Posts by Bobcat

47

Did Stephen believe he would have to wait 2000 years for a resurrection?

by Socrateswannabe in

in acts 7:59, the jews were casting stones at stephen and his last words were, "lord jesus, receive my spirit.".

the wts has contended that all of the ancients who died after jesus were in a sleep-like condition, awaiting a resurrection that eventually happened in 1918-1919 (depending upon which wt reference you are looking at).

and in fact, v. 60 says stephen "fell asleep in death".

Bobcat

Socrates

See my additional edit above.

Take Care

47

Did Stephen believe he would have to wait 2000 years for a resurrection?

by Socrateswannabe in

in acts 7:59, the jews were casting stones at stephen and his last words were, "lord jesus, receive my spirit.".

the wts has contended that all of the ancients who died after jesus were in a sleep-like condition, awaiting a resurrection that eventually happened in 1918-1919 (depending upon which wt reference you are looking at).

and in fact, v. 60 says stephen "fell asleep in death".

Bobcat

Paul seemed to think that the resurrection for fellow believers was still some time in the future. The quotations below are from sometime after Stephen's death. (The links show alternate renderings for 1 Cor 15:23 & 1 Thess 4:15.)

(1 Corinthians 15:20-23 NWT) . . .However, now Christ has been raised up from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep [in death]. 21 For since death is through a man, resurrection of the dead is also through a man. 22 For just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each one in his own rank: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the Christ during his presence.

(1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 NWT) . . .Moreover, brothers, we do not want YOU to be ignorant concerning those who are sleeping [in death]; that YOU may not sorrow just as the rest also do who have no hope. 14 For if our faith is that Jesus died and rose again, so, too, those who have fallen asleep [in death] through Jesus God will bring with him. 15 For this is what we tell YOU by Jehovah's word, that we the living who survive to the presence of the Lord shall in no way precede those who have fallen asleep [in death]; 16 because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel's voice and with God's trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall always be with [the] Lord. 18 Consequently keep comforting one another with these words.

It's hard to say what Stephen thought. If he had heard the teachings of the apostles (Acts 2:46), then he probably heard what they heard from Jesus (Compare John 5:28, 29; 6:39, 40, 44, 54)

Take Care

(It looks like I was still editing whilst you replied. I think my edit took up the thought you expressed)

87

Arguments in favor of the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 BCE

by TJ Curioso in

i received the following explanation in favor of the date of 607 bce.

accepted comments on the points at issue.. .

conclusion.

Bobcat

TJ (and anyone else):

If COJ's book is too much to start with (he being stamped an 'apostate' by the WT), another book to consider is Edwin R. Thiele's "The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings." It can be found here at a very reasonable price.

Thiele's book (paperback, 250 pages) is not about 607/587 per se. It is about dating the Hebrew kings (2 tribe and 10 tribe) starting with Rehoboam (Solomon's son) on down to Zedekiah. Thiele uses known historical dates to pin the starting of the chronology down, and from there, date the reigns of all the Hebrew kings.

Thiele's approach is to use the dating given in the Bible for the reigns of these kings. Thus, he bases his chronology on hard numbers actually given in the OT. Although there is some room for adjustments in his approach, and he admits that, this method is far more accurate than relying on prophecies that are subject to some conjecture and interpretation.

Like I said, Thiele's book is not about the 607/587 issue (nor anything about the WT, for that matter). But using his method, he reaches 586/7 as the year for the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians.

Thiele's book and GTR together provide a two directional approach to understanding the date of the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon. When seen from both perspectives, 586/7 becomes very convincing. And the conviction is not based simply on someone who is (to the WT) an apostate.

33

The world WILL end, but not for religious reasons...

by Monsieur in

i've been watching a very interesting documentary regarding the state of planet earth.. in a nutshell, (scientifically/physically/factualy) earth is experiencing 'pressure' that points to one inevitable result, to correct itself (or more specifically, to correct the effects of the present human cause, in ex- pollution, global warming, resource depletion etc.)..

the last time earth 'corrected' itself, there was mass extinction.

for proof, check out the dinosaur fossil record (unless they are a hoax.).

Bobcat

Monsieur:

There is some resemblance in what you point out to this man's theories.

Note especially the topic "We are past the point of no return" and on down from there.

Some think he is eccentric. Others say he makes a lot of sense. He is definitely very intelligent.

Probably, most hope he is wrong. The alternative is not good for us as a species.

He views earth's ecosystem as being interconnected, similar to a living organism. When something starts making it sick, the ecosystem moves to eliminate the cause.

Take Care

13

wtwr study today

by infernosdante in

was a phrase in the wtwr study today that really bothered me it said,dont tell them what to beleive but ask questions to get the appropriate response.isnt this basically saying dont tell them how they should beleive,instead ask them leading questions till they say what you want them to say?.

Bobcat

Jgnat:

Thank you, but what I was wondering was where the quoted definition came from.

Normally, if this was a WT definition, it would be in italics, without quotation marks (or possibly single quotation marks). But the magazine gives the definition as if it is being quoted from another source ("[definition]", but the source is not given or even hinted at (e. g. "one Bible reference" or "a Bible scholar").

Take Care

13

wtwr study today

by infernosdante in

was a phrase in the wtwr study today that really bothered me it said,dont tell them what to beleive but ask questions to get the appropriate response.isnt this basically saying dont tell them how they should beleive,instead ask them leading questions till they say what you want them to say?.

Bobcat

Since this thread is about the 6/16/2013 WT study, I wonder if anyone could help me find a quote in it.

Paragraph 12 defines "setting things straight" (from 2 Tim 3:16 NWT) as "to make good, to correct, to restore to a proper, upright condition."

So far, when I search for it on Google Books I only get returns that point to this WT article. As if the only place it is quoted is in the article itself. Which wouldn't make sense if this article is the originator of the quote. (The article itself uses quotation marks around the words in bold above.)

I also searched using Google's home/search page, but same result - only references to this WT article. (Dogpile yields the same.)

Any help would be appreciated. My curiosity has got the best of me.

Take care

51

Jeremiah Source Material

by Bobcat in

i started this thread as a single place for anyone who would like to add references to source material, or anything else for that matter, pertaining to the jeremiah book study.. .

page 52:.

here is a thread and numerous comments concerning jeremiah 13:1-11 and whether or not jeremiah traveled to the euphrates to hide a garment.. .

Bobcat

Vidqun:

Just saw your post above. After I recover from work I'll try to concentrate on it. I think the heat of the day has fried my brain.

I did write something about Jer 26:20-23 a day or so ago. But while copying a link I accidentally hit the tab's close window button for the editor window and POOF, all that I wrote went into the nether regions, never to be seen again. (Digital Limbo!) Maybe I'll try again. I don't have Lars' prolific typing ability.

Take care

30

EVIDENCE that Christians fled Jerusalem after 66 CE ...?

by EdenOne in

what the ot says ... what sources of evidence do we have that account for the 'great escape' of the christians from jerusalem after cestius gallus siege of 66 ce ?

do we have any christian prespective about it?

since i concluded that all nt books were concluded before 66 ce (including revelation), what do we have in order to support the story that the jerusalem christians ran to pela ...etc....?

Bobcat

BOTR:

I think everyone agrees with you on 70 for the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. But as Eden and others have mentioned, 66 is when Cestius Gallus came and went. (I think it can even be pinpointed to around Nov 22nd or so when he pulled back.) The Christian flight from Jerusalem and Judea came on the heels of this.

Take Care, and hope you are doing well.

11

Part of "Human Apostates" talk missing?

by breakfast of champions in

for full disclosure, i did not personally go to the convention on the day of the talk, but am going on my wife's recollection and her thorough notes.. when she got home, i asked her about the part and what was said, point by point from the beginning of the talk.

i then mentioned this point (lifted from the other thread ):.

"for instance, in one country a news report instigated by apostates falsely stated that jehovahs witnesses supported hitlers regime during world war two.

Bobcat

BOC:

The part looks like an outline talk. Most of them are, especially the symposium parts. I would wait and see if there might be several reports from different DCs. There might be a human factor that could affect the talk in any particular location. But your asking about it gets the ball rolling for further observations.

Take Care

25

Generation clarification

by zound in

just wanted to clarify something.. [if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-us</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>ja</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> <w:usefelayout /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-ansi-language:en-us;} </style> <!

Bobcat

Vidqun:

Interesting viewpoint. If I understand correctly, "these things" that occur before 'this generation passes away' would be specifically referring to from 24:15 on (using Matthew's account).

Take Care