The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • SWALKER
    SWALKER
    Jehovah has seen to it that the needed secular chronology to calculate such dates has been provided.

    And yet YOU CHOOSE to ignore the thousands of secular chronological references that dispute your 607 date....you're talking out of 2 sides of your mouth again. You claim to be able to prove this date just using the Bible, then state that secular history is needed. Which is it???

    Sorry 3rdWitness...you can't have it both ways. It's not in the Bible alone and YOU KNOW IT CAN'T BE PROVEN!

    What I don't understand is why are you posting on this board? You would be DF'd in a NY minute if you told the local body of elders, unless you are posting here with permission. It's a total waste of time as your/WTS held viewpoint just doesn't hold up under in-depth scrutiny.

    Swalker

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    3rd Witness,you don`t like the posters to use secular sources of information.Yet you insist on using your sources,information from the WBTS publications..You openly admit you could`nt put an arguement together without them..Your not looking for a fair and honest debate..You want to be right..That won`t work here..Thats why you haven`t won a debate yet..All those pages and hours spent on debate and not one win..At least your consistant..LOL!!...OUTLAW

  • Hoping4Change
    Hoping4Change

    3W - Thanks for the clarification.

    Just so I understand then, it is this piece of history (""Amazingly secular history agrees that 539 was the year Babylon was conquered ") that is generally agreed upon by everyone, i.e, both sides of the debate? Another way of asking is, if I were to begin researching this from all available sources, then 539 B.C for the conquering of Babylon is the one "generally accepted fact" from which I should begin my own search? Also, can someone, anyone, briefly explain why this 539 date is so well regarded (i.e what are the sources for establishing this date with this event. Thanks, I truly am trying to understand and follow.

  • thirdwitness
    thirdwitness

    cabasilas: But, does Daniel specifically say there is any other application to the tree dream? ...So, I think you've basically said that if we look at Daniel chapter 4 alone there is no specific application to anything other than what happened to Nebuchadnezzar. How do the "other scriptures" you cited "connect Daniel 4" to the interpretation you are proposing? Do any of them specifically connect Daniel 4? Yes, they use the same metaphor of trees but do they specifically connect Daniel 4? Are you interpreting from the text or reading into the text?

    Yes Daniel definitely does connect God's rulership to the tree dream. That is the theme of Daniel and specifically Daniel 4. From the very outset of Daniel chapter 4 the theme is set. In verse 3 we read of Jehovah, "How grand his signs are, and how mighty his wonders are! His kingdom is a kingdom to time indefinite, (I do not believe that Neb's rulership was to time indefinite) and his rulership is for generation after generation." (But Neb's is not for generation after generation). Continuing the theme the Bible explains the reason for the dream in simple terms at Dan 4:17, "to the intent that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that to the one whom he wants to, he gives it and he sets up over it even the lowliest one of mankind.” Yes, God's everlasting rulership toward the earth and his choosing of whomever he sees fit to place in the position of rulership is the centralized theme of Daniel 4.

    Now if you don't want to look at other parts of the Bible and dig deeply so that you can understand the rest of the Bible then no you will not find any answers. As has been said before, the Bible interprets itself and so we do not have to guess about the meaning of Daniel chapter 4 at all. Incredibly, similar words of Daniel 4:17 are used concerning the kingship of Zedekiah. Ezekiel 21:25-27 reads concerning Zedekiah: "As for you, O deadly wounded, wicked chieftain of Israel, whose day has come in the time of the error of the end, this is what the Lord Jehovah has said, Remove the turban, and lift off the crown. This will not be the same. Put on high even what is low, and bring low even the high one. A ruin, a ruin, a ruin I shall make it. As for this also, it will certainly become no ones until he comes who has the legal right, and I must give it to him."

    Ezekiel 17, 19, and 21 all help explain just what Daniel 4 means.

    Read Ezekiel 21. In reading the entire chapter of Ezekiel 21 did you notice that Jehovah has a sword that he will unsheath upon Judah because of their rebelliousness. It is concerning that sword that the question is asked in verse 10, “Is it (the executional sword) rejecting the scepter (rulership) of my own son (Israel), as [it does] every tree?"

    12 “‘Cry out and howl, O son of man, for it itself has come to be against my people; it (Jehovah's sword) is against all the chieftains of Israel." Amazing! Exactly paralleling Neb's tree dream, Jehovah's sword will even cut down the tree or scepter or rulership of Israel. This connects Ezekiel 21 to Daniel 4.

    The cutting down of the tree or rulership of Israel is of great significance because those kings of Israel represented Jehovah's rulership in the earth.

    1 Chronicles 29:23 tells us, "And Sol´o·mon began to sit upon Jehovah’s throne as king in place of David his father" From this we can see that the kings of Israel did indeed represent Jehovah's rulership on earth.

    It is in this regard that Lamentations 4:20 written after the desolation of Jerusalem and the end of Zedekiah tells us, "The very breath of our nostrils, the anointed one (king of Israel) of Jehovah, has been captured in their large pit, The one of whom we have said: “In his shade we shall live among the nations.” By using the word shade in connection with the king of Israel we are once again reminded of the large tree in Daniel 4 that would provide protective shade covering for all. This is the same protective tree-like shade that God's rulership provided as represented by the kings of Israel.

    So ask yourself this: Out of 'every tree' or scepter or rulership that Jehovah's sword would cut down by means of Babylon which tree would be unbanded and restored in the future, receiving kingship from Jehovah himself as he saw fit? Which one would provide the 'lowliest' twig that would shoot forth and become a majestic cedar in Jehovah's Holy Mountain put on high like no other? It could only be the tree picturing Jehovah's rulership as represented by the kings of Judah who were said to 'sit upon Jehovah's throne'. It could only be that Judean tree which for 7 times would remain banded but thereafter would bring forth God's chosen ruler of all the earth.

    Read the chapters in Ezekiel. Do you see the connection that the Bible makes between Daniel 4 and Ezekiel 21 and 17? Compare Daniel 4:17 "that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that to the one whom he wants to, he gives it and he sets up over it even the lowliest one of mankind"

    And compare Ezek 21:26,27 about the end of Zedekiah's rule and the beginning of Jesus' rule, "Put on high even what is low, and bring low even the high one. 27 A ruin, a ruin, a ruin I shall make it. As for this also, it will certainly become no [one's] until he comes who has the legal right, and I must give [it] to him."

    And Ezekiel 17:24 "And all the trees of the field will have to know that I myself, Jehovah, have abased the high tree, have put on high the low tree, have dried up the still-moist tree and have made the dry tree blossom. I myself, Jehovah, have spoken and have done [it]."

    In all 3 Bible texts it is mentioned that the low will be put on high and that Jehovah is the one giving the rulership to whomever he chooses. There can be no doubt that the tree pictures God's rulership. The end of Zedekiah ends that rulership and is replaced by gentile rulership. The rulership continues once again when the one who has the legal right returns, the twig of Jesse if you will, and once again takes over that rulership.

    So to answer your questions:

    But, does Daniel specifically say there is any other application to the tree dream? ...Yes he does.

    So, I think you've basically said that if we look at Daniel chapter 4 alone there is no specific application to anything other than what happened to Nebuchadnezzar. No I am not saying that.

    How do the "other scriptures" you cited "connect Daniel 4" to the interpretation you are proposing? Ezekiel 17, 19, 21 all have connection to Daniel 4 as shown. Go back and read the whole subheading what the tree dream means for further details on each chapter.

    Do any of them specifically connect Daniel 4? Yes they do.

    Yes, they use the same metaphor of trees but do they specifically connect Daniel 4? Yes I have shown that they do.

    Are you interpreting from the text or reading into the text? I am letting the Bible interpret itself and it does.

  • thirdwitness
    thirdwitness

    Further answer for cabisilas:

    Here at Isa 6:11, notice what is said in conjunction with the desolation of Jerusalem and the restoration of the seed that will come forth: "At this I said: 'How long, O Jehovah?' Then he said: 'Until the cities actually crash in ruins, to be without an inhabitant, ( This happened in 607) and the houses be without earthling man, and the ground itself is ruined into a desolation; 12 and Jehovah actually removes earthling men far away, and the deserted condition does become very extensive in the midst of the land. 13 And there will still be in it a tenth, and it must again become something for burning down, like a big tree and like a massive tree in which, when there is a cutting down [of them], there is a stump ; a holy seed will be the stump of it."

    While this scripture had fulfillment when Jerusalem was restored in 537BCE it would also certainly apply to the holy seed which is to rule God's Kingdom, the foremost of who is Jesus Christ himself. Yes the big, massive tree was chopped down when Jerusalem was destroyed in 607BCE but there was a stump left and that stump is comprised of the holy seed, those who rule in God's Kingdom. Again further proof that the tree dream does indeed have direct bearing on God's Kingdom and His rulership.

  • thirdwitness
    thirdwitness

    This leaves us with these questions remaining except for any new ones that might have been asked:

    Auldsoul: Did the prophecy of Daniel 4 say that a ruler of God's Kingdom would come forth at the end of the seven times? No. So, why do you interpret a second fulfillment into the prophecy where there is no indication of one?

    Outside of application to the specific judgment prophecies wherein "a day for a year" is stipulated, the usage is completely unnecessary.

    Are you aware that the word translated "weeks" in Daniel 9 literally means "weeks of years"?

    "Iddan" does not have to mean more than 7 years. It can mean less than 7 years with equal facility. It can mean "measure of time", or "season" and if you were aware of this possibility prior to posting this false statement then your statement was sophistic. Were you aware that "iddan" can be less than a year, thirdwitness? If so, then you already knew your statement that "it must mean more than 7 years" was false, since you already knew of another possibility.

    Q) Where in Daniel chapter 4 does it specifically say that the 7 times applies to God's rulership? (A) It doesn't say that anywhere in the Bible, much less in Daniel chapter 4.(Q) Where does the Bible specifically say that the tree dream in Daniel chapter 4 has any other application? (A) Nowhere. It isn't in the Bible, unless you include the Bound Volume "Talmud" of Jehovah's Witnesses as part of the Bible, which most JWs do.(Q) Do the passages in Ezekiel 17, 19, 21 and Revelation 12 and Isaiah 6 specifically comment on the passage from Daniel chapter 4 or specifically connect it to what these other chapters are saying? (A) No.

    Midget: ThirdWitness: Seems to me that the Society is arbritary in how it picks and chooses which times are literal days and which are years. Am I correct in understanding how you responded to Steve and AuldSoul's query about this?

    Jayhawk: How does the day for a year rule apply to the Gentile Times Prophecy? As another person has already said, the day for a year rule applied to only 2 prophecies listed in the Bible where it says that would be how it worked. Where is the day for a year rule in the Gentile Times Prophecy? How are we to know that rule is to be used? How are we to know if it is a figurative prophecy with figurative rules, or is it to be taken literally? Again, where are the text clues for the reader to use decernment?

    And jayhawk says of what I wrote concerning applying a day for a year: I don't understand any of this.

  • DannyHaszard
    DannyHaszard
    The funky math is from William Miller and he admitted it was wrong 150 years ago Jehovah's Witnesses Millerite/Adventist sect spin-off American Civil war army captain William Miller is ground zero for Jehovah's Witnesses.

    There is nothing that made me gasp in horror of all WT/JW falsehoods more then this finding that it all came from the Millerite movement.Yes,the "great disappointment" of Oct 22 1844 has never died out... it lives on in the Seventh day Adventist (who admit it) and the Jehovah's Witnesses who deny it. The Millerites: Armageddon (History Channel)

    modem (low bandwidth) version

    DSl/Cable (high bandwidth) version


    This is the highly credible HISTORY CHANNEL (Roger Mudd) not the "apostates" exposing Jehovah's Witnesses as a spin-off of the William Miller movement of 1844 Ergo,no 1914 then there can be no 1918 inspection..... The central CORE doctrine of the Watchtower,yes the reason the Watchtower came into existence was to declare Jesus second coming in 1914.When the prophecy (derived from William Miller of 1842) failed they said that he came "invisibly".

    Ergo,no 1914 then there can be no 1918 inspection and sealing of the 'anointed' so the entire wts doctrinal superstructure comes crashing down like a house of cards Tell the truth and don't be afraid-Danny Haszard Bangor Maine

    thirdwitness what say you? Put aside the chronology for one post and refute the Millerite origins of the Watchtower

  • thirdwitness
    thirdwitness

    Auldsoul: Did the prophecy of Daniel 4 say that a ruler of God's Kingdom would come forth at the end of the seven times? No. So, why do you interpret a second fulfillment into the prophecy where there is no indication of one?

    This question is the same as cabisilas' question which is answered above.

    But the answer is Yes, Daniel showed that Jehovah's rulership was forever and that he would put whomever he liked as ruler of his kingdom even the lowliest one of mankind which was to be Jesus that he would appoint as king. This would happen at the end of the 7 times.

  • thirdwitness
    thirdwitness

    This from auldsoul: Q) Where in Daniel chapter 4 does it specifically say that the 7 times applies to God's rulership? (A) It doesn't say that anywhere in the Bible, much less in Daniel chapter 4.(Q) Where does the Bible specifically say that the tree dream in Daniel chapter 4 has any other application? (A) Nowhere. It isn't in the Bible, unless you include the Bound Volume "Talmud" of Jehovah's Witnesses as part of the Bible, which most JWs do.(Q) Do the passages in Ezekiel 17, 19, 21 and Revelation 12 and Isaiah 6 specifically comment on the passage from Daniel chapter 4 or specifically connect it to what these other chapters are saying? (A) No.

    Also answered above and is the same thing that cabisilas asked.

  • thirdwitness
    thirdwitness

    These questions remain which are basically 3 questions:

    Are you aware that the word translated "weeks" in Daniel 9 literally means "weeks of years"?

    "Iddan" does not have to mean more than 7 years. It can mean less than 7 years with equal facility. It can mean "measure of time", or "season" and if you were aware of this possibility prior to posting this false statement then your statement was sophistic. Were you aware that "iddan" can be less than a year, thirdwitness? If so, then you already knew your statement that "it must mean more than 7 years" was false, since you already knew of another possibility.

    The rest are asking about how and why make the day for a year application.

    I will get to these later.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit