Failure by you to undertake this task will demonstrate to ALL your incompetence in this field.
Speak for yourself
has anyone on here ever come across the tiniest shred of evidence supporting this date for the fall of jerusalem.
i understand rolf furuli is about to but something out on this subject (see elihubooks.com), however even a table of contents has been a long time in coming from this site.
if no evidence exists what can he possibly be writing about?
Failure by you to undertake this task will demonstrate to ALL your incompetence in this field.
Speak for yourself
has anyone on here ever come across the tiniest shred of evidence supporting this date for the fall of jerusalem.
i understand rolf furuli is about to but something out on this subject (see elihubooks.com), however even a table of contents has been a long time in coming from this site.
if no evidence exists what can he possibly be writing about?
AlanF outside the 3 point zone...
He shoots!
Nothing but net!
eating fruit: when eve and then adam ate the fruit, they were given the death penalty and low productivity yield from their food growing efforts.
but, they did get a nice long life, somewhere around 900-930 years.. murder: cain murdered his own brother, abel.
cain whines to jehovah about how severe his punishment is, too great to bear, and jehovah consents to put a mark on him so that no one will harm cain.
What about good old King David. I remember watching this TV show called 'turn round Australia' one morning. The guy who hosts it is a bit of a bible thumper, pretty stuck in his ways. He was telling the story of David and Bathsheba (2Samuel 11). The point he was trying to make by telling this story was that you cant go against god, he will punish you in the end for your wrong doings. So he tells the story of how David lusts after Bathsheba, has sex with her, gets her pregnant, and in the end basically murders her husband Uriah because of all this. The guy then capped the story off by saying that God went ahead and punished David and that no-one escapes Gods judgment therefore. However, he never mentioned how God actually punished David. The reason why is obvious when you read the account. God's punishment upon David, apart from taking away some of his wives, was to kill the child of David and Bathsheba. Infanticide. Some God of justice. The kid gets death for something David does.
Heres another example of Gods great sense of justice:
At 2Samuel 24, David takes a census of Israel. Apparently this was wrong in Jehovahs eyes. So God gives him 3 choices of punishment. David doesn't choose anything. Instead he prefers to fall on the mercy of Jehovah. Gods 'mercy' is to send pestilence against all of Israel and kill 70,000 people. I wonder how many would have been children?
What does David say to Jehovah after this mass slaughter?.
This:
"Here it is I that have sinned and it is I that have done wrong; but these sheep -what have they done?..."(2sam 24:17)
Good question! What did they do? David is the one who took the census.
Apparently God feels no need to follow his own laws:
"Fathers should not be put to death on account of children, and children should not be put to death on account of fathers. Each one should be put to death for his own sin" Dt.24:16
"The soul that is sinning -it itself will die. A son himself will bear nothing because of the error of the father, and a father will bear nothing because of the error of the son..." Ezek 18:20
Nah...God doesn't care about his own laws. Like he says, he is the one "...bringing punishment for the error of fathers upon sons and upon grandsons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation." Ex 34:7
In other words he is a sicko!
has anyone on here ever come across the tiniest shred of evidence supporting this date for the fall of jerusalem.
i understand rolf furuli is about to but something out on this subject (see elihubooks.com), however even a table of contents has been a long time in coming from this site.
if no evidence exists what can he possibly be writing about?
This is what did it for me.
Real simple stuff:
Jeremiah 25:12
"And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of Babylon and against that nation, 'their error'..."
Go read the writing on the wall episode in Daniel and its plain the 70 years ended in 539...not 537.
If you then want to do those little weird gentile times calculations:
539-70=609+ 7 times = 1912?????????????
Just another way of looking at it:
Jeremiah 25:11
"...and these Nations will have to serve the king of Babylon 70 years"
Jeremiah 27:7
"And all the Nations must serve even him and his son and his grandson until the time even of his own land comes and many nations and great kings must exploit him as servant"
539 is when Babylon fell
Again, the seventy years ended in 539. This fact completely destroys 1914. good night!
has anyone on here ever come across the tiniest shred of evidence supporting this date for the fall of jerusalem.
i understand rolf furuli is about to but something out on this subject (see elihubooks.com), however even a table of contents has been a long time in coming from this site.
if no evidence exists what can he possibly be writing about?
Actually, I'm referring to a 609 date, that the Society adjusts from a known 539 date (through some historical maneuvering/manipulation, they shave off 2 years!).
The WT interprets the 70 year prophecy of Jeremiah to mean 70 years of exile in Babylon. They chose the date of 537 as being the end of that exile -when jews returned home- because it suits their nutcase prophectic ideas based around 1914.
537-70=607BC + that 7 times dribble = 1914
However, there is no reason to think 537 is correct....more likely the jews returned in 538. This is according to scholars.
The only real concrete dates are 539 and 586. Both dates are based on the same evidence. The absurdity of the WT position is that it rejects 586 but accepts 539. This is blatant hypocrisy....totally dishonest, idiotic etc etc. They use the evidence when it suits them(539 of which they derive 537 from) and then reject that same evidence when it also supports 586. In fact 586 is considered as more concrete a date than 539 by scholars....try telling the WT that.
i was speaking to a friend who is a j.w and asked her a couple of questions,the first one was that if god created everything perfect why did he give a bird wings when it is to heavy to fly ie:the ostrich,my second was that when the great flood receaded and all life was destroyed what did the lions,tigers and all the other meat eating animals do for food,the answer she gave me was that they ate plants and things?was she winding me up?im still waiting for the ostrich answer.
You totally right Waiting
Personally, i find the idea of Noahs ark hilarious. All those animals on board and they all behaved themselves. The tiger had no desire to tear to shreds the gazelle or anthing....yeah right!
It would have been chaos!
i was speaking to a friend who is a j.w and asked her a couple of questions,the first one was that if god created everything perfect why did he give a bird wings when it is to heavy to fly ie:the ostrich,my second was that when the great flood receaded and all life was destroyed what did the lions,tigers and all the other meat eating animals do for food,the answer she gave me was that they ate plants and things?was she winding me up?im still waiting for the ostrich answer.
what did the lions,tigers and all the other meat eating animals do for food,the answer she gave me was that they ate plants and things?
They ate plants...ha ha
Just like they will in the next world huh...Yeah, makes perfect sense. Yeah just like all those pics in WT literature tell us, where some little kid is seen hugging a grizzly bear and a lamb sits side by side with a lion.Yeah, there will be no more carnivores, no predators. The sheep and wolf and the lion will all be best buddies...of course!!!
Hey, instead of a pet parrot, you'll be able to have a pet Tiger to come home to after you've spent all day out in the fields picking fruit!!!!! What a great life!
do you believe that humans are capable of complete sexual monogamy?.
i believe 100% emotional monogamy is obtainable, but i'm not sure about sexual monogamy.
does gender figure into the equation?
Yes and No
Sort of...
Well....definitely not if your under 30
Who really cares anyway. Sex is so over-analysed these days. All these sex therapists writing in Newspaper & Magazine columns and appearing on those damned yankee talk shows. Tantra this...Kama Sutra that.. Its pretty tiresome all this sex and relationship talk, gone way too far.I mean hey, it sells magazines, but Doesn't seem to be helping much....people seem to just as neurotic about sex as ever.Though, granted, the situation is definitely better than a fundie approach to sex and relationships. Now that is insane
Whats the big deal about sex anyway. You stick it in, wiggle it about, blow your load. Its great fun...and even more fun when your drunk and with someone you dont know.
how to get rid of jehovah witnesses .
--when you open the door and there's one there saying, "hello, i'm.
collecting for the jehovah's witnesses...", interrupt them and say,.
DB:
Those JWs are trying to share the good news of God's Kingdom. And all you do is ridicule them.
Yes...hilarious isn't it!
That's fine BW. Then take your Bible, go out, and preach to others about God's Kingdom, just like Jesus and his disciples did.
Yeah, its great. If they didn't go out and preach there would be no hilarious jokes...
if you havn't seen planet of the apes don't read any further.. my question is: was the planet of the apes earth just back in time or was it a different planet?
and at the end did mark wholberg go back to the planet of the apes or was it earth with the history being changed because of the affects he had on it etc.
any ideas would be met with great anticipation!
haha, perfectpie...Thats exactly what i wondered after i saw the film. None of the people i went and saw it with could understand it either.
How did general thade go back in time????????? He was stuck in the space ship! What planet was what too? I'm sure Walberg went back in time though.
Dumb movie, i thought!