This may get long winded.

Tom, a witness on another topic below, seems to think Christ is already ruling in Heaven and believes like all of them that 1914 is the year He began His rule.

Tom, what proof do you have that 1914 is when Christ began His Rule?

By the way to all witnesses, 1914 is not a correct date. This means that everything you've been taught pertaining to this is false. Would anyone like to give me proof in support of the watchtower's positions on this?

Then I'll start teaching the class. This won't be quick, hope you'll all keep checking in.

Any takers? Let's test your faith and knowledge in the Watchtower.

In anticipation of your 587 B.C.E. date I thought that I would address that first - using scriptural historical records.

When discussing Scripture one need not go to an outside source, especially when the prophets had so much to say on this subject. Daniel is a good place to begin.

The prophets historical record shows that when the 70 years were about to expire, he states "In the first year of Darius [539/538 BCE] ... who had been made king over the kingdom of the Chaldeans; in the first year of his reigning [over the Jews as King in Babylon] I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years." -Daniel 9:1-2

The Bible says the desolation would effect "all" the land, but some claim Jerusalem was spared it for 20 years.

Notice that Daniel said he had worked this out from reading the "books", the word that "had occurred to Jeremiah". Today those words of Jeremiah that Daniel read are found at Jeremiah chapter 25. There Jeremiah says, "And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years. ... Jerusalem and the cities of Judah and her kings, her princes, to make them a devastated place, an object of astonishment, something to whistle at and a malediction'". -Jeremiah 25:11, 18

Yes, Daniel read in Jeremiah that when "all" of the land - yes including "Jerusalem" with her "kings" and "princes" - becomes devastated, 70 years will pass. That is simply what it says.

However, some try to claim that only the land of Judah was to be devastated for 70 years, and it's capital city wasn't part of the prophecy, but only the land around it. This is how they get around the fact that their secular chronology says Jerusalem was only in ruins for 50 years.

Is their theory scriptural?

Where do the Scriptures say the 70 years start?

In the same prophecy of Jeremiah where he speaks of Nebuchadnezzar coming to destroy his people, and where "these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years", he specifically mentions where the "calamity" will start.

Where?

He says, "it is upon the city upon which my name is called that I am starting off in bringing calamity" Jeremiah 25:29). No, it is not upon the land surrounding the city, or on any other nation, but upon the city of Jerusalem itself is where the "calamity" will begin - "the city upon which my name is called".

However, could this calamity be a single attack or a batch of exiles being taken? No, just to make things perfectly clear the "calamity" is described. A few verses further on it tells us: "A calamity is going forth from nation to nation, and a great tempest itself will be roused up from the remotest parts of the earth. And those slain by Jehovah will certainly come to be in that day from one end of the earth clear to the other end of the earth." Yes, this was not the beginning of any vassal Kingship, but bloody destruction of Jerusalem - where "I am starting off in bringing calamity" says Jehovah.

Ezekiel also confirms that the judgment begins with Jerusalem, in a vision. "Pass through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem... Pass through the city after him and strike. Let not your eye feel sorry, and do not feel any compassion... from my sanctuary you should start." Ezekiel 9:4-6). No, the judgment did not start on the countryside of Judah, leaving the city of Jerusalem untouched. The prophecy could not be more clear - the judgment began in Jerusalem with the striking and killing of it's inhabitants.

The prophecies clearly describe the start of the 70 years of desolation and servitude as beginning with the destruction of one City - Jerusalem.

There is more proof that the countryside of Judah only went into exile when Jerusalem was destroyed - not before. What is this proof? It is in 2nd Kings chapter 25. First, it informs us that Jerusalem has been destroyed.

And in the fifth month on the seventh day of the month, that is to say, the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan the chief of the bodyguard, the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the king's house and all the houses of Jerusalem; and the house of every great man he burned with fire. And the walls of Jerusalem ... [were] pulled down.

Now, see if you can spot in the subsequent verses when Judah went into exile:

...and from the city he took one court official that had a command over the men of war, and five men from those having access to the king that were found in the city; and the secretary of the chief of the army, the one mustering the people of the land, and sixty men of the people of the land that were to be found in the city; and Nebuzaradan the chief of the bodyguard then took them and conducted them to the king of Babylon at Riblah. And the king of Babylon proceeded to strike them down and put them to death at Riblah in the land of Hamath. Thus Judah went into exile from off its soil.

That's right. The countryside of Judah did not go into exile before the destruction of the city. It is after Jerusalem was destroyed that "Judah went into exile from off its soil".

These are the Bible's words. Do you believe the Scripture to be true?

Furthermore, The Bible specifically says that there were Judeans living outside of Jerusalem in their own cities and villages, shortly before Jerusalem was destroyed. Jeremiah says, "Now it came about in the fifth year of Jehoiakim [two years into the devastation of Judah, according to your sources] the son of Josiah, the king of Judah, in the ninth month, that all the people in Jerusalem and all the people that were coming in from the cities of Judah into Jerusalem proclaimed a fast before Jehovah."

The New Living Translation says, "People from all over Judah came to attend the services at the Temple on that day." The Message translation says, "all the people from the Judean villages". Clearly, Judah was not ravaged, leaving Jerusalem the sole surviving city, as they claim.

Daniel believed the foretold devastation included Jerusalem, remarking it would be "fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem", and no wonder! The prophecy he consulted in Jeremiah said "all this land" will be devastated, that "Jerusalem and the cities of Judah and her kings, her princes, to make them a devastated place".

The 70 year prophecy is intimately tied together with Jerusalem. That's what Daniel believed. It makes no sense for the prophets to say "all" of the country will be decimated, and then expect their readers to assume it means the largest city will remain untouched for twenty years. The Bible's words are not complicated . They are very clear.

Indeed, it would be very odd for Daniel to have discerned that 70 years of devastation had passed over Jerusalem if the secular chronology is correct. According to the secular chronology, the city was inhabited, with a king, a priesthood, and an operating temple, for two decades during the so-called "devastation".

Additionally, Jeremiah prophesied in "the fourth year of Jehoiakim" Jeremiah 25:1), or 604 BCE in their secular chronology. This is a big problem for your sources, because they say the devastation on Judah had already begun the year before, in 605 BCE. Yet, here Jeremiah is making his prophecy about the future! He says "this land must become a devastated place" Jeremiah 25:11), and "this very city will be devastated" Jeremiah 26:9).

Some people would have us believe that the "devastations of Jerusalem" that Daniel talked about, are some sort of vague concept that began twenty years before Jerusalem was destroyed, when the rest of Judah was (supposedly) ravaged. However, the inspired word of God disagrees on all these points. The Bible shows that Judah was not devastated years prior to the destruction of it's capital city - Jerusalem, no not at all.

What is the significance of the 1914 date?

The Scripture indicates that the "Gentile Times "would begin with the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E. How long would these times last ? The prophet Daniel said for a period of "seven times" In figuring out how long a period seven times is, we have to turn to Revelation 12:14 which tells us how long 3 ½ times is.

It says ...a time = 1, times = 2 + ½ times ... these are equal to 3 ½ times. There were 360 days in the Jewish year so 3 ½ x 360 or 7/2 x 360/1 = 1260 days.

A prophetic day in the Bible is counted as a year as the prophet Ezekiel points out in Ezek 4:6 (also Numbers 14:34) Therefore, 3 ½ times is equal to 1260 years. However, Daniel said that 7 times would have to pass before the Kingdom was established.

If 3 ½ times = 1260 years, then 7 times = 1260 x 2 = 2520 years. The nations, then , would rule for a period of 2520 years from 607 B.C.E. Since this was in the year 607, we could not count 607 years, but rather 606 full years from 2520 would give us the year that the "Gentile Times" would end and the Kingdom established with Jesus Christ as King. 2520 - 606= 1914 a marked year.

Jesus told his disciples to look for the composite sign given in Matthew 24, Luke 21 and Mark 13 and by this sign we would recognize when Christ took his throne in the heavens.

Good Start. Note the upfront basis on which the BOTTOM LINE of support is to come from. Bible Interpretation.

Keep this in mind. - I find of interest, that The Watchtower sights secular and historical documents and recorded events in history, when it supports their doctrines or teachings, but then turn on it, when it doesn't.

Not enough time right now for more.

Worthy attempt, good show, stay tuned.

brogan, here's how I wish to respond to this latest "challenge" of yours. I believe I have seen enough of your posts to pick up on your obvious motive...to discourage as many as possible from listening to what JW's say. You're hoping that people will be gullible enough to believe YOUR baseless arguments.

So, to this question about 1914, and why we believe it was the beginning of the "time of the end"...here's my response to you:

"Turn down foolish and ignorant questionings, knowing they produce fights. But a slave of the Lord does not need to fight." (2 Timothy 2:23-24)

If a person SINCERELY wants to know why we believe we're living in the time of the end, and why we believe that time period began in 1914, they can ask any one of Jehovah's Witnesses to explain it to them. But, there is no point in explaining something to someone who obviously already thinks he knows everything.

First the captivity, is defined as "the period from the fall of Jerusalem (586 B.C.) to the reconstruction in Palestine of a new Jewish state (after 538 B.C.)."

The Babylonians, under Nebuchadnezzar, after twice laying siege to Jerusalem, finally captured it in 586 B.C.E. Nebuchadnezzar's army then pillaged the city, destroying the Temple and sending the inhabitants off to exile in Babylonia.

In 587 Jerusalem fell and numbers of its inhabitants were carried away captive to Babylonia..." (Unger, Merrill, F., Unger's Bible Dictionary, Moody Press, Chicago, 1966, page 782).

Notice that the year 587 is offered instead of 586. There is sometimes a difference of opinion as to which year is the exact one. Nevertheless, it is obvious that 607 B.C. is not even close.

Then you have all the "prophecies" made by the watchtower, and jw’s that have not come true……

How does the Bible say that we are to identify a true prophet?

2 Timothy 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

You mean have a Jehovah's Witness explain what some man has told them to belive, since you don't study the word for yourselves but rely on the watchtower orginization to tell you what to belive and say, in contrast to the Biblical teaching of allowing the Holy Spirit to lead and teach you.

Critics of 607 point to the large body of secular evidence that seems to contradict it. Although there is much evidence, it must not be forgotten that, in effect, they choose to uphold what secular historians say as primary proof above the testimony of the Scriptures.

Historians such as Thiele “correct” the Bible where they believe it is wrong. Yes, in secular chronology, historians say the Bible is incorrect in many places, and then change its meaning to fit Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian secular chronology — trying to reconcile the Holy Scriptures with the writings of pagans.

Here's what one website had to say about Professor Thiele's approach to Bible chronology:

“Edwin R. Thiele indicates in his writings that Biblical chronology must conform to the Assyrian eponyms along with the apparent 763 BC eclipse of the sun.

“Even though he is considered a Biblical chronologist, he nevertheless “corrects” the Bible by using the reported eclipse of 763 BC and by using an Assyrian list of eponyms. [...] Thiele does not understand the dubiousness of using an eclipse to date events or the dubiousness of using the Assyrian list of eponyms to “correct” the Bible.

“[...] Thiele in his 1977 paperback book, A Chronology of the Hebrew Kings, tries to show that Biblical scripture on the reigns of the kings are hopelessly mixed and contradictory by mentioning some apparent contradictions and by quoting some words of noted scholars to the same effect. [...] Thiele at the end of Chapter one says in effect that he has the solutions, but his solutions ignore scripture and he reasons against some scripture.

“Thiele establishes his chronology based not on the Bible but on secular chronology. He uses the eclipse that is reported to have occurred on June 15, 763 BC along with the reconstructed Assyrian eponym list(s) (pp. 28ff). For example he states that:

““For many years Old Testament scholars have noticed that a total of 128 regnal years for the rulers of Judah from the accession of Athaliah to the end of Azariah ... was about a quarter of a century in excess of the years of contemporary Assyria ...” (p. 44).

“He tries to solve this problem by squeezing the Biblical chronology together so that it will agree with the Assyrian chronology by using “dual dating” and “overlapping regnal” schemes (Chap. 4 to 7). But this problem of the missing 25 years may have something to do with corrupt Assyrian kings’ list(s) and/or by the misidentification of the reported eclipse.

“In chapter 6 Thiele tries to fit Israel’s king Pekah’s reign before king Pekahiah in order to squeeze the Biblical chronology into the Assyrian chronology. [...] [He changes] scripture to suit his own theories and by saying without any proof that the scriptures were “late calculations” of records that were lost.

“In Thiele’ 1983 version of his, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, he is very aware of the problem his chronology causes for the scripture concerning Pekah, for he goes to great lengths to defend his idea (pp. 120, 129-137, 174).

“Thiele’s twisting and “reasoning” against scriptures concerning the reigns of Hoshea and Hezekiah is way off the mark (chap 7). Thiele’s main apparent goal is to fit Biblical chronology into the broken Assyrian chronology. But the Assyrian chronology cannot be trusted.” (Underlining ours)

Now, that is the sort of chronology that supporters for 587 would happily believe – yes, a secular chronology that contradicts the Bible and leads to the scriptures being “corrected” for its “hopelessly mixed and contradictory” statements. If we believe the Bible really is the inspired word of God, we cannot accept anything of the sort, irregardless of the secular evidence.

Indeed, the 20-year gap during the Babylonian reigns is only the first discrepancy. As one goes further back in history, the gaps and contradictions with secular history widen more and more – until eventually hundreds of years are involved.

Besides, it's not as if all secular evidence contradicts 607 – because it doesn't. The ancient Jewish historian Josephus argued that Jerusalem was empty for 70 years. He also lists the reigns of the Babylonian Kings – a list which curiously contradicts the Cannon of Ptolemy — for reasons that remain unknown.

Interestingly, not all experts support 587. At least one, Rolf Furuli of Oslo University, writes:

“The chronology of Parker and Dubberstein [hereafter, P&D] has been almost universally accepted for the last fifty years. According to P&D, the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar was 605 B.C.E and his destruction of Jerusalem occurred in 587 B.C.E. The conquest of Babylon by Cyrus occurred in 539...”

“A study of each cuneiform document used by P&D to show in which regnal years of Babylonian and Persian kings intercalary months were added, reveals that 51 percent of the "evidence" used by P&D has no real value, in this author's judgement. A comparison of 1450 cuneiform tablets dated in the reigns of the Persian kings reveals tablets for most of the kings that contradict P&D's scheme, which was based on first and last tablet dated to each king. On this basis it is argued that the chronology of P&D should be radically revised....”

“As of present I have reviewed data from about 7.000 business tablets from the New Babylonian Empire. There are so many tablets that are anomalous (from the point of view of the traditional chronology), that the whole scheme of P&D breaks down; each king seems to have ruled longer than P&D says.”

As we can see, at least some experts will support the Bible's viewpoint against the traditional 587 date. Perhaps one day it may be possible to fill the 20-year gap using secular sources.

Perhaps the evidence is already here, but we don't know it. Researchers sometimes “read into” tablets what they want to see. The same website we quoted earlier points out the following:

• “Broken date read as 11th year by Kruckmann, but must be read 12th on basis of known materials” (Parker & Dubberstein, p. 7).
• “Broken date ... must be read as ‘3’ on basis of known intercalated months” (Parker & Dubberstein, p. 7).
• “By addition of one wedge the year may be read either as ‘3’ or as ‘12,’ or by omission of one wedge it may be read as ‘1.’ Error of either scribe or copyist is evident. Reading as ‘3’ seems preferable to us” (Parker & Dubberstein, p. 7, footnote 12).
• “Possible dates for this letter are year 2 or 9 of Cyrus or year 3 of Cambyses” (Parker & Dubberstein, p. 2).
• “A collation by Sachs and Wiseman has shown that the text from Sippar (Strassmaier, loc. cit.) thought to be from the 4th month is correctly to be dated VII/__/acc. [7th month]” (Parker & Dubberstein, p. 12).
• “... line 19 reads VI/6/18 ... year 18 is impossible, so we assume either a scribal error or an error by Contenau” (Parker & Dubberstein, p. 13). This 18th year pertained to Nabonidus, king of Babylon.

This does not mean all evidence for 587 is faked, because it certainly is not. However, as we can see, sometimes anomalous evidence may be disregarded because it doesn't say what it should say. It is assumed a priori that 587 is correct, as are all other dates that contradict Bible chronology. Perhaps some key evidence has been overlooked, disregarded, or ‘corrected’?

There are, of course, many contradictions between Biblical and secular chronology. For example, the 40-year desolation of Egypt never occurred according to the secular chronology which supports 587. However, we could spend hours considering them all.

Some are also quick to claim that numerous lines of evidence support 587. They argue that one or two lines of evidence can be dismissed, but many lines should not be. However, what is often forgotten is that sometimes different “lines of evidence” are actually from the same source. For example, the works of Berossus is often classed as one line of evidence, the work of Ptolemy as another, and the cuneiform documents as yet one more. Yet, both Berossus and Ptolemy got their information from the cuneiform documents. So in reality, those three “lines of evidence” are really just one.

Ultimately, of course, we do not base our belief in 607 on archaeological evidence, but on what the Bible says. No matter how much evidence is gathered by secular historians, we will never compromise, reinterpret, or correct the Bible to agree with secular history, as many have happily done.

Jehovah's Witnesses go by the Bible as the ultimate authority. We believe 70 years is 70 years long, and we no matter how much secular evidence is presented, it will never be enough to over-ride the Bible.

Watchtower.com

How does the Bible say that we are to identify a true prophet?

Define a "biblical prophet" for me Truett in the Hebrew sense - e.g., as defined by the bible [not the distinction between a false or true mind you, just a prophet].

We'll go from there. Then we'll see if what you claim are JW "prophecies" meet that definition in the bible or not.

Recall that one cannot be either a true or false prophet, it they have never provided prophesy.

Atah Mevine?

as the ultimate authoriy"

You need to back that up in light of what is written in the watchtower and your "presidents"

At one point, The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society taught that God ruled the universe from somewhere in the Pleiades star system.

Charles Taze Russell, claimed that the Bible could be only understood according to his interpretations.

Rutherford predicted that the current world political order would end in 1925. And that "Millions Now Living Will Never Die",

Then you have Nathan Homer Knorr who set up a chairmanship of the Governing Body would also be affected, rotating according to alphabetical order. And finally, in December of 1975, leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses passed from the president of the Watch Tower Society to the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. This Governing Body is administrative and executive in its powers. It elucidates and promulgates the 'present understanding' of the Bible for its membership and interested persons, and clarifies its teachings by means of its publications in many languages and conventions in many countries, as it sees the need. It also appoints members to important positions of oversight. The Governing Body may be contacted by local congregations or servants to obtain advice. Members of the Governing Body also confirm everything that is written in the literature before publishing.

Then from the Watchtower….

"We all need help to understand the Bible, and we cannot find the Scriptural guidance we need outside the ‘faithful and discreet slave' organization." The Watchtower, Feb. 15, 1981.

"We should eat and digest and assimilate what is set before us, without shying away from parts of the food because it may not suit the fancy of our mental taste...We should meekly go along with the Lord's theocratic organization and wait for further clarification…" The Watchtower, February 1, 1952, pp. 79-80.

The Watchtower organization has claimed to be the prophet of God (The Watchtower, April 1, 1972, p. 197)

The Bible says in Deut. 18:20-22, "‘However, the prophet who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded him to speak or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet must die. And in case you should say in your heart: "How shall we know the word that Jehovah has not spoken?" When the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is the word that Jehovah did not speak..."

If the NWT condemns false prophesying and states that it is proof that God is not speaking through that prophet, then doesn’t this prove that the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is not speaking for God?

The Bible plainly teaches that God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, and that there is an absolute truth, while the Watchtower teaches that truth changes as to what ever the new Governing body may change it to.

The Bible says in Deut. 18:20-22, "‘However, the prophet who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded him to speak or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet must die. And in case you should say in your heart: "How shall we know the word that Jehovah has not spoken?" When the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is the word that Jehovah did not speak..."

1897 "Our Lord, the appointed King, is now present, since October 1874," Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 4, page 621.

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

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

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

1922 "The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914." The Watchtower 9/1/22, page 262.

1923 "Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith than Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge." The Watchtower, page 106 4/1/23.

1925 "The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year." The Watchtower, 1/1/25, page. 3.

1925 "It is to be expected that Satan will try to inject into the minds of the consecrated, the thought that 1925 should see an end to the work." The Watchtower, Sept, 1925 page 262.

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

1931 "There was a measure of disappointment on the part of Jehovah's faithful ones on earth concerning the years 1917, 1918, and 1925, which disappointment lasted for a time...and they also learned to quit fixing dates." Vindication, page 338.

1941 "Receiving the gift, the marching children clasped it to them, not a toy or plaything for idle pleasure, but the Lord's provided instrument for most effective work in the remaining months before Armageddon." The Watchtower, 9/15/41, page 288.

1968 "True, there have been those in times past who predicted an ‘end to the world', even announcing a specific date. Yet nothing happened. The ‘end' did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing?.. Missing from such people were God's truths and evidence that he was using and guiding them." Awake, 10/8/68.

1968 "Why are you looking forward to 1975?" The Watchtower, 8/15/68, page 494.

If the NWT condemns false prophesying and states that it is proof that God is not speaking through that prophet, then doesn’t this prove that the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is not speaking for God?

Now go ahead with the canned response you are taught of P roverbs 4:18 which says, "But the path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established."

Whether or not the "light gets brighter" or not does not change the fact that the Watchtower made false prophecies.

Good boy Truett - now point to even one "quote" [falsely presented as they may be, but you already knew that] where in the quote it states, "This Yhwh has said ..."

I don't see a single one. Try again?

If you have never read the Hebrew Bible, you might try looking for something which starts consistenty as "But the days are coming saith Yhwh ...", or "Yhwh of hosts, the God of Israel has said .... " [as in every example of both true and false prophets in the Hebrew texts], or ends with something such as, " ... declares the Lord".

Yet the best you can bring is an organization who states, "This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people" and call it biblical prophesy?

What's that all about.

Are you even aware of the meaning of the phrase ledaber davar bishmi ?

I'm not sure you are. Would you like to learn something Truett?