I understand. It is one on the reasons I'm still "in" too. My family first, but also my friends. I have a few who love me no matter what, but they are torn - "loyalty to Jehovah" = not listening to me. One of my very best friends was PO in my cong for all six years I served as an elder. He is humble, funny, loving, Christlike in his attitude. I love him. If I am DF'ed or DA'ed he would be torn to shreds. Some who who are in are just of average intelligence. (I know that sounds arrogant, but it is true.) They can't understand the issues involved anhymore than they understand unified field theory, calculous, astrophysics, etc..... They have found an emotionally satisfying way to serve God and can't understand anything beyond that. I hope youfind a way to seperate from oppression, and still maintain relationships that are important to you.
allelsefails
JoinedPosts by allelsefails
-
26
It's not the same to make NEW FRIENDS, I want to keep my OLD FRIENDS - Am I right?
by BonaFide ini appreciate all the advice on here about making friends outside the organization.. i am making new friends, both at work and at school.. but it's not the same as old friends.. my old friends i grew up with.
i sometimes go to the movies with them, dumb movies.
like that night at the museum, smithsonian one.
-
-
-
1
andersonsinfo: Who wrote them - revisited
by TheOldHippie inhere are some other authors i found:.
"choosing the best way of life" and "is this life all there is?
" - reinhard lengtat.
-
-
allelsefails
Is there any reference material or info to back up who wrote these books? Just curious. An Elder compared what I believed to Ed Dunlap recently - I take it as a compliment now.
-
9
Give an example of an elected official
by John Doe inthat is not a hypocrite.
to be valid, the official's party opponents must agree with you that said official is not a hypocrite..
-
-
allelsefails
StAnn - that's nice to know. Someone who thinks the "law" shpould be followed even by the government is obviously crazy. That idea was abandoned by FDR. I kind of like the constitution myself and I think if we used it - it might work! I guess I'm crazy like Ron Paul though.
-
17
Bible Canon
by allelsefails inhas anyone done any personal research on how the bible canon was selected?
i am putting together an article on this and would like whatever insight anyone would care to give.
preferably historical references that are verifiable.
-
-
allelsefails
Thaks for all the links and info. Some I have seen some I haven't. I don't have a PHD nor do I have access to all the oldest manuscripts. I'm trying to write a series of articles to use when talking to an open-mind JW. (there are a few) I'm writing them in a way that would have appealed to me a year ago. Any advice on this approach is also welcome. Thanks for everyone's input.
-
17
Bible Canon
by allelsefails inhas anyone done any personal research on how the bible canon was selected?
i am putting together an article on this and would like whatever insight anyone would care to give.
preferably historical references that are verifiable.
-
-
allelsefails
Has anyone done any personal research on how the bible canon was selected? I am putting together an article on this and would like whatever insight anyone would care to give. Preferably historical references that are verifiable. ... I personnally look at the earliest canon we have (c)190 [Muratorian fragment] and see an apocalypse of Peter mentioned along with John's. No mention of 2 Peter (no way the same author as 1 Peter) no mention of James (my favorite NT book) no mention of Hebrews (no way Paul wrote this) and a frank recognition that some books are not settled as a true part of the canon. The writers of these books are pure speculation/tradition as well. How can we know who wrote any of these books?
-
421
70 years = 607?
by allelsefails in70 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.
-
-
allelsefails
Scholar - Does not interpretation belong to God? Again using your theory of eschatological interpretation you can make anything fit these scriptures. It requires interpretation therefore any man can claim to have "interpretted" it. You make an incredible jump of logic that in Daniel there is a context that requires a literal and figurative meaning. You have not quoted anything that even suggests it. You still have quoted nothing to support your position. PS - Who (other than you) has ever celebrated a WT scholar? They are universally dimissed by all scholars I have read about. Just curious.
-
9
Give an example of an elected official
by John Doe inthat is not a hypocrite.
to be valid, the official's party opponents must agree with you that said official is not a hypocrite..
-
-
allelsefails
Ron Paul - everybody thinks he is crazy, but not a hypocrite.
-
421
70 years = 607?
by allelsefails in70 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.
-
-
allelsefails
Scholar - if the "times" of Daniel and the "times" of Revelation are related why do you believe in Daniel 1 time = 360 years but in Revelation 1 time = 1 year? I pointed out to do so is like matching up Nostradamus prophesies after the fact. You can make anything fit. Or like bennyK's quote above. Russell applied the "last days", Gentile times, Harvest time, and Jesus' "parousia" as king to completely different dates and prophecies and proved it scripturally! You can make the scriptures fit whatever you want if you allow the kind of fuzzy assumptions and leaps of logic you make here. Just like the new understanding of Generation - there was an article in 1981 proving that he generation could not scripturally mean the anointed, but now that is what it means and we can scripturally prove it. PS - It would be more convincing if you quote somebody instead of saying "expositors agree" or "celebrated WT scolars" these vague unverifiable references subtract from your arguement rather than adding to it. Just friendly constructive criticism.
-
421
70 years = 607?
by allelsefails in70 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.
-
-
allelsefails
Perhaps more than a cursory reading is necessary. Yes I see verse 3 recognizes that God has dominion over the earth and has a kingdom that lasts forever. vs 32 uses the times for years because that is what times means in this context. vs 34 is again Neb recognizing Jehovah's power to remove or restore an earthly king - which he had just done to Neb. What demonstrates a fulfillment of this prophecy beyond Neb? This is an amazing example of Jehovah's ability to remove and humble the most powerful leader of the time and then restore him after 7 years. Also to give his prophet advance knowledge of the event. Don't see "gentile times" anywhere. "eschatological application" because it used the word times? ..... WTS says: times = years *** re chap. 27 p. 184 pars. 26 God’s Kingdom Is Born! *** 26 How long did this respite for the seed of God’s woman last? Revelation 12:6 says 1,260 days. Revelation 12:14 calls the period a time, times, and half a time; in other words, three and a half times. In fact, both expressions stand for three and a half years, extending in the Northern Hemisphere from the spring of 1919 to the autumn of 1922. This was a period of refreshing recuperation and reorganization for the restored John class. .............. This is the scripture they give to show the length of 7 times! So times mean years of days in Daniel and has a much bigger fulfillment, but only regular years in Revelation? Sorry not reasonable. Might as well be Nostradamus if you're going to randomly apply rules and definitions to bible words and phrases to make them fit your own history. Allelsefails
-
421
70 years = 607?
by allelsefails in70 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.
-
-
allelsefails
Scholar - you stated "There is considerable evidence establishing the seven times with the Gentile Times and the said scholar has tabulated such evidence for the honest and dutiful inquirer" I have been a baptized witness since 1991. I was an elder for more than 6 years. I have read every verse of Daniel several times over and there is no evidence to suggest 7 years = Gentile times. Could you please provide me a link to any such scriptural thought? I don't know who Jonsson is. My thoughts are a result of my own honest bible study. Calling me braindead is not an effective way to prove your claim to christianity. Thanks for your posts, but don't denegrate me. I am a sincere bible student.