thirdwitness' latest post, # 373 on page 61 of this thread, is yet another exercise in misrepresentation, misdirection and obfuscation. He's really dragging the bottom to bring up straw men. Here we go again.
: . . .
: Then at last he admits that JWs just might be right about Christ's parousia being invisible. Thanks for the frank admission.
I "admit" no such thing. This is a lie and a thoroughly moronic claim.
That this conclusion is moronic is shown by the very words thirdwitness quoted:
: AlanF says: No one is claiming that "every eye will literally see Jesus". What posters such as I and AuldSoul are saying is nothing more or less than what the Bible itself says: Jesus' coming would be extremely visible in whatever unspecified manner the Bible writers meant -- if they consciously meant anything at all. If the Bible writers intended that "visible" meant literally, then so be it. If they intended that "visible" meant "in the sense that everyone would understand that Jesus had appeared in no uncertain terms to begin direct rule of the world", then so be it.
Since thirdwitness obviously has severe reading comprehension problems, let me rephrase the above and put it in single sentences:
No one here is claiming that Jesus would return bodily.
The Bible does not specify the exact nature of Jesus' return.
The Bible writers do not tell us exactly what they mean by "every eye will see him".
Various posters state that "every eye will see him" most likely means "with the eyes of understanding".
Various posters state that Jesus' coming will be visible with "the eyes of understanding" to everyone on earth.
: Then AlanF makes another blunder: Readers will note that the above-quoted passage from Daniel (7:13,14) gives no indication whatsoever as to when the supposed prophecies were to be fulfilled. Therefore, it is pure speculation to apply a specific fulfillment to these "prophecies".
: Yes the Bible does tell when Christ's gains rulership as recorded at Daniel 7. It is the time of the last world power, the small horn that becomes great. No speculation needed at all.
This is simply postponing the problem of interpretation of what Daniel meant. A great many commentators have attempted a complete interpretation, all with no resolution. And of course, Watchtower writers have tried their hand at such speculating many times over the years, with different results every few years. Their claims are no more to be believed than any other of the numerous claims they've abandoned. Whatever they teach now about the interpretation of Daniel will be abandoned and replaced by something else, just as surely as their claims about "the generation of 1914" were abandoned and replaced in 1993 and 1995, when world events outpaced them.
:: All you're doing is arguing that Jesus will never again be personally visible on earth, in the sense of his human body being observable or a ghostly manifestation being visible, such as whatever seems to have appeared to such people as the doubting Thomas who is claimed to have put his fingers into Jesus' spear wound. This is not an issue here.
Here comes another misrepresentation. I actually said the exact opposite of what thirdwitness claims. Images of Monty Python's Black Knight keep appearing in my mind.
: Thanks for another admission that JWs are right that Christ's parousia is invisible. Take note lurkers. Even one of the foremost apostates has been forced to admit this because to argue against it would show his Bible ignorance.
Obviously, to anyone with even the slightest reading comprehension, I 'admitted' nothing of the kind. I simply summarized one of thirdwitness' claims and said it wasn't an issue.
:: When lightning flashes, no one with normal senses can fail to see it. Therefore, the parousia, or the coming of the Son of man, will be visible to everyone with normal senses.
Next comes yet another misrepresentation:
: Of course. Anyone who has discerning powers can see Christ's invisible presence is here.
"Everyone with normal senses" obviously includes everyone on earth who is not physically or mentally impaired. Thirdwitness has deliberately misrepresented this obvious meaning to build his straw man.
: That is exactly why Jesus gave a sign. So that his presence could be discerned.
Wrong on several counts. Jesus gave no such "signs". He told people not to view common catastrophes such as earthquakes, famine, pestilence and war as "signs". But even if he did give such commons signs, they would be of no value, because they would be no more specific than 'predicting' that the grass would be green, the sky would be blue and young men would lust after young women.
Why do you refuse to deal with this important point?
: But you do not have such discerning powers. You make silly arguments about earthquakes when the evidence clearly shows that Jesus words, There will be great earthquakes in one place after another is now being fulfilled since 1914. 16,000 per year killed after 1914. 2000 killed per year before 1914. And even though the wars since 1914 have killed about as many as all the wars between the 1st century and 1914 you refuse to see the sign. 1 million per year killed on average in wars since 1914. 50 thousand killed per year before 1914. You and others like you have closed your eyes to Christ's presence and have missed the sign. Too bad for you.
You continue to ignore the thorough disproofs of these claims. You ignore the fact that the period immediately before 1914 had just as many deaths as the period after. You continue to misuse statistics to make these false statements. Were you to write a college paper about your claims and submit it for review, both your peers and your professors would laugh themselves silly at you. The fact that you continue to ignore the facts, and continue deliberately to misuse statistics to 'prove' you claims, proves that you're a liar.
:: Bottom line: Revelation 1:7 is connected with 1914 only in the fertile imaginations of Watchtower writers.
Here comes another misrepresentation and straw man:
: Once again you are off to see the wizard. Another misrepresentation of what JWs believe. We do not believe that Revelation 1:7 is talking about 1914 as I pointed out clearly in my previous post. This is a typical apostate ploy. To misrepresent what JWs believe and then attack that strawman.
You've raised yet another staw man here, because I said nothing about Revelation 1:7 "talking about 1914". I said that "Revelation 1:7 is connected with 1914 only in the fertile imaginations of Watchtower writers." I'm perfectly well aware that the connection is via the Society's imagined "presence of the Lord" beginning and 1914 and ending with Armageddon.
: You have now done this several times:
: You said JWs believe that Noah preached to the 'entire' world. We have never said that.
Nope. I've proved it.
: You said JWs believe parousia only means the stay after his arrival even saying the 96 WT lied. We believe parousia means his arrival and subsequent presence and I pointed that out in several WTs.
Yet another misrepresentation of my arguments. I even explained this for the nth time in my post # 4738 on page 60 of this thread. You continue to misrepresent my argument, which is that the Society actually teaches that its use of "presence" focuses exclusively on the "subsequent presence" part of this meaning." Having yet again missed the import of my statement, the rest of your comments are meaningless.
: And now you say in WT writer's minds Revelation 1:7 is about 1914.
Yet another lie. I said no such thing.
: You are so fond of calling people liars.
I really do enjoy calling pathological liars such as yourself what your own words demonstrate you to be.
: It is now time that you call yourself a liar since everyone else can see that you are such.
LOL! That's pretty funny, in a post in which you've demonstrably lied eight times.
::: Revelation 1:7 corresponds to Matthew 24:30 And then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in lamentation, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
:: A fair conclusion that is entirely in harmony with all of my arguments.
: Great so you agree that JWs are right that Christ's presence is invisible and that he will destroy the wicked at Armageddon. Then why do you teach Christendom's vomit?
Yet another deliberate misrepresentation of what I said. Your straw man is so obvious that it needs no further comment.
:: For the people who know something of Jehovah's Witnesses, almost all reject them as a cult that should be rejected on general grounds,
: Now there's a real eye opener. This really proves a lot. How foolish of me. Of course since the majority rejects JWs they can't be right.
That's not the point. Most people who know JWs well, regard them as a cult because of their cultish practices. Various writers on cults list a number of criteria that distinguish normal groups from cults, and JWs fit most of them to a tee. If you want to discuss these criteria and how JWs fit them, then say so and I'll start a thread on that topic.
: Lets throw in the garbage what Jesus said when he said, Broad and spacious is the road leading to destruction and many are the ones finding it. But narrow is the road and cramped the gate leading to life and few are the ones finding it.
Mormons, Moonies and other cultish Christian groups all apply that scripture. It's meaningless.
: Here's a statement for you: For the people who knew something of Christians in the first century, almost all reject them as a cult that should be rejected on general grounds,.. Your reasoning is overwhelming. How could anyone ever doubt what you say?
They were most certainly a cult in the most general sense. They also had many of the distinguishing features regarded by most people today as defining a cult in the more narrow, pejorative sense. Live with it.