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

by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • stevenyc

    thank you for your response. What you have shown for all to see is how you make interpretations where they don't belong. You have demonstrated amply how twisting scripture to support a false doctrine is required by yur governing body to maintan their control over you.

    I will respond shortly to show, using only the bible, how twisted you can be. However, right now I'm watching the opener of the football season between Bolton v Spurs, and that requires my full, undivided attention.



    3rd Witness,look at the title of your thread..You set the ground rules of this Thread,in the title of Your Thread..The purpose of my post to you was:"You can`t be botherd to follow your own rules,yet you expect every one else to follow them."..That is not Fair or Honest..Once again your dishonesty is being brought to your attention..You expect everyone here to believe you have the Truth,when you cannot be Truthfull??..Your Momma Raised a Fool!!..LOL!!....Your Reply to me,is not an Answer..In your reply to me you say:"How many consult the Insight Book when they want to know about a certain person in the bible?Raise your hand.Probably All Of You.Why?"....Thats a pretty big assumtion,considering how many are xJW`S here?..What about the ones who have never been a JW?..Lots of those here too?..There seems to be a great deal of dishonesty in your posts..Why would anyone believe what you have to say about more important matters,like the Bible??...OUTLAW

  • fjtoth

    Thirdwitness wrote:

    I chose to side with the evidence clearly found in God's word which JWs present.

    If "the evidence" is "clearly found in God's word," why was it that that the Watchtower Society was clearly confused about 1914 until 1953?

    The Bible is indeed clear. It quotes Jesus as saying he would be invisibly present with his disciples "all the days, even to the end of the system of things." (Matthew 28:20)

    The Bible does not teach that Jesus' return will be a greater "invisible presence." When he returns, "every eye will see him," not only his true disciples. (Rev. 1:7; Lu. 21:27; Mt. 24:27) What could be clearer than that?

    Thirdwitness also wrote:

    You want it on a silver platter as I said earlier but thats not the way it happens. You have to dig and search the Bible.

    The Bible does offer the truth about Christ's return on a silver platter. The only reason the Watchtower Society has to "dig and search the Bible" is to get away from accepting the clearly presented simple truth about Christ's return.

    And so, the Society has confused itself.

    First the members of the Society taught that Christ would return to the earth in 1874. When that didn't happen, they said he returned invisibly in that year. At the same time, they said the end of the world would take place in 1914. When that didn't happen, they blamed God, saying he had misled them for a purpose, to accomplish a cleansing among them. In 1929 they published a book called "Prophecy," and on page 65 they claimed they had "absolute scriptural proof" that Christ had really come back in 1874. In 1943, they trashed the 1874 date and replaced it with 1914. Today, every JW dismisses all this confusion and claims that Christ returned invisibly in 1914 and that he will come in a final way at the time of Armageddon.

    Yes, to arrive at the conclusions served up by the Watchtower Society, one must indeed "dig and search," but one will not find those conclusions set forth in the pages of the Bible!


  • AnnOMaly

    In case Fisherman drops by:

    I disagree Ann.

    Fine. We disagree.

    Anyway thanks for responding to my post. Again consider the last 4 verses of 2 Kings with the EZ 21: remove the turban..

    I did and I still disagree. The Scriptures bear out (I gave you a reference) that the turban or crown was not restored to Jehoiachin.

    I am happy that you concede that the last king of Judah mentioned in the Bible was King Jeh. That is it.

    Not so fast. He was the last survivor of those who had been kings of Judah. He was not acting as king of Judah while he was in exile. He had been deposed. He never regained his authority. But this is a pointless discussion since the Bible speaks for itself and we're quibbling over a drop in an ocean, and I don't know how your theory helps any.

    You speak as if you are an authority . You are not.

    No I'm not an authority, but I have examined the subject of the Gentile Times and 607 closely ... and I think I have a reasonable comprehension of what the Bible says and doesn't say.

    Ok with me, you are just stating what you believe. I am not going head with you or with anyone else on this thread about the GTimes. Too tired. Just looking for new info. on 1914 particularly from 3w or scholar.

    I can't top AlanF's reposte so I'll leave it there LOL.

    see you at another thread

    Very possibly.

  • AlanF

    thirdwitless wrote:

    : I would like to address AlanF's long post on page 8.

    We will see that this deceptive JW defender has merely repeated what he has posted before, has presented no actual arguments but only speculation, and has failed actually to address even one challenge I made in that post.

    On Luke 21:24:

    :: Jerusalem will at some future time begin to be trampled on by the nations . . .

    :: Jerusalem will continue to be trampled on by the nations . . .

    :: The question is: which one is right? Since grammar is of no help, let's look at the context.

    : Notice what I have highlighted in red. He has admitted and he is correct that it could mean 'will continue to be trampled'. He says we should examine the context. I agree.

    But does thirdwitless actually examined the context? Not at all. All he does is repeat what he said in his post that I responded to. He seems to think that plastering the Watchtower view on Bible passages is somehow "examining the context".

    : The context is this: Jesus is answering the question about when his presence will take place and what will be the sign.

    I challenged you on this claim about "presence". Where is your response?

    : He then begans to tell how literally Jerusalem will be destroyed. Is this the trampling? If so when did it end. Did it end when the Roman army finished trouncing Jerusalem and led off the captives? Hardly. The trampling continued after that time. The destruction of Jerusalem was not the trampling. Jerusalem was already being trampled on by the Romans before its destruction. They were under Roman authority before 70CE. And so when Jesus said Jerusalem 'will be' trampled until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled he was letting the disciples know that the destruction of Jerusalem would not bring an end to the trampling like they were thinking. It would continue until the appointed times of the nations were fulfilled. God's Kingdom would not be set up in Jerusalem at that time when Jerusalem was being destroyed by the Roman Army. The trampling would continue.

    None of the above examines the context of Luke 21. All that thirdwitless has done is continue his Watchtower-induced speculation that Luke 21:24 has a fulfillment entirely out of character with every other prediction for the future in both Luke 21 and Luke 17 -- as I showed with actual Bible quotations.

    In other words, thirdwitless continues to fail to give any arguments for his position, but merely makes bald-faced, unsupported claims.

    : It is really not that difficult to comprehend.

    It certainly isn't. But your Watchtower-colored glasses make it impossible for you to comprehend that real biblical exposition is not just blindly repeating Watchtower dogma.

    : The context definitely allows for the meaning that AlanF admits is possible.

    It certainly does not. You are demanding that this one verse -- Luke 21:24 -- have a continuing fulfillment when every other verse does not.

    Where is your evidence? Don't stupidly repeat what you've already stupidly parroted twice.

    : Jerusalem will continue to be trampled on by the nations . . .until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled. That is when the trampling would end. That is when his presence would begin. He would assume his position as God's king in the heavenly Jerusalem. And that is after all what they were asking about: When his presence and the end would come.

    Again, "presence" is a wrong translation of parousia in Matthew 24:3. No modern scholars agree with the Watchtower Society on this translation. Furthermore, the Society's 1997 exposition on it is self-contradictory and misrepresents source references.

    : AlanF also says: Huge problem here: After his resurrection, Jesus stated that "All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." (Matthew 28:18) If we take the Bible at its word, then the word "all" really means all. Therefore there was no authority left for God to give at some future time. This passage alone kills off the Society's 1914 doctrine, which requires that God granted further authority to Jesus in 1914 -- contradicting Matthew 28:18.

    : Only a huge problem for persons like AlanF who do not believe the Bible is the inspired word of God.

    It's a problem for anyone who can read and understand simple Bible passages. What thirdwitless proceeds to do is to counter Matthew 28:18 with other scriptures -- in effect, making the Bible contradict itself.

    : But notice Revelation 12 which was to occur in the Lord's day after Jesus statement at Matt 28:18. Notice verse 15 And the seventh angel blew his trumpet. And loud voices occurred in heaven, saying: "The kingdom of the world did become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever." Chirst was to receive authority in a special way in the future.

    : But is this really so? After Satan is cast out of heaven Revelation 12:10 tells us: And I heard a loud voice in heaven say: "Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our God! So even though Jesus was given authority after his ressurection he did not exercise all his authority until the proper time appointed by his Father. He waited until he received his kingship over God's Messianic Kingdom. And even still he has not exercise all his authority because he has not destroyed all the other kingdoms. (Daniel 2:44)

    So according to thirdwitless, Jesus' plain words that he had received ALL power immediately after his resurrection are false.

    There are simple ways to harmonize all these things, but not in accord with Watchtower teaching.

    Can any reader fail to see how JWs like this guy force an understanding of the Bible that makes the Bible contradict itself? While I personally agree that the Bible contains many problematic passages, my point is that these oh-so-self-righteous hypocrites do the same thing they complain about in others -- claim to believe the Bible but reject it whenever necessary.

    : For further proof of this lets look at an illustration that Jesus gave: Luke 19: . . .

    I will not comment on thirdwitless' further forcing Bible contradictions. What I will say is that readers can easily read my original post ( ) and see for themselves that this guy has failed to address a single challenge I made.

    : I like this comment by AlanF revealing his true motives: Translation: A lot of what Jesus predicted for the 1st century did not happen, so we must find ways to extend the failed prophecies at least as far as our day. LOL!

    Amazing. This moron has such poor reading comprehension that he thinks that my words were a statement of my own philosophy. Normal readers understand that my words were a paraphrase of what Jehovah's Witnesses believe.

    Next comes the usual JW-defender ad hominem:

    : Translation: AlanF is playing you all for a bunch of fools as he does not even believe what the Bible says at all. Why do you think he would do anything other than try to mislead you away from the Bible truths that JWs have shown you from the Bible? AlanF tries to argue the Bible when he himself does not even believe it is true. This is why his arguments fall flat.

    : Ask yourself these questions: Do you believe that Jehovah God would give Bible understanding to one who does not even believe that the Bible is His word? Does Jehovah God expect you to learn Bible truths from one who teaches that His Bible prophecies have failed?

    This ad hominem argument is so transparently stupid that it's almost embarrassing to address it.

    Ask yourself these questions: Do you believe that Jehovah God would give Bible understanding to one who twists the Bible to fit his blind loyalty to a group of old men in Brooklyn, who makes it contradict itself? Does Jehovah God expect you to learn Bible truths from a religion all of whose prophecies made in his name have failed?

    The fact is that Jehovah's Witnesses as an organization really don't believe the Bible. There are many proofs of this, but let's consider just one. I've covered this in a recent post ( ). I invited thirdwitless several times to comment about the material but he has declined, for obvious reasons.

    Genesis 1:1 states that in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:2 then begins describing what happened during the rest of the six creative days. Exodus 21:11 and 31:17 clearly state that in six days God made the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in them. Therefore, according to the Bible itself, the entire universe was created on the first creative day. Pretty clear, no? This was the understanding of most Bible believers until the last two centuries.

    Do Jehovah's Witnesses agree with these clear Bible statements? No, they agree with science. They have no disagreement with science that the earth is some 4.5 billion years old and that the universe is about 15 billion years old. Whenever solid science shows that some Bible passage or idea is false, the Watchtower Society goes along with science.

    Christian Fundamentalists, who invariably are Young-Earth Creationists who take Genesis and Exodus literally, disagree with science but at least put their money where their mouth is.

    The proof for my claims is found in the September, 2006 Awake! magazine. It states (page 18) that the fundamental reason that the Watchtower Society disagrees with what it calls these "so-called Christian Fundamentalists" is that if Genesis' creative days were meant to be literal 24-hour days, "then many scientific discoveries over the past hundred years would indeed discredit the Bible."

    How does Awake! justify these claims? By doing what the Watchtower Society has always done: it focuses on Genesis and ignores Exodus.

    So much for thirdwitless' claim that he and his Mommy really believe the Bible.

    The fact is that no Christians today completely believe the Bible in the sense of taking it literally. Doing so results in things like believing that the earth is flat and that the universe was created by fiat some 6,000 years ago.


  • DannyHaszard

    undercover brother thirdwitness your site has the similar layout format look/feel of the master site

    Sci*ntolo*ist defenders pull this same trick

  • DannyHaszard

    No amount of elaboration and spin dry will wash away the Watchtower's soiled adventist roots ole Captain Miller would have never believed it

    Poet and writer Mark Twain sez's "if a million people believe in a stupid thing for a hundred years its' still a stupid thing

  • fjtoth
    I chose to side with the evidence clearly found in God's word which JWs present.

  • jayhawk1

    Thirdwitness' reply

    jayhawk: Does the Book of Daniel say in any part of it that its prophecies are written for the Mesiah? I am asking, because I don't know.

    All of the prophecies in Daniel are about the Messiah.

    Does it say in any part of Daniel that it's prophecies are written for the Mesiah? Look, I know you believe they are, but does it say they are? (I am still looking for anybody who cares to answer it. Is there a scripture in Daniel that says The Book of Daniel's Prophecies are written for the Mesiah? Any takers?)

  • jayhawk1

    I am looking for anybody who can answer the question.

    Is there a scripture in Daniel that says The Book of Daniel's Prophecies are written for the Mesiah?

Share this