i've just published on my website a new article: the "sign of the last days" and 2 timothy 3:1-5 (click to visit).
it contains a critical analysis of the context of 2 timothy 3:1-5 and a refutation of the connection with matthew 24:3, and therefore, of the expression "sign" + "last days".. the article is divided in the following parts:.
introductionthe composite nature of the expression "sign of the last days"the context of 2 timothy 3:1-5the message of 2 timothy 3:1-5two fallacies about the "last days"conclusiondue to its lenght, i won't post it in full here, only the introduction:.
I wonder if when the disciples asked Jesus for a sign (Matt 24) his reply was meant to describe the everyday living conditions of mankind and the normality of life as we know it.
I don't think that was his intention, but I've been wondering how much of his words regarding the "end" were entirely fulfilled in the 1st century. I'm getting near a critical review of Matthew 24 ...
Eden
here is my sweet survival plan, post jw life!
...yet another part of my healing process...yes healing is g o o d.... .
btw, it feels so great to not have to hide and to able to put my picture up anywhere i feel like!.
Be happy, Eric!
Eden
i've just published on my website a new article: the "sign of the last days" and 2 timothy 3:1-5 (click to visit).
it contains a critical analysis of the context of 2 timothy 3:1-5 and a refutation of the connection with matthew 24:3, and therefore, of the expression "sign" + "last days".. the article is divided in the following parts:.
introductionthe composite nature of the expression "sign of the last days"the context of 2 timothy 3:1-5the message of 2 timothy 3:1-5two fallacies about the "last days"conclusiondue to its lenght, i won't post it in full here, only the introduction:.
Paul provides a list of traits of men who Timothy should turn away from, which includes not just those who have a form of godly devotion, but all the rest within that list, hose who are "lovers of themselves, lovers of money, self-assuming, haughty...", etc. I don't think "these" is only referring to the latter portion of that list. Just my two cents.
I think I'm clear that the message to "turn away from" includes all the men whose traits are listed on 3:1-5.
Edit: I made a small edit to make it clearer. Thanks.
Eden
i've just published on my website a new article: the "sign of the last days" and 2 timothy 3:1-5 (click to visit).
it contains a critical analysis of the context of 2 timothy 3:1-5 and a refutation of the connection with matthew 24:3, and therefore, of the expression "sign" + "last days".. the article is divided in the following parts:.
introductionthe composite nature of the expression "sign of the last days"the context of 2 timothy 3:1-5the message of 2 timothy 3:1-5two fallacies about the "last days"conclusiondue to its lenght, i won't post it in full here, only the introduction:.
Are you implying that Revelation was written before 70 C.E?Yes. I estimate that the first visions must have been received starting in 41 CE, and the last vision (the message to the seven congregations) must have been received around 62/63 CE. The book must have been compiled shortly after.
Eden
i've just published on my website a new article: the "sign of the last days" and 2 timothy 3:1-5 (click to visit).
it contains a critical analysis of the context of 2 timothy 3:1-5 and a refutation of the connection with matthew 24:3, and therefore, of the expression "sign" + "last days".. the article is divided in the following parts:.
introductionthe composite nature of the expression "sign of the last days"the context of 2 timothy 3:1-5the message of 2 timothy 3:1-5two fallacies about the "last days"conclusiondue to its lenght, i won't post it in full here, only the introduction:.
I've just published on my website a new article: THE "SIGN OF THE LAST DAYS" AND 2 TIMOTHY 3:1-5 (click to visit)
It contains a critical analysis of the context of 2 Timothy 3:1-5 and a refutation of the connection with Matthew 24:3, and therefore, of the expression "sign" + "last days".
The article is divided in the following parts:
Due to its lenght, I won't post it in full here, only the introduction:
----------
"The expression “sign of the Last Days” is a common occurrence in the literature of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. In fact, this is such a familiar expression that is a constant fixture in the ‘theocratic lexicon’ that the Witnesses use in their meetings, ministry and casual conversation. Here are some examples from recently published literature:
“While giving the composite sign of the last days, Jesus raised this question (…)” – The Watchtower 2009 6/15 pp.20 §1
“(…) as to other features of Christ’s sign of the last days (…)” - Jehovah’s Witnesses—Who Are They? What Do They Believe? pp.15-18
“ (…) a Christian may be conscious of the sign of the last days but (…) “ – The Watchtower 2011 10/15, pp. 3-5
However, using the search tool to search for this expression on the Watchtower Society’s own New World Translation of the Bible, available at the Online Library section of the official www.jw.org website, one can quickly realize that such expression cannot be found on the Bible.
What is its origin? And what does 2 Timothy 3:1-5 have to do with it?"
-----
I hope you find it useful.
Eden
so where are his buildings, monuments, in real life ?
why cant archeologists find them ?
where are the tourist attractions ?.
don't get me wrong, this forum currently has plenty of interesting discussions and posters, but, for those of you who weren't on the old jwd board in the early-to-mid-00s, man...i'm sorry but you really missed out on the glory years of this forum.
it was really a special, unique place then.
again, not dissing the current, but, that huge exciting wave of ex-jw internet activity that occurred in the early part of this century seems to have leveled off.
I was an intermitent curious lurker over the years, until I decided to come out and play earlier this year. Therefore, I don't recall much of the "old days". I do enjoy going back and reading threads where Leolaia has posted on. Having had my education on subjects related with History and Human Sciences, her historian approach to the subjects appeals much to me (not to mention I like her avatar...mmm :P). I also appreciate much the resourceful Blondie when it comes to research within the archives of the WTS.
I do notice a trend lately that people with an open belief in God are immediatly confronted - even bashed -about that very basic belief - as if everything they could argue becomes inherently devalued because of that original "flaw". I'm not complaining about it; But it's a fair observation. That is a trait of intolerance. Curious, heh?
In any case, I really like it here. Frank and open discussion never hurts.
Eden
although there is no explicit commandment or stipulation that ordains child sacrifice in the bible, there are nonetheless numerous passages that discuss it as if it was being practiced.
this post lays the query out.
http://contradictionsinthebible.com/firstborn-sons-redeemed-or-not/.
Abraham can't be used in the context of "child sacrifice". Isaac was about 25 years old when that trial took place. He was no defenseless child. He was a full grown adult that could have easily resisted and overpowered his elderly father if he chose to. His willingness to go through it was a prophetic drama pointing towards Jesus' own willingness to sacrifice himself to do his Father's will. You may like or dislike the very concept, believe it or discard it as folklore, but please be intellectually honest and don't use this episode as an example of Yahweh wanting "child sacrifices".
Eden
at the circuit overseer's talk last week he made the comment that some "of the friends" are finding it difficult to move ahead with jehovah's organization (tm).
the co said that a few had asked, "is it necessary to have 5 meetings a week, and a magazine every other week?".
"couldn't we do without one meeting a week, and have monthly editions of the watchtower?
I do believe that JW's will go down the route of mainstream. They have been already. Doctrinally, it will be a mess, and it will take a lot of re-writing of our own history to forget about our radical past. But the trend is clearly there since the passing away of FW Franz.
Eden
wiki: "william miller (february 15, 1782 december 20, 1849) was an american baptist preacher who is credited with beginning the mid-nineteenth century north american religious movement now known as adventism.
among his direct spiritual heirs are several major religious denominations, including seventh-day adventists and advent christians.
later movements found inspiration in miller's emphasis on bible prophecy.
Wiki: "William Miller (February 15, 1782 – December 20, 1849) was an American Baptist preacher who is credited with beginning the mid-nineteenth century North American religious movement now known as Adventism. Among his direct spiritual heirs are several major religious denominations, including Seventh-day Adventists and Advent Christians. Later movements found inspiration in Miller's emphasis on Bible prophecy. His own followers are known as Millerites."
I've once described the Jehovah's Witnesses as "children of William Miller". What I didn't realize until today is that, at some point, the WTS acknowledged just that, even crediting Miller for a role in the Bible prophecy. In a passage from "The Finished Mystery" book, page 163, there's a commentary on Revelation 9:14. Apparently, William Miller, between 1829 and 1844 is the 'voice from the golden altar before God'. He's also indicated as a member of the "little flock", which is, according to the book, "the consecrated Church". The whole thing is utter nonsense, but it's curious that at some point, William Miller was reckoned as a member of the "little flock" with a prominent role in denouncing the "Evangelical Alliance-Spiritism movement".
Eden
