE vs. 587 BCE - With Pictures!
by mentallyfree31 inapproximately five weeks ago, i visited the local library and searched every book i could find that discusses the destruction of jerusalem in ancient times.
if you didn't see that thread, you can find it here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/192813/1/607-b-c-e-a-trip-to-the-local-library-with-pictures.
the results were conclusive: all secular sources agree that jerusalem was destroyed in 587/586 bce.
-
-
diamondiiz
As I said before, wts likes misquotes and they like to discredit reality without providing proof. WTS scholars have their heads up their own asses just like aiw, where they don't want to see the facts but can't provide the proof for their imaginary 607. I can say this and that without making any sense and that's exactly what wts and other 607 supporters do. While they claim the reignal years may be 18 or so years longer than is believed they don't provide concrete evidence. They try to claim that babylonian scribes cannot be trusted because they lie, they try to claim there is not enough proof found, they may say that Persian kings changed dates on tablets to make themselves look better and on and on. How about showing us and the entire Fucking world your proof for 607. Anything AIW writes doesn't show any proof, quoting a dub "scholar" is sad. Show some proof, tablets or manuscripts that may make us see that your calculation can even add up, don't try to discredit entire world of historians because you claim to be God's people and you just know better, which means shit to everyone outside of your cult.
-
113
Library Visit # 2: 607 BCE vs. 587 BCE - With Pictures!
by mentallyfree31 inapproximately five weeks ago, i visited the local library and searched every book i could find that discusses the destruction of jerusalem in ancient times.
if you didn't see that thread, you can find it here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/192813/1/607-b-c-e-a-trip-to-the-local-library-with-pictures.
the results were conclusive: all secular sources agree that jerusalem was destroyed in 587/586 bce.
-
-
diamondiiz
AIW - why quote crap! WTS used archaeology to support 539BC and disagrees with the same facts that prove 586/7BC for destruction of Jerusalem. Get your head out of your ass! As I said before, all wts can do is try to discredit the facts that are out there proving 586/7. They cannot prove 607 so they try to discredit the reality and history. When Nelson Barbour came up with 606 others seeking dates used 604 and some used 587 if I remember correctly. Name us the Neo Babylonian kings and their years in power and count backwards from 539. You won't find 607 to match. It appears that you don't want the truth but want to believe what you think is a truth even thought it's pure fiction. AIW, you can use this thread for a reference
ps.
these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.
Doesn't need to mean strictly Israel!
-
13
If I become a JW will I have to go door to door?
by Darth plaugeis inof course not.
no one forces you to do that, it's totally your decision.. lol remember that!
!.
-
-
diamondiiz
One needs to go out in service to get baptized but after that, one can stop going out if one wishes, as long as one doesn't mind dealing with shepherding calls once a year. In 19 years of being baptized I think I went out in service for about a 4 or 5 years with sub average hours. I think I might have had 3 or 4 months where I put in 10 or more hours, and by more I mean like 12 or 13 hours. :) I never fudged hours either.