Jump to content

AlanF

Member
  • Content Count

    532
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by AlanF

  1. Arauna said: Of course you are. Perhaps not a six-literal-creative-day creationist, but still a creationist. And you clearly hold a number of young-earth creationist ideas, such as "flood geology" -- which as I have pointed out a number of times, the Society abandoned 40 years ago. Nope. Only the young-earth kind. Intelligent Design creationists range from young-earth to old-earth. The Watchtower Society accepts those figures. You know better, do you? Carbon 14 dating is not used for the age of the earth. Uranium dating and other radiometric methods are on extremely firm footing. You're WAY behind the times, as even the Society accepts them. Nonsense. You present no facts, no math. The half-life of the main isotope of uranium (U-238) is about 4.5 billion years. That of U-235 is 700 million years. U-235 is much less abundant that U-238. Now do the math. Ideas like these are left over from 1940s Watchtower teaching. You're WAY behind the times. I'm fully versed in these myths. Wrong. You're harking back to the "flood geology" that the Society gave up on in the early 1980s. You won't find any such references after 1989, and hardly any after 1980. Facts: "Flood geology" was abandoned by all proper geologists beginning in the 1820s. By 1860 or so, only a few religious holdouts held to it. About 1900 a Seventh-Day Adventist preacher name George McCready Price began a career of defending SDA young-earth creationism by publishing books defending his version of "flood geology" and so forth. In the late 1940s the Watchtower Society began using some of his ideas, as well as those of that arch-crackpoot Immanuel Velikovsky and others. In 1961 a baptist theologian named John Whitcomb and his buddy Henry Morris published the book The Genesis Flood, which under Morris's guidance kicked off the modern young-earth creationist movement, which is now daily fare for most American Christian Fundamentalists. In 1965 the Society published material using many of Morris's ideas, including "flood geology". After that, it used many of Morris's arguments -- which were largely plagiarized from Price -- to argue in favor of Noah's Flood. Around 1980 the Society gave up on all this, but failed to inform the JW community. I learned about the Society's duplicity in 1986, when a 100-page essay defending the Society's arguments on "flood geology" came my way. I wrote to the author to dispute some of his claims. He wrote back and sheepishly told me that he had submitted his essay to the Writing Department for comments, which informed him that they had abandoned all that stuff years earlier. So your beliefs are at least 40 years out of date. Nope. There simply isn't any. Beginning in the 1820s, what religiously based scientists had been interpreting as "Flood diluvium" was realized to be sedimentary layers left by perfectly ordinary geological processes. Truly huge floods leave unmistakeable evidence, such as happened in the State of Washington from about 12,000 to 16,000 years ago. Look online for "missoula floods". Today even Morris's Institute for Creation Research and other young-earth creationist outfits accept that these floods happened. And they are not unique. The thing is that the flooded regions all have definite boundaries, which the flood water never rose above. Had a huge earthwide Flood occurred just 4,400 years ago, such massive scars on the land would be everywhere, but no such thing is to be found. Pure "flood geology" the Society borrowed from Price and Morris -- and debunked decades ago by real scientists. Such "animal graveyards" are purely the imagination of crackpot armchair geologists. Yow! You must be reading Walter Brown's hydroplate nonsense. Even the ICR and Answers in Genesis reject that garbage. Walter Brown alright. Although the ICR and AIG have adopted some of his ideas. But you'll find no such nonsense in Watchtower literature after 1989. Again pure "flood geology" nonsense. Nope. There are generally no such "layers", but occasionally pockets of fossil animals are found. For example, in Nebraska there's a place called Ashfall Fossil Beds, where hundreds of fossil animals from about 12 million years ago were buried over a period of months in a massive ash fall from where the Yellowstone hotspot was. Read about it here:
      Hello guest!
    . There is no evidence for a flood; all evidence shows ash was carried in the air from what is now southern Idaho to Nebraska. Complete nonsense. Not even the Society used to publish such nonsense. Where are you getting this from? Wrong. I'm far more familiar than you are about creationism in its various forms. And again, you have never read a proper scientific book on modern geology or the evidence for evolution. All you've read are creationist publications. Prove me wrong, if you dare, by listing whatever real scientific books you've read. Willfully ignorant is a better term. Zero evidence for your claim. If you think not, then by all means give your evidence. Ah, but you do have time to take pot shots at those far more knowledgeable than you.
  2. Yes, JWs exercising Orwellian crimestop do get bored with topics that clobber their beliefs. My ex-wife did the same thing. As for this discovery, I saw the same show but was not entirely convinced that they had the dating right. Recent discoveries in northwest Africa strongly indicate the presence of Homo sapiens 300,000 years ago, and it is well known that today's Sahara desert has alternated between wet and dry periods for several million years. Archaeological discoveries in Egypt, Libya, etc. clearly show modern human habitation from more than 50,000 years ago. So who knows how the Emirates discovery will pan out?
  3. Kind of like "he endeavored to avoid being dead". But he didn't always succeed. You are what you are until you're not.
  4. TrueTomHarley said: Still incredibly thick. Read my earlier post to Anna. Still lying. My mother and plenty of other older JWs are still around, and saw the false predictions of 1941, 1975, by 2000 and Real Soon Now. You think these people are zombies? [ Drivel deleted ].
  5. What do you think "the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men" means?
  6. Anna said: I think you're very confused about this. Who would have known? Who would have thought him cured? When? True, but that again assumes that those elders knew of the pedophile. Greenlees was not known to anyone but his victims, and perhaps unknown accomplices. The psychiatric community and pretty much everyone dealing with children. And God. Note this: "Pedophilia was first formally recognized and named in the late 19th century." --
      Hello guest!
    the holy spirit did not get the message. Ok. Come on! We all know (at least, non-trinitarians do) that the Bible's use of "holy spirit" is just a metaphor for God's power, or better, just God. So saying that "holy spirit did this and that" means "God did this and that". So are you claiming that God did not know about pedophilia, or that Greenlees was a homosexual pedophile? In the sense that, put plainly, "God was not deceived". Nope. Most Christians claim to follow the directions in the Bible, and you certainly don't accept that God directs them, metaphorically or directly. Once again, by that reasoning the Pope has been appointed by God.
  7. John Paul said: Not until after many of his predictions for the years just prior to 1914 collapsed. Until then he published dogmatic claims like these in The Time Is At Hand (1889), pp. 76-77: << We present the Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the Gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that that date will be the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men. At that date the Kingdom of God, for which our Lord taught us to pray, saying, "Thy Kingdom come," will have obtained full, universal control, and that it will then be "set up," or firmly established, in the earth, on the ruins of present institutions. It will prove that some time before the end of A.D. 1914 the last member of the divinely recognized Church of Christ, the "royal priesthood," "the body of Christ," will be glorified with the Head. It will prove that from that time forward Jerusalem shall no longer be trodden down of the Gentiles, but shall arise from the dust of divine disfavor, to honor; because the "Times of the Gentiles" will be fulfilled or completed. It will prove that the great "time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation," will reach its culmination in a world-wide reign of anarchy. It will prove that before that date God's Kingdom, organized in power, will be in the earth and then smite and crush the Gentile image (Dan. 2:34) -- and fully consume the power of these kings. Its own power and dominion will be established as fast as by its varied influences and agencies it crushes and scatters the "powers that be" -- civil and ecclesiastical -- iron and clay. >> And on pages 98-99: << True, it is expecting great things to claim, as we do, that within the coming twenty-six years all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved; but we are living in a special and peculiar time, the "Day of Jehovah," in which matters culminate quickly; and it is written, "A short work will the Lord make upon the earth.... In view of this strong Bible evidence concerning the Times of the Gentiles, we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, will be accomplished by the end of A.D. 1914. >> Many more such dogmatic statements could be quoted from Russell's book. The September 1 and 15, 1893 Watch Tower is quite revealing as to Russell's view of what would happen before 1914, and that he did not think his views were speculation of any sort. On pages 282-284 it said (p. 1581 of Reprints): << The question comes from many quarters: "Brother Russell, are you not possibly mistaken by a few years in your calculations, since you expect, upon Scriptural authority, that the great trouble will all be over by A.D. 1914, and that in its severity it will probably not reach us before A.D. 1906 to 1908? Is it not possible that the present financial trouble is the beginning of the great trouble?" We answer, No; we think there is no mistake. >> A number of times Russell clearly implied that he could not possibly be wrong. Zion's Watch Tower, July 15, 1894, said on page 226 (p. 1677 Reprints), under the subtitle "Can It Be Delayed Until 1914?": << Seventeen years ago people said, concerning the time features presented in MILLENIAL DAWN, They seem reasonable in many respects, but surely no such radical changes could occur between now and the close of 1914: if you had proved that they would come about in a century or two, it would seem much more probable. What changes have since occurred, and what velocity is gained daily? "The old is quickly passing and the new is coming in." Now, in view of recent labor troubles and threatened anarchy, our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in the 1914 date. They say that they do not see how present conditions can hold out so long under the strain. We see no reason for changing the figures -- nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble. We see no reason for changing from our opinion expressed in the view presented in the WATCH TOWER of January 15, '92. We advise that it be read again. >> The January 15, 1892 Watch Tower said on page 19: << The Scriptures give unmistakable testimony to those who have full faith in its records, that there is a great time of trouble ahead of the present comparative calm in the world -- a trouble which will embroil all nations, overthrow all existing institutions, civil, social and religious, bring about a universal reign of anarchy and terror, and prostrate humanity in the very dust of despair, thus to make them ready to appreciate the power that will bring order out of that confusion and institute the new rule of righteousness. All this, the Scriptures show us, is to come to pass before the year 1914 (See MILLENNIAL DAWN, Vol. II, Chapter IV.) -- that is, within the next twenty-three years. >> The October 1, 1904 Zion's Watch Tower, on pages 296-8 (pp. 3436-8 Reprints) printed a letter from a man who pointed out that Russell's chronology conflicted with data given by Ptolemy's Canon, and that he understood that Russell's view of the Gentile times had changed. Russell responded at length, pointing out that changing his chronology by even one year would throw it completely out of whack. He emphasized his faith in his figures: << We know of no reason for changing a figure: to do so would spoil the harmonies and parallels so conspicuous between the Jewish and Gospel ages.... The brother seems to further misunderstand us to teach that no great trouble will come before October, 1914 A.D. This is incorrect: we expect the great trouble of Rev. 13:15-17 before that date. >> As 1914 approached Russell changed and toned down some of his opinions. The July 1, 1904 Watch Tower said, under the title "Universal Anarchy -- Just Before or After October, 1914 A.D.," on pages 197-8: << What seems at first glance the veriest trifle and wholly unrelated to the matter, has changed our conviction respecting the time when universal anarchy may be expected in accord with the prophetic numbers. We now expect that the anarchistic culmination of the great time of trouble which will precede the Millenial blessings will be after October, 1914, A.D. -- very speedily thereafter, in our opinion -- "in one hour," "suddenly," because "our forty years" harvest, ending October, 1914 A.D., should not be expected to include the awful period of anarchy which the Scriptures point out to be the fate of Christendom. >> Contrary to Russell's expectations the War ended in 1918 without being followed by worldwide Socialist revolution and anarchy. The last member of the Church of Christ had not been glorified, the city of Jerusalem was still trodden down by the Gentiles, the Kingdom of God had not crushed "the Gentile image," and the "new heavens and the new earth" could not be seen anywhere by trouble-tossed humanity. Not one of the seven predictions enumerated in The Time Is At Hand had come true. The book Light I, 1930, page 194, well described the effects of the failed predictions: << All of the Lord's people looked forward to 1914 with joyful expectation. When that time came and passed there was much disappointment, chagrin and mourning, and the Lord's people were greatly in reproach. They were ridiculed by the clergy and their allies in particular, and pointed to with scorn, because they had said so much about 1914, and what would come to pass, and their 'prophecies' had not been fulfilled. >> So, John Paul, your transparent excuses are seen for what they are. Of course it does. Russell taught that there was to be a grand "harvest" between 1874 and 1914. And of course, he made the false prediction that Jesus would begin visibly ruling in 1914. Which Russell did not predict. The rest of your excuses have been shown up for what they are -- deceptive attempts to excuse false prophecies made by the founder of the Watchtower Society.
  8. Anna said: Actually, and in context, and in looking over what I said, I said both. I was also a bit vague several times. Sorry for not being precise. You've already read the quotes from WTS literature that mentioned "our twentieth century", "the turn of the century", and "the end of the century". Those obviously mean "in or by the year 2000". Another WTS piece said "for the year 2000", which can mean in or by. In various comments I shortened all of these claims to "in 2000" for brevity. Here again is what I have posted: <<<< << Shortly, within our twentieth century, the "battle in the day of Jehovah" will begin against the modern antitype of Jerusalem, Christendom. >> -- "The Nations Shall Know That I Am Jehovah"-How? - 1971 << And if the wicked system of this world survived until the turn of the century, which is highly improbable in view of world trends and the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, there would still be survivors of the World War I generation. However, the fact that their number is dwindling is one more indication that “the conclusion of the system of things” is moving fast toward its end. >> -- October 15, 1980 Watchtower, p. 31 << It has been thrilling to see the fulfillment of Jesus’ sign showing that the Kingdom was established in the heavens in that momentous year 1914. And Jesus has told us to rejoice at seeing the dark storm clouds of Armageddon gathering since that time. He has told us that the “generation” of 1914—the year that the sign began to be fulfilled—”will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Matthew 24:34) Some of that “generation” could survive until the end of the century. But there are many indications that “the end” is much closer than that! >> -- March 1, 1984 Watchtower, pp. 18-19 << The Time for a Change Is Near! Carole, from France, has a “marvelous hope” and foresees, for the near future, “something marvelous—not at all like the world we live in.” Samuel, a 15-year-old youth from the same country, also believes in a complete change: “For the year 2000, I visualize a world transformed into a beautiful paradise! But I don’t think that either the present world or its rulers will live to see that day. . . We are living in the last days of the system of things.” Ruth, a German girl of 16, also expresses her confidence in these changes: “I know I’m not smart enough to change the world and make things run right. Only Jehovah, our Creator, can and will do that soon.” >> November 8, 1986 Awake!, pp. 7-8 The Watchtower Society has been making claims like that since its beginning. Not one claim has come true. It taught that 1914 would bring "the end". It taught that 1918, 1920 and 1925 would bring Armageddon. It taught that Armageddon would come shortly after 1942. Then 1975 was really going to be "IT". Then 2000. After that, virtually every year after 2000. But you're deliberately missing my point: A long history of failed predictions of specific dates for "the end" (1914, 1918, 1925, 1975, 2000) plus a history of generally false predictions prove that JW leaders have no actual understanding of whatever the Bible really says or of world events. By the same token, neither do you. Let's see: we have 1914, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1941, 1975, 2000, and Real Soon Now. Um, I was alive for 1975, 2000 and Real Soon Now. My mother was alive for them and 1941. Old Freddie Franz was alive for all of those false predictions. The prediction for 2000 was made at various times from the 1970s through 2000 itself. Real Soon Now started about 1914 and continues. I heard several JWs in the 1980s talking about 2000. In online forums in the late 1990s, many JW apologists threatened: "You'll get yours when 2000 rolls around!" The point, Einstein, is that these JWs did not make this nonsense up for themselves, but read the predictions for 2000 in Watchtower publications. Do a little looking on the jwfacts website and you'll find some quotes. Or read some in my response to Anna above. Are you really this stupid? 1941, 1975, 2000 and Real Soon Now are certainly within peoples' lifetimes. 1975 is NOT arguable, as the links I posted prove. Unfortunately, JW leaders' counsel on that has often been accompanied by predictions of specific years to watch out for: 1914, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1941, 1975, 2000. I don't believe I said in 2000, but by 2000. If not, that's what I should have said, because that's what the first two references explicitly say: "a work that would be completed in our century" and "within our twentieth century, the "battle in the day of Jehovah" will begin". Can't get any clearer than that. >>>> Nope. I already posted two links proving my claim:
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
    Didn't you read them? Probably not, so I present here some information drawn from them. The quotes below prove that the Society dogmatically taught that Adam and Eve were created at the end of the 6th creative day in 4026 BCE, that the 7th creative day began then, that 6,000 years of human history would end in 1975, and that the Millennial rule of Christ would be the last 1,000 years of the 7th day. These dogmatic statements lead only to the conclusion that the Battle of Armageddon would have to be over by late 1975. More graphically, after the 6th creative day ends with Adam and Eve's creation in 4026 BCE, the Society's timeline is: |4026 BCE + 6000 -> 1975 CE + 1000 = 7000 years| ...-------/\--------------------------------------------/\--------------- 6th day-->||<----------------- 7th day ---------------->||<--Millennium--> What the Watchtower Society said: The October 8, 1966 issue of Awake! contained the article "How Much Longer Will It Be?" In answer to the question "when will God bring an end to wickedness?", under the subheading "6,000 Years Completed in 1975", it reasoned that the millennium would be the last 1,000 years of a 7,000-year rest day of God. On pages 19-20 it said: << The Bible shows that when God began to shape the earth for human habitation, he worked for six "days," or time periods. From the indications in God's Word, each was apparently 7,000 years in length. Then Genesis 2:22 states, Jehovah "proceeded to rest on the seventh day from all his work that he had made." This seventh day, God's rest day, has progressed nearly 6,000 years, and there is still the 1,000-year reign of Christ to go before its end. (Rev. 20:3, 7) This seventh 1,000-year period of human existence could well be likened to a great sabbath day, pictured by the sabbath day God commanded ancient Israel to keep after working for six days. (Ex. 20:8-10; 2 Pet. 3:8) After six thousand years of toil and bondage to sin, sickness, death and Satan, mankind is due to enjoy a rest and is in dire need of a rest. (Heb. 4:1-11) Hence, the fact that we are nearing the end of the first 6,000 years of man's existence is of great significance. Does God's rest day parallel the time man has been on earth since his creation? Apparently so. From the most reliable investigations of Bible chronology, harmonizing with many accepted dates of secular history, we find that Adam was created in the autumn of the year 4026 B.C.E. Sometime in that year Eve could well have been created, directly after which God's rest day commenced. In what year, then, would the first 6,000 years of man's existence and also the first 6,000 years of God's rest day come to an end? The year 1975. This is worthy of notice, particularly in view of the fact that the "last days" began in 1914, and that the physical facts of our day in fulfillment of prophecy mark this as the last generation of this wicked world. So we can expect the immediate future to be filled with thrilling events for those who rest their faith in God and his promises. It means that within relatively few years we will witness the fulfillment of the remaining prophecies that have to do with the "time of the end." >> The above material was not dogmatically certain about 1975 being the date for Armageddon, but it was nearly so. Later material became more dogmatic. The Watchtower, May 1, 1968, said on page 271, paragraph 4: << Thus, Adam's naming of the animals and his realizing that he needed a counterpart would have occupied only a brief time after his creation. Since it was also Jehovah's purpose for man to multiply and fill the earth, it is logical that he would create Eve soon after Adam, perhaps just a few weeks or months later in the same year, 4026 B.C.E. After her creation, God's rest day, the seventh period, immediately followed. >> The study question for this paragraph then asked, "When were Adam and Eve created?", not "When were Adam and Eve possibly created?" Paragraphs 5 and 6 then said: << After [Eve's] creation, God's rest day, the seventh period, immediately followed. Therefore, God's seventh day and the time man has been on earth apparently run parallel. >> Apparently run parallel? Based on what? That's a fully dogmatic claim. Continuing: << To calculate where man is in the stream of time relative to God's seventh day of 7,000 years, we need to determine how long a time has elapsed from the year of Adam and Eve's creation in 4026 B.C.E... The seventh day of the Jewish week, the sabbath, would well picture the final 1,000-year reign of God's kingdom under Christ when mankind would be uplifted from 6,000 years of sin and death. (Rev. 20:6) Hence, when Christians note from God's timetable the approaching end of 6,000 years of human history, it fills them with anticipation. Particularly is this true because the great sign of the "last days" has been in the course of fulfillment since the beginning of the "time of the end" in 1914. >> The October 8, 1968 Awake! dogmatically stated on page 14: << According to reliable Bible chronology Adam and Eve were created in 4026 B.C.E. >> The 1969 book Aid to Bible Understanding dogmatically indicated that Adam and Eve were created in the same year. On page 333, under the subject "Chronology," it said that the time from Adam's creation to the birth of Seth was 130 years, and on page 538, under the subject "Eve," it said that at the age of 130 Eve gave birth to Seth. Since this book was published as an authoritative, encyclopedia-like reference (Insight on the Scriptures is mostly identical), these comments again assured the reader that the Society was certain that Adam and Eve were created in the same year, and implied that it was certain that "everything would be over" by 1975. The 1969 booklet The Approaching Peace of a Thousand Years was also definite about 1975. On pages 25-26 it dogmatically said: << More recently earnest researchers of the Holy Bible have made a recheck of its chronology. According to their calculations the six millenniums of mankind's life on earth would end in the mid-seventies. Thus the seventh millennium from man's creation by Jehovah God would begin within less than ten years... In order for the Lord Jesus Christ to be "Lord even of the sabbath day," his thousand-year reign would have to be the seventh in a series of thousand-year periods or millenniums. >> The 1974 book God's "Eternal Purpose" Now Triumphing for Man's Good shows that the idea that the 7th "creative day" began in 4026 BCE was by this time a well-established doctrine. Without reticence, page 51 displays the subtitle "'Evening' of Seventh Creative 'Day' Begins, 4026 B.C.E." The December 15, 1974 Watchtower (pp. 764-766) dogmatically states, not that 1975 may be a critical year, but that it is a critical year: << Now, as the critical year of 1975 enters, it may well be asked: Has the Most High God of prophecy made a name for himself? The answer is self-evident, Yes! By whom? Not by Christendom or by Jewry, but by Jehovah's Christian witnesses!' >> The Watchtower, August 15, 1968, spoke at length about the significance of 1975 on pages 488-501. The article "The Book of Truthful Historical Dates" discussed details again, on page 488: << Do we know that the seventh year from now will conclude the 6,000th year since Adam was created? And if we live to that year 1975, what should we expect to happen? >> In this Watchtower, the article "Why Are You Looking Forward To 1975?" raised a good deal of anticipation when it said on page 494: << What about all this talk concerning the year 1975? Lively discussions, some based on speculation, have burst into flame during recent months among serious students of the Bible. [which students, and who started the fire?] Their interest has been kindled by the belief that 1975 will mark the end of 6,000 years of human history since Adam's creation. The nearness of such an important date indeed fires the imagination and presents unlimited possibilities for discussion. ... of what benefit is this information to us today?... why should we be any more interested in the date of Adam's creation than in the birth of King Tut?... in the fall of the year 1975, a little over seven years from now... it will be 6,000 years since the creation of Adam. >> Since the Society had already dogmatically stated that Adam and Eve were both created in 4026 BCE -- the end of the 6th creative day and beginning of the 7th -- the 6,000 years since then have all been during the 7th creative day, and per the above quotes, the Millennial Reign of Christ must begin in 1975. In the following, note the sense of urgency, and the implication that 6,000 years is a figure of special significance. Continuing on page 499: << Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man's existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah's loving and timely purposes. [What can we say of this from the perspective of 2019?] Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man's existence on earth. It does not necessarily mean that 1975 marks the end of the first 6,000 years of Jehovah's seventh creative "day." Why not? Because after his creation Adam lived some time during the "sixth day," which unknown amount of time would need to be subtracted from Adam's 930 years, to determine when the sixth seven-thousand-year period or "day" ended, and how long Adam lived into the "seventh day." And yet the end of that sixth creative "day" could end within the same Gregorian calendar year of Adam's creation. It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years. >> While this quote contains some cautionary language, the last sentence harks back to the Society's dogmatic statements that Adam and Eve were both created in 4026 BCE. Naturally, the attentive JW would interpret "may involve" as "will involve". But one thing is clear: such a combination of dogmatic and cautionary statements is sure to produce confusion in the minds of listeners, and in the JW mind, such confusion is resolved in favor of the dogmatic statements. By 1967 expectations about 1975 were high. The following is taken from a talk entitled "Serving with Everlasting Life In View," given at a circuit assembly in the spring of 1967 in Sheboygan, Wisconsin by an official of the Society, a District Servant named Charles Sinutko (see
      Hello guest!
    for audio). The speaker emphasized the nearness of Armageddon and specifically said that it would come before 1975. Speaking of the world to come after Armageddon, he said: << Well, now, who will be there, of us here tonight? For the Society has made application of this scripture, in pointing out that those of us among Jehovah's Witnesses that are not regularly associating with his people, without good cause, such as being flat on our back, will not be in the new order. And we're the ones that are going to come around when the doors close, and say 'I want in now. Sir, open to us!' And Jesus will have to say, 'I'm sorry, I don't even recognize you.' Now wouldn't that be an awful thing. Do you see now why the Society implores us, year in and year out, the same old thing, 'Brothers, get in the flock. Don't let any excuses get in our way. Nothing of any nature. There's only one thing that's going to count when that time comes, and that's that we are inside.' And we hope that all of us here tonight are going to listen to the Society's imploring. We're going to listen to the agonizing entreaty, 'Brothers get in!', because they know what's coming. And it's coming fast -- and don't wait till '75. The door is going to be shut before then. >> The May 1, 1968 Watchtower continued this stimulation of anticipation. Using much the same arguments as above, it dogmatically said on page 272: << The immediate future is certain to be filled with climactic events, for this old system is nearing its complete end. Within a few years at most the final parts of Bible prophecy relative to these "last days" will undergo fulfillment, resulting in the liberation of surviving mankind into Christ's glorious 1,000-year reign. What difficult days, but, at the same time, what grand days are just ahead! >> Similarly, the October 8, 1968 Awake!, on page 13, dogmatically emphasized the shortness of the time: << The fact that fifty-four years of the period called the "last days" have already gone by is highly significant. It means that only a few years, at most, remain before the corrupt system of things dominating the earth is destroyed by God. >> How many years are "a few"? When this was said, it was seven. Today, in 2019, we're already 51 years 'few'. Nope. I'm interpreting what they said as they meant it to be interpreted. Why do you think the Society quoted rank and file JWs about the year 2000 as it did? Just for the hell of it? So far so good. But being alert is quite different from making specifc predictions, as if you know for certain some date or short time period. And you've ignored Jesus' warning against trying to figure out when the end was to come or was about to come. Matthew 24 is explicit that those who claim to know when “the time of the end” has arrived or will arrive, in advance of the appearance of “the sign of the Son of Man in heaven”, are false teachers: << 42 Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming ... 44 Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. >> Obviously, anyone who claims he knows, when Jesus specifically stated that his disciples could not know, cannot honestly claim to be one of Jesus’ disciples. Luke 21:8 confirms this with the admonition, “do not follow him”. You and the Society disagree with the Bible on this. Why? You're neglecting what "sign" means in the Gospel accounts. It does not mean what Watchtower tradition claims. Read Matthew 24 and see if you can find where Jesus' answer to his disciples says anything about a sign. It's not until verse 30 that he mentions a sign: << 29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with a great trumpet sound, and they will gather his chosen ones together from the four winds, from one extremity of the heavens to their other extremity. >> So Jesus said that the sign the disciples asked about was "the sign of the Son of man" that appears "in heaven". It will not be invisible, but will be so spectacular that "all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." Therefore no one would need preachers to tell them that this sign was about to appear -- its appearance would be plainly evident. This sign was not the appearance of war, earthquakes, famine and pestilence mentioned in verses 6-7, and in the parallel accounts in Mark and Luke. Rather, those things were what Jesus warned not to interpret as signs that "the end" was about to happen. Following 24:31 we read this: << 32 “Now learn this illustration from the fig tree: Just as soon as its young branch grows tender and sprouts its leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 Likewise also you, when you see all these things, know that he is near at the doors. >> What are "all these things"? Obviously, the "sign of the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" -- not the earthquakes, etc., that Jesus warned against interpreting as signs. Obviously, then, when this heavenly sign appears, Jesus' followers would clearly know that "he is near at the doors", whatever that means. Next, emphasizing that it was impossible for anyone to know in advance, by calculation or by signs, when "the sign of the Son of man" was to appear "in the heavens", Jesus said (English Standard Version😞 << 36 “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. 37 For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, 39 and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left. 42 Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. 43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. >> I don't see how all that could be any clearer: don't try to predict when the end will come, because you cannot know it. The Society claims that its prophetic speculations have been proved true by various events after 1914, such as a supposed 20x increase in earthquakes, and unprecedented increases in war, famine and pestilence. All of those claims have been individually disproved. And as I have repeatedly pointed out, and you and all the other JW defenders on this board have ignored, we have today an unprecedented population explosion. Had the supposed huge increases in worldwide killers taken place, we would have had a population implosion after 1914. Yet we see an increase from about 2 billion to 8 billion. How do you explain that? You'll have to argue with Jesus about this. I did not write the words of warning above. No matter what you believe, Jesus' words warning against trying to predict "the end" still apply. Nope. You didn't hear the fear and upset in his voice. He was trying to excuse the JW organization for its long history of false prophecy in predicting "the end".
  9. I'm already mocking you for your gullibility. Yes, the world has a lot of potentially fatal problems. But they have nothing to do with anything predicted by the Watchtower Society with regard to its ridiculous interpretations of Matthew, Mark, Luke, Revelation, Daniel, etc. for "the generation of 1914". Indeed, all those interpretations have already proved false. The 'world' may well end because of man-induced climate warming, but it will have nothing to do with "Bible based" JW predictions of "the end".
  10. Anna said: It's gross deception. Why? Because it deliberately gives a completely false picture of what the Bible Students said. That's like saying the Nazi's tried hard not to be dogmatic about Nazism, but didn't always succeed. Tell me if the statements quoted below about 1918 and 1920 are dogmatic or not. The Finished Mystery, 1917, pages 62, 64, said with great authority: << The data presented in comments on Rev. 1:1... prove that the Spring of 1918 will bring upon Christendom a spasm of anguish greater even than that experienced in the Fall of 1914. The awakening of the sleeping saints, A.D. 1878, was just half way (three and one-half years each way) between the beginning of the Times of Restitution in 1874 and the close of the High Calling in 1881. Our proposition is that the glorification of the Little Flock in the Spring of 1918 A.D. will be half way (three and one-half years each way) between the close of the Gentile Times and the close of the Heavenly Way, A.D. 1921. >> These predictions failed. More forceful language was used in the predictions of a terrible destruction due to come on Christendom's churches and their members in 1918, with their dead bodies strewn about unburied. Pages 484-485 said: << Also, in the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by millions, it shall be that any that escape shall come to the works of Pastor Russell to learn the meaning of the downfall of "Christianity." >> Page 513 said: << In the year 1918, when Christendom shall go down as a system to oblivion.... God will cause the nations to shake with gigantic revolutions. >> The book also predicted stupendous events for 1920. On page 258 it said: << Even the republics will disappear in the fall of 1920... Every kingdom of earth will pass away, be swallowed up in anarchy... The three days in which Pharaoh's host pursued the Israelites into the wilderness represent the three years from 1917 to 1920 at which time all of Pharaoh's messengers will be swallowed up in the sea of anarchy. >> On page 542 it said: << As the fleshly-minded apostates from Christianity, siding with the radicals and revolutionaries, will rejoice at the inheritance of desolation that will be Christendom's after 1918, so will God do to the successful revolutionary movement; it shall be utterly desolated, "even all of it." Not one vestige of it shall survive the ravages of world-wide all-embracing anarchy, in the fall of 1920. >> How about the following statements about 1925? Were they dogmatic or not? The book Millions Now Living Will Never Die, 1920 Edition, said on pages 89-90: << . . . we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old . . . >> The May 15, 1922 Watch Tower said: << We have no doubt whatever in regard to the chronology relating to the dates of 1874, 1914, 1918, and 1925. It was on this line of reckoning that the dates 1874, 1914, and 1918 were located; and the Lord has placed the stamp of his seal upon 1914 and 1918 beyond any possibility of erasure. What further evidence do we need? Using this same measuring line... it is an easy matter to locate 1925, probably in the fall, for the beginning of the antitypical jubilee. There can be no more question about 1925 than there was about 1914. >> I could go on with this for a long time, but here's the link on this that I already gave you:
      Hello guest!
    Not dogmatic? Please! The split is more like 90-10 when it came to anything to do with the Gentile Times stuff the Proclaimers book was discussing. Believe what you like. Quotes like the above say different. Time to go beddie-bye.
  11. Anna said: They wouldn't. And I don't think that anyone knew Greenlees was a pedophile until 1984, when the parents of the boy he molested complained to the Society. But the holy spirit certainly would know. And the fact that Greenlees served in a responsible position in the Canadian Bethel for many years prior to 1964, all the way up through his removal from the GB in 1984, proves that holy spirit could not have had anything to do with his appointment -- contrary to Watchtower teaching. And if Greenlees was not so appointed, it must logically be that no elders are so appointed -- including GB members. If you really think that elders are directly appointed by holy spirit, then logically explain why Greenlees was not. 21 hours ago, AlanF said: And even back in 1984 it was well known that pedophiles are never cured. I agree. But as you say, he was appointed director in 1964, and then as GB in 1971. So it could have been believed he was cured. Why do you keep saying "cured"? That assumes that someone knew Greenlees was a pedophile before any of his appointments. But no one ever knew -- at least, not those in responsible positions in Bethel -- until 1984. I've said what happened in gory detail in earlier posts. "Cured" had nothing to do with. The rest of the GB found out about his pedophilia when the molested boy's parents complained. Correct. But the holy spirit was not deceived. Discussed perhaps, but even now you still don't understand that holy spirit does no direct appointing of elders. Such "appointing" is only a metaphor, a manner of speaking. It's not real. Go back to my Julia Childs example. Does she direct you in the kitchen? Or do you follow directions in her cookbook? Do you understand the difference?
  12. Anna said: I was taught the same thing in the late 1960s about 1975. I don't believe I said in 2000, but by 2000. If not, that's what I should have said, because that's what the first two references explicitly say: "a work that would be completed in our century" and "within our twentieth century, the "battle in the day of Jehovah" will begin". Can't get any clearer than that. "Insinuated" is the wrong word for what those charlatans did. Nope, it's very specific. "Within the decade ending in 2020 Britain will be out of the EU." Nothing open about that. Two things: Samuel didn't think this up by himself -- the Society taught him. The Society puts 'experiences' like that in its publications for a reason -- to tell JWs what they ought to be thinking. You keep forgetting what Jesus warned his followers: do not follow anyone who claims to represent him and God, and says "the due time for the end has approached". That's what he meant by "keep on the watch", because his followers could not possibly know in advance when the end had approached. He even said,"if you think you know -- that's not it!" Sure, after proclaiming every which way that it was God's prediction not his. Of course it was. Did you read the links I gave you? Which shows that the Bible Students under Russell did not have God's holy spirit guiding them, even though they claimed they did. Russell even said, using the royal "we": "These are God's dates, not ours."
  13. James Thomas Rook Jr. said: Those examples don't revise history -- they are history. But there are hundreds of examples of Watchtower writers revising 'problematic' Watchtower history. I did a study some years ago examining several hundred statements about what the Bible Students believed about 1914 before that date arrived. Only a handful were truthful. Most were deceptive in the sense that they conveyed a wrong view about what was believed, but without a flat-out lie. A couple of dozen just flat-out lied, like "the Bible Students believed that Christ would return in 1914, and that Armageddon would begin then." The truth was that Russell taught that both events had already occurred in 1874, six years before he published an account of 1914 in the 1880 Zion's Watch Tower. My favorite example of such mealy mouthed deception is from the Proclaimers book (p. 163). Speaking about what Rutherford and company taught in the decade after 1914, it said: << As the years passed and they examined and reexamined the Scriptures, their faith in the prophecies remained strong, and they did not hold back from stating what they expected to occur. With varying degrees of success, they endeavored to avoid being dogmatic about details not directly stated in the Scriptures. >> Note that expression "endeavored to avoid being dogmatic". It doesn't say that they succeeded in avoiding being dogmatic, so the statement is not technically a lie. But it gives the strong impression that the main goal of the Bible Students under Rutherford was to avoid being dogmatic -- which simply reading Watchtower literature beyond 1914 proves is not true. Rutherford actually taught that what was written in The Watch Tower was equal to the Bible in authority, including his 1925 prediction of Armageddon where he self-admittedly "made an ass of" himself. Exactly what most JWs do when confronted by information like the above. Of course it is. Tell that to Watchtower leaders.
  14. Not necessarily. That's a rough guide, is all. The best guide, I think, is the consensus of competent scholars over a long period of time. Even then, no one can be sure that we really possess the original manuscripts, because there are many examples where, for example, the Masoretic text differs significantly from the LXX, which many argue is based on an older and more authentic Hebrew text. Of course, if a bona fide ancient Hebrew text from 300 BCE or earlier is found, that would throw a big monkey wrench into Biblical textual criticism.
  15. James Thomas Rook Jr. said: I suspect that this is true in all other language translations. I completely agree -- in principle. In practice, with the Bible we're dealing with three dead languages, so there exist no fluent speakers. Nevertheless, I think competent scholars still do a pretty good job of translating. That's esecially so when independent scholars arrive at essentially the same translations. Pretty spotty, I expect.
  16. TrueTomHarley said: Again we witness Orwellian crimestop. The point, Einstein, is that these JWs did not make this nonsense up for themselves, but read the predictions for 2000 in Watchtower publications. Do a little looking on the jwfacts website and you'll find some quotes. Or read some in my response to Anna above. Yes indeed. That paragon of scholastic aptitude gets all of the Real Soon Now nonsense from the Watchtower Society. Are you really this stupid? 1941, 1975, 2000 and Real Soon Now are certainly within peoples' lifetimes. 1975 is NOT arguable, as the links I posted prove. Unfortunately, JW leaders' counsel on that has often been accompanied by predictions of specific years to watch out for: 1914, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1941, 1975, 2000. We continue to witness Orwellian crimestop. TrueTomHarley said: I did not start this -- others did. As the criticisms of fundamental JW beliefs pile up, JW apologists pull out all the stops to avoid discussion. Here we see TTH sticking his fingers in his ears, shouting La-la-la-la-la! and doing his best to sidestep and deflect issues that show his cult leaders in a truly bad light. TrueTomHarley said: Nonsense. The fact is that I'm quite objective about these things, and as a result have strongly disagreed with some critics of the NWT. You're simply too stupid to understand that, as evidenced by your comments below: Wrong on both counts. A classic instance of the fallacy known as The False Dilemma. So what? Franz was insane but brilliant. A sort of idiot savant of religion. Such people are capable of feats far beyond those of mortal men.
  17. Anna said: The Society made direct statements as well as more subtle suggestions. Take a gander: << How thrilling that must have been for Paul and Barnabas-sailing to their first foreign assignment! The apostle Paul was spearheading the Christian missionary activity. He was also laying a foundation for a work that would be completed in our century. >> January 1, 1989 Watchtower, p. 12 Note that "in our century" was changed to "in our day" in the bound volume and in the CDROM Library. Note that when the following statements were made, the Society was teaching that "the generation of 1914" meant the group of people alive in 1914 who survived until "the end". << Shortly, within our twentieth century, the "battle in the day of Jehovah" will begin against the modern antitype of Jerusalem, Christendom. >> -- "The Nations Shall Know That I Am Jehovah"-How? - 1971 << And if the wicked system of this world survived until the turn of the century, which is highly improbable in view of world trends and the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, there would still be survivors of the World War I generation. However, the fact that their number is dwindling is one more indication that “the conclusion of the system of things” is moving fast toward its end. >> -- October 15, 1980 Watchtower, p. 31 << It has been thrilling to see the fulfillment of Jesus’ sign showing that the Kingdom was established in the heavens in that momentous year 1914. And Jesus has told us to rejoice at seeing the dark storm clouds of Armageddon gathering since that time. He has told us that the “generation” of 1914—the year that the sign began to be fulfilled—”will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Matthew 24:34) Some of that “generation” could survive until the end of the century. But there are many indications that “the end” is much closer than that! >> -- March 1, 1984 Watchtower, pp. 18-19 << The Time for a Change Is Near! Carole, from France, has a “marvelous hope” and foresees, for the near future, “something marvelous—not at all like the world we live in.” Samuel, a 15-year-old youth from the same country, also believes in a complete change: “For the year 2000, I visualize a world transformed into a beautiful paradise! But I don’t think that either the present world or its rulers will live to see that day. . . We are living in the last days of the system of things.” Ruth, a German girl of 16, also expresses her confidence in these changes: “I know I’m not smart enough to change the world and make things run right. Only Jehovah, our Creator, can and will do that soon.” >> November 8, 1986 Awake!, pp. 7-8
  18. James Thomas Rook Jr. said: Well -- sometimes. Indeed -- something that high-control-group leaders like the JW Governing Body always forget. They dictate their version of "a good conscience" to the group members and boot out all who disagree. Thus, members either adopt the leaders' conscience, or they shut up.
  19. Srecko Sostar said: To be more precise, interpretations of 'yohm' are such personal interpretations. The translation itself is not much open to discussion, as virtually all Bible translations use "day". Quite so. The original NWT Committee was comprised mostly of gophers like Albert Schroeder who did busy-work like making cross references. A Greek name George Gangas helped a bit with the Greek translation, but he had no education, and his Greek was modern Greek, not 1st century Greek. The only one who more or less knew what he was doing was Fred Franz, who had a year or two of Greek in college before he joined the Bible Students, but had no education at all in Hebrew. He was entirely self-taught in Hebrew. It seems that much of Franz's knowledge of Hebrew came from looking up words in Hebrew-English lexicons and looking at many Bible translations. He also elicited help from a scholarly Jew living in Brooklyn, and from at least one recognized Bible scholar (Goodspeed?) who produced his own partial Bible translation. In 1994 I met one other actual WTS scholar who seemed competent, but of course he had nothing to do with the original New World Translation. He died about 20 years ago. He was a Romanian named John Albu, who immigrated to the U.S. around 1970, and quickly became a JW, and soon an "anointed one". He soon joined Bethel and worked on translation and chronology stuff. He told me that he was educated in Europe in Hebrew, Greek and other languages. Eventually serious health issues forced him out of Bethel, but he continued to work closely with the Writing Staff. He worked as a doorman for a hotel in Manhattan. It's fairly certain that Albu did much of the research that resulted in the infamous chapter 14 of the 1981 WTS book "Let Your Kingdom Come", written by GB member Lloyd Barry. He told me that part of the reason he became a JW was that the NWT was so fabulously accurate. I suspect that Franz and Albu would strongly object to the new NWT. While it's far more readable in many areas, it violates Franz's dictum that the NWT should be literal to a fault, being more of a "dynamic translation" in the spirit of the New International Version. Of course, Freddie always skewed his translations in favor of pre-existing Watchtower doctrine, sometimes stretching Hebrew and Greek meanings to their limits, and occasionally past those limits. My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that on the whole both versions of the NWT are translationally at least as accurate as the best other translations. In a handful of cases I think it's more accurate than most. They all have inaccuracies and various warts, but in different areas. Much of the criticism of the NWT comes from Christian scholars who are obligated by their religions to argue in favor of doctrines like the Trinity, and so often use really bad arguments to criticize the NWT. I think that Fred Franz was a brilliant but insane man who fell into C. T. Russell's cult at an early age and never recovered.
  20. TrueTomHarley said: Um, I was alive for 1975, 2000 and Real Soon Now. My mother was alive for them and 1941. Old Freddie Franz was alive for all of those false predictions. You really have a bad case of pathological lying. The prediction for 2000 was made at various times from the 1970s through 2000 itself. Real Soon Now started about 1914 and continues. HAHAHAHAHAHA! JW rules, not the Bibles'. Ever read Deuteronomy 18? JW leaders have always claimed to speak in God's name and have always made false predictions. Deut. 18 calls such charlatans false prophets. How about Luke 21:7-8? That's explicit not to follow anyone who claims to speak in God's name and says about the time for "the end": "The due time has approached". False. The language in Watchtower publications is explicit. You've obviously read the quotes, so your rationalizing comment is yet another outright lie. Oh? So JWs are supposed to view Watchtower predictions of "the end" as in consequential? I heard several JWs in the 1980s talking about 2000. In online forums in the late 1990s, many JW apologists threatened: "You'll get yours when 2000 rolls around!" And today we see Arauna vaguely warning that Real Soon Now world leaders will do all manner of vile deeds. And of course, the Society itself makes this warning at every District Convention. Not arguable at all. Following Orwellian crimestop principles, you've simply dismissed from your mind what you've read and, on some level, know very well it is what the false prophets known as JW leaders said. For example, the old Aid book and an Awake! article clearly stated Adam and Eve were born in the same year, just months apart. A late 1960s Watchtower had a big spread on 1975 and one article was titled, "Why Are You Looking Forward To 1975?" Do you need a refresher? Well, here are a couple of refreshers:
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
  21. TrueTomHarley said: Another lie. Plenty of cases have been brought (or would have been brought if not for statutes of limitations) where elders were the molesters. His comments amounts to calling you out on your double standards: You basically say, "We're ok because the world is worse". A deceptive rationalization. It's saying that Christians are above the world. Then explain the Governing Body's actions toward homosexual pedophile Leo Greenlees. LOL at the Orwellian crimestop!
  22. James Thomas Rook Jr. said: The problem is not translation, but original meaning. What did 'ohm' (day) mean to the original writers? Since we can't question them, and since the word has several meanings, we don't know. Young-earth creationists vehemently argue that 'ohm' means 24-hour day. JWs used to claim 7,000 years; now they use the mealy-mouthed term millennia, but the Society actually seems to agree with science that the "geological ages" were hundreds of millions of years long. Old-earth creationists are such for an obvious reason. But that's not the big problem with rationalizing Genesis. The big problem is that, no matter what number of years one allows for the "creative days", the order of creation is mostly wrong according to the timing of the fossil record. Genesis has flying creatures of all sorts -- including birds -- created on the 5th day, but land creatures first created on the 6th day. Yet land creatures appeared long before birds. Land-dwelling insects appeared 400 million years ago; land-dwelling amphibians 365 million; birds (in the form of the primitive intermediate form Archaeopteryx) not later 150 million; all but a handful of modern birds appeared later than 66 million years after the demise of the dinosaurs. Note that the above is true irrespective of the evolution/creation question: I've spoken only of the appearance -- not the evolution or creation -- of creatures in the fossil record. Arguing that the fossil record is wrong is like claiming a flat earth -- which the Bible does in Isaiah 40:22 (pizza pie shape) and indicates in several other places.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.