Posts by Spade

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

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.

Spade

To MeanMrMustard, the person that thinks I'm not correctly comprehending Jeremiah 25 8-11. I'm doing no such thing.

Q: Considering Jehovah's thoughts through the prophet Jeremiah, who is Jehovah primary concerned with and who is his word against?

A: The nation of Israel. The reason the prophecy was uttered in the first place is because the Israelites disobeyed Jehovah.

“From the thirteenth year of Jo·si′ah the son of A′mon, the king of Judah, and down to this day, these twenty-three years the word of Jehovah has occurred to me, and I kept speaking to you people, rising up early and speaking, but you did not listen. And Jehovah sent to you all his servants the prophets, rising up early and sending [them], but you did not listen, neither did you incline your ear to listen, they saying, ‘Turn back, please, every one from his bad way and from the badness of your dealings, and continue dwelling upon the ground that Jehovah gave to you and to your forefathers from long ago and to a long time to come. And do not walk after other gods in order to serve them and to bow down to them, that you may not offend me with the work of your hands, and that I may not cause calamity to you.’

“‘But you did not listen to me,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘to the intent that you might offend me with the work of your hands, for calamity to yourselves.’

“Therefore this is what Jehovah of armies has said, ‘“For the reason that you did not obey my words, here I am sending and I will take all the families of the north,” is the utterance of Jehovah, “even [sending] to Neb·u·chad·rez′zar the king of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these nations round about; and I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of astonishment and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite. And I will destroy out of them the sound of exultation and the sound of rejoicing, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the hand mill and the light of the lamp. And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.”’ Jeremiah 25:3-11

At the time when this was stated, Neb·u·chad·rez′zar, the king of Babylon represented supreme rulership.

“‘The tree that you beheld, that grew great and became strong and the height of which finally reached the heavens and which was visible to all the earth, and the foliage of which was fair, and the fruit of which was abundant, and on which there was food for all; under which the beasts of the field would dwell, and on the boughs of which the birds of the heavens would reside, it is you, O king, because you have grown great and become strong, and your grandeur has grown great and reached to the heavens, and your rulership to the extremity of the earth. Daniel 4:20-22

That it why these nations (plural) was used instead of this nation, but the direct application of the prophecy was primarily concerned with the nation of Israel, as they were the only nation that was completely subdued and taken into captivity.

Considering the hatchet job you did on Daniel 9:1-2 it's you that has a grammar problem.

In the first year of Da·ri′us the son of A·has·u·e′rus of the seed of the Medes, who had been made king over the kingdom of the Chal·de′ans; in the first year of his reigning I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years. Daniel 9:1-2

You somehow derive the concept of servitude from the word devastations.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/devastation

1. to lay waste or make desolate; ravage; destroy

If the land becoming a devastated place for 70 years doesn't have direct application in Jeremiah 25:11, it certainly does in Daniel 9:2.

This is how it is rendered in another translation:

http://nlt.scripturetext.com/daniel/9.htm

During the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, learned from reading the word of the Lord, as revealed to Jeremiah the prophet, that Jerusalem must lie desolate for seventy years. Daniel 9:2 (New Living Translation)

7

Objectivism

by Spade in

does anyone here agree with ayn rand and her supporter's version of objective reality?.

http://www.aynrand.org/site/pageserver?pagename=objectivism_intro.

my philosophy, objectivism, holds that:.

Spade

Does anyone here agree with Ayn Rand and her supporter's version of objective reality?
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=objectivism_intro

My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that:

Metaphysics, Objective Reality: Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.

http://www.atlassociety.org/religion_objectivism
Question: Is Objectivism compatible with religion?

Answer: Most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods. Some religions posit a personal god (or gods); others believe in impersonal supernatural forces. (See George Walsh, The Role of Religion in History, chapter 1.) Objectivism rejects any notion of the supernatural as incompatible with the objectivity and regularity of nature as identified by reason. There is no credible evidence of miracles, magic, or other supernatural phenomena in nature.

The dominant forms of religion in our culture posit a personal god, a Supreme Being, who created the world, is omnipotent and omniscient, imposes moral duties on man, and expects worship. Those who accept this idea have the burden of showing why such a hypothesis is necessary. In this regard, Objectivists are atheists because the arguments for the existence of such a being are not sound. Objectivists reject the existence of God for the same reason they reject the existence of elves, leprechauns, and unicorns: because there is no credible evidence of such beings.

It is said that we need to posit God as a creator in order to explain the existence of the natural world. But there is no reason to think that the existence of this world requires an explanation by anything outside itself. While individual things in the natural world come and go, as a result of specific causes within that world, it does not follow that the world itself must have a cause.

It is said that we need to posit God as a designer in order to explain the complex order within the natural world, including the adaptation of living things to their environments. But the existence of order as such does not require an explanation. Any existing thing must have some identity and obey causal laws. It is only with the natural realm that we can explain how a particular type of order arises from natural causes. That includes the particular order we find among living things, for which the best current explanation is the operation of evolutionary processes.

Of course these brief summaries cannot do justice to the arguments, which have been discussed by philosophers for centuries. For further discussion and references, see George Smith, Atheism: The Case Against God.

There is a profound difference, then, between Objectivism and traditional religions in their respective views of the world. But this is not the primary conflict. The primary conflict is reason versus faith as methods of adopting one's worldview in the first place.

Objectivism regards reason as an absolute. It holds that all knowledge is based on the evidence of the senses. It holds that all beliefs, conclusions, and convictions must be established by logical methods of inquiry and tested by logical methods of verification. In short, it holds that the scientific approach applies to all areas of knowledge. Blind faith, by contrast, consists in belief not based on evidence, or based on such spurious forms of "evidence" as revelation and authority. Faith is essentially an arbitrary exercise of the mind, a willful credulity based on subjective emotions rather than objective evidence, a desire for certainty without the scrupulous cognitive effort required to achieve rational certainty. Faith cannot substitute for reason as a means of knowledge, nor can it supplement reason. Reason is incompatible with arbitrary procedures of any kind.

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

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.

Spade

Pay attention to AnnOMaly's response:

No, no, NO! The 'nations serving the king of Babylon' lasts 70 years. It doesn't say the land will be a devastated place for 70 years.

Spade, your statement is only true if you accept that grammar doesn't matter when reading the Bible. That is, we can just read the bible, verbs = nouns, and adverbs can just jump around, attaching themselves to other verbs, like like little frogs. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeee...

I honestly believe there is no hope of reasoning with you until you actually learn more about grammar. You are trying extermely hard to prop up a doctrine based, not only on outdated and faulty evidence, not only on fallacious logic, but on the sheer inability to read a simple sentence and understand it. You are the GB's worst nightmare. Not us. Not the apostates here. I think they fear *you*... a sympathizer that tries so hard to defend the cornerstone of the WTB&TS authority structure on a public forum, only to fail miserably for all the JW lurkers to see. They fear this type of exposure, not because there are better arguements or better evidence to present. Actually, any GB member, if faced with the same task you have taken on, could not do any better. They want R&F JWs to believe they have God-given authority, but for goodness sake, believe it quietly! Don't try to defend it on a public forum, lest everyone might see how retarded their doctine really is!

So keep it coming... publish it for all the world to see. Let's show anyone out there who is doubting, and JW looking for answer, just how utterly hopeless it is that the WTB&TS has truth...

MeanMrMustard

What's a nightmare is repeating information more than once that directly addresses an argument (I'm not doing it again). It's people like you that have a serious problem with reading and comprehension.

And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years. Jeremiah 25:11

And I will make Jerusalem piles of stones, the lair of jackals; and the cities of Judah I shall make a desolate waste, without an inhabitant. Jeremiah 9:11

Daniel bore witness to the prophecy pronounced by Jeremiah as exclusive to the Israelites.

In the first year of Da·ri′us the son of A·has·u·e′rus of the seed of the Medes, who had been made king over the kingdom of the Chal·de′ans; in the first year of his reigning I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years. Daniel 9:1-2

Name of Book: Jeremiah
Writer(s): Jeremiah
Place Written: Judah; Egypt
Writing Completed (B.C.E.): 580
Time Covered (B.C.E.): 647-580

Name of Book: Daniel
Writer(s): Daniel
Place Written: Babylon
Writing Completed (B.C.E.): c. 536
Time Covered (B.C.E.): 618-c. 536

20

does the society help or hinder

by therevealer in

jw
friends

.

Spade

A Bible-based religion would know that this passage is discussing discpline within the congregation, not re-interpreting the laws of the land. Christians will certainly "render unto Caesar" all that is due under Caesar's law, not applying their own personal interpretation. So let's look at a typical reporting law and see what is required, which you can look up at the Dept. of Health and Human Services:

Texas Family Code § 261.101; 261.202

The requirement to report applies without exception to an individual whose personal communications may otherwise be privileged, including an attorney, a member of the clergy, a medical practitioner, a social worker, a mental health professional, and an employee of a clinic or health-care facility that provides reproductive services.

In a proceeding regarding the abuse or neglect of a child, evidence may not be excluded on the ground of privileged communication except in the case of communication between an attorney and client.

§ 261.109

A person commits an offense if the person has cause to believe that a child's physical or mental health or welfare has been or may be adversely affected by abuse or neglect and knowingly fails to report in accordance with the reporting laws.

All you have to do is scroll down and read the next paragraph and the policy clearly addresses your concern.

http://www.jw-media.org/aboutjw/article23.htm

However, even if the elders cannot take congregational action, they are expected to report the allegation to the branch office of Jehovah's Witnesses in their country, if local privacy laws permit. In addition to making a report to the branch office, the elders may be required by law to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities. If so, the elders receive proper legal direction to ensure that they comply with the law. Additionally, the victim or anyone else who has knowledge of the allegation may wish to report the matter to the authorities, and it is his or her absolute right to do so.

What was stated has nothing to do with reporting but something to do with how the matter is treated in a congregation judicial committee or a secular court of law.

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

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.

Spade

Hold on! You can't have it both ways, Spade.

You can't declare, "ancient history in itself cannot be proven" as if to say sound conclusions cannot be made based on it, and then assert, "there's enough secular data that has been preserved to our time to come to conclusions." Anyway, all the secular data that have been preserved lead to the conclusion that Jerusalem was demonstrably NOT destroyed in 607 BCE! You really are a joke. Have you 'met' Neil who posts under the misnomer 'scholar'? You two would get on famously. (Where is he? P. 16 of the thread and he's still not showed! He must be ill.)

I didn't go from one extreme to the other. While world history outside the original Bible canon is necessary to arrive at conclusions, discretion and objectivity should be used before arriving at foregone conclusions. If and when secular history conficts with the complete and harmonious Biblical chronology, which gives us a time-line without contradictions, showing the total fulfillment of every prophecy Jehovah gave us, I don't accept it.

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

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.

Spade

And consider this: Jer. 51:28, 29, 37.

"Sanctify against her the nations, the kings of Me′di·a, its governors and all its deputy rulers and all the land of each one's dominion. And let the earth rock and be in severe pain, for against Babylon the thoughts of Jehovah have risen up to make the land of Babylon an object of astonishment, without an inhabitant. ... And Babylon must become piles of stones, the lair of jackals, an object of astonishment and something to whistle at, without an inhabitant."

The context is clearly about God's retribution on Babylon at the hands of the Medes - understood to have happened in 539 BCE, yes? And the same language is used as in Jer. 9:11 so must have been a favorite expression. Did the Medes and Persians strip the land of Babylon of its inhabitants when they conquered it? You know the answer. Ever heard of poetic or prophetic hyperbole? Or "artistic poetic rhetoric" (C.J.H. Wright's expression in The Message of Ezekiel)?

Jeremiah 9:11 obviously had a literal application to the Jewish nation even narrowing the Jews taken in exhile to a specific number.

These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·rez′zar took into exile: in the seventh year, three thousand and twenty-three Jews. Jeremiah 52:28

In the first year of Da·ri′us the son of A·has·u·e′rus of the seed of the Medes, who had been made king over the kingdom of the Chal·de′ans; in the first year of his reigning I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years. Daniel 9:1-2

What was stated in Jeremiah 51:36-37 was stated because of the parallel prophecy regarding Babylon the Great.

Therefore this is what Jehovah has said: "Here I am conducting your legal case, and I shall certainly execute vengeance for you. And I will dry up her sea, and I will make her wells dry. And Babylon must become piles of stones, the lair of jackals, an object of astonishment and something to whistle at, without an inhabitant. Jeremiah 51:36-37

re chap. 33 pp. 238-239 par. 10 Judging the Infamous Harlot

Ancient Babylon sat on many waters-the Euphrates River and numerous canals. These were a protection to her as well as a source of commerce producing wealth, until they dried up in one night. (Jeremiah 50:38; 51:9, 12, 13) Babylon the Great also looks to "many waters" to protect and enrich her. These symbolic waters are "peoples and crowds and nations and tongues," that is, all the thousands of millions of humans over whom she has dominated and from whom she has drawn material support. But these waters are also drying up, or withdrawing support. -Revelation 17:15; compare Psalm 18:4; Isaiah 8:7.

And the sixth one poured out his bowl upon the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, that the way might be prepared for the kings from the rising of the sun. Revelation 16:12

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

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.

Spade

You're wrong about those who ridiculae you, Spade. That includes me. You see, if you were a serious debater, engaging in a bonafide discussion, I would not bother posting my images and neither would Outlaw. The thing is that you're a joke. Even Leolaia who ridicules no one and doesn't engage in Ad Hominems has addressed herself to you and said:

"Whoa, whoa, whoa, now just wait a minute. You either don't get the point I've been making or you are being intellectually dishonest."

"It seems that your only reason for insisting on the last two months of Cyrus' first year is because that's what is demanded by Watchtower chronology."

I already addressed this matter in post 195: According to the Bible and the secular history: the release of the Jews from captivity certainly could have occurred in 537 B.C.E. We're dealing with a fine time line here. Add the fulfillment of the 1914 prophecy. 2,520 years from 1914 pinpoints the date for Jerusalem's destruction on 607 B.C.E. (the beginning of the Gentile domination). 70 years added to 607 B.C.E. = 537 B.C.E. There's enough secular data that has been preserved to our time to come to conclusions. As to those who choose not to come to any conclusions about a divine time table and reject the 1914 prophecy, I'm perfectly happy to let them go their way and keep posting trashy pictures if it makes you feel better. That comes simply because I support Jehovah's Witnesses and other reasons not related to this thread.

As for you, beloved ones, call to mind the sayings that have been previously spoken by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, how they used to say to you: “In the last time there will be ridiculers, proceeding according to their own desires for ungodly things.” These are the ones that make separations, animalistic [men], not having spirituality. Jude 17-19

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

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.

Spade

Don't all cults and religions state this?

I was a witness from birth till 42. I served as an appointed man for the best part of 20 years. As an elder I saw all the grime and dirt that sullied the congregation, and contaminated the minds of generations. I saw the results of the lies disseminted by the cult leaders. I never saw any evidence of spirit in action.

I saw tired, drained, depressed souls who were existing to slave for a false prophet.

So spade don't spout cut n paste watchtower bullshit at me. I have lived through it and survived.

You support for this organisation doesn't just make you stupid, it make you fucking evil too.

I'm associated with Jehovah's Witnesses also and I've come to know them as fine individuals. For one thing, they don't use the kind of language you do.

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

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.

Spade

How the hell have I missed this thread?

Spade v Leo with illustrations by Outlaw!!

Good god this has to enter the "best of" section - just for humour induced by Spade's awesome stupidity.

No, I would say many on this discussion board take a very different stand on God's existence than what's accepted by contemporary society.

http://www.atlassociety.org/religion_objectivism

Question: Is Objectivism compatible with religion?

Answer: Most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods. Some religions posit a personal god (or gods); others believe in impersonal supernatural forces. (See George Walsh, The Role of Religion in History, chapter 1.) Objectivism rejects any notion of the supernatural as incompatible with the objectivity and regularity of nature as identified by reason. There is no credible evidence of miracles, magic, or other supernatural phenomena in nature.

Objectivism regards reason as an absolute. It holds that all knowledge is based on the evidence of the senses. It holds that all beliefs, conclusions, and convictions must be established by logical methods of inquiry and tested by logical methods of verification. In short, it holds that the scientific approach applies to all areas of knowledge. Blind faith, by contrast, consists in belief not based on evidence, or based on such spurious forms of "evidence" as revelation and authority. Faith is essentially an arbitrary exercise of the mind, a willful credulity based on subjective emotions rather than objective evidence, a desire for certainty without the scrupulous cognitive effort required to achieve rational certainty. Faith cannot substitute for reason as a means of knowledge, nor can it supplement reason. Reason is incompatible with arbitrary procedures of any kind.

The truth as taught by Jehovah's Witnesses is confirmed as truth when measured against the above procedures.

http://www.watchtower.org/e/20091001/article_03.htm

Like Isabel and Roberto, millions of Jehovah’s Witnesses have experienced the power of the holy spirit in their lives. Jehovah’s active force—the force behind the creation of the universe—can be made available to you if you wish. God is willing and eager to share his spirit with you if you earnestly request it. But to receive that spirit, you need to learn the truth about him and sincerely seek to do his will.—Isaiah 55:6; Hebrews 11:6.

Under the empowering force of holy spirit, you may receive the strength to serve God successfully and to face whatever challenges may arise in your life. This is what the Bible assures us: “[Jehovah] is giving to the tired one power; and to the one without dynamic energy he makes full might abound. . . . Those who are hoping in Jehovah will regain power. They will mount up with wings like eagles. They will run and not grow weary; they will walk and not tire out.”—Isaiah 40:28-31.

5549 posts later, you're just as stupid as the day you repudiated God's spirit.

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

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.

Spade

Now that Spade has been shown that the sources s/he cites don't support what s/he wants them to support, s/he sidesteps the issue by saying "ancient history in itself cannot be proven," and then c&ps a WTS comment about secular history being too unreliable to harmonize with biblical chronology, and also throws in a little ad hominem for good measure by suggesting those that try to reconcile the two are either atheists or duplicitous! Dear me!

You've well and truly lost this one, Spade. Time to bow out?

Contributors like “Leolaia” and “AnnOMaly” and a few others work the mannerly logic while spam artists like "OUTLAW" and others work the ad hominem attacks. It's all meshed together with trashy overtones. This says much about the overall character of this discussion board and why I take nothing here seriously.