disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
Alice:
"Everyone here has completely missed the point, that the Bible is a highly unified book that points to a time when God's Kingdom as a visible organization will emerge from Christendom and will put an end to all other kingdoms."
If that was your point, then why didn't you call this thread "The Bible - A Highly Unified Book"???
I thought your point was about the dates for the Gentile Times???
disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
This has turned out to be a great thread on the subject!
I hope newbies will read past Alice's initial uninformed post.
You all did a great job!!
just been reading the resurrected topic "remember when assemblies were fun".. bought back some good memories particularly regarding the 'holiday camps'.. i was going to add this but decided it warranted it's own topic.. the 'good times' have been replaced by incessant rules.
here is a selection from the last circuit assembly i attended.
please feel free to add to the list.. .
My favourite was the year they papered over all the mirrors in the ladies bathrooms to keep us all from getting too haughty.
Yep, there's nothing like a 2-block-long hike across a parking lot, trying to carry kids, bags, lunchboxes, ............with a prairie wind blowing your skirt over your head.............. and getting into the building with your hair all over the place and your sweater has pulled your blouse over enough to show your bra straps, and you CAN'T CHECK YOURSELF IN THE MIRROR TO SEE IF YOU ARE MEETING THEIR STANDARDS OF DECENCY!!
disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
I haven't looked into it. I assume there's some sort of discrepancy.
Frick!!
Yes, Alice. Read the other threads on this. The same scholars who accept the 539 date and are quoted by the WT, are suddenly considered "wrong" by the WT for their other dates, simply because they disagree with 607.
Hello??? Look at the threads Outlaw posted here for you!! Can you show just as many sources that agree with the WT dates?
disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
I'm only concerned with a logical rebuttal to the information I posted. If no one has a response that counters anything I stated, that means I'm right about what I've said. Running your mouth off about referenced material means you have no logical rebuttal to the information.
So you say. And yet you totally ignored TD's excellent point. As usual.
I just don't see much point in debating you, since you are so deliberately and woefully uninformed.
disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
I populated this information with plenty of my own input.
Baloney. There's so much crap in that post that has nothing to do with the issue, it's not even funny. Just one example:
Length of this cylinder is 22.86 Centimetre, and it is now kept in the British Museum;
Why is this important to disproving the date? Please, cut out all the crap and make your point in your own words.
Until you cut out the crap that has nothing to do with your point - very few people here read anything you post.
disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
I don't understand Carl O. Jonsson's motivation. Really.
Thus, proving that you haven't informed yourself on the issue before posting the giant cut-and-paste.
Go back and read the other threads, Alice. Then post a rebuttal with your disagreements. Try to put it in your own words.
disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.
carl o. jonsson).
along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.
Alice,
Why don't you debate this on one of the MYRIADs of threads already devoted to debating 537? Have you even read any of them?
I'm not going to read your giant cut-and-paste, searching for the tiny kernel of information that may be hidden in there, but basically you are saying.......
"Although there is very little secular confirmation for the JW viewpoint, you should all accept it anyways."
You are treating this issue like it is new to this forum. But, everyone here has already looked at the issue in its entirety.
Call me when you have an original thought and not just a cut-and-paste.
picture the situation:.
a jw sister, let's call her marjorie, has a non jw father who died.
she arranges for an elder to take the funeral at a crematorium and marjorie's non-jw husband pays for a reception at a pub afterwards.. marjorie has a disassociated son.
Jamie:
Last fall I was informed by non-jw aunt that my jw mom was in the hospital with symptoms that sounded like a minor stroke. I called her, and she was very irate that I, a df'd person called to inquire about her well being and that I'd have to learn her diagnosis "through the grapevine"...again so much for the "necessary family business" allowance.
A hug to you, sweet lady.
(((( Jamie ))))
what's your passion?.
some people are very intense when it comes to politics, religion, jws, sex, love, the arts, music and almost anything that could get them revved up..
