Posts by Larsinger58

10

According to Hebrews 3:1-6;10:19-22 Jesus is the faithful slave, as the great high priest

by wannabe in

Larsinger58

Amazing! Indeed, Jesus of the 2nd coming is the "faithful and discreet slave."

11

144,000 as Kings and Priests Really? or not?

by Crazyguy in

in revelation chapters 7 and 14 there it talks about the 144k but says nothing of them being kings and priests.

in revelation chapter 5 and 20 it mentions ones being kings and judges, but if you notice in chapter 20 verse 4-5 it talks about martyrs coming to life judging and reigning with jesus, not the 144k specifically.

in verse 5-6 talks about the first resurrection and that all that share in this first resurrection will be priests of god and of jesus and they will reign for a thousand years.. so notice in revelation chapters 7 and 19 a great crowd is mentioned being alive standing before the throne standing at the same time as the 144k are mentioned.

Larsinger58

I'd ask, does it make sense to have kings and priests with no people to serve? Who do the kings and priests serve?

My understanding is that the 144,000 are natural Jews, but only make up 1/10th of the entire number of king-priests based on Isa 6:14. The "great crowd" who come out of the great tribulation would be those who are served by the king-priests. The entire number of king-priests would thus be 1,440,000.

Revelation is so symbolic though, there's lots of room for different interpretations.

19

Daniel 2:33,34,44,45 scripturally proves the Kingdom was not established in 1914!

by yadda yadda 2 in

at daniel 2:33-35, the "stone" not cut by hands strikes the image on the feet of iron and of molded clay and crushes them.

notice that in daniel 2:44,45, the setting up of the kingdom is synonymous with the stone crushing the image.

verse 44 talks about the kingdom crushing when it is set up, and verse 45 talks about the feet being crushed by the stone.

Larsinger58

So it was written for the age of crisis the pseudonymous author found himself in, not as a book of prophecy about some far off kingdom of God to be "set up" many centuries later.

I know some people will simply not believe the Bible, regardless. But in Daniel's defense, the chronology is what comes through as confirming how accurate Daniel's prophecies are about the future. Daniel has three chronology prophecies that have to match up to the same year for the second coming. But they are based on actual events:

1. The "7 times" prophecy, which is what 1914 is based on dates the 2nd coming 2520 years after the fall of Jerusalem. This is based on that date being 607 BCE. The original date for the fall of Jerusalem is 529 BCE. That means the 2nd coming would be in 1992 rather than 1914. But that date has to match two other prophecies.

2. The "seventy weeks" prophecy requires the messiah to fulfill the 70th week. The first time he fulfills the first half; the second time he fulfills the second half. The 70th week of the first coming was 29-36. We only have to count down to our time. 70 weeks is 490 years. 4 x 490 = 1960. 1960 + 36 = 1996. So the 70th week of the second coming ends in 1996 and begins in 1989. That means the messiah would arrive within less than 1 year of the mid-week passover on April 6, 1993. That means he must arrive in 1992-1993. That matches #1! So this dating is based on the appearance of Christ in 29 CE. It is not related to ancient events with distorted dates.

3. Finally, the "1335 days" reflects the 2nd coming after the return of the Jews to their homeland which ends 1290 days. November 30, 1947 is when the official Jewish exile ended as well as the so-called "gentile times." This ended the 1290 days. In that case, the messiah was to arrive 45 years later to fulfill the 1335 days. 1290 + 45 = 1335. 1947 + 45 = 1992. Now 1947 is a modern event prophesied by Daniel that links to the 2nd coming year. Yet it is the same year you get in #1 and #2.

#1 is a bit complex because of revisionism during the Persian Period. But that is easily observed and confirmed. The apocryphal book of "Esdras" compared to Ezra/Nehemiah points to where the revisions were made. Even so, astronomy helps us to recover the original timeline. The VAT4956 thus independently dates year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar II to 511 BCE in 2 lines. The other lines match 568 BCE, which is the current popular revised timeline. But note what happens when year 37 is dated to 511 BCE? That means year 19 falls in 529 BCE. Is that a coincidence? No.

Now I'm not promoting this interpretation here for your acceptance. I'm just noting that depending upon your interpretation one is impressed or not impressed with whether Daniel actually prophesied about future events or just events occurring around his own time, even though, his own time was during the Neo-Babylonian and early Persian Period and not much later during the post-exilic times of Epiphanes.

If someone doesn't want to believe and don't want anything to be fulfilled, then nothing anyone can say will change their minds. But for others of us, we're very impressed how what was prophesied by Daniel has come true in modern times.

Of course, I'm critical of those who go out of their way to discredit the Bible without knowing how to interpret it correctly, but who don't apply the same intensity to the pagan records and pagan history. Few want to discuss issues of pagan historical revisionism but automatically assume the Jews just made up things and that their history is chronically inaccurate. So I say, let's look at both with the same critical eye and see what we come up with.

19

Daniel 2:33,34,44,45 scripturally proves the Kingdom was not established in 1914!

by yadda yadda 2 in

at daniel 2:33-35, the "stone" not cut by hands strikes the image on the feet of iron and of molded clay and crushes them.

notice that in daniel 2:44,45, the setting up of the kingdom is synonymous with the stone crushing the image.

verse 44 talks about the kingdom crushing when it is set up, and verse 45 talks about the feet being crushed by the stone.

Larsinger58

CRAZY: thats one slow moving stone.

LARS: Well, the kingdom in heaven is set up before it is set up in the earth, so the two events do not happen at the same time.

The Bible does state that Armageddon would seem "delayed" so it seems like a slow-moving stone, except once the chronology is corrected, then the 2nd coming occurs in 1992 and not 1914. So the stone is moving a bit faster than JWs currently believe.

19

Daniel 2:33,34,44,45 scripturally proves the Kingdom was not established in 1914!

by yadda yadda 2 in

at daniel 2:33-35, the "stone" not cut by hands strikes the image on the feet of iron and of molded clay and crushes them.

notice that in daniel 2:44,45, the setting up of the kingdom is synonymous with the stone crushing the image.

verse 44 talks about the kingdom crushing when it is set up, and verse 45 talks about the feet being crushed by the stone.

Larsinger58

The reason why Daniel and Ezra/Nehemiah were suppressed was because they expose some of the original chronology and kings.

For instance, Ezra 6:14,15, besides confirming that Darius I only ruled for six years, confirm that Darius I's successor was called "Artaxerxes" and that king is understood to be Artaxerxes, Longimanus throughout the book of Ezra. But Daniel 11:2 confirms that the 4th king after Cyrus, which is the successor to Darius I, would fight against Greece and that part of history is well confirmed by the history of Xerxes' invasion in Greek records.

Also, we have extant documents that confirm that Xerxes was also known as Artaxerxes, whether or not you conclude they were the same king.

So once Xerxes claimed he was his own son, Artaxerxes, these two books had to be suppressed. This was during cold war times between Persia and Greece so the Jews cooperated, of course. They were very protective of Artaxerxes.

So, since we are all so informed and so smart, why not focus on trying to disprove the Bible and prove that Xerxes and Artaxerxes, Longimanus were actually not the same king? Go ahead and try. Be informed! Let's investigate.

19

Daniel 2:33,34,44,45 scripturally proves the Kingdom was not established in 1914!

by yadda yadda 2 in

at daniel 2:33-35, the "stone" not cut by hands strikes the image on the feet of iron and of molded clay and crushes them.

notice that in daniel 2:44,45, the setting up of the kingdom is synonymous with the stone crushing the image.

verse 44 talks about the kingdom crushing when it is set up, and verse 45 talks about the feet being crushed by the stone.

Larsinger58

PHIZZY: Many scholars feel that Daniel was written mainly about Antiochus 1V Epiphanes, and was completed shortly before his death in 164BC.

LARS: Interesting you'd focus on that detail, Phiz. For the record, Daniel clearly dates his own book. He served under Nebuchadnezzar II as well as Darius the Mede and was still alive when Cyrus came to the throne.

Some think Daniel was written much later because of the extant copies and language. But the book of "Esdras" (Ezra/Nehemiah) and Daniel were suppressed for a while by the Jews themselves in an attempt to cooperate with the Persians in covering up the identity of Xerxes who was also going by the name of Artaxeerxes. The Jews loved Xerxes/Artaxerxes. But after Xerxes invaded Greece, he became a target for assasination so he was able to fake his death and claim that he was his own son. The Book of Daniel combined with Ezra/Nehemiah reflected the original history, though, so they were suppressed. To help with the revised history, the Jews then wrote a revised version of "Esdras" that leaves off the part of the history. The original book of Ezra/Nehemiah showed Nehemiah returning with the original exiles in the 1st of Cyrus, but also showing that Nehemiah served under Artaxerxes throughout his entire rule and surviving into the reign of Darius II. The Persians expanded this part of the history in order to make Darius I old enough to be the grandfather to Artaxerxes was was now claiming to be the grandson of Darius I instead of his son. The rule of Darius I was expanded from six years to 36 years. Plus the book of Daniel provides specific information about the kings of Persia.

After the Persian Empire ended and Xerxes got away with faking his death, the canonical Ezra/Nehemiah and Daniel resurfaced and the resurfaced versions are what reflect the later dating including linguistic issues.

But, Phizzy, since you are so focussed on bashing Daniel, why don't you compare the apocryphal "Esdras" with canonical Ezra/Nehemiah and then comare that with Josephus' history.

Even so, it is a fact that the apocryphal "Esdras" proves revisionism from this period by the Jews. As I said, the Jews loved Xerxes and so they were very cooperative. In fact, they may have masterminded some of the cover-up.

But as I said, regardless of the actual age of the earliest extant copies, Daniel was written during the Neo-Babylonian and Persian Periods.

Now why don't you entertain us with your intellectual reasons for why the Jews have two versions of "Esdras"?

19

Daniel 2:33,34,44,45 scripturally proves the Kingdom was not established in 1914!

by yadda yadda 2 in

at daniel 2:33-35, the "stone" not cut by hands strikes the image on the feet of iron and of molded clay and crushes them.

notice that in daniel 2:44,45, the setting up of the kingdom is synonymous with the stone crushing the image.

verse 44 talks about the kingdom crushing when it is set up, and verse 45 talks about the feet being crushed by the stone.

Larsinger58

YADDAYADDA2: I was rather hoping someone would comment on my argument per se, on its merits. So far I've had no direct feedback on the content of my post?

LARS: In direct response to your issue of the delayed destruction of the image, there's nothing wrong with that. Based on other scriptures, Satan is cast out of heaven at the same time as the second coming and then cast down to earth. Then there is an itnerval of time when Christ's angels go and seal the elect while Satan prepares the nations for Armageddon. So there is a delay and that is effectively represented by the delay between the stone being cut out of the mountain and then striking the image. That is, there is a delay from the time the kingdom is set up in heaven and when it actually gets set up in the earth. So in this case I would side with the WTS on this interpretation, EXCEPT per Revelation, the UN is in power when Armageddon strikes. The ten toes would adequately represent the UN, i.e. multiple kingdoms. Ten toes wouldn't represent well the dual-world power of the Anglo-Saxons.

The delay is scriptural. I don't see a clear issue in this case.

3

Mordecai and Esther

by DATA-DOG in

the drama at the dc was strange.

it seems the dramas have been a bit lacking, and is there ever a drama about the new testament?

oh, well.. anyway, it seems like the wtbt$ has put it's own spin on esther as well.

Larsinger58

My thoughts?

From "Insight", page 121 under "Apocrypha":

Additional ancient testimony. One of the chief external evidences against the canonicity of the Apocrypha is the fact that none of the Christian Bible writers quoted from these books. While this of itself is not conclusive, inasmuch as their writings are also lacking in quotations from a few books recognized as canonical, such as Esther, Ecclesiastes, and The Song of Solomon, yet the fact that not one of the writings of the Apocrypha is quoted even once is certainly significant.

The Book of Esther is not inspired, so... it doesn't matter, really.

33

conspiracy theories

by James Brown in

i don't know if this has been posted or not.. but it proves there is a world of conspiracy.

not just one conspiracy theory.. the canadian minister of defense admits that the world is being visited by 4 alien races.. for cofty and leolia, i guess sitchin is right after all.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeqdvyfmbau&feature=youtu.be.

.

Larsinger58

There are aliens and other life forms beyond the earth. They are called: ANGELS!

39

i would love to debate

by new hope and happiness in

i would love to be able to debate some of the issues on this site.. this is the first site i have debated on.. i would like to debate with credibility.. i think i debate on only what i feel secure about, and that is a good start.

.

but on this thread i would appreciate some tips on how to constrctively debate on a thread..

Larsinger58

WHATHAPPENED: My advice is never get personal or nasty and insulting.

LARS: Absolutely right. I believe that if you are confident in your own view, that you can accept the views of others even if they disagree with you. There is no reason to be rude or nasty. Those who are threatened by your view or your stance on your view tend to get emotional and then that shows up in an angry response.

But..... (grin)... I also think profanity can be colorful and may be the only language available to express a strong point. You know, Jesus did not refrain from namecalling. He called someone "offspring of vipers." Was that like calling someone in our day an SOB? I mean, in his day, was it an insult. YOU SON OF A SNAKE!!

So I think some words that are profanity add the true intensity to something, whereas there is no "polite counterpart." But I don't defile myself by actually saying the words. I just use the initials, like: WTF!!! Which I can later say means: "Why the fuss?" ROFL!

Anyway, I agree. Point well taken. Be polite and respectful. In my mind, we are all fellow "survivors" from the WTS cult. You know? We're all lost and trying to find our way. We're here to support each other. That's the main thing, right? What topic is so urgent that it preempts our humanity toward one another?