@hisblud

you have no point,

jonah in the bible predicts fall of nineveh forty days to his proclamation, but it never happen;

Jonah 3:4

4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said,Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

Because of scoffers, here is what jonah said to the lord when the timing change

Jonah 4:4

4 But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he became angry. 2 So he prayed to the Lord, and said,“Ah, Lord, was not this what I said when I was still in my country? Therefore I fled previously to Tarshish; for I know that You are a gracious and merciful God, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness, One who relents from doing harm. 3 Therefore now, O Lord, please take my life from me, for it is better for me to die than to live!”

to scoffers, jonah was a false prophet, that he wish to die

my question is; can the timing of God's prophecy change?

easy easy. You people are mixing prediction and warning up.

Warning have an element of repentance attached to it while a prediction must occur whether their is repentance or not.

Taking the story of jonah above, it falls under warning and they repented thus the wrath of God did not occur but the return of Yahshua is a prediction that will occur whether people repent or not.

Read this for your enjoyment

Many things were foretold precisely that they might not come to pass. What we have to decide is whether the prophesy was intended as a prediction or as a warning.

PREDICTION:

If it was a prediction, the plain statement of fact about the future was absolute andwas falsified by the event.

WARNING:

If it was a warning, it carried an unexpress condition clause, “unless you repent.”

https://www.biblicaltraining.o rg/library/prophecy- i/biblical-her

now lets take the failed prediction of your prophet on 1914

"But bear in mind that the end of1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble. Zion's Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226what we had there was a prediction which MUST occur whether people repent or not and not a warning. Today we are in 2013 and trouble has not ended. Thus we can thus say your prophets were FALSE PROPHETS becos what they predicted has not come to pass. Jman is in full agreement that your prophets' prophecy na lie.

@hisblud

im not a jw! but you have forced 'warning' on jonah's issue,

You people are mixing prediction and warning up.

Warning have an element of repentance attached to it while a prediction must occur whether their is repentance or not.

a,where is Gods message of warning to jonah in the bible that suggest warning? quote the verse here please, dont fail to do that!

b,did jonah added warning to his message to the nineveh? if yes, quote the verse here please

c, did nineveh return to the same bad ways after God decides to change his mind? and was the prophecy of destruction fufilled on ninevites later on? answer

im waiting for your reply

thanks, good that you aint a jw, let me ask you a simple question. Say you were in 1894 and a prediction came that in 1914, troubles will end becos Yahshua will return. Now some people repented and some did not, will the repentance of people cause God Who knows the day and hour to delay/postpone the return of Yahshua becos some of them repented?

hisblud:is 1914 not a lie = NWT is also a lie.

that is not the question. give me reasons for calling NWT false. I will take your refusal to provide a prove as a deceitful lie.

1914 is not a lie. I wonder who fed you with that.

me been deceitful. Ok oh, did this occur? Answer me yes or no, long grammar not needed.
"But bear in mind that the end of1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble. Zion's Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226are we still seeing trouble?
Secondly, which bible did the prophet use to come about the chronology that culminated in trouble ending in 1914 ? Thank you

That publication you quoted. After some research on this subject, I doubt if Russell stated that 1914 will be an end to times of trouble. I just cant lay hand on that publication you quoted.
But let me quoted secular source of what the witness spoke about. First they preached that that year will be the end of the gentile times, though not having full knowledge of what really was going to happpen. the time of the gentiles did end in that year and we ve not changed that belief till today cos we saw the visible manifestation of it.
Though some began to have uninscriptural expectation that they were going to receive their reward in heaven that year, this was not included in the chronology which gave rise to the prediction of the end of the gentile times. it was just an expectation arising from there not knowing fully what will happen after 1914. If this wrong expectation is what you mean, then you are correct, that however, never meant that what they said about 1914 failed.
But they did indeed saw that that year will mark the beginning of troubles NOT end of it according to Matthew's account. Lets see the local Newspaper report.
“The terrific war outbreak in Europe has fulfilled an extraordinary prophecy. For a quarter of a century past, through preachers and through press, the ‘International Bible Students,’ best known as ‘Millennial Dawners,’ have been proclaiming to the world that the Day of Wrath prophesied in the Bible would dawn in 1914. ‘Look out for 1914!’ has been the cry of the hundreds of traveling evangelists.”—The World, a New York newspaper, August 30, 1914.

That publication you quoted. After some research on this subject, I doubt if Russell stated that 1914 will be an end to times of trouble. I just cant lay hand on that publication you quoted.

1894 "Seventeen years ago people said, concerning the time features presented in Millennial Dawn, They seem reasonable in many respects, but surely no such radical changes could occur between now and the close of 1914: if you had proved that they would come about in a century or two, it would seem much more probable. What changes have since occurred, and what velocity is gained daily? 'The old is quickly passing and the new is coming in.' Now, in view of recent labor troubles and threatened anarchy, our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in the 1914 date. They say that they do not see how present conditions can hold out so long under the strain. We see no reason for changing the figures-nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble." (Zion's Watchtower, Can It Be Delayed until 1914? C. T. Russell July 15, 1894, Also in Watchtower Reprints, l894 p. 1677)

But let me quoted secular source of what the witness spoke about. First they preached that that year will be the end of the gentile times, though not having full knowledge of what really was going to happpen. the time of the gentiles did end in that year and we ve not changed that belief till today cos we saw the visible manifestation of it.

But they did indeed saw that that year will mark the beginning of troubles NOT end of it according to Matthew's account.

Secondly, which bible did the prophet use to come about the chronology that culminated in trouble ending in 1914 ? Thank you

Yooguyz: Following...

arsenalwenger: The following facts should be establised:
<The calendar system used by the Jews during the babylonian era is different frm this gregorian era. Gregorian era has 365days as 1yr while the Jews calender uses 360days for 1yr. U cannot calculate a BC era using Jewish calender system and conclude ur prediction, during AD era, using gregorian callender. Its like saying 15'C (centigrade)+45'F (ferenhiet) is equal to 60. So this fact knocks out 1914 as false

<Secular history has it that the babylonians destroyed Jerusalem in 587 BC as aginst 607 BC as taught by JW.

<The dream of Nebuchadnezer which gave room to this calcualtion is never in anyway related to christ coming. The sysmbolic tree that was cut off was interpreted by Daniel as the fall of Nebucadnezer and his goin insane for certain period so that he can acknowleged the most high.

<Christ never say his coming will be invisible (Read Act 2)

<Christ says ALL authority has been given unto him in heaven, on earth and underneath the earth. He made the statement immediately after his ressurection. So christ's had been exercising his heavenly authority for over 2012 years and did not start in 1914.

Many many proofs and biblical evidence shows that the year 1914, as being taught by JW, is false.

TroGunn:

TroGunn:

True, Secular history has it that the babylonians destroyed Jerusalem in 587 BC as against 607 BC as taught by JW. Now, secular history is known to be wrong. And when you consider the basis for the 587 BC date, you'll realise that it's almost certainly wrong.

The Bible points to 607BC as the date Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem. Here's how:

Various Bible verse show that Jerusalem was to lay desolate and waste for 70 years.

2 Chronicles 36:20-23 - "And he removeth those left of the sword unto Babylon, and they are to him and to his sons for servants, till the reigning of the kingdom of Persia, to fulfil the word of Jehovah in the mouth of Jeremiah, till the land hath enjoyed its sabbaths; all the days of the desolation it kept sabbath -- to the fulness of seventy years. And in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, at the completion of the word of Jehovah in the mouth of Jeremiah, hath Jehovah waked up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, and he causeth an intimation to pass over into all his kingdom, and also in writing, saying, Thus said Cyrus king of Persia, All kingdoms of the earth hath Jehovah, God of the heavens, given to me, and He hath laid a charge on me to build to Him a house in Jerusalem, that is in Judah; who is among you of all His people? Jehovah his God is with him, and he doth go up.'" ( Young's)

Clearly Babylon fell, generally accepted to be in 539BC. Cyrus in his first year of ruling Babylon decreed the Jews can go back to Jerusalem.

It's also generally accepted that the Jews were back in Jerusalem by 537CE, which is when the 70-year exile ended. Thus, counting back, the start of the 70years would be 607BC - based on the Bible. Secular history arriving 587BC is based on records known to have errors.

Note that it's a calculation of years, so the length of 360- or 365 day-per-year is irrelevant since days are not being used.

We'll look at the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, other related Bible verses and how it all fits together in another post.

It was Babylon, NOT Jerusalem.

By using the year 607B.C., they are able to match up a time prophecy that they have taken from the bible to show that Jesus became king of the heavens in the year 1914.

To change to the date that archaeologists accept would move this prophecy which is a MAJOR part of their beliefs. To change their beliefs like that would put a large portion of what they believe into question.

arsenalwenger: You r wrong. The Bible never gave any date on the siege of Jerusalem but chronicles. Most (if not all) bible scholars use secular history and archeological findings to determine their propehtic date and most atimes wrong. The JW are great users of encyclopedia and scientific materials to justify many of their teachings.

If they do not agree with the encyclopedia here concening 587\586 BC (which is a secular source they often quote), why will they agree with other information they have been getting from it? Or could it be that they accept what is only favourable to their teachings alone and leave the rest. That is hypocrisy.

Whether the siege is 607 BC or 587 BC is still immaterial. This is because christ's ruler authority didnt start in 1914 or 1894 going by the siege. Jesus said immediately after his resurection that all power has been given unto him, i mean all power.

The JW made us understand that Jesus was ethroned in 1914 and from then started exercising his powers. This is technically making Jesus' statement wrong. If Jesus is not wrong, the JW is false.

hisblud: you welcome. There is something about 1914 that they cant call it a mistake. Every other date according to jman05 was a mistake except 1914. Another thing i quite cant put together is this, you claim secular historians are wrong on the date but generally 607BC is accepted. Could you give us WHO comprised of the generally that agree with your calculation? This 1914?

hisblud: @jman: i stated this

Your reply:

Then i replied



Are you game jman?

hisblud: easy easy. You people are mixing prediction and warning up.


Warning have an element of repentance attached to it while a prediction must occur whether their is repentance or not.


Taking the story of jonah above, it falls under warning and they repented thus the wrath of God did not occur but the return of Yahshua is a prediction that will occur whether people repent or not.

Read this for your enjoyment



now lets take the failed prediction of your prophet on 1914 what we had there was a prediction which MUST occur whether people repent or not and not a warning. Today we are in 2013 and trouble has not ended. Thus we can thus say your prophets were FALSE PROPHETS becos what they predicted has not come to pass. Jman is in full agreement that your prophets' prophecy na lie.

TroGunn:



It is generally accepted and known to be factual that the date that Cyrus led the military campaign that sacked Babylon was in 539BC. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_Cylinder

According to Jewish Encyclopaedia, "On the first day of the year, Nisan 1 (March 20), 538, in conformity with Babylonian custom, he grasped the hands of the golden statue of Bel-Marduk, and thus became consecrated as monarch. From this ceremony dates the first year of his reign as "King of Babylon, King of all the Lands." - http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4828-cyrus

From this, Cyrus made order for the Jews to return (538BC) and the Jews eventual return in 537BC ( in the 7th month according to Ezra 3:1-5) can be deduced quite accurately. This marks the end of the 70-year exile. Counting back 70years takes us to 607BC as the time when Jerusalem was made desolate.

It's a simple case of whether we accept the Bible's 70-year exile (Jeremiah 25:1, 2, 11; 29:10; Daniel 9:2) or secular sources 50-year exile. The Bible has always been accurate and we'd take that over any secular source.

The secular sources for the 50-year exile are known to have inaccuracies. One of them is the records of Berossus who lived close to Neo-Babylonian period. His record is known to be inaccurate - he was wrong about who Assyrian King Sennacherib succeeded - his Father or brother.

Another secular source is the Canon of Ptolemy - largely accurate but known to contain omissions.

The 3rd source, based on ancient tablets detailing dates in relation to position of moon and planets can support both the 587BC and 607BC dates.

Of course, we'd go with the Bible record of 70-year exile anytime because of it's track record of accurate history. Secular history gets revised now and then to fit current information - the Bible has stayed accurate and gets vindicated, as this fairly recent example shows- http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/135432#.UouXEZt3vX4

arsenalwenger: Typical of JW, confuse them and wind them down with argument and inconsistent proof. The link you provided have no correlation or justification or 1914. 1914 is a fraud only accepted by JW as a basis to enforce their official doctrine.

Christ said that all power that is in heaven, on earth and underneath the earth has been given to him immediately after his ressurection. He didnt have to wait until 1914 to get that done. Read your bible alone and ask God for inspiration to direct you. You are only telling me what the watchtower wants you to tell me. Wathctower is very wrong here. I wonder why you chose to believe and spread falsehood.

loveroftruth: You must be a coward.

It was you and i that had this debate earlier, but here you are, instead of asking me to continue with you, you are picking it with others.



i had addressed this issue of Neneve befor and educated you, but you dont seem to learn.

See the starting post i hard addressed to you when you started this your lies.

See my first post on that thread below to you, and any honest person can go to that thread from the link posted below also and find out who you are:

@Hisblud

you seem to know what Johnah did not know ?

Why did he Johnah complained that God is a forgiving God, that Yahweh will forgive them after he has preach to them ?

Why did Johnah got angry when God refused to destroy the Nenivites ?

Please answer.

And stop lying that Jw said that 1914 will be the end of the world, they did not say that.



now read this and educate your self, if the lies will leave you:


"But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was very angry. And he prayed unto the LORD, and said, I pray thee, O LORD, was not this my saying, when I was yet in my country? Therefore I fled before unto Tarshish: for I knew that thou art a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the evil." (Jonah 4:1-2).
......................................

Again, This was the message that God gave to Johnah and not those lies up there you posted:

"And the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the second time, saying, Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee. So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days’ journey. And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown." (Jonah 3:1-4).
........................

That message up there is very clear, but liars like you will add and twist it.

The point here is, that someone say what God has said even though God changed his mind, it cannot and will not make him a false prophet unless he lied and say what God has not told him.

But Jw never said that the are prophesying, no, rather, they are bible students that preached what they have seen in the bible.

Can you say that what they say is not in the bible ? No, you cannot.

So, your evil intent to maligned them is on you head.

Keep twisting. Maybe that is what your church teaches you.

Christians indeed, liars.

https://www.nairaland.com/1511829/why-people-treat-jehovah-witnesses/2#19644835

That is the thread where i had the discussion with you and you could not prove that Jonah's commission to to Nenevites was to warn them, it is a disgrace that your hatred for Jw has pushed you to open another thread.

hisblud: hmm from the quote above, it makes your assertion false. It stated that the END not BEGINING of troubles.

arsenalwenger: This 1914 complex mathematics is not only a hoax but a perfect brainwashing. How can a man in his right senses allow another man to dump into his brain without questioning?

Believe that Jesus come back or made his presense in 1914, believe that my grandma is a virgin.

hisblud: please expantiate, what does this mean "the end of the gentile times" and "we saw the visible manifestation of it". Are you insinuating that gentiles dont rule no more? How?

TroGunn:



It is generally accepted and known to be factual that the date that Cyrus led the military campaign that sacked Babylon was in 539BC. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_Cylinder

According to Jewish Encyclopaedia, "On the first day of the year, Nisan 1 (March 20), 538, in conformity with Babylonian custom, he grasped the hands of the golden statue of Bel-Marduk, and thus became consecrated as monarch. From this ceremony dates the first year of his reign as "King of Babylon, King of all the Lands." - http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4828-cyrus

From this, Cyrus made order for the Jews to return (538BC) and the Jews eventual return in 537BC ( in the 7th month according to Ezra 3:1-5) can be deduced quite accurately. This marks the end of the 70-year exile. Counting back 70years takes us to 607BC as the time when Jerusalem was made desolate.

It's a simple case of whether we accept the Bible's 70-year exile (Jeremiah 25:1, 2, 11; 29:10; Daniel 9:2) or secular sources 50-year exile. The Bible has always been accurate and we'd take that over any secular source.

The secular sources for the 50-year exile are known to have inaccuracies. One of them is the records of Berossus who lived close to Neo-Babylonian period. His record is known to be inaccurate - he was wrong about who Assyrian King Sennacherib succeeded - his Father or brother.

Another secular source is the Canon of Ptolemy - largely accurate but known to contain omissions.

The 3rd source, based on ancient tablets detailing dates in relation to position of moon and planets can support both the 587BC and 607BC dates.

Of course, we'd go with the Bible record of 70-year exile anytime because of it's track record of accurate history. Secular history gets revised now and then to fit current information - the Bible has stayed accurate and gets vindicated, as this fairly recent example shows- http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/135432#.UouXEZt3vX4