Posts by Mad Dawg

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

Isaac, is your quote the section of Insights that scolar refers too? Thanks for posting it. Regardless, we have the WT claiming a date that does not come from the Bible. It comes from secular sources.

My points are thus:

The legitamacy of the GB and the WTS is bases on dates - 607, 537, 1914, 1919.
No where in the Bible can it be shown that these dates are pegged to a certain point in history.
Any date that is given is calculated using secular translations of Babylonian writings.
Therefore, we can factually state that the legitamacy of the GB and the WTS is ultimately based on Bablylonian writings - not the Bible.

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

Mad Dawg

Scholar said:

You should consult Insight On The Scriptures, 1988, Vol.1.pp.568-569 under the heading 'Cyrus' Decree for the Return of the Exiles under the article entitled CYRUS for a more detailed discussion on this matter. Enjoy!

Ummmm, a couple of things here:

Ø You have loudly and proudly proclaimed that you could easily prove that the exiles returned 537 years before the common era using the Bible ONLY.

o Why are you sending me to a book if you can easily do this using only the Bible?

o If this is such an easy task, why are you having such a hard time with it?

Ø I will not refer to Insight for two reasons:

o It is not the Bible. If you are using the Bible only, then use the Bible.

o I do not have access to this book. I am not going to buy this book when it has nothing to do with my question.

You have claimed that this is any easy task, please do it and be done with it. Please be a man of your word.

347

Are You Paul or are you Saul?

by reniaa in

jw
friends

this was the same man at different times in his life yet he changed his name because he completely changed his ideals and goals too.

both were extremely zealous, both thought they were doing gods work, both thought they were working for the greater good.. acts 8:3 (new international version)3but saul began to destroy the church.

going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.. soul thought gods work was to destroy the christians but paul.... acts 20: 19i served the lord with great humility and with tears, although i was severely tested by the plots of the jews.

Mad Dawg

Ren said:

what lists ones written by people that would have called first century Christians a cult?

Because of your mangled grammar, I am not sure what you are asking. However, first century Christians were considered a curiosity. But they were not considered a cult as the term is understood today. Luke 5:30 NIV, Acts 24:5 NIV, Acts 24:14 NIV, Acts 26:5 NIV, Acts 28:22 NIV

Early Christianity was considered by contemporaries as a sub-division of Judaism.

Mad Dawg said:

First, I find it odd that you would defend your faith with a list that puts your faith on the same level as David Koresh and the Branch Davidians.

Ren Said:

To be homest as soon as you said David Koresh you lost me because thats akin to using Godwin's law, deliberately mentioning a heinous murderous sect to make people associate it with witnesses...badly done Mad dawg. If thats what you think of witnesses we don't have much to discuss.

Reniaa

HOLY COW, REN!! Take a deep breath, Ren. Sloooowly let it out. Let’s examine this like adults now.

Ø Who posted this link that equates the WTS with David Koresh? Ren's Link

Ø Bingo! YOU DID!!

Ø Who is associating Koresh with the WTS?

Ø Correct again! YOU ARE!!

Ø How am I the bad guy for pointing out WHAT YOU DID!?

Ø Read your quote again more carefully: “thats akin to using Godwin's law, deliberately mentioning a heinous murderous sect to make people associate it with witnesses”

Ø CONGRATULATIONS, REN!!! You have now connected the WTS with Nazis! Am I a bad guy for noticing what YOU did here too?

Ø Where do you get off equating the Branch Davidians with Nazis? They are just imperfect men.

Ø Can you give an example of what they did that was so "heinous"? It was the Government that murdered people.

Ø As victims of government aggression, I am actually sympathetic with them.

Ø No, I don’t view witnesses as you seem to think I do.

You really shouldn’t be making such lame accusations just to avoid answering pointed questions.

347

Are You Paul or are you Saul?

by reniaa in

jw
friends

this was the same man at different times in his life yet he changed his name because he completely changed his ideals and goals too.

both were extremely zealous, both thought they were doing gods work, both thought they were working for the greater good.. acts 8:3 (new international version)3but saul began to destroy the church.

going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.. soul thought gods work was to destroy the christians but paul.... acts 20: 19i served the lord with great humility and with tears, although i was severely tested by the plots of the jews.

Mad Dawg

Ren said:

no thx and going over back history of imperfect men is not my idea of fun, If you look for imperfection in imperfection you will find it!

All a ex-Jw can prove by telling how bad such and such a witness was is that they are imperfect men Well! I already knew that.

Spirit guidance doesn't preclude imperfection.

and in fact we are told biblically that we await the time when 'imperfection becomes perfection' While I try not to use imperfection as an excuse I cannot allow it as a Reason to condemn either!

http://www.armageddononline.org/failed_armageddon1.php

Ren my dear, just a few comments and questions now that I have a little time:

Ø First, I find it odd that you would defend your faith with a list that puts your faith on the same level as David Koresh and the Branch Davidians.

Ø Who else on that list is Spirit directed?

Ø If they are the only channel of communication from God, shouldn’t they have the best record of any - even if it is not perfect?

Ø Why do they have the worst record on the list?

Ø Why should I trust my eternal destiny with someone who is wrong every time?

Ø JW’s believe that the GB alone is spiritual enough that they alone can understand the Bible, but they are no better than anyone else. Which is it?

Ø I am willing to condemn EVERY single person on the list, that claimed to speak for God, as a false prophet. Are you willing to do the same?

Ø I am willing to apply any standard that I hold the WTS to, to every other person or religious organization. Do you hold the WTS to the same standards that you apply to other religions?

Ø Reading WT, Awake, meetings and field service aren’t fun either. You would do well to read early WT writings and those of the early Church Fathers. Perhaps you could avoid inadvertantly embarassing yourself by confusing theology as biography.

Ø As I have read many of the writings of Russell and Rutherford, I know more about the early doctrines of your faith than you do.

Ø JW’s would be surprised to learn that they hold to a faith that was founded in Egyptian/ Babylonian paganism. Russell taught that the pyramid was a stone witness equal to the Bible.

Ø I don’t know where you got the idea that the council of Nicea invented the trinity or the deity of Christ, but it is bunk. These doctrines were held long before Nicea.

Ø Arius was excommunicated, not executed.

Ignatius of Antioch – Letter to the Ephesians ca. 100

“There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death”

“God Himself being manifested in human form for the renewal of eternal life.”

Hyppolytus - Against Heresies ca. 220

“For this is a peculiarity of the pre-eminence of God, not to stand in need of other instruments for the creation of those things which are summoned into existence. His own Word is both suitable and sufficient for the formation of all things, even as John, the disciple of the Lord, declares regarding Him: All things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made.”

Hermas - The Shepherd ca.100

“and the son is the Holy Spirit”

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

Mad Dawg

"Scholar" said:

Your question is too easy...

Then please answer it. I need to see the light.

...for starters if you want scriptural proof for 537 BCE for the Return then you only need to read the last few verses of 2 Chronicles and then proceed to read Ezra 1:1 until 3:1. This contains all of the esential historical and chronological data that you need. Enjoy the feast.

Ok, I read the verses. Tell me what I am missing here. I don't see anywhere where it is said that any of this is 537 years before the common era or any other fixed point in time. Please, pretty please, help me. I am a lost soul in search of light. Help me find the light. Relieve me of my blindness. Please show me how these verses show that the return was 537 years before the common era. I need help with faith in God's only channel.

347

Are You Paul or are you Saul?

by reniaa in

jw
friends

this was the same man at different times in his life yet he changed his name because he completely changed his ideals and goals too.

both were extremely zealous, both thought they were doing gods work, both thought they were working for the greater good.. acts 8:3 (new international version)3but saul began to destroy the church.

going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.. soul thought gods work was to destroy the christians but paul.... acts 20: 19i served the lord with great humility and with tears, although i was severely tested by the plots of the jews.

Mad Dawg

Ren, thank you for the response. It is much appreciated. I will be looking into them. As I have stated in the previous post, there is a difference between saying, "Ya know, I think X" and saying that it is "God's date." If any/all of the people claimed that it was God's date, I would have no problem declaring them false prophets. I looked at the link you provided, thank you for that link. I wish they had sourced their material. It would be interesting to see what was said in the original context.

Just wondering, have you read any of the books by Russell or Rutherford? I have, they are quite interesting.

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

Mad Dawg

Scholar! Wait! Before you run off again, please oh please oh please oh please explain how you can show from the Bible ONLY, that Jerusalem fell 607 years before the common era. You have a start by showing that the exiles returned 70 years later. Can you establish that the return was 537 years before the common era using only the Bible? PLEASE?

347

Are You Paul or are you Saul?

by reniaa in

jw
friends

this was the same man at different times in his life yet he changed his name because he completely changed his ideals and goals too.

both were extremely zealous, both thought they were doing gods work, both thought they were working for the greater good.. acts 8:3 (new international version)3but saul began to destroy the church.

going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.. soul thought gods work was to destroy the christians but paul.... acts 20: 19i served the lord with great humility and with tears, although i was severely tested by the plots of the jews.

Mad Dawg

Ren my dear, you said the following:

I have yet to see actual proof that date setting is a crime and if it is, it should be applied to every christian faith, since the majority of them have done it Including all the biggies and oldest.

I have never heard this before. Would you be so kind as to list them? Please list the sources as well. I like to read this stuff. I know of certain idiots that have published books like 88 Reasons in '88. They are indeed false prohpets if they are saying that God told them that it will happen. I don't believe them to be false prophets if they are saying "By comparing the evidence from the Bible to current events, I think that X will happen by Y date."

The following are a few of the items that make it hard to accept them as anything other than a false prophet:

Mr. Russel said that it was God's date that the end of religion and governments would be in 1914. This obviously did not happen.
If 1914 was so obviously the parousia, why did it take the WTS almost 30 years to see it themselves when they are God's Spirit directed organization? If they couldn't see it, why should I believe it now?
Why did Mr. Rutherford never say anything about the parousia being in 1914? He and Mr. Russel always taught that the parousia was in 1874.
Where in the Bible does it say that the princes would return in 1925?
I know that this is "very old light", but let's get real here. If Mr. Rutherford had a Biblical basis for this in 1920, then we should find the same basis today.
Where are the millions that were alive in 1920 that would never die?

In medical scools, it is said, "If you hear hoofbeats, think horses - not zebras." The WT said itself that if people did not read the WT, they would go back to the teachings of the historical church. In other words, the WT know that no one would come to the conclusions of the WT unless they were fed this from the WT. They know that a simple, straight forward reading of the Bible confirms historical Christianity. One of the things that people who actually understand the Bible realize is that JW's see some very strange looking zebras in the Bible. True Christians will accept it straight from the horse's mouth - without long, excruciatingly convoluted 'explanations'.

Have you ever read the old books by Russel and Rutherford? You really should, they are very interesting.

MD

9

Abercrombie "Banishes" Girl With Prosthetic Arm To Storeroom Because She Doesn't Fit The "Look Policy"

by Yizuman in

by hortense, 3:45 pm on sat jun 13 2009, 65,186 views copy this whole post to another site.

slurpcancel </form></form> google_ad_section_start just in case their racism, sexism, and general awfulness hasn't been enough to turn you away from abercrombie & fitch after all these years, here's another glimpse of the inner workings of the horrible store.. when i previously (and gleefully) wrote about the economic troubles that abercrombie was having a few months back, i mentioned that my personal hatred for the store comes from the fact that one of the women i was in the intensive inpatient unit with during my treatment for anorexia was heavily recruited by the store just days before her hospitalization (she was incredibly underweight) because she had "the look" they wanted.

turns out that this horrific "look policy" doesn't just revolve around being stick-thin; according to riam dean, she was forced to work in the stockroom, as opposed to on the floor, at abercrombie's london flagship store because her prosthetic arm didn't fit the company's attractiveness standards.

Mad Dawg

Hmmm, maybe Michael Moore should apply there then sue them because they said he doesn't have the look.

44

Wow

by mrsjones5 in

jw
friends

my 11 year old daughter wrote this.

it's based on a book called "the cay" by theodore taylor that was told from the perspective of a boy.

at sunset, the air was heavy and hot.

Mad Dawg

You have an amazing daughter. She is truly gifted in her writing.