2nd Peter 3:8 says that a thousand years with God is as a day and a day is as a thousand years. So which is it? Or is it all just nonsense?
I vote nonsense.
i think in this matter many times.
based in this, i think that the creative days not have the same duration.
for example, the 7th day can be 7000 (4 hrs celestial * 7) years long like and the rest of days, each 42000 years long (24 hrs celestial * 7).. .
2nd Peter 3:8 says that a thousand years with God is as a day and a day is as a thousand years. So which is it? Or is it all just nonsense?
I vote nonsense.
whenever i talk to jw's, and even in some of the jw official videos, i detect a definite vibe of sadness coming off these people.. i am very sensitive to "atmospheres" and to peoples emotional state, you wouldn't think so, because more often than not i do not react to what i detect, i just let people get on with it.. but i do get this feeling that they are sad, probably because very, very, very deep down they realise that it is all false, maybe ?.
I'm probably not as perceptive as you but I have noticed a perfunctory, going-through-the-motions air about Witnesses these days. I'm with you about their deep down feelings. Here it is 2013, only one year away from the 100th anniversary of 1914 and still no Armageddon. That's got to weigh heavily on the minds of witnesses-especially old-timers.
i read in the watchtower 2013-07-15 simplified page 11 paragraph 5 this:.
he cleansed the temple in jerusalem twice.
the first time was at the start of his ministry, and the second was at the end of his ministry.
I'm going to write a post about this in detail but I want to address this particular issue. This is a case of people trying to write a "fifth gospel" if you will. That is, they're trying to collate things reported on in the different gospels into one cohesive account, and it just doesn't work. It doesn't work because when you mash the gospels together the resulting "fifth gospel" disagrees with the originals.
This is a case in point. In the synoptic gospels, Jesus is depicted as cleansing the Temple at the end of his ministry. In fact, this is the event that leads to his execution. However, John has Jesus cleansing the Temple at the beginning of his ministry. The problem? NONE of the gospel accounts say that Jesus cleansed the Temple twice! The idea that Jesus did this twice can only be derived if you attempt to combine the accounts together into one, something the original writers never intended.
The far more likely scenario is that the author of the Gospel of John, wanting to incorporate the pericope of the Temple cleansing into his work, simply put the event in a different place in his narrative.
dear misguided people,.
here we are in the midst of 2013, only one year from the 100th anniversary of 1914. since i have many family members who are still jehovah's witnesses, and who still believe that the end of the world is coming any minute now, i thought i would post a little list of events, a timetable if you will, of some end-time prophesies and how long ago they were.. around 2,600 years ago zephaniah promised: "near is the great day of the lord, near and coming very quickly; listen, the day of the lord!
around 1,980 years ago jesus promised,"...this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.
^^Wow! Someone who is even more batsh!t crazy than the Jehovah's Witnesses!^^
Also, he takes so long to say so little!
dear misguided people,.
here we are in the midst of 2013, only one year from the 100th anniversary of 1914. since i have many family members who are still jehovah's witnesses, and who still believe that the end of the world is coming any minute now, i thought i would post a little list of events, a timetable if you will, of some end-time prophesies and how long ago they were.. around 2,600 years ago zephaniah promised: "near is the great day of the lord, near and coming very quickly; listen, the day of the lord!
around 1,980 years ago jesus promised,"...this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.
...I'm afraid I have some bad news for you, Farkel. Perhaps you'd better sit down...
dear misguided people,.
here we are in the midst of 2013, only one year from the 100th anniversary of 1914. since i have many family members who are still jehovah's witnesses, and who still believe that the end of the world is coming any minute now, i thought i would post a little list of events, a timetable if you will, of some end-time prophesies and how long ago they were.. around 2,600 years ago zephaniah promised: "near is the great day of the lord, near and coming very quickly; listen, the day of the lord!
around 1,980 years ago jesus promised,"...this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.
Dear Misguided People,
Here we are in the midst of 2013, only one year from the 100th anniversary of 1914. Since I have many family members who are still Jehovah's Witnesses, and who still believe that the end of the world is coming any minute now, I thought I would post a little list of events, a timetable if you will, of some end-time prophesies and how long ago they were.
Around 2,600 years ago Zephaniah promised: "Near is the great day of the LORD, Near and coming very quickly; Listen, the day of the LORD! "-Zephaniah 1:14
Around 1,980 years ago Jesus promised,"...This generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur." -Matt 24:34
Also around the same time Jesus said," Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here that will not taste death at all until first they see the son of man coming in his kingdom." -Matt 16:28
Around 1,960 years ago Paul thought that he would be among those living who would be caught up alive to heaven. -1 Thess. 4:16,17 (note the use of the first person 'we' in verse 17.)
About 1,920 years ago, John quotes the resurrected Jesus as saying,"Yes, I am coming quickly"-Rev 22:20
Moving on to more modern times, in 1888, 125 years ago, Charles Taze Russell stated in the book, The Time is at Hand "That the Lord must be present, and set up his Kingdom, and exercise his great power so as to dash the nations to pieces as a potter's vessel, before A.D. 1914, is then clearly fixed; for it is 'in the days of these kings' - before their overthrow - i.e. before A.D. 1914 - that the God of heaven shall set up his Kingdom.. The 'Times of the Gentiles'.. will run fully out with the year A.D. 1914, and at that time they will all be overturned and Christ's Kingdom fully established.. Both of these ripenings (Rev. 14:1-4, 18-20) will be completed in a period of forty years, ending with the year A.D. 1914." 1914 was 99 years ago, folks.
Russell's successor, J.F. Rutherford thought that the end would be in 1925. In the Watchtower of March 1, 1923, it states, "Have we more reason, or as much, to believe the kingdom will be established in 1925 than Noah had to believe that there would be a flood? .. Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures, marking the end of the typical jubilees." 1925 was 88 years ago.
Later on, the Watchtower Society felt that 1975 was the end. The May 1 1968 Watchtower said, "Eight years from the autumn of 1967 would bring us to the autumn of 1975, fully 6,000 years into God's seventh day, his rest day. The immediate future is certain to be filled with climatic events, for this old system is nearing its complete end. Within a few years at most the final parts of Bible prophecy relative to these 'last days' will undergo fulfillment, resulting in the liberation of surviving mankind into Christ's glorious 1,000-year reign!" 1975 was 38 years ago.
What's the point of all this? Just this: It ain't gonna happen folks! People have been saying that God's going to give the world an enema for the past 2600 years but it hasn't happened yet and it's simply not going to happen. WAKE UP! It's 20-frickin'-13 already! Enjoy your life now and quit twiddling your thumbs waiting for a "New Order" that's never going to come.
Amen.
CyrusThePersian
P.S. This is an updated post I made several years ago.
the washtowel and asleep magazines made the list.
an over-zealous dub just posted this link to my facebook wall.
http://www.clicktop10.com/2013/07/top-10-most-popular-magazines-of-2013/.
The one and only reason they're so popular is that six million braindead dubs stand on every street corner on the planet giving away that trash.
in john 8:44 jesus is quoted as saying that the devil is a "liar and the father of the lie.
" an obvious reference to the serpent story in genesis chapter 3.
(the johannine community, responsible for the gospel of john, the epistles of 1, 2, 3 john and revelation, was among the first to equate the serpent of genesis with satan, see rev.
In John 8:44 Jesus is quoted as saying that the Devil is a "liar and the father of the lie." an obvious reference to the serpent story in Genesis chapter 3. (The Johannine community, responsible for the gospel of John, the epistles of 1, 2, 3 John and Revelation, was among the first to equate the serpent of Genesis with Satan, see Rev. 20:2)
However, before we accept Jesus' word for it, let's apply a little analysis to Genesis chapter 3. Let's start with v. 4 and 5:
But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
OK, here we have what Jesus reckons was the first lie, because we know later in the narrative that the woman, Eve, and Adam as well, did die. But wait! Let's take a closer look. The serpent basically tells Eve that three things will happen if she eats the fruit:
She will not die
Her eyes will be opened
She will be like God, knowing good and evil.
Author Robert Heinlein once wrote that there are three ways to lie. One is by telling a baldface untruth, anyone can do that. The second way is to tell the truth-but leave out or add to it certain parts so that your listener is unclear as to what is really truthful. The third way is to tell the complete truth, but tell it in such a way that your listener is sure you are lying. The serpent at first look appears to be using the second way to lie, because some of what he says is true:
In verse 7 the Bible states that Eve and Adam's eyes were opened. In verse 22 God declares, " Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil..." So the serpent is two for three so far.
That leaves us with the, "You will not die" part. Did the serpent lie about this? A possible answer may lie in the rest of verse 22 and verses 23 and 24:
Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever _ therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken. He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life.
The question is: Would the serpent have known what God was going to do? According to the story, all Adam and Eve had to do was eat of the tree of life to not die, yet God has now blocked access to this tree. If the serpent knew that this was God's evil plan, then yes, he's a liar. However, there is no indication that the serpent knew of God's plans and for all we know the serpent only knew that eating of the tree of life would grant immortality and that eating of the tree of Good and Evil would open their eyes.
So the question is: Did the serpent lie?
DISCLAIMER: I do not in any way believe that any of this horsecrap is in any way true, I merely offer this as a literary analysis, much as one might offer up an analysis of Tom Sawyer's use of reverse psychology in manipulating his friends into whitewashing the fence in "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer".
i know there are not many peterists out there but for the sake of argument all you bible believers, a question for you.
its looking more and more like the book of revelation was written for john's time and not ours.
the number mentioned 666 is more likely 616 for the emperor caligula who put a statue of himself in the temple at jerusalem, and the first verses in the book and the last chapter all say that these thing will happen quickly.
It should be obvious to anyone who puts an ounce of critical analysis into the book of Revelation that it's nothing more than a thinly disguised, semi-psychotic rant against the Roman Empire.
Despite the fact that the writer cleverly hides the true nature of this work (because wishing death and destruction of the Empire could get you crucified) there are parts that show the true intention of the writing, most notably the 17th chapter, which describes the "whore of Babylon" as seated on seven mountains (v9) an obvious reference to the seven hills of Rome:
If you need further evidence the author provides it in verse 18:
"The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth."
What other city could this be but Rome? In the first century Rome ruled over the vast majority of the Western world. But why is this city called Babylon? Because Babylon was a traditional enemy of the Jews and subsequently, Rome became the great enemy of the Christians. In Revelation, "Babylon" becomes a code name for the city that John saw as opposed to God and his people- i.e. Rome. (The real city of Babylon, by the way, was just a crumbling virtual ghost town by the time John wrote Revelation). And just like Babylon of old, Rome too was going to suffer destruction, and quickly, according to John.
The fact that it didn't happen that way probably led later readers to try to interpret the book to their own time, a practice that obviously continues to our day. But if you see the book not as a mystical prophesy, but as it really is, the product of a first century mind with a bone to pick with an oppressive empire, it becomes clear what the book is and what it meant to those it was addressed to.
in acts 18:2,3 we read:.
"there he met a jew named aquila, a native of pontus, who had recently come from italy with his wife priscilla, because claudius had ordered all jews to leave rome.
paul went to see them, and because he was a tentmaker as they were, he stayed and worked with them.".
"Paul actually argues with Cyphas. They could be different people. Its especially stranget that a renamed Cyphas who becomes Peter is stilled called Cyphas by Paul."
Right you are! I was going to discuss that very point in my post. I'm writing it now.