ros

Joined

• started 20 topics
• posted 321 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by ros

• 
  27

  Is God a Flip-Flopper?

  by Amazing1914 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have never been able to find a satisfactory answer to these two verses from the bible:exodus 34:7: keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.. .

  deut.

  24:16: the fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Ask me at the conference :-)

  ~Ros
• 
  9

  Perspectives?

  by Norm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  another year has passed since the horrible events in new york and the world continues to be a dangerous place.

  almost 3000 people died an awful death that day on september 11.

  2001 and it will take time for the painful memory of it all to fade.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  SixofNine wrote:

  America would do well to quit using the term "war" for things that are not wars.

  Precisely what I have thought. There is a vast difference between a police action against crime against humanity (i.e., brutality, torture, mass murder, etc.) and "war" for conquest for national gain. If this were indeed a real war (of which is it is said "all is fair in love and war"), I think the world basically realizes that the U.S. has the technological capability of WMDs to anhilate a country like Iraq--IF this were a real war in "worldly" terms.

  ~Ros

  Edited to remove duplicate quote from 6o9.
• 
  9

  Perspectives?

  by Norm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  another year has passed since the horrible events in new york and the world continues to be a dangerous place.

  almost 3000 people died an awful death that day on september 11.

  2001 and it will take time for the painful memory of it all to fade.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Norm:

  Long time, no see. How have you been? :-)

  In this thread, you have taken MY argument with civil libertarian extremists.
  I don't want to create a false impression about my political views (or perhaps the term should more appropriately be *non*-political views) and nationalism, but I have wondered why raving socialists who rant about the numbers of people killed in a military action (which I agree is tragic), don't express the same concern for life lost with the world's real "weapon of mass destruction", i.e., automobiles. Does political ideology versus social expediency somehow make a moral difference about the reason for the numbers of deaths? If I understand it, statistically, a greater number of the young soldiers killed in combat would die in traffic accidents if they were not in the Military.

  ~Ros
• 
  17

  The Prayer of Ramzi Yousef

  by Farkel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ramzi yousef was the mastermind behind the major al qaeda attacks, including the first world trade center bombing, the cole bombing and others.

  he had plotted the deaths of president clinton, pope john paul ii and the prime minister of pakistan.

  he had hatched up a plan to destroy up to a dozen jumbo jets as they flew over american cities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Farkel:

  What a great post. I am going to copy it in my e-mail group (with appropriate credit, of course. :-)))

  Thanks,

  ~Ros
• 
  20

  Update on my disappearance

  by Amazing1914 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have not been on the board much.

  i have been back in the diploma factory (university) since the middle of may.

  it is very fun.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Amazing and Wasasister:

  Good comments! Recently while killing time at an airport between flights, I discovered a book by Tammy Bruce (LA feminist radio talk show host of left-wing socio-political perspectives), and through it a previous book ("The New Thought Police"). I would never have imagined that I might be impressed by the views of one such as Ms.Bruce, but I surely AM--to an extraordinary degree! I am equally delighted by the realization, and relief, that in agreeing with her far more than I disagree with her on the issues, this agreement is quite obviously (at least in my mind) not based on social or cultural bias. I am grateful to her. Check it out if it might interest you.

  ~Ros
• 
  96

  587 BC for Total Dunderheads

  by Farkel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  if you're a dunderhead on neo-babylonian history (like me) you've probably remained totally clueless whenever the subject of the chronology leading to back 607 b.c.

  since i had nothing better to do today, i decided to finally take the time it takes to understand why dub chronology on that date is wrong.

  this piece of information alone should give you a clue about how bored i am!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Tor:

  I think I'm on Scholars "ignore" list. Don't exactly know how I got there. :-)

  ~Ros
• 
  96

  587 BC for Total Dunderheads

  by Farkel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  if you're a dunderhead on neo-babylonian history (like me) you've probably remained totally clueless whenever the subject of the chronology leading to back 607 b.c.

  since i had nothing better to do today, i decided to finally take the time it takes to understand why dub chronology on that date is wrong.

  this piece of information alone should give you a clue about how bored i am!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Concerning a 1914 parousia:

  The Watchtower prophecy has it that Christ + 144,000 saints will reign in heaven for 1000 years.
  AND . . . they insist these numbers (144,000 and 1000) are literal numbers.

  So, if Christ returned in 1914, were 144,000 saints resurrected at that time?
  Not according to the WT prophecy.

  Has the 1000-year reign begun?
  Not according to the WT prophecy. It begins immediately AFTER Armageddon.

  Will some of the144,000 "saints" live through Armageddon into the New Earth, and thereafter die and be resurrected?
  That used to be the doctrine. Is it still the view? (Especially since anyone who dies in Armageddon has no hope of a resurrection.)

  It is now 90 years after 1914.
  If Christ returned in 1914, he has been reigning 90 years and the millenium has not begun.
  If some of the 144,000 will not die and be resurrected until after Armageddon, they will not reign with Christ for a full 1000 years.
  Christ and those "saints" who were resurrected in 1914 (or were they supposed to be resurrected in 1919?) will have reigned for 1000 years plus 90 years plus however many years still remain until Armageddon.

  For all their insistence that the 144,000 and 1000 years are literal numbers in prophecy, in no way can it be said in their teaching that Christ + 144,000 reigned for 1,000 years.

  Their own teaching denies the numbers are literal.

  QUESTION: If Christ returned in 1914, how has that affected the earth? What has changed? Weren't things supposed to get better?

  ~Ros
• 
  96

  587 BC for Total Dunderheads

  by Farkel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  if you're a dunderhead on neo-babylonian history (like me) you've probably remained totally clueless whenever the subject of the chronology leading to back 607 b.c.

  since i had nothing better to do today, i decided to finally take the time it takes to understand why dub chronology on that date is wrong.

  this piece of information alone should give you a clue about how bored i am!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Marjorie:

  Thanks for linking back to that post. I remember it and I think I copied it at the time, but now I know I have it.
  Very interesting observation!!!

  ~Ros
• 
  96

  587 BC for Total Dunderheads

  by Farkel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  if you're a dunderhead on neo-babylonian history (like me) you've probably remained totally clueless whenever the subject of the chronology leading to back 607 b.c.

  since i had nothing better to do today, i decided to finally take the time it takes to understand why dub chronology on that date is wrong.

  this piece of information alone should give you a clue about how bored i am!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Scholar wrote:

  You are quite correct, only a dunderhead could accept a hypothetical date 587 for the Fall of Jerusalem. The WT Society using reliable biblical data computes this event for 607. A foolproof methodology of 539 for the Fall of Babylon followed by the release of the Jews under Cyrus in 537 which ended their exile to Babylon and the desolation of the land of seventy years. One merely fixes the beginning of these momentous events by adding seventy years to 537=607. Boy that is so easy.

  Yep, that is precisely how the WT comes up with that date--by counting 2 years forward from 539 then back 70. The year 607 is not based on any other scientific or historical evidence. The question in this simple (not brilliant) scenario is, what is it you're calculating for the 70 years?

  The problem for the WT is that there are astronomical "absolute dates" from which your 607BC can be shown to be at or about Nebuchadnezzar's first year, and consequently that Babylon reigned about 70 years from the time he became king. There is no way it can be 18 years off to validate Jerusalem's destruction coinciding with Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year--which is in full harmony with the scriptures:

  "This whole land shall become a ruin and a waste, and these nations shall serve the king of babylon seventy years. Then after seventy years are completed, I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, . . ."--Jer.25:11

  "Only when Babylon's seventy years are completed will I visit you, and I will fulfill to you my promise to bring you back to this place."--Jer.29:10

  The Babylonians (and the Jews) were meticulous in their records of the reigns of their kings.
  As Farkel explained--in a slightly different fashion--they did not have the Gregorian calendar. It should not need to be explained that the Babylonians did not have a concept of calendar count-down to Christ--nor did the Jews (i.e., BC or AD ("in the year of our Lord"). All of that began in the chuches some centuries after the Christian era began. The way both the Jews and Babylonians kept track of years was by associating events, including astronomical events and records, with what year an event occurred in the reign of which king. So, the dating of important events would be stated something like:

  "In the ninth year of King Zedekiah of Judah, in the tenth month, King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon and all his army came against Jerusalem and beseiged it; in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month, a breach was made in the city. When Jerusalem was taken, . . ."--Jeremiah 39:1,2

  "And in the ninth year of [Zedekiah's] reign, in the tenth month, on the tenth day of the month, King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon came with all his army against Jerusalem, and they laid seige to it; they built siege works against it all around. So the city was besieged until the eleventh year of King Zedekiah. On the ninth day of the fourth month the famine became so severe in the city that there was no food for the people of the land. . . . In the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month--which was the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon--Nebuzaradan the captain of the bodyguard who served the king of Babylon, entered Jerusalem. He burned the house of the Lord, . . ."--Jer.52:4-13

  In our day, "absolute dates" are derived from archaeological finds, records of ancient events that describe precise astronomical events--such as solar and lunar eclipses and other celestial occurrences of interest to astronomers--associated with a particular year in the reign of a particular king the way we see the Bible account preserved records of events between Babylon and Jerusalem. The Babylonians, and Nebuchadnezzar in particular, were avid astronomers--for which historians are greatly indebted. There are at least 30 astronomical events for Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year recorded on the Babylonian astronomical diary discovered by archaeologists, named VAT 4956, as well as others dated in the reigns of two of his successors. Thereby are at least 30 "absolute dates" for the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar. If you pinpoint Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year, then you can pinpoint his first year. If you pinpoint his first year, then you can pinpoint his 18th/19th year, the year he beseiged Jerusalem. As one historian put it, the year of the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon is one of the very few certain dates in ancient history. Add to the astronomical "absolute" dating the fact that 539 BC agrees with every other line of historical and archaeological research.

  So for this discussion--it is not the year when Babylon was conquered by the Persians that the WT's chronology for the 70 years hinges, since all agree on 539 BC for that. (Which, btw, 539 BC is derived indirectly from only one "absolute date" associated with the 6th year of Cyrus.) The critical point for the Watchtower's argument is whether the 70 years applied to Babylon, or--as they claim--to the time of Jewish exile when they were without their temple in Jerusalem. And that definition hinges on, among other things, what year was the 18/19th year of King Nebuchadnezzar.

  XQsThaiPoes:

  Disproving the Watchtower's chronology about the 70 years should not be misunderstood as agreeing with their interpretation of what the 70 years is supposed to represent for long-range prophecy. Using it to calculate the 1914 parousia is a whole other discussion, which becomes moot when you understand their flawed chronology. :-)

  ~Ros
• 
  145

  Invitation To Americans To Find Fault With The British..

  by Englishman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  i thought we ought to even things up a little... go for it!.

  no obscenities please.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ros

  Why would I want to find fault with another country? That wouldn't be very polite. :-)

  ~Rosalie