ThirdWitnoid said:
Hellrider said one day was as a thousand years. ; I figured everyone saw the illogic of 7 times being 2,520,000 so i didn't comment on that.
Ha ha, oh you so sneaky! This is what I wrote:
Should We Apply the Day for a Year Rule?No. The "day for a year"-rule isn`t even a rule a all. It is used twice in the entire Bible, once in Numbers 14 (the 40 years in the desert), and once in Ezekiel 4. Both the times that this "rule" (which isn`t even a rule) goes into effect, it is explicitly stated that it does. Also, the YEARS of punishment in these two passages, are equivalent to the number of DAYS that Israel were being disobedient to God. So, "a day for a year" is punishment for Israel! This aspect is not there in neither Jeremiah nor Daniel, and there is no mentioning of the "day for a year-rule" at all. Clearly then, to use it, is wrong.
The Bible also says that to God, a thousand years is like a day, and a day like a thousand years. There is no reason why THIS should not be used in conjunction (hope that`s the right word, english is my 2nd language) with the 2520 days. In fact, it would make MORE sense that THIS rule be applied, instead of a year, as the aspect of punishment is not there (as the Bible explicitly states that the 70 years are for Babylon). That would place the end of the world to be 2520000 years into the future from the day these words were written down. Of course, the "Jehovahs witnesses" are not interested in waiting that long. They want it right now, before even one more generation "that saw these events fulfilled" have passed away.
I believe the difference between my post and your summary of my post should be evident to everyone. Again you are back to your old tricks of distorting what people write in their posts and their arguments against you. Also: You claim to be answering arguments and points made! In relation to the points I raised in my first post (see above) and in similar posts by other participants, you simply referred us to the part of your essay with "Should we apply the day for a year rule". Well, the point is that the argument I and others have raised, is that the "day for a year - rule" (which isn`t even really a rule) should NOT be applied, and we have thoroughly explained WHY! And NONE of the reasons why it should NOT be applied, are covered in your "essay" (and I use that term in its widest possible sense). So, you do NOT answer arguments, you just refer them to some crap you have written that does NOT answer the points and arguments we have made. That means you are just here to spread your propaganda, like a witnoid equvalent to Joseph Goebbels trolling about (and I don`t doubt for a second that you are here on the direct command of "highranking" WTS-officials). Frankly, I can`t understand why the admins put up with it. This is a discussion forum! Not a forum for your thorusand-year-Reich-propaganda!
