Posts by Londo111

82

the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

by pleaseresearch in

so a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).

Londo111

And he wasn't interested in discussing the matter either.

21

Why do trolls do what they do?

by Londo111 in

jw
friends

i truly don't understand the mindset of a troll.

i know it's been explained, but i still don't get it.

it is hard to distinguish between a troll and a jw apologist at times because the reactions are very similar.

Londo111

I'm wondering who is hitting dislike? Did I step on someone's toes?

21

Why do trolls do what they do?

by Londo111 in

jw
friends

i truly don't understand the mindset of a troll.

i know it's been explained, but i still don't get it.

it is hard to distinguish between a troll and a jw apologist at times because the reactions are very similar.

Londo111

I truly don't understand the mindset of a troll. I know it's been explained, but I still don't get it.

It is hard to distinguish between a troll and a JW apologist at times because the reactions are very similar. How can one tell the difference?

74

This site should be called Anti-Jehovahs-Witnesses Cry-babies

by the-Question in

so, you left because of a bad example(s).. why all the whining?

nothing better to do with your time?.

you at least know far more about the bible than any church-goer?.

Londo111

World conditions since 1914 have only gotten better as a whole...which is a whole another video series: www.jwlove.org/1914ad

But in regard 607 BC, I'll take the first point about the Bible interpretation. There is nowhere in the Bible that proves the Jews returned from exile in 537 BC. If one reads Ezra chapters 1 to 3, it seems to point to 538 BC.

74

This site should be called Anti-Jehovahs-Witnesses Cry-babies

by the-Question in

so, you left because of a bad example(s).. why all the whining?

nothing better to do with your time?.

you at least know far more about the bible than any church-goer?.

Londo111

BTW...if you want to talk about 607 BC, start another topic on the matter. Argue the case.

74

This site should be called Anti-Jehovahs-Witnesses Cry-babies

by the-Question in

so, you left because of a bad example(s).. why all the whining?

nothing better to do with your time?.

you at least know far more about the bible than any church-goer?.

Londo111

There's lots of this information in written form out there about 607 BC. All it takes is a little googling.

https://ad1914.com/history-of-the-doctrine/

https://jeffro77.wordpress.com/index/607-for-dummies/

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/607-587.php

And this is a synopsis of each of the videos I linked to above: www.jwlove.org/607bc

We've had plenty of debates with JW apologists on this forum about this very subject.

74

This site should be called Anti-Jehovahs-Witnesses Cry-babies

by the-Question in

so, you left because of a bad example(s).. why all the whining?

nothing better to do with your time?.

you at least know far more about the bible than any church-goer?.

Londo111

As a JW, I would've said the same thing. Historians are not doing guesswork. And the Bible itself points to 587 BC.

That is why I did this video series on the subject exploring this from every angle.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLyNx0oM_bmgDJHQFzgm4L0rRuPpwTOVmz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-K8pyVfKcU&index=1&list=PLyNx0oM_bmgDJHQFzgm4L0rRuPpwTOVmz

74

This site should be called Anti-Jehovahs-Witnesses Cry-babies

by the-Question in

so, you left because of a bad example(s).. why all the whining?

nothing better to do with your time?.

you at least know far more about the bible than any church-goer?.

Londo111

I didn't leave because of "bad examples".

I left because I researched 607 BC and found not only was it wrong, the Watchtower articles defending 607 BC was deceptive.

Editing to add: Then I researched other topics (1914, the Faithful Slave, House to House preaching, the Great Crowd, ect) and found them equally erroneous.

23

1919 What???

by NikL in

i had seen it before but never actually looked.. sure enough in july 15 2013 wt .... 17 in the past, we have stated in our publications that these last four references apply to jesus’ arriving, or coming, in 1918. as an example, take jesus’ statement about “the faithful and discreet slave.” (read matthew 24:45-47.

) we understood that the “arriving” mentioned in verse 46 was linked to the time when jesus came to inspect the spiritual condition of the anointed in 1918 and that the appointment of the slave over all the master’s belongings occurred in 1919.

(mal.

Londo111

I remember my grandfather told a story where he was invited in, realized the person was part of the "evil slave" and he basically freaked out.

17

Has 1919 been abandoned? Is the sky falling?

by FatFreek 2005 in

i copied the following two items from jw dot orgs site entitled “dates of prophetic significance” at site below:.

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200271564.

once held to be year when ‘true lord and messenger of the covenant’ came to spiritual temple (mal 3:1): w10 3/15 23; w07 4/1 22; w07 12/15 27-28; jd 179-182; re 31-32, 55-56; w92 12/1 13; w89 4/15 7; w89 7/1 30; w87 6/15 14-15. .

Londo111

What sir82 said.

1919 is still the most important Watchtower date, supposedly when Jesus appointed a small group of "anointed" at HQ the "faithful slave" as the only channel God is using to serve spiritual food at the proper time.

The "Kingdom Rules" paragraph there doesn't contradict any "new light" about the "captivity" to "Babylon the Great".