COVENANTS

[ReChoired]

COVENANTS

This thread is specifically about "covenants" (and/or "testaments") in scripture, and how they affect salvation or the plan of redemption, who they are made with and by whom. There is a lot of confusion in "Christian" circles about the subject of covenants, and this thread is to consider what scripture says in some detail that Christians, the world over, may understand God's word together.

PLEASE NOTE (READ): Before jumping into this thread and getting something off of your mind, I would ask that all who desire to participate herein, please just take some time to pray each instance you enter this thread and also when replying/responding to/in this thread. Pray for the guidance of the Holy Ghost/Spirit, and His indwelling, along with the fruit that comes. Ask for the mind of Christ Jesus. Then after doing so, and entering, please take some prayerful time to consider each response and texts and evidences that are given by each participant. Do not rush to answer. Consider carefully all that is given, point by point.

 

[ReChoired]

There was a statement made on the matters of "covenants" which was stated as,

"Moses made it clear in a Deuteronomy 5 that their father’s nor anyone else had the law and ten commands before then:" [citation reference] [Deuteronomy 5:2-22, along with Exodus 31:13, was given in evidence, with Deuteronomy 5:3,15; Exodus 31:13 being specifically highlighted]​

"... Notice that after he says that only they and no one before them had ever been given what Moses was giving them, He gave them the Ten Commandments: ...

... Deu 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. ..."​

The claim is, by this participant, that the "Ten Commandments" are the "this covenant" that God had made with the peoples (Moses and 'Israel' (physical descendants of Jacob)), and that this (or these Ten Commandments) is/are the 'old covenant'.

A question we can ask, Is the statement true, based upon the word of God, and the context of Deuteronomy 5 (as is cited)?

Let's take a look.

Does Deuteronomy 5:3 explicitly state that the "this covenant" is anywhere the exact "Ten Commandments"?

No.

This means that some people "think" that it does by implication, being so near to the Ten Commandments being re-iterated by Moses.

What is the "this covenant" that Moses is speaking about in Deuteronomy 5? It is found referred to in vs 2.

Deu 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.​

Please notice, that the "covenant" referred to, was "made" with the peoples ("us") "in" (not near, or around) "Horeb".

Where can we find such an event, of a "covenant" "made" "in" "Horeb"/"Sinai" that is original? It is found in Exodus 19 & 24.

Exodus 19:12 "... that ye go not up into the mount, ..."

Exo 24:1 And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the LORD, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off.
Exo 24:2 And Moses alone shall come near the LORD: but they shall not come nigh; neither shall the people go up with him.
Exo 24:3 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do.
Exo 24:4 And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel.
Exo 24:5 And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the LORD.
Exo 24:6 And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar.
Exo 24:7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.
Exo 24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.
Exo 24:9 Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel:
Exo 24:10 And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.
Exo 24:11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.
Exo 24:12 And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them.
Exo 24:13 And Moses rose up, and his minister Joshua: and Moses went up into the mount of God.
Exo 24:14 And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, until we come again unto you: and, behold, Aaron and Hur are with you: if any man have any matters to do, let him come unto them.
Exo 24:15 And Moses went up into the mount, and a cloud covered the mount.
Exo 24:16 And the glory of the LORD abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud.
Exo 24:17 And the sight of the glory of the LORD was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel.
Exo 24:18 And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.
​

What then is the "this covenant" that was not made with any of their ancestors?

It is found in Exodus 19:3-9, 24:1-11.

The "this covenant" is not the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were not spoken aloud by the LORD in awesome majesty, until 3 days later (Exodus 19:11,16). Rather, it is the "... if ... then ... and ..." (Exodus 19:5-6) of the LORD, and the agreement of the elders of the people that said, "All that the LORD hath spoken we will do." (Exodus 19:8), "All the words which the LORD hath said will we do." (Exodus 24:3).

There was never anywhere before Mt. Sinai/Horeb that the LORD had ever made such an arrangement (covenant) or agreement with the Patriarchs. It was unique with Moses and the peoples of Jacob/'Israel'.

The Ten Commandments were already known long before Mt. Sinai. For instance, see Exodus 16 in which God spake of the Sabbath of the LORD, the 7th Day.

Exo 16:26 Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none.
Exo 16:27 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.
Exo_16:28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?
​

Each of the other of the Ten Commandments may also be seen long before Mt. Sinai, upon request.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Hi Re,

For God's people over history there were two major covenants, the law covenant for pre-Christians and the new covenant put into force on Pentecost of the yr 33 CE. We are still under that covenant.

 

[ReChoired]

Hi Re,

For God's people over history there were two major covenants, the law covenant for pre-Christians and the new covenant put into force on Pentecost of the yr 33 CE. We are still under that covenant.

Hi Robert Gwin. How are you today?

The "two major covenants" (sic), as I understand them from scripture (KJB), are:

[1] The "Everlasting Covenant" (aka, "New Covenant", "Covenant of Life and Peace" (Malachi 2:5)), which was formed between the Person/Being of the Father and the Person/Being of the Son (aka: 'Israel'; Matthew 2:13-15,19-21; Hosea 11:1) in eternity past before angels or men were created, and witnessed by the Person/Being of the Holy Ghost/Spirit, and later ratified by Jesus' blood (Psalms 116:14,18 and the Father's confirmation/ratification after Jesus' ascension in Psalms 61:5, sealed by the Holy Ghost/Spirit). God promised to write His Law (Ten Commandments, God's "my law", "my covenant"; Exodus 16:4; Jeremiah 6:19, 9:13, 16:11, 26:4, 31:33, 44:10; Ezekiel 22:26; &c) upon the hearts of mankind that they may do them (Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 11:19, 36:25-29, 37:26-28; Hebrews 8:10, 10:16; 2 Corinthians 3:3)

[2] The 'old Covenant' (Hebrews 8:13), which was formed between God and Moses & the peoples of Jacob (their leaders) (Exodus 19:3-9, 24:1-11), of which all peoples (except Christ Jesus) failed in keeping their promises (Hebrews 8:6-8) to God, even beginning to fail as soon as the golden calf incident (Exodus 32:1), was where the peoples promised God that they would keep God's law, "my covenant" (Ten Commandments).

In this, Exodus 19 & 24, reveals two distinct and separate covenants:

[2A.] God's Law, "my covenant" (Ten Commandments) (in Exodus 19:5).

[2B.] "... if ... then ... and ..." of God (Exodus 19:5-6) and the promise of the people themselves, "All that the LORD hath spoken we will do." (Exodus 19:8), with Moses as the Mediator of that agreement (Exodus 19:7, &c).​

God's people have always seen the Ten Commandments, not as the Old Covenant itself, but as the eternal promises ("better promises", "I will") of God in the New Covenant, and to that which the peoples agreed to "do" in the Old Covenant. The Ten Commandments were never an agreement (a covenant) between God and the people, but rather they were always that perfect will and character of God which were to be done or carried out by all mankind, after the image and likeness of God by and through the Holy Ghost/Spirit.

Christians are truly participating in the New Covenant.

Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?​

However, there are many which have taken the name, and yet are still attempting their own agreement with God, and live in disobedience as they of old.

A clarifying point. If I may ask you, and not to derail the thread too far, When you say "Pentecost of the yr 33 CE", how did you arrive at this date/conclusion, from scripture and history (please cite your sources)? Secondarily, is there a particular reason to use "CE", rather than "A.D." (Anno Domini; (Latin for Year of the/our Lord))? When you utilize "CE", do you recognize this as meaning 'common era', or 'Christian era'? If meaning, 'common era', what was the delineating event that marks the beginning of this, and/or the end of the previous ('BCE', I assume) in your view? Thank you for clarifying when you have opportunity.

I personally do not use 'CE' (common era) or 'BCE' (before common era), as in this age of secularism, I find it unhelpful in speaking to others when sharing the Gospel with them. I find that starting from Christ our Lord is best, as it lets people know where I am coming from right away, no surprises, and that the 'BC' and 'AD' identification methods have been around for a long time and most know them.

From my own prayerful study of the bible and careful searching of history, I find that Pentecost, being the year of the crucifixion, death, burial, resurrection, glorification, and ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ, was in A.D. 31. You may see a historical chart with scripture on it here for that - https://archive.org/download/awhn-2300-day-years-prophecy-of-daniel-8-vs-14-and-its-sub-parts/AWHN - 2300 Day-Years Prophecy of Daniel 8 Vs 14 And Its Sub-Parts.jpg

A brief synopsis of that understanding, may be found beginning in Daniel 8:13-14,26, 9:24-27, in which the going forth of "the commandment" (Daniel 9:25) to restore and to build Jerusalem was finalized in 457 BC (in the fall, one of the most established chronological dates in history, evidence upon request), in the 7th year of the reign of Artaxerxes I Longimanus/Macrocheir as found given in Ezra 7, and "the commandment" was given of God, through 3 Persian Kings (Cyrus II, Darius I Hystaspes and Artaxerxes I Longimanus/Macrocheir), as specified in Ezra 6:14 during the reign of the Medo-Persian empire as Daniel 8 required, of which Daniel 9 forms a section of ("determined"; Daniel 9:24). Utilizing the 'day for a year' principle of Numbers 14:34; Ezekiel 4:6 (&c, more as needful here - https://archive.org/download/secrets-unsealed-stephen-bohr-20-reasons-to-apply-the-day-for-a-year-in-bible-prophecy/Secrets Unsealed - Stephen Bohr - 20 Reasons To Apply The Day For A Year In Bible Prophecy.pdf ), the '70 weeks' (Daniel 9:24), become 490 years (70 x 7), in a greater parallel, or anti-type, to Jeremiah's own 70 years as Daniel understands in Daniel 9:1-2. Therefore, from 457 BC, the 69 weeks (7 + 62 (& 7 x 69); making 483 years (49 + 434); Daniel 9:25), would terminate in the year A.D. 27 at the baptism of Jesus (6 months after John the Baptist began his own ministry in A.D. 26) in the river Jordan (Luke 4) at about the age of 30 years old (Luke 3:23). The final 'week' (Daniel 9:27) of the 70, being split into two equal portions, would bring the close of Jesus' ministry in A.D. 31 at the midpoint of that final 'week' with the true sacrifice given (Hebrews 10:26), and the endpoint of the 'week' in A.D. 34 with the stoning of Stephen by order of the Sanhedrin (Hebrews 2:3).

 

[Robert Gwin]

Hi Robert Gwin. How are you today?

Hi, doing well thanks for asking. Please do not think me disrespectful for not calling you sir/maam as I could not figure out which you are.

The "two major covenants" (sic), as I understand them from scripture (KJB), are:

[1] The "Everlasting Covenant" (aka, "New Covenant", "Covenant of Life and Peace" (Malachi 2:5)), which was formed between the Person/Being of the Father and the Person/Being of the Son (aka: 'Israel'; Matthew 2:13-15,19-21; Hosea 11:1) in eternity past before angels or men were created, and witnessed by the Person/Being of the Holy Ghost/Spirit, and later ratified by Jesus' blood (Psalms 116:14,18 and the Father's confirmation/ratification after Jesus' ascension in Psalms 61:5, sealed by the Holy Ghost/Spirit). God promised to write His Law (Ten Commandments, God's "my law", "my covenant"; Exodus 16:4; Jeremiah 6:19, 9:13, 16:11, 26:4, 31:33, 44:10; Ezekiel 22:26; &c) upon the hearts of mankind that they may do them (Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 11:19, 36:25-29, 37:26-28; Hebrews 8:10, 10:16; 2 Corinthians 3:3)

[2] The 'old Covenant' (Hebrews 8:13), which was formed between God and Moses & the peoples of Jacob (their leaders) (Exodus 19:3-9, 24:1-11), of which all peoples (except Christ Jesus) failed in keeping their promises (Hebrews 8:6-8) to God, even beginning to fail as soon as the golden calf incident (Exodus 32:1), was where the peoples promised God that they would keep God's law, "my covenant" (Ten Commandments).

In this, Exodus 19 & 24, reveals two distinct and separate covenants:

[2A.] God's Law, "my covenant" (Ten Commandments) (in Exodus 19:5).

[2B.] "... if ... then ... and ..." of God (Exodus 19:5-6) and the promise of the people themselves, "All that the LORD hath spoken we will do." (Exodus 19:8), with Moses as the Mediator of that agreement (Exodus 19:7, &c).​

God's people have always seen the Ten Commandments, not as the Old Covenant itself, but as the eternal promises ("better promises", "I will") of God in the New Covenant, and to that which the peoples agreed to "do" in the Old Covenant. The Ten Commandments were never an agreement (a covenant) between God and the people, but rather they were always that perfect will and character of God which were to be done or carried out by all mankind, after the image and likeness of God by and through the Holy Ghost/Spirit.

Christians are truly participating in the New Covenant.

Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?​

However, there are many which have taken the name, and yet are still attempting their own agreement with God, and live in disobedience as they of old.

A clarifying point. If I may ask you, and not to derail the thread too far, When you say "Pentecost of the yr 33 CE", how did you arrive at this date/conclusion, from scripture and history (please cite your sources)? Secondarily, is there a particular reason to use "CE", rather than "A.D." (Anno Domini; (Latin for Year of the/our Lord))? When you utilize "CE", do you recognize this as meaning 'common era', or 'Christian era'? If meaning, 'common era', what was the delineating event that marks the beginning of this, and/or the end of the previous ('BCE', I assume) in your view? Thank you for clarifying when you have opportunity.

CE stands for common era. The year of our Lord is somewhat deceptive, as most consider it Jesus' birth, and AD after death, but we believe the year of the Lord is the year Jesus became the Messiah, at his baptism at the age of 30.

Great question Re, We believe Tiberius Caesars reign began in 14 CE, with Jesus becoming the Messiah in his 15th yr of reign Luke 3:1. He being 30 at that point. We believe Jesus' ministry lasted 3 and a half yrs Dan 9:27. He attended 4 Passovers during his ministry. The yr of Jesus' death was a great sabbath Jn 19:31 which happened in the year 33. I do not know how often this occurs, but we are sure it did not happen in 31 or 32.

I am sorry this is so condensed, but I tried not to complicate it. Hope that helps, and is understandable.

I personally do not use 'CE' (common era) or 'BCE' (before common era), as in this age of secularism, I find it unhelpful in speaking to others when sharing the Gospel with them. I find that starting from Christ our Lord is best, as it lets people know where I am coming from right away, no surprises, and that the 'BC' and 'AD' identification methods have been around for a long time and most know them.

From my own prayerful study of the bible and careful searching of history, I find that Pentecost, being the year of the crucifixion, death, burial, resurrection, glorification, and ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ, was in A.D. 31. You may see a historical chart with scripture on it here for that - https://archive.org/download/awhn-2300-day-years-prophecy-of-daniel-8-vs-14-and-its-sub-parts/AWHN - 2300 Day-Years Prophecy of Daniel 8 Vs 14 And Its Sub-Parts.jpg

A brief synopsis of that understanding, may be found beginning in Daniel 8:13-14,26, 9:24-27, in which the going forth of "the commandment" (Daniel 9:25) to restore and to build Jerusalem was finalized in 457 BC (in the fall, one of the most established chronological dates in history, evidence upon request), in the 7th year of the reign of Artaxerxes I Longimanus/Macrocheir as found given in Ezra 7, and "the commandment" was given of God, through 3 Persian Kings (Cyrus II, Darius I Hystaspes and Artaxerxes I Longimanus/Macrocheir), as specified in Ezra 6:14 during the reign of the Medo-Persian empire as Daniel 8 required, of which Daniel 9 forms a section of ("determined"; Daniel 9:24). Utilizing the 'day for a year' principle of Numbers 14:34; Ezekiel 4:6 (&c, more as needful here - https://archive.org/download/secrets-unsealed-stephen-bohr-20-reasons-to-apply-the-day-for-a-year-in-bible-prophecy/Secrets Unsealed - Stephen Bohr - 20 Reasons To Apply The Day For A Year In Bible Prophecy.pdf ), the '70 weeks' (Daniel 9:24), become 490 years (70 x 7), in a greater parallel, or anti-type, to Jeremiah's own 70 years as Daniel understands in Daniel 9:1-2. Therefore, from 457 BC, the 69 weeks (7 + 62 (& 7 x 69); making 483 years (49 + 434); Daniel 9:25), would terminate in the year A.D. 27 at the baptism of Jesus (6 months after John the Baptist began his own ministry in A.D. 26) in the river Jordan (Luke 4) at about the age of 30 years old (Luke 3:23). The final 'week' (Daniel 9:27) of the 70, being split into two equal portions, would bring the close of Jesus' ministry in A.D. 31 at the midpoint of that final 'week' with the true sacrifice given (Hebrews 10:26), and the endpoint of the 'week' in A.D. 34 with the stoning of Stephen by order of the Sanhedrin (Hebrews 2:3).

We believe the 20th year of Artaxerxes reign was in 455 BCE, close to your 457, which likely accounts for the difference of understanding of the yr of Jesus' death.
(Open entire response to read fully)

 

[ReChoired]

Hi, doing well thanks for asking. Please do not think me disrespectful for not calling you sir/maam as I could not figure out which you are.

You are welcome. No, I do not think you disrespectful at all. I find you very courteous Robert. I am male (single), if that may be helpful to you, but if you please, I would not like to be called 'sir', as it means 'lord' (originally a title of knights, etc) and I am definitely not that , but if you want, "Re" is just fine if you want to use a shorter version of the user designation. I have many user names online (hundreds), and it helps keep me safe. Glad to meet you! Do you love to study in the word?, I do. So, if you love to do that, let's have some study together.

CE stands for common era.

Ok, thank you for clarifying your position. I did not want to assume. If you prefer to utilize that abbreviation I will understand what you mean, so no worries.

The year of our Lord is somewhat deceptive

I wouldn't say 'deceptive', though I might say, through a bit of historical inaccuracy, slightly off by about 4 years reckoning, if we take the birth of Christ Jesus as the start for year 1. That was all found out later, but I feel in general it is accurate enough, as human things go.

, as most consider it Jesus' birth, and AD after death

Yes, most understand at Jesus' birth (really circa 4 BC, which was later found out through a more thorough study of chronology). You are correct, that many, unlearned (without knowledge), consider AD to mean "After Death", but that is a modern phenomena, and not an historical one, since most scholars and chronologists wrote in Latin, and understood is original meaning, "Anno" (Year) "Domini" (of the Lord). I usually just explain it as I go to people, and thy seem to pick it right up.

, but we believe the year of the Lord is the year Jesus became the Messiah, at his baptism at the age of 30.

When you say "we", you are referring to whom specifically just so I am aware? The only issue with that understanding (Jesus is Lord at about the age of 30 when he became Messiah) as I compare it to scripture, is that Jesus always was the Messiah/Christ (John 1:41, 4:25; the anointed) even before His birth. The angel Gabriel (he which stands in the presence of God) stated in the Gospel of Luke:

Luk_2:11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
Luk_2:26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.
​

Herod likewise stated:

Mat_2:4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
​

It is also true that Jesus was anointed yet again at the baptism in the Jordan, but also anointed again in Heaven at Pentecost, see Psalms 133:1-3; Acts 2:1-3,33; Revelation 5:6, becoming then, at that moment, the great high priest of the Heavenly Sanctuary above and began His ministry in the Holy Place (Revelation 1, &c).

It's kinda like Jesus being the Son of the Father before coming in the likeness of sinful flesh, and becomes the son of God (the Father) in another manner, and yet again in another manner in the resurrection ('this day I have begotten thee').

 

[ReChoired]

Great question Re, We believe Tiberius Caesars reign began in 14 CE, with Jesus becoming the Messiah in his 15th yr of reign Luke 3:1. He being 30 at that point.

Yes, the 14th when he was in sole reign, but what of the co-reign?

*“...to determining when the reign of Tiberius Caesar started.[38] The traditional approach is … that the reign of Tiberius started when he became co-regent in 11AD, placing the start of the ministry of John the Baptist around 26 AD. ...” - [Wikipedia; "Baptism of Jesus"] - Baptism of Jesus - Wikipedia​

[ Tiberius - Wikipedia ]
[ File:TwentySevenAD.jpg - Wikipedia ]
[ Pontius Pilate - Wikipedia ]
[ Philip the Tetrarch - Wikipedia ]
[ Herod the Great - Wikipedia ]

As for instance, these two timetables would express the historical account with scriptural one:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Ezrachonology.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/TwentySevenAD.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Ezrachonology.jpg

We believe Jesus' ministry lasted 3 and a half yrs Dan 9:27. He attended 4 Passovers during his ministry. The yr of Jesus' death was a great sabbath Jn 19:31

All agreed.

which happened in the year 33.

I must disagree with the chronology here. Would you be interested in a condensed historical account, and why it cannot be year 33 (AD)?

I do not know how often this occurs, but we are sure it did not happen in 31 or 32.

Most have a misunderstanding in Chronology, that can be clarified. Would you like to see what I have seen?

I am sorry this is so condensed, but I tried not to complicate it. Hope that helps, and is understandable.

Totally understandable, though I disagree with a small portion (chronology), and if you would like we can look at that a bit more also. No worries about condensation, I can follow. If at any point I get lost, I will just ask you for clarification as best I can and try not to assume anything.

We believe the 20th year of Artaxerxes reign

May I ask you, why you start the calculation (Daniel 9:25; 70 Weeks) in the 20th Year of Artaxeres I (Nehemiah 1), rather than the 7th in Ezra 7? Would you be interested in why I believe it to be in Ezra 7 (7th year) and not Nehemiah 1 (20th year)? I do not mind a little detour as we discuss covenants. I love study, so no worries too much there as long as I am trying to understand a position.

was in 455 BCE

Can you show from a chronological account how you arrived at 455 BCE for the 20th year of Artaxerxes I, rather than 444 BC? I would like to share with you how I arrive at 444 BC for the 20th year of Artaxerxes from a chronological standpoint. I love history, especially when it ties into prophecy!

, close to your 457, which likely accounts for the difference of understanding of the yr of Jesus' death.

Yet the difference is not so much the years, but rather each of the starting points of calculation and why, and perhaps some chronological differences. We might do better to take a close look at each of ours.

(Open entire response to read fully)

Ok, I think I got to everything. Let me know if I missed anything.

What did you think of the response about the covenants? Do you personally think that the 10 commandments are the old covenant, and if so, can you explain why that is so? And if you would be willing to see what I might share, I would like to share why I believe it is not so.

 

[Robert Gwin]

You are welcome. No, I do not think you disrespectful at all. I find you very courteous Robert. I am male (single), if that may be helpful to you, but if you please, I would not like to be called 'sir', as it means 'lord' (originally a title of knights, etc) and I am definitely not that , but if you want, "Re" is just fine if you want to use a shorter version of the user designation. I have many user names online (hundreds), and it helps keep me safe. Glad to meet you! Do you love to study in the word?, I do. So, if you love to do that, let's have some study together.

Ok, thank you for clarifying your position. I did not want to assume. If you prefer to utilize that abbreviation I will understand what you mean, so no worries.

I wouldn't say 'deceptive', though I might say, through a bit of historical inaccuracy, slightly off by about 4 years reckoning, if we take the birth of Christ Jesus as the start for year 1. That was all found out later, but I feel in general it is accurate enough, as human things go.

Yes, most understand at Jesus' birth (really circa 4 BC, which was later found out through a more thorough study of chronology). You are correct, that many, unlearned (without knowledge), consider AD to mean "After Death", but that is a modern phenomena, and not an historical one, since most scholars and chronologists wrote in Latin, and understood is original meaning, "Anno" (Year) "Domini" (of the Lord). I usually just explain it as I go to people, and thy seem to pick it right up.

When you say "we", you are referring to whom specifically just so I am aware? The only issue with that understanding (Jesus is Lord at about the age of 30 when he became Messiah) as I compare it to scripture, is that Jesus always was the Messiah/Christ (John 1:41, 4:25; the anointed) even before His birth. The angel Gabriel (he which stands in the presence of God) stated in the Gospel of Luke:

Luk_2:11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
Luk_2:26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.
​

Herod likewise stated:

Mat_2:4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
​

It is also true that Jesus was anointed yet again at the baptism in the Jordan, but also anointed again in Heaven at Pentecost, see Psalms 133:1-3; Acts 2:1-3,33; Revelation 5:6, becoming then, at that moment, the great high priest of the Heavenly Sanctuary above and began His ministry in the Holy Place (Revelation 1, &c).

It's kinda like Jesus being the Son of the Father before coming in the likeness of sinful flesh, and becomes the son of God (the Father) in another manner, and yet again in another manner in the resurrection ('this day I have begotten thee').

Hi Re, I will do my utmost to not call you sir, I made a note and I apologize in advance for the times I mess up in the future as that is my natural way of speaking. When I say we, I am one of Jehovah's witnesses and I am referring to us as a whole, as our beliefs as a faith.

I certainly understand your position on when Jesus became the Messiah, and appreciate your scriptural proof for such. We definitely agree he was the foretold Messiah/Christ. I think that you are fully aware that language changes over time, hence the need for updated translations. I am 67 yrs old and have observed it, and clearly one can see it by looking into the King James version of the Bible and seeing the 1600's language. I am not exactly sure when we switched to using BCE and CE exactly, but we did it because those in the field are being taught that in the classroom and it is a growing acceptance of the record of time. Perhaps even a more accurate way of rendering it, although it has a less spiritual feeling to it.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Yes, the 14th when he was in sole reign, but what of the co-reign?

*“...to determining when the reign of Tiberius Caesar started.[38] The traditional approach is … that the reign of Tiberius started when he became co-regent in 11AD, placing the start of the ministry of John the Baptist around 26 AD. ...” - [Wikipedia; "Baptism of Jesus"] - Baptism of Jesus - Wikipedia​

[ Tiberius - Wikipedia ]
[ File:TwentySevenAD.jpg - Wikipedia ]
[ Pontius Pilate - Wikipedia ]
[ Philip the Tetrarch - Wikipedia ]
[ Herod the Great - Wikipedia ]

As for instance, these two timetables would express the historical account with scriptural one:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Ezrachonology.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/TwentySevenAD.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Ezrachonology.jpg

All agreed.

I must disagree with the chronology here. Would you be interested in a condensed historical account, and why it cannot be year 33 (AD)?

Most have a misunderstanding in Chronology, that can be clarified. Would you like to see what I have seen?

Totally understandable, though I disagree with a small portion (chronology), and if you would like we can look at that a bit more also. No worries about condensation, I can follow. If at any point I get lost, I will just ask you for clarification as best I can and try not to assume anything.

May I ask you, why you start the calculation (Daniel 9:25; 70 Weeks) in the 20th Year of Artaxeres I (Nehemiah 1), rather than the 7th in Ezra 7? Would you be interested in why I believe it to be in Ezra 7 (7th year) and not Nehemiah 1 (20th year)? I do not mind a little detour as we discuss covenants. I love study, so no worries too much there as long as I am trying to understand a position.

Can you show from a chronological account how you arrived at 455 BCE for the 20th year of Artaxerxes I, rather than 444 BC? I would like to share with you how I arrive at 444 BC for the 20th year of Artaxerxes from a chronological standpoint. I love history, especially when it ties into prophecy!

Yet the difference is not so much the years, but rather each of the starting points of calculation and why, and perhaps some chronological differences. We might do better to take a close look at each of ours.

Ok, I think I got to everything. Let me know if I missed anything.

What did you think of the response about the covenants? Do you personally think that the 10 commandments are the old covenant, and if so, can you explain why that is so? And if you would be willing to see what I might share, I would like to share why I believe it is not so.

I definitely appreciate the length you went to to show your timeline Re. The only thing I can say is that very likely both of us realize that a timeline is speculation, and neither of us would be able to prove the correctness of it. What convinces me of our timeline being correct, as I questioned it as well when I was a beginning student, as well as the relevancy of it is, that the brothers put into print in 1879 the end of the appointed times of the nations and the enthronement of Jesus as King. They put into print 1914, and lo and behold the signs Jesus gave came about. In October of 1914 WW#1 broke out, the first sign Jesus gave to his disciples to recognize his presence as King. That is what made me believe the date was accurate.

For us the giving or taking of a few yrs is kind of irrelevant as likely we both agree that we are very deep into this system, and that the generation Jesus referred to that will not be gone before all those things occurred is very close to it's demise, meaning that Jesus' return is very near. That is why I am interested in the time line.

We believe that the 10 commandments were the part of the law covenant which existed of over 600 laws that was personally penned by Jehovah's hand. I will certainly look at your viewpoint on why you think the 10 were not part of the Law covenant given through Moses.

 

[ReChoired]

Hi Re, I will do my utmost to not call you sir, I made a note and I apologize in advance for the times I mess up in the future as that is my natural way of speaking.

Ok, thank you Robert. No worries then about 'slipping up', as I know that when things are natural to us, it is hard to catch everything. So I will not take offense in future. It's one of the reasons I wrote what I did in the OP about prayerfully engaging in this thread and with one another.

When I say we, I am one of Jehovah's witnesses and I am referring to us as a whole, as our beliefs as a faith.

Oh, ok! I used to have a mailman (carrier), "Dan", who was an elder in the WTS organization. Very nice man, and I was able to spend a little time with him (and the other he came with, while the third waited in the car outside) as he would come by, and once or twice invited him for study when he had time off. That was several years ago.

There was also a younger fellow, can't remember the name of him now, that I also spent a little time with. I have met many other Jehovah's Witnesses over the years; some as they came to my parents door, and some as I went to their doors (door to door) years later, and many online.

I appreciate many things that they practice and teach (though some things I disagree with).

I certainly understand your position on when Jesus became the Messiah, and appreciate your scriptural proof for such. We definitely agree he was the foretold Messiah/Christ.

Scripture is my foundation, Isaiah 8:20.

I think that you are fully aware that language changes over time

Sure. Classic example, James 2:3 KJB, "gay clothing".

, hence the need for updated translations.

Here is where I would disagree with you. I am thoroughly studied in modern translations, and can show many reasons why they are not good, and in many cases, quite destructive to the Gospel and living righteously. If you want, I can share some of those things with you also, and I can start with the Bible as the foundation and example of how JEHOVAH elohiym treats 'archaisms', and shifting languages. Let me know. We can do some of that here also.

I am 67 yrs old

You are elder than I, and I pray I do not disrespect that difference, and treat you kindly as you deserve, though I pray that if I have to say something 'straight', you will not take offense, but take it as a response of love to you ward.

and have observed it, and clearly one can see it by looking into the King James version of the Bible and seeing the 1600's language.

I think you may have a confusion of something here, but I won't be certain until we look at it a bit more. The language of the Bible is the language of the Bible, no matter what language it is in (English, Greek, Hebrew, Latin, etc), no matter what age it is in, though certain "words" may become 'archaic', or take on alternate, and even counter, meanings. The language of the KJB is still to this day (presently) used in much of the world, since it is of England English. Therefore, it is spoken in the UK, Europe, China, India, Australia, South America's and North America's (including the united States and Canada), etc. I have an entire book, on this subject of the language of the KJB, and it shows how the English (England) language is used in everyday common places, like newspapers, books, movies, to this present day. If you would like, I can cite a bit of that also if you want to look at some of it.

I am not exactly sure when we switched to using BCE and CE exactly, but we did it because those in the field are being taught that in the classroom and it is a growing acceptance of the record of time.

I have found that the reason it was switched, was because of the King of the South (Daniel 11:40), or alternatively known as "the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit" (Revelation 11:7), or "king over them" (Revelation 9:11), that "great city, which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt" (Revelation 11:8), the very spirit of "Pharaoh" (Exodus 5:4-5, 8-9), which is known in modern language as 'secular humanism' (atheism, evolutionism, etc). The religion of JEHOVAH was being removed from educational systems in the world, and replaced with a secular religion. Like I said though, I understand why some use it.

Perhaps even a more accurate way of rendering it, although it has a less spiritual feeling to it.

It is the lack of Godly or Bible "spiritual" that concerns me, though it has another "spiritual" association as I understand it above. However, I do not desire to make the difference between us on that a thing to stumble over.

 

[ReChoired]

I definitely appreciate the length you went to to show your timeline Re.

Oh sure thing. I am most serious about sharing what I believe and why. I love the truth as it is written in the word of God. I love God, in a way that sometimes makes me sad because I feel that I haven't done enough (or feels insignificant) to express that love for what God did for me. It is not about earning that love from God, but an owing of love.

The only thing I can say is that very likely both of us realize that a timeline is speculation, and neither of us would be able to prove the correctness of it.

Not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify this point? Are you speaking of the historical aspects (like creation, flood, Babylon, Medo-Persia, etc) or future ones (7 last plagues, etc), or the whole in general? From my understanding of scripture, it accurately and precisely records many events to even specific days in some instances.

What convinces me of our timeline being correct, as I questioned it as well when I was a beginning student, as well as the relevancy of it is, that the brothers put into print in 1879 the end of the appointed times of the nations and the enthronement of Jesus as King. They put into print 1914, and lo and behold the signs Jesus gave came about. In October of 1914 WW#1 broke out, the first sign Jesus gave to his disciples to recognize his presence as King. That is what made me believe the date was accurate.

I am not following. Maybe I can ask you something, as I have attempted to ask other WTS members (can I use JW for short, or what do you prefer) and I never really received an specific answer due to various reasons.

I have some questions. It concerns the time prophecies as understood by the WTS/JW org. I would like to cite from their common books, which I have here in front of me, and then ask a few questions.



Question 01 - Is this timelime (picture) accurately representing the WTS/JW prophetic timeline as understood in their source materials?

Question 02 - Are the following statements accurate and perfect quotations from "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy":

In regards the WTS/JW timeline above, the '2,520' it is written in Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy:

PADP, page 96 reads, "... [28] Since the "seven times" are prophetic, we must apply to the 2,520 days the Scriptural rule: "A day for a year." This rule is set out in a prophecy regarding the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem. (Ezekiel 4:6,7 compare Numbers 14:34.) ..."​

In regards the WTS/JW timeline above, the '2,300' it is written in Pay Attention To Daniel' Prophecy:

PADP, page 177 reads, "... The 2,300 days constitute a prophetic period. Hence, a prophetic year of 360 days is involved. (Revelation 11:2,3, 12:6,14) This 2,300 days, then, would amount to 6 years, 4 months and 20 days. ..."​

Question 03 - If Questions 01 and 02 are answered in the affirmative ('Yes'), then How can the WTS/JW say that the '2,520' of Daniel 4, according to their theology, needs to have the 'day for a year' principle, as cited, applied which makes for 2,520 natural years, and when it comes to the '2,300' of Daniel 8:14, which the WTS/JW org. say "constitute a prophetic period", and not apply the same rule therein, as done to the '2,520' which are the "prophetic" "seven times"? (This question is asking about consistency in application of said "Scriptural rule" in WTS.JW theology)

Question 04 - According to WTS/JW theology/doctrines, can anyone provide sourced documentation (available to be read online, PDF, etc) on what the WTS/JW org teaches on the following time prophecies (or if they are time prophecies at all), when they occurred, or will occur:

Daniel 11:14 (KJB) - "in those times"
Daniel 11:24 (KJB) - "even for a time"
Daniel 11:40 (KJB) - "at the time of the end"
Revelation 2:10 (KJB) - "tribulation ten days"
Revelation 3:10 (KJB) - "the hour of temptation"
Revelation 8:1 (KJB) - "about the space of half an hour"
Revelation 9:5,6,10 (KJB) - "five months", "those days", "five months"
Revelation 9:15 (KJB) - "an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year"
Revelation 10:6 (KJB) - "that there should be time no longer"
Revelation 11:9,11 (KJB) - "three days and an half"
Revelation 17:12 (KJB) - "one hour"

Also, are the times of Revelation 11:2,3, 12:6,14, 13:5, differing or the same timeframes as found in Daniel 7:25, 12:7 (please expound briefly with source citation)?​

Question 05 - Why does the WTS/JW timeline (above), begin the 7 heads of Revelation 17 with [1] "Egypt" and [2] "Assyria" (PADP, page 165), rather than Babylon?

I am most interested in obtaining these answers. I have been trying to find out for years on at least one of these (like Q4).

For us the giving or taking of a few yrs is kind of irrelevant as likely we both agree that we are very deep into this system,

I would agree that we are in the final stages of this earth's history. WWI for me is simply part of Matthew 24:6; Mark 13:7.

and that the generation Jesus referred to that will not be gone before all those things occurred is very close to it's demise, meaning that Jesus' return is very near.

Yes and no from my part. I believe we are in the last generation, but it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with WWI as you understand. I do believe that Jesus' second advent is near.

That is why I am interested in the time line.

Ok. I just wanted to discuss some of the details, and if you find anything in my timeline that needs correction to help me know it, as I would rather not have any error, and presently do not see any in that which I have shared. I have tried to accurately give the WTS timeline, and do desire your input, in case I missed anything, and would like to add the further information if possible from answers to my question 4.

 

[ReChoired]

We believe that the 10 commandments were the part of the law covenant which existed of over 600 laws

Have you seen the evidence that shows that the talmudic counting (613) is incorrect and based in kabbalistic Jewish mystic numerology? I can show you if you would like.

that was personally penned by Jehovah's hand.

Do you mean that all "600" (sic) were "personally penned by Jehovah's hand", or just the Ten Commandments? From my study of scripture, only the Ten Commandments were engraved by God's hand, and the all else (in the first five books) was basically given by Moses' hand by inspiration from God's Holy Spirit.

I will certainly look at your viewpoint on why you think the 10 were not part of the Law covenant given through Moses.

Ok, appreciate that. I want to consider a few verses:

Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

What "law" is Paul referring to in Romans 3:31?

What "my law" is Jeremiah referring to in Jeremiah 31:33?

Then I want to look at 2 Corinthians 3:1-18 carefully:

2Co 3:1 Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you?
2Co 3:2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:
2Co 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
2Co 3:4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
2Co 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
2Co 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
2Co 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:
2Co 3:8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
2Co 3:9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.
2Co 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.
2Co 3:11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.
2Co 3:12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:
2Co 3:13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
2Co 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
2Co 3:16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
2Co 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
2Co 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

The text shows that the Ten Commandments remain and were not the old covenant.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Ok, thank you Robert. No worries then about 'slipping up', as I know that when things are natural to us, it is hard to catch everything. So I will not take offense in future. It's one of the reasons I wrote what I did in the OP about prayerfully engaging in this thread and with one another.

Oh, ok! I used to have a mailman (carrier), "Dan", who was an elder in the WTS organization. Very nice man, and I was able to spend a little time with him (and the other he came with, while the third waited in the car outside) as he would come by, and once or twice invited him for study when he had time off. That was several years ago.

There was also a younger fellow, can't remember the name of him now, that I also spent a little time with. I have met many other Jehovah's Witnesses over the years; some as they came to my parents door, and some as I went to their doors (door to door) years later, and many online.

I appreciate many things that they practice and teach (though some things I disagree with).

Scripture is my foundation, Isaiah 8:20.

Sure. Classic example, James 2:3 KJB, "gay clothing".

Here is where I would disagree with you. I am thoroughly studied in modern translations, and can show many reasons why they are not good, and in many cases, quite destructive to the Gospel and living righteously. If you want, I can share some of those things with you also, and I can start with the Bible as the foundation and example of how JEHOVAH elohiym treats 'archaisms', and shifting languages. Let me know. We can do some of that here also.
I apologize Re for not being able to chop the conversation as you do into sections, perhaps you can guide me into the hows of it.

I used to believe the KJV was the Bible rather than a version. I now recommend the New World Translation as the most accurate version as you may understand. One thing is for certain, the removal of God's name is very dangerous Rom 10:13. Any version which does so clearly should not be recommended, although when asked I recommend the KJV in the 3rd spot as you can find the path in it, just a tad bit more difficult.

Lets discuss some of the things you disagree with, that is where the key to truth lies.

You are elder than I, and I pray I do not disrespect that difference, and treat you kindly as you deserve, though I pray that if I have to say something 'straight', you will not take offense, but take it as a response of love to you ward.

I think you may have a confusion of something here, but I won't be certain until we look at it a bit more. The language of the Bible is the language of the Bible, no matter what language it is in (English, Greek, Hebrew, Latin, etc), no matter what age it is in, though certain "words" may become 'archaic', or take on alternate, and even counter, meanings. The language of the KJB is still to this day (presently) used in much of the world, since it is of England English. Therefore, it is spoken in the UK, Europe, China, India, Australia, South America's and North America's (including the united States and Canada), etc. I have an entire book, on this subject of the language of the KJB, and it shows how the English (England) language is used in everyday common places, like newspapers, books, movies, to this present day. If you would like, I can cite a bit of that also if you want to look at some of it.

I have found that the reason it was switched, was because of the King of the South (Daniel 11:40), or alternatively known as "the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit" (Revelation 11:7), or "king over them" (Revelation 9:11), that "great city, which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt" (Revelation 11:8), the very spirit of "Pharaoh" (Exodus 5:4-5, 8-9), which is known in modern language as 'secular humanism' (atheism, evolutionism, etc). The religion of JEHOVAH was being removed from educational systems in the world, and replaced with a secular religion. Like I said though, I understand why some use it.

It is the lack of Godly or Bible "spiritual" that concerns me, though it has another "spiritual" association as I understand it above. However, I do not desire to make the difference between us on that a thing to stumble over.

Please open the whole thing Re to see my reply

 

[Robert Gwin]

Oh sure thing. I am most serious about sharing what I believe and why. I love the truth as it is written in the word of God. I love God, in a way that sometimes makes me sad because I feel that I haven't done enough (or feels insignificant) to express that love for what God did for me. It is not about earning that love from God, but an owing of love.

Not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify this point? Are you speaking of the historical aspects (like creation, flood, Babylon, Medo-Persia, etc) or future ones (7 last plagues, etc), or the whole in general? From my understanding of scripture, it accurately and precisely records many events to even specific days in some instances.

Sure, our timeline is different than yours, so one of us is incorrect. The Bible doesn't give dates, so any dates given are simply opinion, which may be correct or not.

I am not following. Maybe I can ask you something, as I have attempted to ask other WTS members (can I use JW for short, or what do you prefer) and I never really received an specific answer due to various reasons.

I have some questions. It concerns the time prophecies as understood by the WTS/JW org. I would like to cite from their common books, which I have here in front of me, and then ask a few questions.

I cannot answer for others, but to me the timeline is not all that interesting to me. I told you what convinced me that the brothers were correct as they put it in writing in 1879, and then WW#1 broke out in 1914, that is what convinced me.

View attachment 15809

Question 01 - Is this timelime (picture) accurately representing the WTS/JW prophetic timeline as understood in their source materials?

Question 02 - Are the following statements accurate and perfect quotations from "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy":

In regards the WTS/JW timeline above, the '2,520' it is written in Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy:

PADP, page 96 reads, "... [28] Since the "seven times" are prophetic, we must apply to the 2,520 days the Scriptural rule: "A day for a year." This rule is set out in a prophecy regarding the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem. (Ezekiel 4:6,7 compare Numbers 14:34.) ..."
Looks the same to me:
*** dp chap. 6 p. 96 par. 28 Unraveling the Mystery of the Great Tree ***
28 Since the “seven times” are prophetic, we must apply to the 2,520 days the Scriptural rule: “A day for a year.” This rule is set out in a prophecy regarding the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem. (Ezekiel 4:6, 7; compare Numbers 14:34.)

​

In regards the WTS/JW timeline above, the '2,300' it is written in Pay Attention To Daniel' Prophecy:

PADP, page 177 reads, "... The 2,300 days constitute a prophetic period. Hence, a prophetic year of 360 days is involved. (Revelation 11:2,3, 12:6,14) This 2,300 days, then, would amount to 6 years, 4 months and 20 days. ..."

*** dp chap. 10 p. 177 par. 25 Who Can Stand Against the Prince of Princes? ***
The 2,300 days constitute a prophetic period. Hence, a prophetic year of 360 days is involved. (Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14) This 2,300 days, then, would amount to 6 years, 4 months, and 20 days.
Yes looks the same to me.​

Question 03 - If Questions 01 and 02 are answered in the affirmative ('Yes'), then How can the WTS/JW say that the '2,520' of Daniel 4, according to their theology, needs to have the 'day for a year' principle, as cited, applied which makes for 2,520 natural years, and when it comes to the '2,300' of Daniel 8:14, which the WTS/JW org. say "constitute a prophetic period", and not apply the same rule therein, as done to the '2,520' which are the "prophetic" "seven times"? (This question is asking about consistency in application of said "Scriptural rule" in WTS.JW theology)

Those were explained in the publications. Do you simply want me to copy the explanation and give it to you? Space is limited here, my email is [email protected]

Question 04 - According to WTS/JW theology/doctrines, can anyone provide sourced documentation (available to be read online, PDF, etc) on what the WTS/JW org teaches on the following time prophecies (or if they are time prophecies at all), when they occurred, or will occur:

Daniel 11:14 (KJB) - "in those times"
Daniel 11:24 (KJB) - "even for a time"
Daniel 11:40 (KJB) - "at the time of the end"
Revelation 2:10 (KJB) - "tribulation ten days"
Revelation 3:10 (KJB) - "the hour of temptation"
Revelation 8:1 (KJB) - "about the space of half an hour"
Revelation 9:5,6,10 (KJB) - "five months", "those days", "five months"
Revelation 9:15 (KJB) - "an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year"
Revelation 10:6 (KJB) - "that there should be time no longer"
Revelation 11:9,11 (KJB) - "three days and an half"
Revelation 17:12 (KJB) - "one hour"

Also, are the times of Revelation 11:2,3, 12:6,14, 13:5, differing or the same timeframes as found in Daniel 7:25, 12:7 (please expound briefly with source citation)?​

Question 05 - Why does the WTS/JW timeline (above), begin the 7 heads of Revelation 17 with [1] "Egypt" and [2] "Assyria" (PADP, page 165), rather than Babylon?

I am most interested in obtaining these answers. I have been trying to find out for years on at least one of these (like Q4).

I would agree that we are in the final stages of this earth's history. WWI for me is simply part of Matthew 24:6; Mark 13:7.

Yes and no from my part. I believe we are in the last generation, but it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with WWI as you understand. I do believe that Jesus' second advent is near.
Mat 24: 7 Nation will rise against nation, clearly a distinctive war compared to the previous conflicts Jesus said would happen. I believe WW#1 was clearly the fulfillment of Jesus' words there.
Ok. I just wanted to discuss some of the details, and if you find anything in my timeline that needs correction to help me know it, as I would rather not have any error, and presently do not see any in that which I have shared. I have tried to accurately give the WTS timeline, and do desire your input, in case I missed anything, and would like to add the further information if possible from answers to my question 4.

I must apologize to you Re, you have great questions, but sadly they are just not questions that I have been interested in, and they are certainly important, but I think above my echelon a bit. I think you already have the Daniel book, and here is the link for the Revelation book:

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/?contentLanguageFilter=en&pubFilter=re&sortBy=1

Those books explain our position on those verses.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Have you seen the evidence that shows that the talmudic counting (613) is incorrect and based in kabbalistic Jewish mystic numerology? I can show you if you would like.

Do you mean that all "600" (sic) were "personally penned by Jehovah's hand", or just the Ten Commandments? From my study of scripture, only the Ten Commandments were engraved by God's hand, and the all else (in the first five books) was basically given by Moses' hand by inspiration from God's Holy Spirit. Just the 10

Ok, appreciate that. I want to consider a few verses:

Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

What "law" is Paul referring to in Romans 3:31?

What "my law" is Jeremiah referring to in Jeremiah 31:33?

Then I want to look at 2 Corinthians 3:1-18 carefully:

2Co 3:1 Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you?
2Co 3:2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:
2Co 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
2Co 3:4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
2Co 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
2Co 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
2Co 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:
2Co 3:8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
2Co 3:9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.
2Co 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.
2Co 3:11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.
2Co 3:12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:
2Co 3:13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
2Co 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
2Co 3:16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
2Co 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
2Co 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

The text shows that the Ten Commandments remain and were not the old covenant.

Jehovah's witnesses observe 9 of the 10 commandments today Re, the only one not observed is the Sabbath.

 

[ReChoired]

I apologize Re for not being able to chop the conversation as you do into sections, perhaps you can guide me into the hows of it.

No worries, I understand. There are several ways to "chop the conversation".

[1] Use the highlight (with mouse) and "+Quote" feature. In this method, you will highlight a certain portion (or all) of my response, and after you highlight what you want, a little 'tag' will appear at the end (normally, sometimes broken, just refresh page and try again), and click the "+Quote" option. It will then save those quotes in a sort of 'notepad' and a message at the top of your browser will say, "Message added to Multi Quote". Then, look at the bottom left of forum for the "INSERT QUOTES" button. Reply to the message this way, and choose which quotes to include in the reply. You can do one or multiple at the same time. It will automatically load each quote you want to reply to. Then, in your reply, just begin typing after each "{/quote}" section you want to reply to, or before each "{Quote="{name}, post:{number}, member:{number}..."}", if you want to make a statement before what I said.

[2] The other way which might be easier, or not depending, is to simply click the "<- Reply" button at the bottom right of my response. At this point, an entire post will show up as normal with "{Quote="{name}, post:{number}, member:{number}..."}" followed by my response ending with "{/quote}", to which you normally type after. You can highlight and copy those sections of code and past them in any part of my reply to break it up. Each thing you want to reply to in my response, just make sure it begins with the section of code [JUST A SAMPLE] "{Quote="{name}, post:{number}, member:{number}..."}" and ends with "{/quote}". For instance, if I reply with the following:

"This is a test sentence. Do not be frustrated. Learn something new today!"

You can either reply to the whole thing like this:

[JUST A SAMPLE] "{Quote="{name}, post:{number}, member:{number}..."}" This is a test sentence. Do not be frustrated. Learn something new today!"{/quote}" Then type your reply here, or even before it. Or, you can break it up:

[JUST A SAMPLE] "{Quote="{name}, post:{number}, member:{number}..."}" This is a test sentence. "{/quote}"

[JUST A SAMPLE] "{Quote="{name}, post:{number}, member:{number}..."}" Do not be frustrated. "{/quote}"

[JUST A SAMPLE] "{Quote="{name}, post:{number}, member:{number}..."}" Learn something new today! "{/quote}"

Then simply reply after each "{/quote}". So, when you click the "<- Reply" button, you should see the code you need at the top and bottom of my reply. Always use that for reply to those specific things.

[3] The third and final way, which might be easier for you, is simply to copy any section of my reply you want and paste it into your reply, and just add the following code before and after each reply, [BEFORE] "{quote}" [AFTER] "{/quote}", and replace the "{", "}", with "[", "]", instead. It will not show my name as the person, but will give simple quotes.

I sometimes use a combination of all three depending.

I used to believe the KJV was the Bible rather than a version. I now recommend the New World Translation as the most accurate version as you may understand. One thing is for certain, the removal of God's name is very dangerous Rom 10:13. Any version which does so clearly should not be recommended, although when asked I recommend the KJV in the 3rd spot as you can find the path in it, just a tad bit more difficult.

I believe the KJB is the Bible, the inspired and preserved words of God in the English language. Robert, can you clarify what you mean when you say "the removal of God's name"? The name of JEHOVAH is still in the KJB (English, in 7 places), and a shortened form also in many. Do you mean all the places in which the English translation reverences the name of God, and simply uses something like "LORD", or "LORD God" in the places where the Masoretic Hebrew has "יהוה"? If so, Do you know why the KJB did what they did? A very good and Biblical reason.

In the NT koine Greek that underlies the KJB, is there any place in which one Apostle or NT writer wrote in koine Greek the name "IEOVAH", or did every single one of the NT writers, in the original language, simply use "kurios" (kyrios), etc., when citing an OT passage with God's name in it or speaking about JEHOVAH specifically?

Question: If the NT writers, under inspiration of the Holy Ghost (you believe the NT is inspired of God, yes?), wrote in koine Greek a form of the word for 'Lord', such as the word "κυριε" (Hebrews 1:10 GNT TR) when translating from the Hebrew "יהוה" (Psalms 102:12), why cannot the KJB translators do the same when going from Hebrew to English and just use "Lord"?

Question: If the OT writers, under inspiration of the Holy Ghost (you believe the OT is inspired of God, yes?), wrote in Hebrew (some Syriack) a form of the word for 'Lord', such as the word "אדני" (adonai) (Psalms 16:2, etc) when referring to "יהוה" (Psalms 16:2, etc), or where they were referring to another place in the OT, or restating a section of the OT, and simply used "אדני" (adonai) where was "יהוה" in a previous place, why cannot the KJB translators do the same when going from Hebrew to English and use "Lord" or "LORD"?

To understand your position Robert, I would really need an answer to those two last questions.

Lets discuss some of the things you disagree with, that is where the key to truth lies.

Ok, sounds good, let's talk about the covenants and God's Law (Ten Commandments).

Please open the whole thing Re to see my reply

Ok, think I got to everything.

 

[ReChoired]

Just the 10

Ok, thank you for clarifying. Would you understand by that then, that God made distinction between that which God specifically wrote (Ten Commandments) and that which Moses wrote (everything else), or do you not think there is any difference by that distinction?

Jehovah's witnesses observe 9 of the 10 commandments today Re, the only one not observed is the Sabbath.

I do not find anywhere in scripture where God commands anyone to just keep "9" out of the Ten Commandments. James and John said,

Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law [Ten Commandments, 10/10], and yet offend in one point [1/10], he is guilty of all [10/10].

1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression [1/10 or more] of the law [10/10].
​

Solomon said:

Ecc_12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments [10/10]: for this is the whole duty of man [Adam, the 1st and Last].​

So, if I may ask, why do you, as a Jehovah's Witness, only observe 9/10 and not keep the one commandment God (JEHOVAH) said to "Remember" (Exodus 20:8-11)? That is sin according to John in scripture, and it also means that the other 9 are also broken and not actually kept according to James.

 

[ReChoired]

Sure, our timeline is different than yours, so one of us is incorrect.

Ok, so I see it this way.

[1] The timeline I provided is correct and the WTS/JW is in error. Or,
[2] The WTS/JW timeline I provided is correct and the timeline I provided is in error. Or,
[3] Both timelines are in error.​

How can we determine which is the correct timeline, or at least a more accurate one? What do you suggest? I am interested in truth and presenting accurately. Where should we begin to test the timeline? I am ready to accept your suggestion to where we begin to test and look.

The Bible doesn't give dates

Yes and no.

The Bible in many places gives exact 'dates' such as the "third year of Cyrus" (Daniel 10:1), and even down to specific 'days', but if you mean a 'date' like "October 22 1844" spelled out, in that you are correct. However, that does not mean that we cannot know exactly when a prophecy began or when a prophecy ended. God is not in the business of having us guess at anything. The Bible provides enough information that we may know with certainty the times God has left for us to know. God is the God of order and time (I know you would agree).

As for the history of time, please consider my own studied Chronology from scripture and prophecy, combined with historical accounts here, beginning from Genesis unto our day -

https://archive.org/download/age-of-the-earth/Age of the Earth.pdf

, so any dates given are simply opinion, which may be correct or not.

I disagree with you Robert. I think we can be exact. However, if we take your position, then it automatically undermines your position, seeing as then you cannot know anything about 1914, or the WTS/JW 607 BC with specificity. Your position is in doubt by your own stated position, while mine is not. You may not accept my position (certainty), but that is not evidence against that position, logically speaking. I can provide the historical documents which provide me with certainty. Can you provide evidence to the contrary that would place doubt upon my position? Likewise, can you provide historical documents which would show your position more accurately (though you do not believe with certainty)?

I am more than willing to share what I have without prejudice. I ask you test all of it and tell me where it is in error, and that way you can help me best.

I cannot answer for others, but to me the timeline is not all that interesting to me.

May I ask why not? From my own perspective, an accurate timeline, proves to me that God (JEHOVAH) is who God said God is:

Isa 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:​

So, when God provides an accurate and detailed timeline, it shows to me that God is, and able to do what God said.

I told you what convinced me that the brothers were correct as they put it in writing in 1879, and then WW#1 broke out in 1914, that is what convinced me.

Can you show me exactly what was in print in 1879, so I can take a look at it please?

Looks the same to me:
*** dp chap. 6 p. 96 par. 28 Unraveling the Mystery of the Great Tree ***
28 Since the “seven times” are prophetic, we must apply to the 2,520 days the Scriptural rule: “A day for a year.” This rule is set out in a prophecy regarding the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem. (Ezekiel 4:6, 7; compare Numbers 14:34.)

*** dp chap. 10 p. 177 par. 25 Who Can Stand Against the Prince of Princes? ***
The 2,300 days constitute a prophetic period. Hence, a prophetic year of 360 days is involved. (Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14) This 2,300 days, then, would amount to 6 years, 4 months, and 20 days.
Yes looks the same to me.

Ok, thank you.

Those were explained in the publications. Do you simply want me to copy the explanation and give it to you? Space is limited here, my email is [email protected]

Thank you for your email. I may utilize that as needful. If I cannot receive the information I need here, I might contact you, unless you would prefer by email, then I can contact you right away.

I have fully read both publications. I did not find the answer to Question 3 in there. Can you cite the portion that directly address Question 3. It is possible I simply missed it. Recited:

Question 03 - If Questions 01 and 02 are answered in the affirmative ('Yes'), then How can the WTS/JW say that the '2,520' of Daniel 4, according to their theology, needs to have the 'day for a year' principle, as cited, applied which makes for 2,520 natural years, and when it comes to the '2,300' of Daniel 8:14, which the WTS/JW org. say "constitute a prophetic period", and not apply the same rule therein, as done to the '2,520' which are the "prophetic" "seven times"? (This question is asking about consistency in application of said "Scriptural rule" in WTS.JW theology)

I personally do not think there is any 2520 (years) in Daniel 4 to begin with, but we can look if you desire, and perhaps show me what I am missing.

Mat 24: 7 Nation will rise against nation, clearly a distinctive war compared to the previous conflicts Jesus said would happen. I believe WW#1 was clearly the fulfillment of Jesus' words there.

"Nation" isn't "kingdom", it is from the koine Greek "ethnos" (ethnic).

"εγερθησεται γαρ εθνος επι εθνος"​

The second part says "kingdom", which refers to state/political powers.

In any case, I do believe that Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 do speak in general about wars (like WWI, II, Vietnam, Cold War, Iraq/Iran, etc), but there is no date, or time prophecy associated. It is just a statement of events, not time. Why do you associate Daniel 4 with Matthew 24:7? I truly believe that after October 22 1844 we cannot know the specific "times", though we can know the "events".

Why do you say, "... clearly a distinctive war compared to the previous conflicts Jesus said would happen." In other words, I am asking, why do you say "war" singular, compared to "conflicts" (previously) plural? In Matthew 24:6, there are "wars" (plural), and in Matthew 24:7, it begins with the word "for" (which references vs 6), which means 'because, or being the cause or reason'), and thus those 'wars' (vs 6) are the result of (vs 7).

I must apologize to you Re, you have great questions, but sadly they are just not questions that I have been interested in, and they are certainly important, but I think above my echelon a bit.

I understand that you may not be interested in my questions, however, I had hoped you might know where I might find the answers, or know someone who is interested in my subject. Would you pass my questions along to someone who might be able to address them? I am still interested in finding answers to them.

I think you already have the Daniel book

Yes, I have it right here.

, and here is the link for the Revelation book

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/?contentLanguageFilter=en&pubFilter=re&sortBy=1

Those books explain our position on those verses.

Thank you. I will take a look through it, as I had tried to get a physical copy of that book a while ago, and when I had in the past gone looking online for it, did not find it, but that was some time ago. I will let you know if it answers the questions or not.

 

[Ziggy]

I have often wondered at this verse:

Gen 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Abraham was God's friend.
What did Abraham do that was different or originated that this new/old covenant have or didn't have in it?
We know that circumcision was given to Abraham.
Would that be considered a charge, a commandment (singular)
What are the statutes and laws and commandments in plural?

How many of these were carried over to the Mosaic Covenant?
Thank You
Hugs

 

[Robert Gwin]

I believe the KJB is the Bible, the inspired and preserved words of God in the English language. Robert, can you clarify what you mean when you say "the removal of God's name"? The name of JEHOVAH is still in the KJB (English, in 7 places), and a shortened form also in many. Do you mean all the places in which the English translation reverences the name of God, and simply uses something like "LORD", or "LORD God" in the places where the Masoretic Hebrew has "יהוה"? If so, Do you know why the KJB did what they did? A very good and Biblical reason.

Hi Re, I think you helped me with posting, we will see how this works out. To answer this part. YHWH is God's name, it occurs thousands of times in the Bible, yet the translators of the KJV, not B, V stands for version of the Bible, the translators ignored God's name and changed it to Adonai, properly translated Lord. A good example of the manipulation is Ps 110:1 which is easy to see the alteration which contains both YHWH as well as Adonai, yet the KJV says The LORD said to my Lord, when in reality the Bible said Jehovah said to my Lord. It is notable however that where LORD is all capatalized it is where the Divine Name occurs. Some publishers have included that in the forward.