Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Of course it did! Jesus himself taught it. What happened with JWs is they got snookered into believing false prophets who claim to be scholars when they were just liars. Now you have an incomplete inaccurate Bible and interpretation of the Bible. I've proven this many times.The catholicism form of translating tries to make Jesus look like God to support their false council teaching of a trinity which didnt start until 381 ce at the council of Constantinople. Never before was a trinity served by true followers because it doesnt exist. I already showed you--The LORD(YHWH) said to my Lord(Jesus) proves he is not YHWH.
No it doesn't. Neither does it mean that in Genesis. You are adding and taking away from the Bible. It's staring you right in the face and you deny it. God means Godhead. Those with true knowledge know there is God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost. All three have authority to judge.
Of course it did! Jesus himself taught it. What happened with JWs is they got snookered into believing false prophets who claim to be scholars when they were just liars. Now you have an incomplete inaccurate Bible and interpretation of the Bible. I've proven this many times.
It can be used as a title or adjective, but it can also be a proper name. The Canaanites believed El or Eloah was the Heavenly Father, the Deity that was above all of the other deities. They were henotheists, worshiping a high, Almighty God and lower gods.Elohim translates--Supreme one or mighty one
Elijah translates-El is Yhwh
Israel translates-prince of EL
Angels and judges were called Elohim= proof it is not a name but a title
Psalm 109:26= Help me YHWH my Elohim
Those claiming it to be a name are wrong.
It can be used as a title or adjective, but it can also be a proper name. The Canaanites believed El or Eloah was the Heavenly Father, the Deity that was above all of the other deities. They were henotheists, worshiping a high, Almighty God and lower gods.
I have. Many, many scholars. Thousands! Millions! You have your few pathetic so-called scholars that have added and subtracted from the Bible and the understanding.Ask any scholar on earth. They know its fact.
Elohim means the most high God, singular. So, what's the problem? It's with JW's. Who then it Jehovah? Ya! God and god the Son...BAMB!!!The Hebrews probably used the word Elohim as the supreme one. But one cannot get by the facts that the Abrahamic God served by Israel to this day is a single being God-YHWH(Jehovah) and never used Elohim as plural for their God, like the religions living in darkness say they used it as plural for him.
Yep! Worship the Father, Elohim and do it in the name of the Son, Jesus Christ who is Jehovah. God and god. Lord and lord. That's the 100% undeniable fact. By the way, did God change from Adam to Abraham? No. What actually happened is Jehovah the Son stated to worship the Father in the name of the Son. You make it seem like God changed from Godhead of more than one to a Godhead of just one. God is the same today, yesterday and forever in the future. BAMB AGAIN!You best check the facts---From Moses on up until this very day, the Israelite religion, teach, serve and worship the Abrahamic God= a single being God=YHWH(Jehovah)--he is the Father. That God was taught, served and worshipped by Jesus when he attended those places of worship, and to every bible writer--These are 100% undeniable fact. You best take another look. If you dont, you have already lost.
Yep! Worship the Father, Elohim and do it in the name of the Son, Jesus Christ who is Jehovah. God and god. Lord and lord. That's the 100% undeniable fact. By the way, did God change from Adam to Abraham? No. What actually happened is Jehovah the Son stated to worship the Father in the name of the Son. You make it seem like God changed from Godhead of more than one to a Godhead of just one. God is the same today, yesterday and forever in the future. BAMB AGAIN!
The teachings of Jesus and the Facts of true God worship history back my teachers 100%. Where do think that leaves the rest?
C.T.Russell-the only man on earth who saw Rev 6 to be 1914-Why? The other religions had centuries prior to him to see it, why couldnt they? In 1879 he said-Peace will be taken from the earth in 1914--The prophecy in Daniel of the establishment of Gods kingdom in heaven. It was 2520 years from the removal of the last king in Jerusalem=607 bce+2520= 1914-- It says at Rev 6-He receives his crown( the establishment of Jesus on the throne)_ it also says-Peace will be taken from the earth=ww1. proving the prophecy fulfilled.Jehovah's Witnesses? You're kidding. You came out of the ridiculous millerites in the mid 1800s. Stick with scripture.
You think CT Russell was the only tool on the planet prophesying Armageddon and the 2nd Coming of Christ as well? See, none of the others gave a specific date because Jesus himself said he didn't now when the Father would decide enough is enough and end things. Apparently, CT Russell thought he was the Father. That was a huge false prophecy to have included the exact date of destruction.You keep cutting down C.T Russell as a false prophet, alls he did was confuse the war in heaven for Armageddon and try to put a date on a real prophecy from God. But then you missed this reality--In 1879 C.T. Russell said--Peace will be taken from the earth in 1914--he was correct by using bible chronology, yet no other on earth could see the prophecy to be fullfilled but C.T.Russell--even though they had centuries to see it. 2520 years from the removal of the last king in Jerusalem, a prophecy in Daniel pointing to Rev 6= the establishment of Gods kingdom in heaven. 607 bc was the removal + 2520= 1914--Rev 6 says-He receives his crown( establishment of Gods kingdom rule in heaven) as well rev 6 says and peace will be taken from the earth=1914=ww1. So one must ask--Why was C.T.Russell the only man on earth to see that event coming 35 years prior to its occurrence, when every other religion had centuries before him to figure it out? Holy spirit is the answer and lack of holy spirit for the others. No doubt satan was seriously attacking him, he already owned the rest, thus he made errors not false prophecy.
It can be used as a title or adjective, but it can also be a proper name. The Canaanites believed El or Eloah was the Heavenly Father, the Deity that was above all of the other deities. They were henotheists, worshiping a high, Almighty God and lower gods.
You think CT Russell was the only tool on the planet prophesying Armageddon and the 2nd Coming of Christ as well? See, none of the others gave a specific date because Jesus himself said he didn't now when the Father would decide enough is enough and end things. Apparently, CT Russell thought he was the Father. That was a huge false prophecy to have included the exact date of destruction.
CT Russell made the same mistake many did. They thought themselves prophets when they themselves didn't believe in direct revelations with prophets and apostles any more because they had the Bible. They thought WW1 was Armageddon. terrible war but it ended and 20 years later WW2 and that was supposed to be the end. Since then, we've had conflicts here and there. Korea, Vietnam....But, no Armageddon. Perhaps you should look at Isaiah's seership and in Chapter 25:4 as it pertains to nuclear war and the affects of it. Although we used a couple of nukes to end WW2, Satan is still unbound and causing tribulations all over the world. So, Armageddon has not happened. There is no date even if the so-called prophet CT Russell thought so. He is no prophet and anyone I'd follow for correct doctrine. He can't even give Jesus Christ His glory. And, to say that Russell was the only one to see WW2 coming is a con and a big lie. JW's try to throw that one around but it's a lie.
The following is from a historian from the following Reddit:
It pretty much shows that WW1 was going to happen and most people actually knew it.
So I actually have a lot of trouble with /u/thewildshrimp's post; mainly because it focuses entirely on the wrong things. Like for instance he completely blows past the 1911 Moroccan Crisis as if it were an afterthought and specifically his phrase "all powers loved war and wanted to show off their new toys and military power" specifically sets me off. Instead of going through and pedantically nit picking away at fine details I may as well just write a post that I think tackles more critical issues and answers your question a little more concretely than a bunch of powers fighting with their new toys. I take great exception that in a topic as nuanced and complex as the causes of the First World War the conclusion of the post would be, and I quote, "Crisis after crisis in the early 20th century cemented the alliances and soon Europe just became one little spark away from Armageddon" with next to no actual explanation what those crisis' were or why they were so important. I don't want to call out /u/thewildshrimp and say his post was/is wrong per se but it is incomplete and ill focused in my opinion.
I'm going to be really cliche here and begin my post with a quote by German Foreign Secretary Bernhard von Bulow (not the General!) in which he said "Mit einem Worte: wir wollen niemand in den Schatten stellen, aber wir verlangen auch unseren Platz an der Sonne" -- roughly translating into "In a word, we want no one in the shade, but we also demand our place in the sun." Keep that in the back of your mind throughout the reading as it is not the mind of one radical exception, but of the people and the government of Germany throughout this period.
So let's begin. First, a map of Europe for reference. I'd keep this open while reading my post just in case you need to keep up or want to see where things are w.r.t. each other.
Secondly, while I think that this topic is best handled topically I'm going to handle it chronologically. While it's certainly less efficient in my opinion it helps really give an idea how all of these things played off each other. When you separate them into topics it compartmentalizes all these things when it's best to think of them happening all at the same time. Basically I'm telling you this is going to be a monumental clusterfuck of a post so good luck.
Third, let's discuss the topic of inevitability. Inevitability is a stupid word but it's a convenient one at that for lower level education. We simplify things all the time for high school students (which is where I'm going to assume you were first exposed to this idea) and this is one of those topics. Ultimately nothing in history is inevitable and it's not our job as pseudo-historians to try and prescribe a bunch of conditions on the past and say X was inevitable because of Y. It removes human agency. What we can say was that because of the conditions (which I will explain briefly) created in the early 20th century, a war became progressively more likely toward the powers in Europe because of divisions being created.
To understand why France went to war in 1914 we have to wind the clock back quite a few decades to 1871. The Franco-Prussian War was the final war of German Unification and it would, overnight, unite hundreds of independent principalities and kingdoms into one continuous state thus creating arguably the most powerful state in Europe. In the process of this Alsace-Lorraine would be taken and the French overwhelmingly embarrassed on the field of battle. Germany would be formed with Bismark and Willhelm I at the head and together they realized what kind of situation they were in -- they were without any friends and were entirely encircled by Great Powers. Russia to the East, Austria-Hungary to the South, France to the West, and Great Britain to the North via the North and Baltic Sea's. In many ways she was squeezed from all sides. Britain, remaining basically isolationist from Continental politics could be removed from the conversation and thus only 3 powers remained of importance -- France, Austria-Hungary, and Russia. Creating mutual understanding the League of Three Emperors was born which was a mutual alliance between the three powers along with understanding to help quell minority groups such as the Poles whose burden they all shared.
This was precisely the peace that Bismark envisioned. Britain off doing its own thing in the seas with its colonies, France beaten and broken and entirely without allies, and its Eastern boundaries safe from harm. This would change in 1878 with the Russo-Turkish War. The Turks would be completely and totally destroyed by the Russians. It was not even close and the Russians, seizing the opportunity, would sign a lopsided treaty which forced the Ottomans to release a state called "Greater Bulgaria" which, while technically an Ottoman Protectorate, would be a Russian puppet state in the Balkans which nearly pushed the Turks out of Europe. The Germans and Austro-Hungarians alike were obviously terrified of this clear power grab and called for a conference of Great Powers to call for the partitioning of the Ottomans to supersede the Russo-Ottoman treaty called The Treaty of Berlin. This gives us a much more modern looking Balkans which Russia has significantly less influence over and at this point, in 1878, relations began to break down. Here is a great map I recommend opening now to see the state of Europe leading up to WWI at this point.
The Russians and Austro-Hungarians, each with ambitions in the Balkans, would begin to get at each others throats and what was once a cordial alliance grew into outright rivalry. The Russians also grew distant from the Germans as it was the Germans who called for and hosted the conference which got in their way of their goals. Bismark, ever so clever, would at the same time sign a secret defensive alliance with Austria-Hungary with respect to Russia while also signing a secret non-aggression pact with Russia which stated the two sides would stay out of each others hair as long as both sides weren't an aggressor toward one of their allied states. This would effectively stabilize the situation and once again create that scenario presented earlier -- a secured East, a friend to the South, an isolated enemy to the West and an ambivalent power to the North.
I want to emphasize something here though;Germany was not doing this out of the good of her heart or for Austria-Hungary's support or because she believed in A-H's 'cause' necessarily. It was a purely defensive move by Bismark. Germany was isolated and surrounded by Great Powers (A-H, a crumbling but still great power to the South, Russia to the East, France to the West, and Britain to the North via sea) and needed to secure anyone for an ally and A-H was the desperate lonely one at the bar who would have taken anyone that asked. The alliance with Austria-Hungary must be clarified as first and foremost a mutual defense against a mutual threat of Russia and not a friendship or some sort of sign of diplomatic agreement between the two (as I'll go into later). As an afterthought but still worth mentioning for a later point, the "Triple Alliance" as it's called would be formed at this point with Italy being brought into the fold creating a mutual alliance between Germany, A-H, and Italy. Italy was not considered a 'great power' but was still a significant addition to the team and considered close to Germany.
Bismark, who was de facto leading Germany pre 1888, after securing this deal would look toward Russia. He would not sign an alliance with them but more like a non-aggression pact. As long as Germany doesn't attack France and Russia doesn't attack Austria-Hungary they'll stay out of each others business is the meat of it. Bismark had essentially perfected his craft and secured Germany's future at least for the time being. Russia and Austria-Hungary were placated, A-H was in his grasp and at least a great power ally, Britain didn't care about continental conflicts really at all, and France was completely and utterly isolated. I should also note at this point Russia and Great Britain basically hate each other over the whole Crimea War thing and a lot of tensions with Central Asian colonial issues -- notably contention between the two over Persia and Tibet.
Being Older does not make TRUTH......just as the Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absense. There is a vast difference in the records found in the Holy Scriptures than in the pre-existing fables concerning such as pre-existed Abraham, it was with Abraham that faith was demonstrated to the God of Creation via personal sacrifice (Abraham was placed to the test when he was commanded to sacrifice his son...........God mirrored Abraham's faith when God demonstrated His love for all humanity by sacrificing His Only Begotten Son. Truth must be "tested" as is mandated in the doctrine of Christianity......"Test All Things......."Has nothing to do with the Koran or Islam. There were no Chaldeans or Ur of the Chaldees in the time of Abraham.
I have said nothing about lineage. Many of the old testament stories are originally from the Ugarit at Ras Shamra. They are older than Abraham.
Jehovah Witness religion is the first of the false religions. So, you are correct. The point is, the end of the world did not start with WW1. It began with our Civil War when slaves rose up against their masters.Are you kidding????? they all scoff at 1914. 1914 is 100% correct. This world is about to find out. My teachers say-Babylon the great( world empire of false religions) is the next event, The bible shows it occurs quickly, it says God puts it in their hearts to do away with her, it cannot be stopped.---its the locking of the door to all, it triggers the tribulation. You are on the wrong side.
Jehovah Witness religion is the first of the false religions. So, you are correct. The point is, the end of the world did not start with WW1. It began with our Civil War when slaves rose up against their masters. Joseph Smith prophesied this and named where it would begin, not the date. But, that wasn't Armageddon either and neither was WW1. The end of the world did not happen in 1914. So, once again, Russell lied as well as did other in the JW's prophets-scholars.Are you kidding????? they all scoff at 1914. 1914 is 100% correct. This world is about to find out. My teachers say-Babylon the great( world empire of false religions) is the next event, The bible shows it occurs quickly, it says God puts it in their hearts to do away with her, it cannot be stopped.---its the locking of the door to all, it triggers the tribulation. You are on the wrong side.
Jehovah Witness religion is the first of the false religions. So, you are correct. The point is, the end of the world did not start with WW1. It began with our Civil War when slaves rose up against their masters.
Jehovah Witness religion is the first of the false religions. So, you are correct. The point is, the end of the world did not start with WW1. It began with our Civil War when slaves rose up against their masters. Joseph Smith prophesied this and named where it would begin, not the date. But, that wasn't Armageddon either and neither was WW1. The end of the world did not happen in 1914. So, once again, Russell lied as well as did other in the JW's prophets-scholars.
God's Kingdom in Heaven began billions of years ago in earth time. It began before the foundation of the universe was made. And, on earth, the foundation began when Adam and Eve left the Garden of Eden. Jesus Christ founded His Church 2,000 years ago. What happened in 1830 was Jesus Christ restored His kingdom to what it had originally been established by him on the foundation of Prophets and Apostles through Revelation (the Rock). Goofy JW's for sure... 1914. LOL!I didnt say the end of the world started with ww1, i said it was the establishment of Gods kingdom in heaven. You will see.
imagine that. The prophecy in daniel is clear-rev 6 = 1914God's Kingdom in Heaven began billions of years ago in earth time. It began before the foundation of the universe was made. And, on earth, the foundation began when Adam and Eve left the Garden of Eden. Jesus Christ founded His Church 2,000 years ago. What happened in 1830 was Jesus Christ restored His kingdom to what it had originally been established by him on the foundation of Prophets and Apostles through Revelation (the Rock). Goofy JW's for sure... 1914. LOL!
Elaborate please your fictional math.imagine that. The prophecy in daniel is clear-rev 6 = 1914
