T Nation

Interested in a Serious Religious Debate? Part 2

I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?

[quote]blacksheep wrote:
Stated,

“…So understanding that Jesus’ parousia or presence is an invisible presence started when he became king in heaven and that it is going to be extended over a period of years and signs would be needed to identify this period of time that would mark the last days or the conclusion of the system of things is essential to surviving Armageddon. This began in 1914…”

Jesus warned aginst those who say Christ has already come or is already present, but true followers of Christ must not believe them (Mat. 24:23).

Jesus warned against false prophets because He foresaw that false teachers would take advantage of the curiosity, intrest, and fears of the people to lead them astray. but Jesus indicated that those who are truly the elect, chosen, faithful, will not be deceived (Mat. 24:24).

Jesus reemphasized His warning (Mat. 24:26) by saying that if anyone says Jesus is already here, Christians must not believe them. The Bible teaches that believers shall literally be snatched up when Jesus comes back for His church (I Thes. 4:17). His followers will be changed “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye” (I Cor. 15:52).

Down through the centuries of Church history many have claimed Christ has returned or have set dates for His return.

The coming of Jesus will not suit any of the predictions of false teachers and date-setters because it will be sudden and will bring the gathering of all who are in Christ (I Thes. 4:16-17). No one will have to tell the true believer that Christ has come.

Jesus illustrates the suddenness of His coming first by comparing it to lightning that flashes across the sky from east to west with tremendous speed. So quick will be His return (Mat. 24:27).

Jesus clearly states what He has implied all through this chapter. The disciples wanted to know the time of his coming. The father has not chosen to reveal the time even to the angels (Mat. 24:36).

Clearly, neither believers nor unbelievers will have any advance warning of the day and hour of Christ’s coming to snatch away (rapture) the Church (Mat. 24:42).

The only way to be prepared for the coming of jesus is to maintain a state of readiness at all times. Thus, though the day or the hour cannot be known, His coming is certain (Mat. 24:44), for God is always faithful to His promises (Mat. 24:13). There will be no excuse for those who are caught unprepared.

[/quote]
You’re right Blacksheep that Jesus did warn against false prophets and he also warned against people being misled in regards to seeing Jesus. But your missing what I’m saying in my two explainations probably because they are so long. We are not saying we know the date of Armageddon. You quoted Matthew 24:26 which Jesus warns about people about seeing hime. We don’t think that people will see Jesus when he became king in heaven and during his parousia or presence. This happened invisible to human eyes in heaven.

When Jesus comes meaning when he is visible to the world this is when Armageddon will start and God will have Jesus remove those who don’t obey and those that don’t know God. This is comparable to the flood event in Noah’s day. No one knows not even Jesus when this will happen; only God knows. That’s what the scripture you quoted at Matthew 24:36 and Matthew 24:42 are talking about. However, Jesus parousia or presence which most Bibles incorrectly translate as coming mentioned at Matthew 24:3 and Matthew 24:37-39 is not the same as Armageddon. How can we tell? We can tell because of what both Matthew 24:3 and Matthew 24:37-39 states about Jesus’ parousia or presence. At Matthew 24:37-39 Jesus does not compare his parousia or presence which most Bible incorrectly translate as “coming” to the flood event. Again, the flood event is comparable to Armageddon and when Jesus comes meaning when he makes himself visable that is when Armageddon starts. At Matthew 24:37-39 Jesus compares his parousia to the days leading up to the flood event, not the flood event itself. It took Noah 50-60 years to build the ark. When Noah was building the ark during the 50-60 year period the people in those days did not pay attention to what Noah was doing and the badness around them. Jesus is saying that during the days of his parousia or presence it will be similar. People will take no note of the signs around them until Armageddon starts which by that time is too late. This shows that Jesus’ parousia or presence will be a number of years like it was a number of years leading up to the flood in Noah’s day.

At Matthew 24:3 when asked what would be the signs of his parousia or presence Jesus gave signs that his disciple were to look for to know when that would happened which shows that it would not be obvious and to know when this began they would have to recognize the signs. Again, when Jesus “comes” the world will know because Armageddon will start people will not need signs to know this because it will be obvious, For example, if one were on vacation and he wanted to go to the ocean but did not know how to get there he may go to a gas station to get directions. The attendant tells the person that there are many signs along the road that if followed will take you to the ocean. If that person followed the clearly marked signs and arrived at the ocean once he is there he would not need another sign next the large body of water with the words ocean on it because it would be obvious that the large body of water is the ocean because he can clearly see it. My point is that something that one can clearly see does not have to be identified with signs because they can clearly see it. By Jesus giving signs to recognize his parousia or presence shows that it would not be clearly visable and one would have to take note of the signs to know that they were in Jesus parousia or presence. This links to Matthew 24:37-39 because Jesus said during the days of his parousia or presence people will take no note of the signs he told his disciples to look for several verses earlier. So again this shows that Jesus’ parousia or presence would not be clearly visible and that these signs would occur over a period of time.

So Jesus parousia or presence being compared to lightening at Matthew 24:27 does not illustrate the suddenness of Jesus’ parousia or presence because Matthew 24:37-39 clearly shows that it is going to be a number of days and years this is going to take place. The parousia or presence of Jesus being compared to lightening shows that those who discern the signs will see them as clearly as lightening flashing in the sky. Jesus uses this illustration at Luke 17:20-24 when he is talking to the Pharisees and then his disciples. When the Pharisees ask Jesus when the Kingdom of God was coming he tells them that it is not coming with striking observableness. Why does he tell them that? It’s because they are not his disciples and they would not be able to discern cleary when the kingdom of God was coming. On the other hand, he then turns to his disciples at Luke 17:24 and says "For even as the lightning, by its flashing, shines from one part under heaven to another part under heaven, so the Son of man will be.{/i}

Two things. First, those verses show that only Jesus’ disciples would be able to clearly discern God’s Kingdom and the days of the son of man by recognizing the signs that Jesus tell them to look for. Second, Jesus links the days of the Son of Man with God’s kingdom and if you look to Matthew 24 you will see that the days of the Son of man is the same as Jesus’ parousia or presence. So like I stated in my first two post Jesus becoming king in heaven at 1914 is the start of God’s kingdom, is when his parousia or presence starts and is the start of the conclusion of the system of things or last days of this system of things.

Thankfully God loving has provided us with signs to look for to know that we are living during Jesus’ parousia or presence and the last days so people who can discern them can be prepared.

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]blacksheep wrote:
Stated,

“…So understanding that Jesus’ parousia or presence is an invisible presence started when he became king in heaven and that it is going to be extended over a period of years and signs would be needed to identify this period of time that would mark the last days or the conclusion of the system of things is essential to surviving Armageddon. This began in 1914…”

Jesus warned aginst those who say Christ has already come or is already present, but true followers of Christ must not believe them (Mat. 24:23).

Jesus warned against false prophets because He foresaw that false teachers would take advantage of the curiosity, intrest, and fears of the people to lead them astray. but Jesus indicated that those who are truly the elect, chosen, faithful, will not be deceived (Mat. 24:24).

Jesus reemphasized His warning (Mat. 24:26) by saying that if anyone says Jesus is already here, Christians must not believe them. The Bible teaches that believers shall literally be snatched up when Jesus comes back for His church (I Thes. 4:17). His followers will be changed “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye” (I Cor. 15:52).

Down through the centuries of Church history many have claimed Christ has returned or have set dates for His return.

The coming of Jesus will not suit any of the predictions of false teachers and date-setters because it will be sudden and will bring the gathering of all who are in Christ (I Thes. 4:16-17). No one will have to tell the true believer that Christ has come.

Jesus illustrates the suddenness of His coming first by comparing it to lightning that flashes across the sky from east to west with tremendous speed. So quick will be His return (Mat. 24:27).

Jesus clearly states what He has implied all through this chapter. The disciples wanted to know the time of his coming. The father has not chosen to reveal the time even to the angels (Mat. 24:36).

Clearly, neither believers nor unbelievers will have any advance warning of the day and hour of Christ’s coming to snatch away (rapture) the Church (Mat. 24:42).

The only way to be prepared for the coming of jesus is to maintain a state of readiness at all times. Thus, though the day or the hour cannot be known, His coming is certain (Mat. 24:44), for God is always faithful to His promises (Mat. 24:13). There will be no excuse for those who are caught unprepared.

[/quote]
You’re right Blacksheep that Jesus did warn against false prophets and he also warned against people being misled in regards to seeing Jesus. But your missing what I’m saying in my two explainations probably because they are so long. We are not saying we know the date of Armageddon. You quoted Matthew 24:26 which Jesus warns about people about seeing hime. We don’t think that people will see Jesus when he became king in heaven and during his parousia or presence. This happened invisible to human eyes in heaven.

When Jesus comes meaning when he is visible to the world this is when Armageddon will start and God will have Jesus remove those who don’t obey and those that don’t know God. This is comparable to the flood event in Noah’s day. No one knows not even Jesus when this will happen; only God knows. That’s what the scripture you quoted at Matthew 24:36 and Matthew 24:42 are talking about. However, Jesus parousia or presence which most Bibles incorrectly translate as coming mentioned at Matthew 24:3 and Matthew 24:37-39 is not the same as Armageddon. How can we tell? We can tell because of what both Matthew 24:3 and Matthew 24:37-39 states about Jesus’ parousia or presence. At Matthew 24:37-39 Jesus does not compare his parousia or presence which most Bible incorrectly translate as “coming” to the flood event. Again, the flood event is comparable to Armageddon and when Jesus comes meaning when he makes himself visable that is when Armageddon starts. At Matthew 24:37-39 Jesus compares his parousia to the days leading up to the flood event, not the flood event itself. It took Noah 50-60 years to build the ark. When Noah was building the ark during the 50-60 year period the people in those days did not pay attention to what Noah was doing and the badness around them. Jesus is saying that during the days of his parousia or presence it will be similar. People will take no note of the signs around them until Armageddon starts which by that time is too late. This shows that Jesus’ parousia or presence will be a number of years like it was a number of years leading up to the flood in Noah’s day.

At Matthew 24:3 when asked what would be the signs of his parousia or presence Jesus gave signs that his disciple were to look for to know when that would happened which shows that it would not be obvious and to know when this began they would have to recognize the signs. Again, when Jesus “comes” the world will know because Armageddon will start people will not need signs to know this because it will be obvious, For example, if one were on vacation and he wanted to go to the ocean but did not know how to get there he may go to a gas station to get directions. The attendant tells the person that there are many signs along the road that if followed will take you to the ocean. If that person followed the clearly marked signs and arrived at the ocean once he is there he would not need another sign next the large body of water with the words ocean on it because it would be obvious that the large body of water is the ocean because he can clearly see it. My point is that something that one can clearly see does not have to be identified with signs because they can clearly see it. By Jesus giving signs to recognize his parousia or presence shows that it would not be clearly visable and one would have to take note of the signs to know that they were in Jesus parousia or presence. This links to Matthew 24:37-39 because Jesus said during the days of his parousia or presence people will take no note of the signs he told his disciples to look for several verses earlier. So again this shows that Jesus’ parousia or presence would not be clearly visible and that these signs would occur over a period of time.

So Jesus parousia or presence being compared to lightening at Matthew 24:27 does not illustrate the suddenness of Jesus’ parousia or presence because Matthew 24:37-39 clearly shows that it is going to be a number of days and years this is going to take place. The parousia or presence of Jesus being compared to lightening shows that those who discern the signs will see them as clearly as lightening flashing in the sky. Jesus uses this illustration at Luke 17:20-24 when he is talking to the Pharisees and then his disciples. When the Pharisees ask Jesus when the Kingdom of God was coming he tells them that it is not coming with striking observableness. Why does he tell them that? It’s because they are not his disciples and they would not be able to discern cleary when the kingdom of God was coming. On the other hand, he then turns to his disciples at Luke 17:24 and says "For even as the lightning, by its flashing, shines from one part under heaven to another part under heaven, so the Son of man will be.{/i}

Two things. First, those verses show that only Jesus’ disciples would be able to clearly discern God’s Kingdom and the days of the son of man by recognizing the signs that Jesus tell them to look for. Second, Jesus links the days of the Son of Man with God’s kingdom and if you look to Matthew 24 you will see that the days of the Son of man is the same as Jesus’ parousia or presence. So like I stated in my first two post Jesus becoming king in heaven at 1914 is the start of God’s kingdom, is when his parousia or presence starts and is the start of the conclusion of the system of things or last days of this system of things.

Thankfully God loving has provided us with signs to look for to know that we are living during Jesus’ parousia or presence and the last days so people who can discern them can be prepared.[/quote]

So you are confirming that the JW’s prophecies are incorrect and they are false prophets?

There have been some interesting answers to the question I asked regarding Christians serving in wars. From my viewpoint Mse2us is right on the money regarding non-participation in wars. My understanding from reading the bible is that you can either follow the teachings of Jesus, or you can live and die by the sword. It seems to me that one cannot be serving both God and nation - either you serve one or the other. I am interested in hearing more thoughts on this.

[quote]wimpuskhan wrote:
There have been some interesting answers to the question I asked regarding Christians serving in wars. From my viewpoint Mse2us is right on the money regarding non-participation in wars. My understanding from reading the bible is that you can either follow the teachings of Jesus, or you can live and die by the sword. It seems to me that one cannot be serving both God and nation - either you serve one or the other. I am interested in hearing more thoughts on this.[/quote]

I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the post or your way of thinking. I am not in the military, but if an outside threat was invading the US, I am going to take up arms to help my country. I would love to see peace throughout the world, but if you have read the Bible there is only one that can bring peace to the world and that is the Prince of Peace. There is nothing us humans can do to bring peace.

I heard a statistic, but really do not have hard evidence to back it up, but here it is anyway. I heard that during all of recorded history there has maybe been 20-40 years of time where peace was all over the world at once. When I heard this statistic it did make me think.

I will say that we are at war, not in flesh and blood, but between Heaven and Hell.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

but if you have read the Bible there is only one that can bring peace to the world and that is the Prince of Peace. There is nothing us humans can do to bring peace.
[/quote]

I agree.

To try and deal in absolutes is hard, because we are human and falible. I am glad I have the Grace of God, through Jesus Christ, because without it I would be lost.

[quote]wimpuskhan wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]wimpuskhan wrote:
I have a question for anyone willing to answer. Why is it that many of those who identify themselves as Christians are willing to fight for their country against others who also identify themselves as Christians? For example there were Catholics and other denominations on both warring sides in world war 1 and 2. It was my thought that the followers of Jesus Christ would choose to remain peaceful, especially towards one another.[/quote]

The good news is that the wars in which you referred to, were not religious wars. They aren’t warring as Christians. I think you would have to look at each war on it’s own merits and see what is going on. As a general rule, Christians are called upon to not do harm to Christians or anybody else. At the same time, you do have to defend your home, and your country from people who seek to destroy it. That being said, war should always be a last resort, but you cannot serve people if you let them get dominated and walked all over.
War sucks every time. But I stand by my stance that he best way deal with war, is to end it as quickly as possible which means you hold nothing in reserve. If you feel you needed to go to war, do it well and win as fast as possible. It’s the best scenario for all sides involved. The only thing that should drag out is a formidable enemy not your own politics.[/quote]

So are you saying that “the state” is higher in rank than God, so Christians should ignore “thou shalt not kill” even though there are fellow brethren on the other side of the rifle sight? [/quote]

No, that’s not what I am saying. Reread, self defense and preservation is an imperative. Imagine what the world would look like if every good hearted Christian nation just allowed themselves to be rolled over so as to not kill their fellow man. The entire world would be oppressed.
Good people do go to war, they do kill and get killed at times. That’s war, it sucks.

[quote]mse2us wrote:
The second question BackInAction asked:

  1. What’s so important about October 1914? I keep seeing references to this date, but am not sure what exactly transpired on that year according to JWs beliefs.

In the late 1800 Jehovah’s Witness or Bible Students as they were called back then looked to the year 1914 as a year of great significance. In the 1800’s there were a number of religious men who had set out a variety of views on Jesus’ prophecy about “the times of the Gentiles” and the prophet Daniel’s record of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream regarding the tree stump that was banded for “seven times.” This prophecy is in Daniel 4:10-17 and it shows a tree that has been chopped down and a band of iron is put around it so that it would not grow. An angel then says let “seven times” pass over it. Tree’s are sometimes used in the Bible to represent rulership as seen at Ezekiel 17:22-24 and 31:2-5.

As recorded at Luke 21:24, Jesus said: "Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations [“the times of the Gentiles,” King James Version] are fulfilled. Jerusalem had been the capital city of the Jewish nation - the seat of rulership of the line of kings from the house of King David. These kings were unique because God anointed or chose these kings to sit on the thrown and these kings represented God’s rulership. So the Jerusalem in Luke 21:24 was a symbol of God’s rulership. So chopping down a symbolic tree represented how God’s rulership as expressed through the kings at Jeruselum would be interrupted. But the vision also said that the trampling would be temporary - seven times. Many people in the 1800’s tried to figure out how the tree being banded or prevented to grow for “seven times” related to Jerusalem being trampled by the nations and how long was “seven times.” As early as 1823 A non-JW named John A Brown was able to calculate that the seven times was 2520 days. He did this by applying a scripture at Revelation 12:6,14 which shows that three and a half times (a time=1, times=2, half time=1/2) is equal to a thousand two hundred and sixty days so “seven times” would last twice as long or for 2520 days. The problem was that he or no one else knew when in history to apply 2520 days. The founders of my religion along with other non-JW’s got together and they figured out that the start of the Gentile times began with the removal of King Zedekiah mentioned at Ezekial 21:25-27 which states:
“25 'O profane and wicked prince of Israel, whose day has come, whose time of punishment has reached its climax, 26 this is what the Sovereign LORD says: Take off the turban, remove the crown. It will not be as it was: The lowly will be exalted and the exalted will be brought low. 27 A ruin! A ruin! I will make it a ruin! It will not be restored until he comes to whom it rightfully belongs; to him I will give it.”

That is a prophecy that points to a king of Israel, who God rejects, who loses the kingship. Another anointed king is not put on the thrown "until he comes to whom it rightfully belongs. This is the start of the Gentile times when Jeruselum is trampled on mentioned at Luke 21:24 and when the tree which symbolizes God’s rulerhip expressed through the kings of Jeruselum is chopped down prevented from growing for “seven times.” Jesus is the one who "rightfully belongs so the trampling ends and the copper band is removed when Jesus is made king in heaven.

The trampling begins in 607 B.C.E. when Babylon conquers Jerusalum and king Zedekiah is taken into captivity. Zedekiah is the last king in the line of David to sit on God’s thrown and God’s thrown become vacant There are other kings that become king in Israel after the Israelites are freed from Babylon but none are in the line of David. However, Jesus is a descendant of David so he has the legal right to the thrown. There is a lot of debate as to when Babylon conquered Jerusalem and many historians say this happened in 586 B.C.E. instead of 607 B.C.E. But there is a simple way to tell who is right: historians or Bible chronology. I get to that later.

Once people figured out when in history to apply the “seven times” or 2520 days from 607 B.C.E. they quickly realized that the nations did not stop trampling Jerusalem 2520 days after it’s fall. So they quickly realized that this prophecy covers a much longer time. They then applied the scriptures at Ezekiel 4:6 and Numbers 14:34 which state “a day for a year” and that 2520 days became 2520 years. When you add 2520 years to 607 B.C.E and not include year zero because there was not a year zero you arrive at 1914 A.D. So in the late 1800’s the group of Bible students looked to 1914 as a significant date in Bible prophecy but they did not know exactly what to expect.

So we believe that the prophecy above points to when Jesus is given the vacant thrown of his forefather David and when he becomes king over God’s heavenly kingdom. This is just one piece of the whole puzzle that points to 1914 but just this alone would not be enough evidence even for me. Fortunately, there is a lot more.

Once Jesus became king in heaven the Bible states that significant changes on earth would occur. Revelation 12:7-12 shows a war breaking out in heaven and Michael who is Jesus in his heavenly position along with his angels battles Satan and his angels and Michael kicks Satan along with his angels out of heaven and throws them down to earth. Notice what verse 12(NIV): "Therefore rejoice, you heavens and you who dwell in them? But woe to the earth and the sea, because the devil has gone down to you! He is filled with fury, because he knows that his time is short." Isaiah 55:20 and Revelation 17:15 shows that sea and water means people. So when Satan got kicked out of heaven the earth got noticeable worse. Many historians contend that the 20th century was unlike any other century before and more people died during the 20th century than all other centuries combined. Also, notice what verse 10 states: “Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say: "Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ. For the accuser of our brothers, who accuses them before our God day and night, has been hurled down.” So once Satan is kicked out of heaven an angel officially announces God’s kingdom as coming into power and Jesus as the king. This is another piece of evidence that shows Jesus became king in 1914 but both of what I mentioned above still is not enough Biblical proof. There is still more.

The four horsemen of the apocalypse is the next piece of evidence. Most people don’t know who these four riders represent. Revelation 6 shows that the first rider is on a white horse, arrayed in white, with a crown, has a bow and goes forth conquering and completing his conquest. This rider is none other than Jesus Christ as the newly crowned king. But he is also riding with 3 seemingly evil riders. A red horse and the rider has a sword and “takes peace away from the earth so they should slaughter one another.” A black horse and the rider has a pair of scales and a voice is heard begging for food. And a pale horse whose name is Death and Hades. Verse 8 of chapter 6 explains what each of the three seemingly 3 evil riders represent: “And authority was given them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with a long sword and with food shortage and with deadly plague and by the wild beasts of the earth.” Now how can we know for sure that the rider on the white horse is Jesus. Besides being arrayed in white which represents righteousness, on a white horse with a crown, Revelation 19:11-16 identifies the rider on the white horse as Jesus. Now why would Jesus in his role as king ride with 3 seemingly evil riders? It’s because when Jesus became king in heaven he kicked Satan and his demons out and to the earth. Satan in his fury would bring WOE or trouble upon the people of the earth. And evidence of this is a war that occurred that had never happened prior to that. World War 1 in 1914 here about 90 percent of the earth’s nations were involved and over 20 million people died and since then the 20th century was plagued by war. Some researchers estimate that more than 100 million people have died as a result of war since 1914 - this is the rider on the red horse. Food shortages. The World Heath Organization estimates that malnutrition is involved in the deaths of 5 million children each year despite the fact that food production has increased - this is the rider on the black horse. Deadly plague or pestilence. Despite medical advances, old and new diseases plague us with no cure in sight for many and the thing that has been in the news of late is the fact that diseases that once had cures are starting to become more powerful and resistant to drugs that once cured them - this is the pale horse.

I just hit the preview button and this is way too long but there is still more Biblical evidence that points to the year 1914 as being when Jesus became king in heaven and when the last day or conclusion of the system of things started. The Last Days is something I really want to talk about and show how Jesus becoming king in heaven is the start of the last days and explain how the last days we’re living in today parallels with the Last Days of the Jewish system of things that came to an end in 70 C.E. So again the prophecy of 2520 years being applied to the date of 607 B.C.E. and arriving at 1914 shows when the king in the line of David would be given the Davidic thrown; Satan being kicked out of heaven and thrown to the earth and an angel announcing that God’s kingdom has come into power with Jesus as the king; Satan in his fury causing woe to the people of the earth and war, famine and pestilence are some of the results of this fury. And this being symbolized with the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse war, famine and pestilence who ride with Jesus when he became king, is still not all of the Biblical evidence. I will finish the rest Saturday afternoon.

[/quote]

This is what I was looking for. This is not a literal biblical interpretation, in fact I’d consider it quite a stretch.
Satan, has been around here for a while…The shit did not hit the fan just in 1914. Every generation has thought that the end times was in there life time. Eventually, somebody is going to be right.
Personally I don’t know or care. If the world is coming to an end, so be it. I am small issue to it and thinking or worrying about it in any way is not going to help me one iota.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?[/quote]

Because that turned out well.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?[/quote]

Because that turned out well.[/quote]

For someone that does not care about Religion you sure do like to troll these threads.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?[/quote]

Because that turned out well.[/quote]

Because the Nation of Israel has to be around for the prophecies in the Book of Revelation to be fulfilled.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?[/quote]

Because that turned out well.[/quote]

Because the Nation of Israel has to be around for the prophecies in the Book of Revelation to be fulfilled.[/quote]

And this IS literally in the book of Revelations.

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?[/quote]

Because that turned out well.[/quote]

Because the Nation of Israel has to be around for the prophecies in the Book of Revelation to be fulfilled.[/quote]

And this IS literally in the book of Revelations.[/quote]

depends on your eschatological view…

My interpretation would say no, but that is because I am an a-millenialist, with partial preterist leanings. IE I am more inline with the traditional Catholic\lutheran\reformed presbyterian view.

Not the Darby view which is so common in churches as well as movies of our day.

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?[/quote]

Because that turned out well.[/quote]

Because the Nation of Israel has to be around for the prophecies in the Book of Revelation to be fulfilled.[/quote]

And this IS literally in the book of Revelations.[/quote]

depends on your eschatological view…

My interpretation would say no, but that is because I am an a-millenialist, with partial preterist leanings. IE I am more inline with the traditional Catholic\lutheran\reformed presbyterian view.

Not the Darby view which is so common in churches as well as movies of our day.
[/quote]

I personally am not a pre-tribulation rapture person myself. I will say that Israel has to be around for the prophecies to be fulfilled. I might say that is my interpretation because the temple has to be rebuilt because the anti-Christ has to defile the temple, so for the temple to be rebuilt the nation of Israel has to be around. IMHO until the temple is rebuilt the second coming can not happen, but God can do whatever he wants because he is the only one who knows the hour or time of the return.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?[/quote]

Because that turned out well.[/quote]

Because the Nation of Israel has to be around for the prophecies in the Book of Revelation to be fulfilled.[/quote]

And this IS literally in the book of Revelations.[/quote]

depends on your eschatological view…

My interpretation would say no, but that is because I am an a-millenialist, with partial preterist leanings. IE I am more inline with the traditional Catholic\lutheran\reformed presbyterian view.

Not the Darby view which is so common in churches as well as movies of our day.
[/quote]

I personally am not a pre-tribulation rapture person myself. I will say that Israel has to be around for the prophecies to be fulfilled. I might say that is my interpretation because the temple has to be rebuilt because the anti-Christ has to defile the temple, so for the temple to be rebuilt the nation of Israel has to be around. IMHO until the temple is rebuilt the second coming can not happen, but God can do whatever he wants because he is the only one who knows the hour or time of the return.[/quote]

all of that is still part of the darby view, which in reality is dispensationalism. The most common accepted version being pre-millenial view.

I have yet to find one prophecy in the OT which denotes a third temple. Usually the claim is all the prophecies are double fulfillment. Which is fine if you want to claim that, but the burden of proof for a double fulfillment is upon that claim.

I find very little reason for Israel to even become a nation again for biblical prophecy to be fulfilled. I am in the minority though, in fairness this view has been the most common throughout the church history up until darby convinced alot of people that if you read the Bible a certain way then the prophecies look like this.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Just so everyone knows this prophecy as stated above by the Jehovah’s Witnesses was made after 1914. The original Jehovah’s Witness Prophecy by the founder of the Jehovah’s Witness was that Christ would return in 1914 and the battle of Armogedden would happen in 1914. When this did not happen, and after the death of the founder of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the new leaders changed the prophecy to mean that Jesus would reign in Heaven in 1914.

The definition of prophecy from God means that it has to be 100% correct. If one item is incorrect then the prophet is not from God. We see in Deut 18:22

When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

This is nothing more than a warning to all that follow a false prophet.[/quote]
No your wrong D Jerusalem being trampled on by the nations until the appointed times mentioned at Luke 21:24 being fulfilled in 1914 was discerned in the late 1800 so they knew that 1914 would be a year of significance. I said in my post that the Bible students did not fully understand what this exactly meant and yes they did have it wrong at first. But that does not mean that the fulfillment of Jesus’ statement about Jerusalem being trampled on by the nations until the appointed times did not occur in 1914. Nor does it mean that Jesus did not become king in heaven in 1914.

Nice try D but never did we claim to be prophets or have been given anything through divine intervention such as a prophetic dream. Some pastors actually say that God or Jesus told them or took them to heaven or told them something through a dream so their listeners will believe or do something. Never did we claim that. So the scripture you quoted at Dueturomeny does not apply to us. When that warning was written there were prophets and were going to be many prophets that God used and was going to use to give instruction to his people. When these prophets spoke it was as if God was speaking so if what they said did not come true then one was able to know that they were not true spokesmen of God. We knew back then as we know now that God’s way of communicating with us is through the Bible and prophetic dreams stopped after the apostles died in the first century. So again no D we were not able to discern the significance of 1914 in a prophetic way.

We were able to discern the significance of 1914 through a sincere and careful search of the Bible about several existing prophecies mentioned in the Bible as to when they would be fulfilled. Again we never claimed to have been given anything that is not in the Bible. That’s why in my post I quote scriptures only and not a theological explanation without scripture.

We were wrong as to exactly what happened in 1914 but that does not mean nothing happened in 1914. What I mean is that if we were looking to 1914 and absolutely nothing happened in that year then we would have known that we were completely wrong. But since a worldwide event that never happened before did happened in 1914 we realized that we had to take a closer look at the Bible to see exactly what took place in 1914. Once we did that we were able to discern what I explained in my two post.

The reason why we were wrong initially is due to what I explained in my second post. Most Bibles translate the Greek word parousia as “coming” but as I explained in my second post a more accurate rendering is “presence.” If you can get your hands on an Interliner word-for-word Greek to English translation of the Bible you will see that parousia is translated as “presence” and not “coming.” Since most people associate Jesus’ coming or return as to when Armageddon would start we mistakenly thought that Jesus parousia which most bibles at the time translated as coming was when Armageddon would happen. But once we realized that Jesus’ parousia means presence which means arriving and remaining, we realized that his parousia and his heavenly kingship would be invisible to human eyes that’s why Jesus gave us signs to look for at Matthew 24 so we would know when this would occur. I explained from the Bible in my second post as to why Jesus’ parousia or presence which means arriving and remaining is going to be a number of years or period of time.

Any easy way to know what parousia means is by going to dictionary.com.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parousia

and then go to

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/presence[/quote]

I am not here to argue with you, but I will reiterate the false prophecy predicted by Charles Taze Russell.

In 1876, pastor Russell wrote an interesting article based upon one of the fundamental beliefs Society for the imminent coming of a terrestrial theocratic KINGDOM OF JEHOVAH. This article entitled; ‘Gentile Times: When do they End?’, appeared in the October 1876 issue of Bible Examiner. On page 27 of that issue, referring to the Gospel of Luke 21: 24, the founding president predicted that the “Seven Times will end in A.D. 1914”. However, the expected KINGDOM OF JEHOVAH did not come. None of the events concerning Jerusalem, mentioned in Luke 21: 24 (see the biblical text below) happen in the year 1914. The Society then concluded that the predicted year was to be a turning point in human history and not the end of the “Seven Times” (see details below). Two years later, pastor Russell died.

This is not the only time that the Jehovah’s Witnesses prophesied the second coming of Christ. There are many instinces where you all believed that the second coming would happen in a given year and were Wrong. Below is taken directly from your Watchtower.

IDENTIFYING THE “PROPHET” – “So does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come? These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet?..This “prophet” was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah’s Christian Witnesses…Of course, it is easy to say that this group acts as a ‘prophet’ of God. It is another thing to prove it,” (Watchtower, Apr. 1, 1972, p. 197). (See Deut. 18:21.)

1897 “Our Lord, the appointed King, is now present, since October 1874,” (Studies in the Scriptures, vol. 4, p. 621).

1899 “…the ‘battle of the great day of God Almighty’ (Revelation 16:14), which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth’s present rulership, is already commenced,” (The Time Is at Hand, 1908 edition, p. 101).

1916 “The Bible chronology herein presented shows that the six great 1000 year days beginning with Adam are ended, and that the great 7th Day, the 1000 years of Christ’s Reign, began in 1873,” (The Time Is at Hand, forward, p. ii).

1918 “Therefore we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old, particularly those named by the Apostle in Hebrews 11, to the condition of human perfection,” (Millions Now Living Will Never Die, p. 89).

1922 “The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914,” (Watchtower, Sept. 1, 1922, p. 262).

1923 “Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith than Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge,” (Watchtower, Apr. 1, 1923, p. 106).

1925 “The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year,” (Watchtower, Jan. 1, 1925, p. 3).

1925 “It is to be expected that Satan will try to inject into the minds of the consecrated, the thought that 1925 should see an end to the work,” (Watchtower, Sept., 1925, p. 262).

1926 “Some anticipated that the work would end in 1925, but the Lord did not state so. The difficulty was that the friends inflated their imaginations beyond reason; and that when their imaginations burst asunder, they were inclined to throw away everything,” (Watchtower, p. 232).

1931 “There was a measure of disappointment on the part of Jehovah’s faithful ones on earth concerning the years 1917, 1918, and 1925, which disappointment lasted for a time…and they also learned to quit fixing dates,” (Vindication, p. 338).

1941 “Receiving the gift, the marching children clasped it to them, not a toy or plaything for idle pleasure, but the Lord’s provided instrument for most effective work in the remaining months before Armageddon,” (Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1941, p. 288).

1968 “True, there have been those in times past who predicted an ‘end to the world’, even announcing a specific date. Yet nothing happened. The ‘end’ did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing?.. Missing from such people were God’s truths and evidence that he was using and guiding them,” (Awake, Oct. 8, 1968).

1968 “Why are you looking forward to 1975?” (Watchtower, Aug. 15, 1968, p. 494).

http://www.carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses-and-their-many-false-prophecies

I took the above from the link.

M&M the truth really hurts doesn’t it? You might say that you all are still learning. I say how can you believe what you have been taught is correct if all of these false prophecies have come from your leaders. Turn to the truth that has been the same for 2000 years.[/quote]
D do you actually thing you’re telling me something new all of those books are avaiable to me and all Jehovah’s witnesses know about the mistakes when we were in our infancy as a religion. I just looked at the first Watchtower you listed about Identifying the Prophets and the paragraph is taken out of context. If you read the article in it’s entirety Jehovah’s Witnesses are not indentified as prophets.

Like I said before, we are not a perfect religion and yes we have made mistakes. There are plenty of examples in the Bible when individuals and the group God was calling his people made mistakes and had to have their thinking readjusted. For example, the apostles had misplaced expectations and thought the resurrected Jesus was going to restore the nation of Israel to its former glory when they asked him if he was restoring the kingdom to Israel. They asked this despite the fact that Jesus said his kingdom was no part of the world. Read John 21:21-23 and there you will see a huge mistake Peter made with regard to a statement Jesus made. Peter misunderstood this statement and he spread this false information among all of the brothers. So we understand and realize that we made mistakes and will probably continue to make mistakes.

Since we were and still are so eager for Armageddon to come in our infancy we did make mistakes about trying to set dates for Armageddon. The last date we did this with is 1925 since then we have not fixed a date for Armageddon. Since I’ve been born we are regularly reminded about the mistakes we’ve made in the past in regards to trying to fix a date for Armageddon and since I’ve been alive we have not fixed a date for Armageddon. Since we realized we are not perfect as a group learning from our mistakes refines us. For example, in our infancy back in the early 1900’s we did not regard God’s clear warning regarding idolatry and we used the cross in our worship. We reasoned like all other Christian religions that using a cross in our worship and praying to it brought us closer to God. But after closely examining the scriptures and seeing examples in the Bible such as when God punished the Israelites when they made the golden calf dispite the fact that they called the festival a festival to Jehovah. And seeing God’s clear commands to not even make let alone pray to anything other than God no matter what, we realized that this clearly ignored God’s law regarding idolatry so we stopped using the cross in any part of our worship and removed them from our buildings.

This is what you are not getting D. It is impossible to use the Bible to tell when Armageddon is going to start I know you know that. I know that and all Jehovah’s Witness know that. The Bible states that it will come like a thief in the night. Now this is the point. Being able to discern the signs that Jesus told his disciples to look for that would mark his presence and the conclusion of the system of things is not the same as saying we know when Armageddon is going to start. The fact that we made mistakes in trying to fix a date for Armageddon does not take away the fact that the signs Jesus told his disciples to look for at Matthew 24 started in 1914, intensified since that year and we’ve been able to identify them.

Albert Einstein obviously was a brilliant scientist. He is credited with the Theory of Relativity and the E=mc2 equation and this greatly helped mans understanding of space and time and led to other discoveries that has greatly helped man over the past 100 years. But Albert Einstein made the mistake of disregardeding Quantum Mechanics when most scientist believed QM was the wave of the future. Many feel that without QM the transistor would not have been invented and without the transistor I would not be typing on this forum. So Albert Einstein made a mistake when he disregarded QM. So because of his mistake would you say that all of his other scientific discoveries are false? Of course not you. Why? Because you can see the results of his other scientific discoveries. The same can be applied to the 1914 date. We can clearly see the signs that Jesus told us to look for that point to his kingship in heaven, his parousia or presence and the start of the last days beginning in 1914.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I just had another thought on the will of God and WWII. I am not saying that what Hitler did was what God wanted, but he did use evil to make something good come out of it.

My point, had Hitler not murdered millions of Jews would the west ever have given the Land of Palestine back to the Israelis after the War? Would the new nation of Israel been reformed?[/quote]

Because that turned out well.[/quote]

Because the Nation of Israel has to be around for the prophecies in the Book of Revelation to be fulfilled.[/quote]

So basically you introduced even more bloodshed into an already volatile area on the basis that you had to fulfill some prophecy that may not have been meant to be taken literally.

Nice.

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]wimpuskhan wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]wimpuskhan wrote:
I have a question for anyone willing to answer. Why is it that many of those who identify themselves as Christians are willing to fight for their country against others who also identify themselves as Christians? For example there were Catholics and other denominations on both warring sides in world war 1 and 2. It was my thought that the followers of Jesus Christ would choose to remain peaceful, especially towards one another.[/quote]

The good news is that the wars in which you referred to, were not religious wars. They aren’t warring as Christians. I think you would have to look at each war on it’s own merits and see what is going on. As a general rule, Christians are called upon to not do harm to Christians or anybody else. At the same time, you do have to defend your home, and your country from people who seek to destroy it. That being said, war should always be a last resort, but you cannot serve people if you let them get dominated and walked all over.
War sucks every time. But I stand by my stance that he best way deal with war, is to end it as quickly as possible which means you hold nothing in reserve. If you feel you needed to go to war, do it well and win as fast as possible. It’s the best scenario for all sides involved. The only thing that should drag out is a formidable enemy not your own politics.[/quote]

So are you saying that “the state” is higher in rank than God, so Christians should ignore “thou shalt not kill” even though there are fellow brethren on the other side of the rifle sight? [/quote]

No, that’s not what I am saying. Reread, self defense and preservation is an imperative. Imagine what the world would look like if every good hearted Christian nation just allowed themselves to be rolled over so as to not kill their fellow man. The entire world would be oppressed.
Good people do go to war, they do kill and get killed at times. That’s war, it sucks.[/quote]

I understand where you are coming from regarding self defense. But you are right when you mentioned that those in WW 1 and 2 were not warring as Christians. True Christians would not fight against fellow believers. By fighting against each other these people put nationalism before religion.

[quote]wimpuskhan wrote:

I understand where you are coming from regarding self defense. But you are right when you mentioned that those in WW 1 and 2 were not warring as Christians. True Christians would not fight against fellow believers. By fighting against each other these people put nationalism before religion. [/quote]

I don’t think so. In many cases it’s kill or be killed. A war of plunder or conquest is one thing. A war resulting from a real provacatation is something else. You cannot judge in a general sense it has to be a taken on a case by case business.
I guarantee you most soldiers would rather not fight a war.