Scholar and Fisherman

by Jorden 207 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Jorden

  You have shown that the JW interpretation of the 42 months is obviously wrong, which is good. But then you have associated it with an alternative superstition, which benefits no one.

  Yes, I have shown that the JW interpretation of the 42 months is wrong. So, there is no reason for you to continue to engage with debating 607. If anything, switch to asking them to defend what I laid out. Because the way it stands now if their explanation of the 42-months and Rev 11:15 is in error then that along proves that 1914 is wrong and therefore no need to prove or disprove 607.

  But as for you and what you say about me in referring to the UN...

  First, when you speak to a JW about 607 and the 70 years, etc... do you do not refer to Scriptures and WTS publications in order to show their nonsense?

  Example:

  [Jeremiah 25: 11 And all this land will be reduced to ruins and will become an object of horror, and THESE NATIONS will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years.”’ 12 ‘But when 70 years have been fulfilled, I will call to account the king of Babylon and that nation for their error,’ declares Jehovah,]

  [8-1-81 WT p. 27-28 – “The idol-worshiping Babylonians now were in line for God’s judgment to be executed upon them. That happened in 539 B.C.E. when Babylon was overthrown by the Medes and the Persians.”]

  [Isaiah’s Prophecy 1 p. 253-254 par. 21 – …the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination…]

  [10-1-11 WT – According to secular chronology, the Babylonians dominated the land of ancient Judah and Jerusalem for some 70 years, from about 609 B.C.E. until 539 B.C.E. when the capital city of Babylon was captured.]

  Likewise, if I am speaking to a JW about the 42-months, wild beast, etc...I have to refer to the Scriptures and WTS publications that they have attached to the wild beast, etc.

  __________

  When it comes to what I have said and asked to you about the UN what about it do you find to be a superstition/conspiracy?

  Fact is that the League of Nations was created after WW1.

  Fact is the United Nations was created after WW2.

  Fact the current UN chief said as recently as 2/6/23 that the world is heading into WW3.

  Fact he also said to all 193 member states "to wake up and realise that solidarity is the only way out of disaster."
  

  solidarity - unity (as of a group or class) that produces or is based on community of interests, objectives, and standards

  unity - the state of being united or joined as a whole

  Fact is this was said as recent as 5-5-23.

  Fact is George Bush in talking about the UN and the vision for it he said; 'when we are successful, and we will be'.

  Fact is Watler spoke about the nations giving up their sovereignty in support of the UN and he said that that would be a bitter pill to swallow for some. (I advise you to listen to ALL of his clip and listen closely to EVERYTHING he says.)

  Fact is Ted Turner said what he did here and he gave $1 billion to create the United Nations Foundation, a public charity to broaden U.S. support for the UN.

  Given what is said by George, Water and Ted and given that the current UN chief (2023) speaks of the world heading toward WW3 and says "solidarity is the only way out of disaster."

  Why is it that you insist on accusing me of pushing some conspiracy/superstition for asking what do you think would become of the UN if WW3 does occur?

  I do not expect you to answer me on this because the fact is you cannot based on what you have already said:

  Hence I will not be humouring you further on the matter.
• 

  Jeffro

  Jorden:

  When it comes to what I have said and asked to you about the UN what about it do you find to be a superstition/conspiracy?

  To ‘support’ his position of the conspiracy, he irrelevantly posts evidence that the organisation exists, along with some unfounded opinions and misinterpretations of other vague statements.

  First, when you speak to a JW about 607 and the 70 years, etc... do you do not refer to Scriptures and WTS publications in order to show their nonsense?

  Sigh… yes, obviously I refer to the material that they claim supports their position. And I also have not ridiculed you for also mentioning scriptures in the context of showing them that their interpretation of the 42 months is incorrect. (As a word of advice, though it can be a good strategy to ask questions to guide a discussion, it doesn’t work particularly well if the questions are fallacious and the other person already understands what you’re doing.)

  Both the history of the period and the genre of Revelation confirm that the 42 months referred to the Roman occupation and destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70 CE. It is not only unproductive but also superfluous to replace the JWs’ incorrect superstitious interpretation with an alternative incorrect superstition.

  When it comes to what I have said and asked to you about the UN what about it do you find to be a superstition/conspiracy?

  🤦‍♂️ Don’t pretend that the notion that it’s a conspiracy theory is some novel idea I’ve just come up with on my own. (Though my own independent analysis of the Bible already confirms that those aspects have no relevance to any such conspiracy.)

  New_World_Order_(conspiracy_theory) And no, I haven’t needed to refer to or rely on that article to know the conspiracy theory is unfounded.
• 

  Jeffro

  Above, I said:

  it doesn’t work particularly well if the questions are fallacious

  I anticipate that Jorden will query this. Specifically, his line of questioning was a false equivalence because my use of scriptures to rebut the JW view is quite different to not just rebutting their view but going on to promote an alternative superstitious view that is widely recognised as a conspiracy theory.
• 

  Jorden

  First, you must be a very weak person with no self-control. You said two different times:

  Hence I will not be humouring you further on the matter.

  I’m not going to entertain further discussion about the ‘new world order’ nonsense.

  And yet you responded back again after having made each statement.

  Anyway, since you did let's take what you just said:

  Don’t pretend that the notion that it’s a conspiracy theory is some novel idea I’ve just come up with on my own.

  Whenever people don't want to talk about 'FACTS' they immediately refer to it as being a 'conspiracy'.

  I have asked you what do you think would become of the UN if WW3 does occur?

  I have asked that with you considering ONLY the facts that I supplied. These include what the current UN chief said recently. What Walter said. What George said. What Ted said. Also, in considering the League came after WW1. The UN after WW2.

  If we were in court and you and I were on the jury, the judge would inform us that we could only consider the information presented there at that time and not to think about and consider anything that we heard or knew before coming into the court room.

  With that said, I don't care about what you think you know or what others say about a New World Order, etc. I am talking about the FACTS that I presented. You are hearing what is being said firsthand from the sources themselves. I am asking you to form an opinion yourself based on what you hear and based on what you know about the UN and tell me what do you think would become of the UN if WW3 does occur?

  And based on the FACTS that I presented what is there you find to be superstition/conspiracy?
  
  
  
• 

  Jeffro

  🤦‍♂️ I respond where I see fit for the benefit of honest readers. I’m not under any obligation to reply or to stop replying at any time for any reason and subject to change without notice. But also, as previously indicated, I am not discussing with the conspiracy theorist, I am telling other readers where he is wrong.

  Notice how the conspiracy theorist tries to appeal to his information as being factual, but this is true only to the extent that it is a fact that the organisations exist and it is a fact that some people have expressed opinions. He also characterises general statements about solidarity as a more specific agenda without any factual basis. There is no factual basis to the claim that the UN seeks to bring about WWIII in order to swoop in and take over, nor is it a fact that any of it has any relevance to superstitious interpretations of the Bible.
• 

  Jorden

  I respond where I see fit for the benefit of honest readers. I’m not under any obligation to reply or to stop replying at any time for any reason and subject to change without notice.

  Do you see fit to reply and choose to respond to these two questions for the benefit of honest readers...

  I am asking you to form an opinion yourself based on what you heard/seen from the FACTS I presented and based on what you know about the UN and tell me what do you think would become of the UN if WW3 does occur? And based on the FACTS that I presented what is there you find to be nonfactual/superstition/conspiracy?
• 

  Jeffro

  😂 Honest readers can see that I have already dealt with the substance of what he is classifying as facts.
• 

  Jorden

  Honest readers can see that I have already dealt with the substance of what he is classifying as facts.

  Notice how the conspiracy theorist tries to appeal to his information as being factual, but this is true only to the extent that it is a fact that the organisations exist and it is a fact that some people have expressed opinions. He also characterises general statements about solidarity as a more specific agenda without any factual basis.

  You say that my facts are only factual in that the UN exist. Why is it that you will not tell me (or honest readers) what it is that you find that I have presented to be nonfactual?

  You also state that it is factual 'that some people have expressed opinions.' Do you think I just presented to you some random people on youtube or on a podcast?

  George Bush as sitting president said (First link )what he did to congress/military (US government). In referring to what he said was the 5th objective he said that 'that new world (order/era) was struggling to be born.' And everything he states in describing it he makes clear when speaking from the oval office (link two/video) that it is the UN that is to head that NWO. The vision that he said he shared in Helsinki (to world leaders) he makes clear that that is the UN's.

  User Clip: President H.W. Bush Joint Session of Congress Promotes New World Order | C-SPAN.org

  Bush Sr. New World Order Speech (rare) - YouTube

  
  
  
  

  Walter speaking after retiring from media said that he was now able to speak freely and everything he said was about US supporting the UN. He said that the reason the UN is not functioning to the degree that it was founded was because Christian senators would not vote to do so.

  Ted founded the UN foundation did so for the sole purpose to broaden U.S. support for the UN. Keep in mind that the US was already a member and $upporting the UN since 1945 and yet still Ted started the UNF in 1998 to broaden U.S. support for the UN, in order to promote the UN for the purpose of what George and Walter state, to allow it to become the entity that it was purposed to be.

  Even Pope Francis says:

  A shift toward globalism is necessary, in order to fight climate change and other worldwide “threats.”
  “When a supranational common good is clearly identified, it is necessary to have a special authority legally and concordantly constituted capable of facilitating its implementation. We think of the great contemporary challenges of climate change, new forms of slavery and peace,”
  “an excessive demand for sovereignty on the part of States.”
  Our only hope for planetary peace and progress is to make room for “international organizations” to develop into governing bodies, supplanting the “state interests” with the will of the United Nations,

  Do you really think that these are just 'some people' with 'opinions'?

  What if we put all that aside for the moment. Just focus on what the current UN chief said about heading into WW3 and he told all 193 member states "to wake up and realize that solidarity is the only way out of disaster."

  This is coming not from just 'some man' it is coming from the head man of the UN, an organization that says in their charter under purpose of UN:

  [To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;]

  Based on that, what does solidarity/unity (the state of being united or joined as a whole) mean for the 193 member states?

  Remember the League came about after WW1 and it's purpose was, 'Hey look here the nations need to come together as one so that the world never goes to war like that again.

  Many nations agreed and joined on, but US (leaders at that time) were like, NO THANKS we want our sovereignty we will not join. Other nations the same, so the nations that did was not enough and the League failed.

  Then in time WW2 came and after it was like, AHH see another world war occurred, should have all joined as one under the League and WW2 would not have happened. Then the nations including US were like well maybe there is a need to some extent to have an international body in place (UN) BUT we still want our own sovereignty.

  Now 78 years later the head of that body (UN) that was set up in 1945 for the purpose of not having a third world war, is saying the world/nations are walking right into WW3.

  So, now it is like, 'what how can that be Mr. chief UN guy...we thought the UN was supposed to keep that from happening again, what the heck have we nations been $upporting it these past 78 years.

  Chief says because all you nations that joined and have been $upporting the UN's existence as an organization, you ALL still wanted your own sovereignty....and as long as that is the case nations are always going to fight about borders/land/territory, etc. Fight about environment/pollution/climate, etc. Fight about human rights/religious beliefs, etc. Just look at the so-called 'United' States, they are not 'United'. Look at how they endlessly fight against each other as a D and a R. They should be called the 'Divided' States. Likewise, that is the state the nations are in "the world has never been more threatened or more divided', we need 'solidarity among nations.' Nations need to join together as a whole(one) in order to have peace. That is what George, Walter, Ted, and heck even the pope has been saying for years.
• 

  Anony Mous

  I don’t think the New World Order theory is specious, it is a neo-Marxist idea and there are plenty of people that loudly admit they want to implement it. The good thing is that it’s nearly impossible to implement, look at the EU, once you have a body of people they start subdividing into groups, the EU experiment is on the edge of collapse, the UN has been ineffective for all but the first few years of its existence and even that (Nuremberg trials) were rather controversial and still not universally accepted, the UN effectively existed until the start of the Cold War, since then it has done nothing.

  Yes, there are obviously people that believe we should all unite into a single group and peace will naturally break out, JWs are the most transparent about it at least, but any other attempt is equally religious in nature.

  That all being said, I still haven’t seen any non-biblical evidence from our ‘scholar’ about 607 being accurate.
• 

  Vidqun

  Jorden, you might be on to something. A global emergency, e.g., natural catastrophes, would give the UN vast powers. They are also pushing for a Biomedical Security State with WHO pressuring the governments, removing individual rights, of course. If you are on Twitter, follow this tweet.

  https://twitter.com/LibertyMutual8/status/1647127824199737346?s=20