To my "knowledgeable" brothers

 

I've decided to bring back a blog post "aware proclaimer" because of the depth of the questions asked and the importance of the topic.

I would have preferred to do so by intervening on the blog concerned but, after just four comments, these were closed.

It was therefore not possible for me to do it in a "canonical" way and among other things it would have been a problem for the length of the post.

I wish to premise that the purpose of this article is not to argue with anyone.

Just as I myself don't like receiving controversies, I don't even like making them.

However, since it is a subject that is very close to my heart and should be close to the heart of every Christian, I have the hope that this article will prompt someone to reflect on the Scriptures away from certain paradigms,

Anyone who wants can make their own assessments.

I invite and encourage the author of the post below to intervene scripturally if he believes that the answers given are not logical and/or scriptural.

The post, which I reproduce in its entirety, can be found at this link

https://proclamatoreconsapevole.blogspot.it/2017/08/il-1914-una-data-significativa-per-la.html?showComment=1501765929040

You can answer here about your skepticism in the date of 1914 but you have to bring historical proofs and give a valid alternative on the explanation of the prophecies. For example you have to prove
1 - What unprecedented war was Jesus referring to?
2 - Why does the red horse of apocalypse say that in the day of the Lord peace would be taken from all the inhabited Earth and not just the area of ​​ancient Israel?
3 - What preaching work does Jesus refer to if not that of these times?
4 - In addition to the development of nuclear weapons and mass extermination, what weapons will nations still have to develop to arrive at the predicted last days?
5 - If the politicians agree in saying that the solutions to humanity's global problems must be solved with a world government, what other development await the skeptics on the political and governmental issue?
6 -........the list is huge and very long, but the meaning is only one: Does anyone have a valid alternative to the accurate and scriptural explanation given by God-guided ekklesia?

If with simplicity and in a way that everyone understands (this Jesus taught us to teach in a way that everyone understands) someone has a reasonable alternative, say it but remaining within the reasonable and not on the according to me and according to him I am not speaking of generation but of the beginning of the
sign
I only recommend serious and reasonable things, not personal ideologies and pre-packaged propaganda.

1 - What unprecedented war was Jesus referring to?

Meanwhile, let's start from the principle that it is not the experts of this world who decide what is "unprecedented" and what is not, especially if we speak from God's point of view.

We must refer only to the Bible and, consequently, every time we say "historians also say... experts also confirm..." we must do so in a subordinate way to the Bible.

Everything can be useful, as well as archaeological finds, but regardless of what others "say" only the Bible can have the last word.

We agree on that, don't we?

“What unprecedented war was Jesus referring to? ”

Demand is limited and leaves some time because nearly every war , as military technology has advanced, has been "unprecedented."

Not to mention that even the meaning of "unprecedented" can be interpreted.

The Thirty Years War was unprecedented for its time .

The Hundred Years' War, fought between the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of France between 1337 and 1453, was also "unprecedented" at least in its duration.

The war that led to the defeat of Napoleon was unprecedented and if we do an honest search we will find many that, until then, turned out to be unique in their kind or unprecedented.

It is clear that we have to set a limit to this meaning.

What do we mean by "unprecedented"?

Do we mean the number of dead and the nations involved?

If we mean this, then WW1 is not without precedent because the next war (WW2) far outclassed the first.

World War I killed about 37 million people (estimates vary) and there were about fifteen nations involved.

For the time it was an unprecedented war... so much so that it was said that there would never again be such a great and devastating war.

Unfortunately, however, less than thirty years later the Second World War broke out, causing about 70 million deaths (here too estimates vary greatly) and with the involvement of as many as 56 states.

Let's stop for a moment and try to reason.

If after World War I Armageddon had come then we could have said, without possibility of being proven wrong, that World War I was unprecedented and would remain so for all eternity.

It probably was that way for those living at the time who expected Armageddon, and therefore deliverance from the satanic system, at any moment.

Unfortunately this did not happen and a few years later another war broke out... much more devastating than the first.

It's too easy to take historians of that era to say "They said that war was unprecedented" because it was that way until then .

It is as if we took a cartographer from the 1300s and said "The American continent does not exist because all the maps of the time confirm that it does not exist".

If we want to have a minimum of intellectual honesty, therefore, the only unprecedented war that we can point to, for now , is the Second World War.

This alone should be sufficient to call into question that the great war Jesus was referring to was that of 1914 (and consequently, the reference year).

According to this reasoning, it could be the second... unless a bigger one breaks out in the future, but it certainly can't be the first.

The point is all here.

If the war Jesus was referring to is not that of 1914 (because today we can say that it was not without precedent)... then the date 1914 is wrong.

Obviously that this date is wrong we shouldn't just infer it from what historians say (who can say what they want) but simply because it is not supported by the Bible.

In this regard, if you want to objectively evaluate what biblical bases there would be to support this date, you can take a look at the following link.

http://Attentionallaprofezia.blogspot.it/2017/05/lacronologia-linterpretation-la.html

Thus answering the question " What unprecedented war was Jesus referring to?"

Surely he was not referring to the one that broke out in 1914.

2 - Why does the red horse of apocalypse say that in the day of the Lord peace would be taken from all the inhabited Earth and not just the area of ​​ancient Israel?

In the same question we can find the answer.

Do we believe that World War I took away peace from "all the inhabited Earth"?

Among other things, this did not even happen in the Second World War.

So the question should be… "What war in history robbed all of the inhabited earth of peace?"

Answer: still none.

3 - What preaching work does Jesus refer to if not that of these times?

The preaching work would be done earth wide and as a witness to all nations and to this day this has not yet happened.

Among other things, from the study of Revelation we understand that after a period of inactivity (the suppression of the continuous sacrifice) the preaching work will have a new and unexpected impulse.

Only then and in the midst of the great tribulation is the work completed from Jehovah's standpoint.

Today, across China, India, and many Muslim nations, nearly 3 billion people have not met Jehovah's Witnesses. Can we honestly say that she has been preached all over the earth?

Incidentally, even if this was the preaching work that Jesus foretold was this, he would have no title in corroborating 1914. The preaching work, since it was to reach every nation, tribe, and tongue, had to begin some time before the end of the times .

The Lord only specifies that this work, in the end (that is, during the sign that we would have seen and recognized) would have been taken to every corner of the earth but does not specify at all when it would have begun.

That is to say, the preaching work could have started in 1800, 1900, 1950, or some other date...but "at last," that is, by the time Armageddon would come, this good news would have been brought into the world by now. the whole inhabited earth (a message which becomes, in fact, the basis for judgment).

So, answering the question " What preaching work does Jesus refer to if not that of these times?" the answer is:

We don't know, but even if this were the case, it has no basis in corroborating 1914.

4 - In addition to the development of nuclear weapons and mass extermination, what weapons will nations still have to develop to arrive at the predicted last days?

How should answering this question corroborate or disprove 1914?

War is a topic we don't want to hear about but we got used to saying "A third world war would destroy all mankind why Jehovah wouldn't allow it" as well as being an emotional response, it doesn't take into account the Scriptures .

In fact, the scriptures show that there will remain only one ruling power that will "apportion the ground for a price" - Compare Revelation 13:2; Daniel 11:39

Daniel 11:40 clearly shows that, in the time of the end, there will be a clash between the kings of the north and the kings of the south and even if we wanted to play on their respective identities (who will be this or who will be the other) we all agree that must there be a clash between these kings or not?

The position of some Jehovah's Witnesses is not very clear because if we agree that a confrontation must take place, then we should also ask "Where did the king of the south go, after the writing of Daniel 11:40?"

Is there still talk of the king of the south?

And we should also ask... "Where have the kings of the north and the south gone in Revelation?"

If the head of the wild beast slaughtered to death seen by John is the Anglo-American empire or the king of the south (as the current understanding says) where is the king of the north spoken of in Revelation?

Where does it speak, again in Revelation, of two antagonistic human powers?

Isn't it clearly seen, in both Revelation and Daniel, that at some point in human history only one world power remains?

Today, in 2017, is there only one world power?

If there is more than one world power then is it so hard to do one plus one regardless of the discussions about the identity of the king of the north?

So the destructiveness of weapons has no bearing on whether or not the "great war" described by Jesus was that of 1914.

What weapons there will be and to what extent Jehovah will permit destruction , we do not know.

We only know that it will not allow total destruction and in fact from the scriptures it is understood that humanity still exists at the end of the war (a war that will not immediately lead to Armageddon).

Therefore, answering the question " Besides the development of nuclear weapons and mass destruction, what other weapons will nations have to develop to reach the predicted last days?"

The answer is: We don't know, but we do know that Jehovah will not allow mankind's total destruction. Among other things, from the study of Revelation we understand that this war is "guided" by spiritual creatures and it is also for this reason that the king of the south, with all his "chosen men", will not be able to get the better of it - Compare Revelation 9:13-20; Daniel 11:15, 16

5 - If the politicians agree in saying that the solutions to humanity's global problems must be solved with a world government, what other development await the skeptics on the political and governmental issue?

Also in this question is inherent the answer that the Bible gives and in some way refutes all the theories in support of 1914.

Today there is not a single government but there will be after the great war foretold by the scriptures.

The king will do as he wishes and apportion the land for a price.

Humanity will come to adore this king who will recreate a kind of United Nations.

Who is like the wild beast... and who can wage war against it?

After winning the war, now that the king of the south is gone with all his allies, who will be able to wage war against it?

Nobody but Christ.

This will lead to a one world government and the illusion of having finally achieved peace and security.

So to the question..." what other developments are waiting for... on the political and governmental issue?"

We are waiting, in fact, for the war to wipe out all the other powers and for this process to lead to a single world government.

World War I and World War II did not lead to a one world government.

6 -........the list is huge and very long, but the meaning is only one: Does anyone have a valid alternative to the accurate and scriptural explanation given by God-guided ekklesia?

So let's see.

The ekklesia says that the generation that would have seen the end is that of 1914 but now they are almost all dead and, after dozens of revisions (and I would like to remind you: other dates prior to 1914 which were then changed) we now speak of "multiple generation " and that is, a generation that intersects with another generation... and this because it is easier to find all the meanings and make dozens of flights of fancy on the word "generation" and stick to the comma (who knows what the Lord... ) rather than candidly admitting that he was wrong and that 1914 is not a date established by the Bible exactly as 1975 was not established.

The accurate explanation of the ekklesia says that the two-horned beast of Revelation is the Anglo-American empire but in Daniel it is said that it is the king of the north who "comes to his end" and there will be no helper for him. This happens at the hand of Michael, the great prince.

The ekklesia has not given, so far, any explanation of the contradiction between Daniel and Revelation (or rather: the contradiction that the official explanation creates because Daniel and Revelation do not contradict each other at all).

The accurate explanation of the Ekklesia applies the 2300 days, as well as the 1290 and 1335 days to publications, resolutions and assemblies.

Similarly it does with much of Revelation (the horses with the tails of scorpions are the anointed ones who preach and disseminate literature "poisonous" to Christianity).

Ever the accurate explanation of the Ekklesia explains that the "seventh trumpet" sounded in 1914 while the fifth and sixth sounded in 1919 and so on.
In an attempt to match an unreasonable explanation, even the trumpets are in no particular order thus also contradicting the words of the apostle Paul who, speaking of the seventh trumpet, says that it is precisely "the last" - compare 1 Corinthians 15:52 with Revelation 11:15

Alternative explanation: The victor of the last human war is the king of the north, according to what Daniel says.

He will be the last dominant world power.

The generation that "will not pass at all" is the generation that will see the outbreak of this war (future but close) which will lead, in fact, to a single winner.

All the events described in Revelation up to the war of Armageddon take place within a maximum span of 13/14 years.

14 years fully fit into a generation and it is safe to say "it will not pass at all".

Where are the scriptures that would confirm this as a "valid alternative explanation"?

If you are really interested, I will bring you the links where these topics have been treated in depth.

Posted 4th August 2017 by attention to prophecy