Posts by Larsinger58

42

VERY DEEP QUESTIONS for elect/annointed/those with insight/holy spirit/etc

by EndofMysteries in

only need answer if you have already researched, come to an understanding, or have seen this and currently figuring it out.

if you have no idea what i'm talking about, then question doesn't apply to you as i feel it's information that is only understood at the right time and to those allowed to get understanding of it.. ***if you would like to give me some answers, but feel the information can't be posted publically or your restricted in whom to give it to, feel free to message me directly.

that's also why i am asking these questions in a way in which only you would understand, but i do not know how to find you otherwise.. .

Larsinger58

1. God's Kingdom and the return of it, have you seen it described as literal, with a literal temple on earth with literal waters and trees of life, also the temple described as being inside of you with waters inside of you, and also as a heavenly kingdom which either rules from heaven or comes to earth with waters and trees of life (either real or symbolically), have you concluded what all of them mean and which is true or how all descriptions may relate to each other from the supposed difference.

I'm of the "anointed" in the JW context of the "healthy class", etc.

Christ arrives to rebuild the spiritual temple, the actual sealing of the elect is the building of the spiritual temple. He does not come to rebuild any earthly temple. That was what prefigured the final spiritual one. The total number of the memebers is 144,000 natural Jews and 1,296,000 gentiles to make up the total number of 1,440,000.

Your reference to the water bubbling forth from within is not directly related to any kingdom "inside" someone. Jesus just said, "Whoever drinks from the water that I will give him will never get thirsty at all, but the water that I will give him will become in him a fountain of water bulbbling up to impart everlasting life."

The concept of the "kingdom" being inside you is a misapplication of Jesus' words that the "kingdom is in your midst" and was a reference to the kingdom not being that observable. "The kingdom of God is not coming with striking observableness..For, look! the kingdom of God is in your midst."

What he was saying was that kingdom members would not be pointing to Christ, openly identifying him, nor to themselves, but it would be secretive. Thus when he said the kingdom was in their midst it meant that secret kingdom members were in their midst standing right in front of them.

So the kingdom being inside you and the waters inside you are not related to the temple, unless you are more specific than above for these references. There's no contradictions.

LS

12

What Josephus Really Wrote about the 70 Years

by Ultimate Reality in

there have been some partial quotations of josephus on this board recently in relation to how he explained the '70 years'.. .

in the interests of scholastic honesty and so that his words are not taken out of context, here are some relevant passages with their context.

you might ask yourself, do the 70 years (as spoken by the prophet jeremiah) begin with the destruction of the temple or before the destruction of the temple?

Larsinger58

Yes, it's complex and at some point one has to try to decide what is more credible. It is not easy.

Sometimes I think I'm the only person along with the elect who really need to know the absolute truth, in some way, to be protected from Satan's propaganda. But that many will never understand, nor do they need to. Think of all the non-Christians? They don't have the context to debate Biblical chronology. Or think even of non Witnesses. So much in the NT is related to the witnesses and the "evil slave" which is the GB that the average non-Witness will never understand those applications because they are too specific to the WTS.

So perhaps I should just be content that I have enough information not to be fooled, and that's the primary thing. Everybody doesn't need to know everything.

LS

37

If You Want to Expose JW's, Get it Right!

by AllTimeJeff in

jehovah's witnessses, (and esp their leadership, the governing body) are guilty of so many things, that one has to be careful of the tabloid rumors swirling around them.. it's probably helpful to review first of all what jw's are guilty of.

they are absolutely guilty in their efforts to control active members under the dictates of the conscience of the gb.

every other watchtower article usually has big time references to how we shouldn't be like those self righteous pharisees in jesus day for all the rules, followed by another article next describing what one can (could) or can't (shouldn't) watch on tv, wear for clothing or hairstyles, etc.

Larsinger58

There is one Youtube site totally dedicated to finding "subliminal" images in the publications. You be the judge. I don't think all of it is intentional but some of it seems rather suspicious.

http://www.youtube.com/user/binsubimages#p/u/26/2CvL7FUgWb0

LS

12

What Josephus Really Wrote about the 70 Years

by Ultimate Reality in

there have been some partial quotations of josephus on this board recently in relation to how he explained the '70 years'.. .

in the interests of scholastic honesty and so that his words are not taken out of context, here are some relevant passages with their context.

you might ask yourself, do the 70 years (as spoken by the prophet jeremiah) begin with the destruction of the temple or before the destruction of the temple?

Larsinger58

This is just my opion, but It seems clear to me, that 70 years refers to the totality and 50 years just for the

the temple. I try not to read between the lines. But I have learned to never assume I'm correct. I think

joesephus would have realized that he had two different time lines there. Or even in his time someone

would have pointed it out to him.

You should realize that these historians had to walk the political line. If they told the truth they wouldn't get published. So the solution was to write something politically correct and hide details of the original chronology. Thus a lot of the original events are hinted at in the historical works that survive. Josephus was very adept at it and he definitely knew the revised and the original chronology.

For instance even Against Apion 1.21 is suspicious for giving away the events at Babylon during the 20 years of Cyrus reign claiming to be a reference to the siege of Tyre for 13 years beginning year 7 of Nebuchadnezzar.

Why?

Because if you begin a count of 13 years from year of Nabonidus it ends up matching the fall of Babylon. He claims someone became a king in year 14. Plus, "Hiram" was someone during the time of Nebuchadnezzar, sort of a hint there is something hidden. That reference thus prevents us from excluding that Josephus didn't know the precise chronology of the NB Period. Even in his antiquities he gives us an 18-year for Evil-Merodach, later changed to just 2 years in Against Apion.

The corrected history has Cyrus ruling for 20 years beginning the 6th year of Nabonidus. That is based on Babylonian records. If so the period from the 1st of Nabonidus to the 1st of Cyrus over Babylon is a 25-year period. We know from the Bible that Darius the Mede ruled for six years and thus Nabonidus's original rule would be 19 years (25 minus 6 = 19). Cyrus rules for 21 years inclusive down to his rule in Babylon starting with year 6. But if you begin the 20-year count from year 7 then the 20th year will be the 1st of Cyrus at Babylon. That's a 19-year period. 19 minus 6 years for Darius the Mede leaves 13 years, the number of years Josephus claims Tyre was under siege. But it would also be the number of years from year 7 of Nabonidus that Babylon would fall in his 19th year. So if you want, Josephus confirms that he knew Darius the Mede ruled for 6 years and the precise Babylonian timeline.

There are other examples in the works of the other revisionists. I'll give you two of my favorites!

LS

30

Mary's Research Project

by besty in

just for newbies, lurkers and as a reminder for all.

mary undertook a huge compilation of critical analysis of many of the key watchtower doctrinal points.

it can be downloaded as a 150mb pdf - only 2mb so won't kill your internet connection.

Larsinger58

Good stuff, Mary.

All XJWs don't agree on every detail, but surely this will get people to THINK for once and examine their own belief system and some of the issues and questions regarding the WTS.

Maybe more of us should publish something along our areas of research as well like you did.

Again, nicely done.

LS

1

Good News Of Kingdom! Unauthorized! 2nd part

by wannabe in

good news of kingdon-unauthorized 2nd part.

then, too, consider their clean righteous air, their practice of disfellowshipping for unrepentent wrongdoers from their midst, their strict adherence to bible principles all serves to aid them in misleading others they meet in their door-to-door ministry; coupled with their urgent message that 'the kingdom of god is near.

' all serving to mislead others into believing, that they are the 'way of the truth', as they claim.

Larsinger58

It is rather complex but Daniel references that there would be no "temple" sect for "2300 evenings and mornings" which means after that period a temple sect would appear again "in its right condition."

Anyway, la, la, la, la, la, the WTS is that "temple in its right condition" for 110 years from 1886-1996 to fulfill that prophecy. As the temple sect, though, they do produce the "man of lawlessness" that clearly sits down in the temple sect, meaning God's own organization, namely JWs. So you have a confirmation the GB would become apostate, IF the WTS is the true temple organization.

But noting that, what they preach is "good news", I mean, eternal life? perfect health? No wickeness?

But certainly, focussing on their shortcomings one could certainly find reasons to exclude them from being what they believe about themselves, which is "Jehovah's organization."

Basically, also as the Bible prophesied this organization would be corrupted from the earliest by "weeds" and thus would remain a mixture of wheat and weeds until the "harvest", meaning around the time of the second coming.

Anyway, the "end" in reference is the end of the "gentile times" which ended in 1947 and by that time the "good news" was to have been preached world wide, which it was by 1947. NH Knorr, in fact, went on an around-the-world speaking engagement earlier that very year, specifically fulfilling the prophecy that after the "good news" was preached world wide, "then the end would come." It did on November 30, 1947, when the gentile times ended.

Nice topic.

LS

9

Re Gabriel's answer at Daniel 9

by Doug Mason in

daniel 9:24-27 records the answer to daniels prayer by angel gabriel.

interpretations of these verses have resulted in a wide range of interpretations.. .

my suggestions are intended to provide parameters that may assist when an attempt is made to unearth the meaning of gabriels answer.. .

Larsinger58

DOUG

Lars,

Have you read:

http://www.jwstudies.com/Fried_Conquest_and_Restoration.pdf

Doug

Thanks. I read over this material. She thinks Ezra 4's reference to "Artaxerxes" is a reference to Artaxerxes I and thus uses that misconception to help date this material. She doesn't realize that this "Artaxerxes" is a reference to the successor of Kambyses (called "Ahasuerus" in Ezra) is Bardiya-Smerdis. It was during his reign the work was stopped until the 2nd of Darius when the work began again.

I think such a huge miss would tend to taint this commentary. Strange though, because even the WTS understands this is Bardiya-Smerdis and other scholarly references for Artaxerxes sometimes calls Artaxerxes, Longimanus, Artaxerxes II rather than I because of this previous Artaxerxes.

Thanks for the reference.

LS

12

What Josephus Really Wrote about the 70 Years

by Ultimate Reality in

there have been some partial quotations of josephus on this board recently in relation to how he explained the '70 years'.. .

in the interests of scholastic honesty and so that his words are not taken out of context, here are some relevant passages with their context.

you might ask yourself, do the 70 years (as spoken by the prophet jeremiah) begin with the destruction of the temple or before the destruction of the temple?

Larsinger58

Remember, the specific 70 years is from the time the "people go off their land" which is the last deportation, year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar. That is truly when the LAND was desolate. The temple was destroyed 4 years earlier, in year 19.

When the Babylonian records were revised during the Persian Period though, besides removing 2 years from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, the new Babylonian timeline condensed some events during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. It starts with year 1 where the deportation of Daniel and the conflict with pharaoh Necho are condensed into year 1. Per the Bible, Daniel is deported in the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar.

From that point on though, the Babylonian Chronicle and the Bible vary by 1 year. The deportation of Jehoiachin occurs in year 7 per the chronicle but year 8 per the Bible. So Josephus is already influenced by the revised chronology when he references the fall of Jerusalem in year 18 rather than in year 19. That one revision thus has translated in the fall of Jerusalem being spread over year 18/19, and Josephus for claiming contrary to scripture that Jeusalem fell in year 18 vs 19. But it doesn't matter for the 70 and 50-year references since those are counted from year 23, the last deportation.

So this seems to be Josephus doing his best to deal with the double chronology, the Biblical chronology and the revised secular chronology which was perfected by Xenophon near the end of the reign of Artaxerxes II, one of the revisions being the removal of 26 years of NB chronology that got added to the Persian kingships. The 50-year reference seems to be the focus of those who think the revised timeline is real, which might have been the genius of Josephus, but at the same time is a technically accurate reference for the desolation period from year 23 to the 1st year of Cyrus when he first became king over Persia, 20 years before becoming king over Babylon, which is a 70-year period.

We're discussing the details, we may as well know ALL the issues. It's complex.

LS

12

What Josephus Really Wrote about the 70 Years

by Ultimate Reality in

there have been some partial quotations of josephus on this board recently in relation to how he explained the '70 years'.. .

in the interests of scholastic honesty and so that his words are not taken out of context, here are some relevant passages with their context.

you might ask yourself, do the 70 years (as spoken by the prophet jeremiah) begin with the destruction of the temple or before the destruction of the temple?

Larsinger58

PSACRAMENTO So we have it seems 2 seperate timelines, oen to do with the total event and one to do with what happened to the temple in specififc.

OR, that Joe was making it clear that the timeline for the desolation of the temple , according to the jewish books, was different than Berosus wrote.

I agree, there does seem to be some confusion, especially when in Against Apion we have the fifty-year statement AND the seventy-year statement regarding the desolation.

and so it lay in that state of obscurity for fifty years; (1.19)

it so happened that our city was desolate during the interval of seventy years, until the days of Cyrus king of Persia. (1.21)

This is either a contradiction or we're missing a subtle double reference. 50 years for the temple, 70 years for something else. Interesting theory.

I've resigned to settling that it is a subtle reference to the two rulerships of Cyrus which has a difference of 20 years. Cyrus ruled for 20 years over the Persian part of the empire before he became king over Babylon and started counting his rulership years over again from year 1. So that is what works for me as far as the double reference of a 20-year desolation and 70-year desolation. 54 years is mentioned in the context of 1.21

"Under his reign Cyrus became king of Persia." So that the whole interval is fifty-four years besides three months.."

So I think the 54 years is a cryptic clue to the contradiction. That is, from the fall of Jerusalem until the 1st of Cyrus is a desolation period of exactly 74 years. But from the fall of Jerusalem to when Cyrus first became king over Persia it is 54 years. In other words desolation for 74 years from the fall of Jerusalem until Cyrus became king in Babylon, but 54 years to when Cyrus became king over the Persian Part of the empire. This allows both statements to be true depending upon which rule of Cyrus you reference, which is either 54 years or 74 years. Anyway, it's a 20-year difference between the 70 years and the 50 years.

So I sort of agree with you. You can apply both the 70 and the 50 years to different concepts.

LS

30

Mary's Research Project

by besty in

just for newbies, lurkers and as a reminder for all.

mary undertook a huge compilation of critical analysis of many of the key watchtower doctrinal points.

it can be downloaded as a 150mb pdf - only 2mb so won't kill your internet connection.

Larsinger58

BibleTwit,

:It proves how effective scholarship can fool so many people.

Yeah. Effective scholarship sure fooled you.

Farkel

Hi Fark! Howzit? How's my favorite concert pianist? You know of course, I'm one of your biggest fans and admirers. I admire you for being able to deal with that echo in your brain every time you think something. Regardless, you have to respect that!

rofl

Nah, just kidding. We all know you're of average intelligence, regardless of those poll results!!

But who cares about intelligence. Everybody loves you! You're Mr. Popularity, hands down!

You should post more often, guy! This board is BOOOOORING! (Mainly because of me, I think!!!) We need to lighten up, have more laughs!!

Thanks Farkelmeister!!

LS