AlanF
-
Posts
1,227 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
World Wiki
Events
Posts posted by AlanF
-
-
On 11/30/2019 at 1:57 PM, Jack Ryan said:
"A casualty on the altar of education..."
Nothing Culty here.... Not at all /s
It can't get any clearer: "LIsten to Jehovah's voice!" is a direct claim to inspiration by the Governing Body.
-
2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:
Of course! What in the world is so controversial about that?
In Western law, it is called, “presumed innocent until proven guilty.” In common parlance, it is “refrain from gossiping.”
I sort of miss the times when outright gossip did not form the stuff of headlines
Unless I am missing something, that is because he was not. 13 years is what it looks like from the article.
He is removed when an apparently creditable accusation surfaces. It is shocking, perhaps, that he might do such a thing, but it appears pretty uncontroversial in the way it was handled.
And sometimes you wish that there was more differerentiation in “molestation.” At present, anything from a hand on the inner thigh or rear end to outright rape is described (and sometimes deliberately confused) as “molestation.” None of those actions are great, of course, but there is a substantial difference between them.
It's exactly the attitude TTH displays here -- "Oh, molestation is no big deal!" -- that has gotten JW leaders in deep doo doo, and is the source of the extreme disgust about them shown by so many people.
-
Arauna said:
Quote11 hours ago, AlanF said:
Only the young-earth kind. Intelligent Design
I happen to have a brother who did research on toxins. He became a Jehovahs witness while doing research at the largest research centre in the southern hemisphere which made vaccinations etc for race horses. He is also a brilliant mathematician. He did his degrees in "Carbon" chemistry..... which is about everything that is "living" and carbon based.
I have always had a love for science because of my brothers and a natural aptitude.
I see no such "aptitude" in your acceptance of a mishmosh creationist ideas from various sources. Nor in your refusal to name the sources you rely on. Nor in your refusal to read real science books.
QuoteWhen I still lived in Africa, I had a few interesting discussions with him... Yes, unfortunately many people were awestruck when Dawkins became a celebrity...but unfortunately very little substance there.....
LOL! Some people think Newton and Einstein were loons.
QuoteMy brother gave me several reasons why the mathematics and chemistry about the age of the earth is incorrect.
How long ago? 1945? And what were his reasons? My guess is that you completely misunderstood much of what he said.
QuoteBut you did not answer me- why uranium has not all turned to lead? This is one of the simplest questions.
I certainly did: the half-life of U-238 is 4.5 billion years. The fact that you don't recognize that as an answer proves that you don't understand even such simple things in science. So let me try to educate you.
"Half-life" refers to the fact that all radioactive materials decay at a fixed rate such that after a period of time called the "half-life", one half of the original material is left ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life ). Thus uranium-238 decays ultimately into lead-206 (do you even know what those numbers mean?) through a long chain of other radioactive decays ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-238 ). Thus, if the age of the earth is 4.55 billion years, however much U-238 it had at its beginning has lost a bit more than half of its mass as it decayed into lead-206. "One half" is a good deal bigger than "none", wouldn't you say?
Now consider that all elements heavier than lithium (number 3 in the periodic table) are synthesized in supernova explosions. According to cosmologists the universe is about 13.7 billion years old. That's about 3 half-lives of U-238. Thus the original amount of U-238 in the universe would have decayed to about 1/8 as much. But elements are constantly being synthesized in the supernovas that occur in the universe all the time, and so U-238 is always being created.
QuoteThere is ample proof of the flood - the sedimentation and the layers.
Nope. As I've told you several times, that's pure young-earth creationist claptrap -- "flood geology".
A careful examination of sediment layers does not show virtually instantaneous deposition, but usually a relatively slow accumulation of stuff followed by periods of no deposition, or even erosion. For example, in the Grand Canyon region there are hundreds of sediment layers now turned to stone. Many layers show evidence that, at some point, deposition stopped, the shallow sea level dropped and/or the land rose, and eroson occurred, sometimes of an unknown number of turned-to-stone lower layers, leaving erosional products such as cliffs, stream beds and cobbles in those beds.
For example, the Grand Canyon itself contains nearly 40 layers of sedimentary rock on top of the lowest Precambrian rocks ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Grand_Canyon_area ), ranging in age from 200 million to 600 million for the sediments, and about 2 billion years old for the Precambrian basement rocks. There are some 14 unconformities (gaps) between these layers. During one ancient period of deposition, limestone accumulated in a layer that is now called the Muav Limestone, followed by deep burial for an unknown time period. Eventually this layer was exposed due to uplift of the land, and an unknown amount of the top layers were eroded away, leaving a surface cut by many erosion channels. Later, a different kind of limestone was deposited on top of all this, forming the Temple Butte layer. Roughly 65 million years of sedimentation were eroded away between these two layers. Eventually erosion stopped again for an unknown time, then another layer of limestone was desposited on top, called the Redwall Limestone. The process repeated many times.
All manner of fossil animals and plants are found in these layers, including burrows and trackways of footprints. This is impossible in a huge flood lasting a few weeks.
Near Denver, Colorado is an exposure of sedimentary rock that is tilted at a steep angle and was eroded partly away during the uplift of the Rocky Mountains. It is now a city park. Some of the individual layers in this exposure contain dinosaur footprints and trackways. There is no way dinosaurs left footprints there during Noah's Flood. The layers contain plenty of fossil animals, too.
The region north of the Grand Canyon is called The Grand Staircase ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Staircase ) because as one travels north from the Grand Canyon, one sees cliff after cliff in the sedimentary layers that are piled on top of one another. Various dating methods show that the higher the layer, the younger it is. The topmost sediments in Bryce Canyon are about 40 million years old. The whole assemblage is about 3,000 meters thick.
QuoteWhen one looks at the Geologists explanation for the so-called" millions of years "between" the layers when the layers themselves are so deep, one realises quickly there is a problem. They cannot explain it away.
It's thoroughly explained, not explained away.
Once again, your claims are purely those of young-earth creationist "flood geology" -- which even the Watchtower Society abandoned 40 years ago. Why do you cling to this nonsense?
QuoteThe Cambrian explosion
I've explained this to you several times now: the "Cambrian explosion" lasted 20 million to 140 million years, depending on how it's defined. That is in no way an "explosion".
Quoteand the lack of transition bone specimens in the development of flight. Wings suddenly appear.
I already explained all this to you. Certain early dinosaurs called theropods appeared at least 180 million years ago, which looked an awful lot like birds, and had feathers. Eventually primitive birds appeared about 150 million years ago. Archaeopteryx is the first known "true bird", but it was a true "intermediate" in the sense of having bird-like and dinosaur-like features. This critter was so much like the contemporary small dinosaurs like Compsognathus that two specimens were identified as such and spent a hundred years in museum drawers until the 1970s.
Don't you learn?
QuoteIf only the fittest survive - there should be millions of bones of transitional animals / birds which did not survive.
There are plenty of such things. I've given you links to descriptions of them. You simply refuse to learn anything.
QuoteThe bone record does not substantiate the claims of evolutionists of slow development.
Of course it does. Once again, read a good book on paleontology and evolution, like Donald Prothero's Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why it Matters.
Why do you continue to refuse to educate yourself?
-
38 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
What I would like to know, Arauna, is how the two Penguins got from Antarctica, to the launch site of Noah's Ark.
God temporarily gave them permission to fly.
-
4 hours ago, Anna said:
I don't think so, more like "some people just can't help themselves"
I agree that some people can't help themselves when it comes to lying. The Watchtower Writing Staff in particular.
-
7 hours ago, John Paul said:
Like I said, reread those passages you try so hard to defend. It will give you evidence you are not willing to learn the truth.
My excuses or yours. The only deception I see comes from people that don't educate themselves about history. Anyone can take something out of context in order to express a negative outcome. What those people can't do is teach an educated person how to lie, especially when those, lies are poorly drawn.
Yet another instance of Orwellian crimestop.
-
Arauna said:
QuoteOn 11/29/2019 at 7:21 PM, AlanF said:
I am not a creationist......
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.
QuoteI do not believe the creation of animals and people took only 24 hours. This is what creationists believe.
Nope. Only the young-earth kind. Intelligent Design creationists range from young-earth to old-earth.
QuoteI do believe that jehovah created the earth and the physical universe and the age of the rocks on earth gives one an idea of the age of the earth. Genesis 1: 1 and 2 However, the earth is not as old as the estimates given by some evolutionists.
The Watchtower Society accepts those figures. You know better, do you?
QuoteThere are many problems with carbon 14 dating as well as the other methods. Uranium breaks down into lead reasonably fast.... and there is still uranium left on the earth.....
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.
Quoteso if the earth is as old as they say, there would be no uranium left.
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.
QuoteI do believe that the earth after its creation was left to cool down and there was water on the earth from this process - as the bible indicates.
Ideas like these are left over from 1940s Watchtower teaching. You're WAY behind the times.
QuoteAfter this God started to prepare the earth for human and animal habitation and only now calls each period a day. He used 6 periods, called a day, to work on this. But he also calls all the creation of heaven and earth (including its preparation) a day - one total period in genesis 2:4.
I'm fully versed in these myths.
QuoteWhen you promote the idea that the layers of the earth is not in line with bible chronology you are mistaken. You see the geological record together with the biblical record confirms the biblical history.
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.
QuoteMany geologists try to hide the evidence of a earthwide flood
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.
Quotebut the violent evidences of a flood is everywhere on earth - especially the animal grave yards which were mostly in gullys.
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.
QuoteThe earth tore open and released waters deep under the earth
Yow! You must be reading Walter Brown's hydroplate nonsense. Even the ICR and Answers in Genesis reject that garbage.
Quoteand gave way to volcanic activity and tsunamis.
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.
QuoteIt was an extremely violent event which left the earth completely changed afterwards. The earth moved considerably as water is not only heavy but extremely powerful in its movement when tectonic plates move. The weight of one bucket of water should give one an idea of the weight and pressing down of sediment involved. This pushed out all oxygen.... perfect for the formation of coal, diamonds etc. Water also drew back and this can be seen in some formations.
Again pure "flood geology" nonsense.
QuoteThe layers of animals packed down in the different layers of sediment is proof of a violent flood.
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: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashfall_Fossil_Beds . There is no evidence for a flood; all evidence shows ash was carried in the air from what is now southern Idaho to Nebraska.
QuoteAnd the same sediment layers appear all over the earth with the lighter materials higher up such as sea shells etc.
Complete nonsense. Not even the Society used to publish such nonsense. Where are you getting this from?
QuoteMe thinks you dismiss too much evidence which honest scientists do not ignore!
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.
QuoteYea- you will most probably call me a moron.... again....
Willfully ignorant is a better term.
Quotebut because evolutionists do not take the flood into account and the change of the earth during the flood their carbon calculations and ice age calculations could be totally wrong.....
Zero evidence for your claim. If you think not, then by all means give your evidence.
QuoteNo I do not punt..... I have a life. My life does not consist of sitting on internet talking to trolls who really do not care to even consider an aspect different to their own opinion.
Ah, but you do have time to take pot shots at those far more knowledgeable than you.
-
2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:
GB members are responsible not only about CSA cases in Organization, but also for many misconceptions on doctrinal matters and interpretations of Bible.
For example, how old humans are. Before few moments TV program on one channel giving documentary about archaeological research in Emirates and how they found place where people lived, not before 10.000 years as they thought previously, but before 125.000 years. Until that moment my JW wife looking with interest on program, but after this "detail" she said, "now they are boring" and switched program on other channel :))))
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?
-
16 hours ago, Anna said:
It might sound mealy mouthed, but it's hardly deception.
They tried hard not to be dogmatic, but they didn’t always succeed. Sometimes they did well and were not dogmatic, and sometimes they didn’t do well, and were dogmatic.
I believe they endeavored to avoid being dogmatic. But obviously didn't always succeed.
Kind of like "he endeavored to avoid being dead". But he didn't always succeed.
You are what you are until you're not.
-
TrueTomHarley said:
Quote9 hours ago, Anna said:
10 hours ago, AlanF said:
“I don't believe I said in 2000, but by 2000.” Ok, well that's what I wanted to clear up. I thought you said it.
Of course he said it. He is now trying to walk it back because, despite all his blustering, he couldn’t quite make it stick.
Still incredibly thick. Read my earlier post to Anna.
QuoteIt is as you say. The nearness of the end has been impressed upon Witnesses from their inception, but the only specific date in anyone’s lifetime today is 1975.
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 ].
-
8 minutes ago, John Paul ll said:
Yes, Russell predicted the end of the gentile times would end in 1914. That doesn't mean he predicted the end of the world in 1914. There's difference between the end of ages and the end of the world.
What do you think "the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men" means?
-
Anna said:
Quote14 hours ago, AlanF said:
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 did assume that someone knew he had done something in the past, but that it was believed he was changed and would never do it again in the spirit of 1 Cor 6:11.
I think you're very confused about this. Who would have known? Who would have thought him cured? When?
QuoteI have noticed this is one of the reasons why in the past pedophiles ended up molesting other victims besides the original victim. Elders assumed the person was "cured" and would never do it again.
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.
Quote14 hours ago, AlanF said:
And even back in 1984 it was well known that pedophiles are never cured.
Well known by whom?
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." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PedophiliaApparent the holy spirit did not get the message.
Quote14 hours ago, AlanF said:
Quote
I don't know what happened in 1984 when he was forced to resign.
I've said what happened in gory detail in earlier posts.
Missed that.
Ok.
Quote14 hours ago, Anna and AlanF said:
the holy spirit had nothing to do with it, that he was appointed by men who were evidently deceived.
Correct. But the holy spirit was not deceived.
Well, in a manner of speaking, since holy spirit is not a person but a force.
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?
Quote14 hours ago, AlanF said:
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?
I do understand it is a manner of speaking, since holy spirit is not a person, as I mentioned above. You obviously meant it as a metaphor as well when you said it "was not deceived".
In the sense that, put plainly, "God was not deceived".
QuoteBy the same token, it can be said someone is appointed by holy spirit even though it was merely written directions that were being followed.
Nope. Most Christians claim to follow the directions in the Bible, and you certainly don't accept that God directs them, metaphorically or directly.
QuoteSince God used holy spirit, his force, to inspire people to write down His directions, when appointing overseers, elders do so according to those directions. Doing so correctly is contingent on the honesty of the one being appointed, and the astuteness of those doing the appointing. If the person actually qualifies, then it can be said they were appointed by holy spirit as per Acts 20:28 "Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God...."
Once again, by that reasoning the Pope has been appointed by God.
-
John Paul said:
QuotePeople here should go back and reread their historical understanding of Russell. He had a wait and see attitude about 1914
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.
Quotewhile he had claimed Jesus presence was felt in 1874. That of course had nothing to do with Jesus being enthroned in 1914,
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.
Quotenor does it revise a historical fact world war one started 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.
-
Anna said:
Quote10 hours ago, AlanF said:
I don't believe I said in 2000, but by 2000.
Ok, well that's what I wanted to clear up. I thought you said in.
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. 7-8The 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.
>>>>Quote42 minutes ago, AlanF said:
and 1975, which was not official anyway.
Of course it was.
Read moreDisagree. It was insinuated, but never official.
Nope. I already posted two links proving my claim:
https://www.critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/1975-new-info.html
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 https://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/1975.php 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'.
Quote42 minutes ago, AlanF said:
The Society puts 'experiences' like that in its publications for a reason -- to tell JWs what they ought to be thinking.
Your opinion. I think you are reading too much into it.
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?
Quote42 minutes ago, AlanF said:
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!"
Jesus said to keep on the watch because you do not know the day when it's coming, so yes, logically one would have to stay alert.
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?
QuoteBut Jesus also gave signs when the disciples asked him when, and Jesus said when these things occur, (the signs) you will know he is near at the door. So when one sees the sign, one is merely led to a logical conclusion that the "end must be approaching".
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?
QuoteIn any case, what is the objective of someone who says the end is approaching? Is it to help rouse and warn people to become alert so that they can be ready and "found by him spotless and unblemished and in peace" ? Why would Jesus be upset and warn about false prophets and those saying "the due time for the end has approached" unless these people were doing it with evil motives, such as those pretending to be Christ's followers but really are ravenous wolves.
You'll have to argue with Jesus about this. I did not write the words of warning above.
QuoteI do not believe this applies to the org.
No matter what you believe, Jesus' words warning against trying to predict "the end" still apply.
QuotePerhaps that is what Schroeder meant when he said "that Bible verse does not apply to us".
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".
-
2 minutes ago, Arauna said:
I never read a direct prediction that the end would come in 2000. Any case, we are supposed to be ready ALL the time because it will come as thief in the night. The other comparison is to a pregnant woman..... she knows the event is eminent but does not know the hour.
Did the bible not warn that people will scoff and say: where is it ? ....and when they do not expect it the events will suddenly follow each other .....rapidly one will see prophecies being fulfilled. I have no doubt in my mind that it is getting closer every day that passes.
We are seeing the storm clouds rolling in on several sides. My brother told me that they had temperatures if 53.2 Celsius in south Africa..... and the hight of the summer will only be in February - in 3 months. Farmers have not planted.
Governments are keeping quiet about crop failures, unprecedented ocean destruction due to warm sea currents and many other problems. The dollar and stable stockmarket is the main concern. Keep everyone in the dark until the biosphere collapses.
Growing hate between the " iron and clay" elements in most western governments - irreconcileable to where it is almost cold civil war. Maneuvering behind the scenes of the UN..... 176 nations have signed up on the 3 agreements - a good indication of where we are in the stream of time.
Surveillance and control of powerful private global companies, super artificial intelligence, CRISPR software on sale for anyone who wants to use it, CHina and Russia has more and more ports and other mineral resources under their control and the growth of atheism, immorality (LGBTQ etc) and other devastating philosophies...... as well as a rise in spiritistic religions...... the main one in the UN - theosophy.
One thing for sure - the world is not growing better as some are saying - but worse as each day passes. A Christian genocide is ongoing in middle east and north Africa. No one cares about this because the UN human rights organization has been taken over by Muslim countries who vote each other in. Countries with the worst human rights sitting in top positions.
Well.... I can go on..... and on....
Laugh on and on..... suddenly the mockery will turn into gnashing if teeth in anger....
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 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
Trust NO ONE, and you will seldom be disappointed.
I've never been disappointed in you, James.
-
Anna said:
Quote36 minutes ago, AlanF said:
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. >
Read moreIt might sound mealy mouthed, but it's hardly deception.
It's gross deception. Why? Because it deliberately gives a completely false picture of what the Bible Students said.
QuoteThey tried hard not to be dogmatic, but they didn’t always succeed.
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: https://critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/part-3-statements-concerning-1918-1925.html
Not dogmatic? Please!
QuoteSometimes they did well and were not dogmatic, and sometimes they didn’t do well, and were dogmatic.
The split is more like 90-10 when it came to anything to do with the Gentile Times stuff the Proclaimers book was discussing.
QuoteI believe they endeavored to avoid being dogmatic. But obviously didn't always succeed.
Believe what you like. Quotes like the above say different.
Time to go beddie-bye.
-
Anna said:
Quote21 hours ago, AlanF said:
23 hours ago, Anna said:
It's because they thought he was cured.
You know that, do you?
You're wrong. I told you earlier: Greenlees was a pedophile in 1964 when he was appointed a Director, and before that according to one of his child victims, Mark Palo, who has put his story online. Greenlees was 72 when he was forced off the GB. Pedophiles don't start up at age 72 -- they just keep doing what they've long been doing
Read moreI don't know it, I am being logical about it. Why would anyone knowingly want to appoint a practicing pedophile?
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.
QuoteI don't know what happened in 1984 when he was forced to resign.
I've said what happened in gory detail in earlier posts.
QuoteBut whatever it was led the rest to believe he wasn't cured after all.
"Cured" had nothing to do with. The rest of the GB found out about his pedophilia when the molested boy's parents complained.
Quote21 hours ago, AlanF said:
Furthermore, if holy spirit had anything to do with the Governing Body -- which formed the judicial committee that found Greenlees guilty of child molestation -- it would never have 'directed' Nathan Knorr to appoint Greenlees as Director in the first place, or it would have seen to it that Greenlees was not appointed a GB member in 1971, or that he was removed long before 1984.
I thought I had already agreed that if Greenlees was a pedophile when he was appointed director, and then later GB member, the holy spirit had nothing to do with it, that he was appointed by men who were evidently deceived.
Correct. But the holy spirit was not deceived.
QuoteAnd I thought we had already discussed the "mechanics" of how holy spirit works.
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?
-
Anna said:
Quote4 hours ago, AlanF said:
The Society made direct statements as well as more subtle suggestions. Take a gander:
. . .
Thanks for those references. I obviously must have read some of them, especially the ones from the 80's and I am aware that our mothers would say we would never go to school, that Armageddon would be here by then.
I was taught the same thing in the late 1960s about 1975.
QuoteThis was nothing new to me since we were saying this almost since the founding of the JWS. What I was questioning was the specific date 2000. That Armageddon would come in that year,
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.
Quotein the same way as was insinuated for 1975.
"Insinuated" is the wrong word for what those charlatans did.
Quote"Within the 20th Century" is open,
Nope, it's very specific. "Within the decade ending in 2020 Britain will be out of the EU." Nothing open about that.
Quoteand just because 15 year old Samuel "visualizes something happening in 2000" doesn't mean we had to think it will happen exactly then, lol.
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.
QuoteSamuel is 48 today, probably with kids, maybe a grandad, and probably still a JW. I know plenty of people who visualized something happening, and nothing happened, and they are still visualizing it. But, everyone in their right mind yearns for good things, and Jesus told his followers to "keep on the watch" and Peter "await and keep close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah".
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!"
QuoteAs for the society setting specific dates for the end, 1925 sticks in my mind, for which Rutherford apologized,
Sure, after proclaiming every which way that it was God's prediction not his.
Quoteand 1975, which was not official anyway.
Of course it was. Did you read the links I gave you?
QuoteAnd 1914 of course....
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."
-
James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
QuoteWhat gets me is, as in the book 1984 ... the Society revises history, as stated in the examples given above,
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.
QuoteThat was Winston Smith's JOB ... to revise history.
THEN .... when called on their actions, stare blankly into the headlights and say "No, we didn't!"
Exactly what most JWs do when confronted by information like the above.
QuoteIt's a good thing I understand such things as normal to all people, or it would "stumble" me.
Of course it is. Tell that to Watchtower leaders.
-
30 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
There is always the final arbiter .... the "smell test".
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.
-
James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
Quote2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:
f it is #2, you will find yourself in another beef with @James Thomas Rook Jr.. You should have heard him carry on about the impossibilities of translating without advanced education on another thread.
I am still of the opinion that when translating from ENGLISH, to another language, a person MUST be a fluent EXPERT at both languages, and have lived in areas where both are spoken extensively, and also have a DEEP knowledge of the history and culture of both places, AND have a potload of plain old common sense .... which is not all that common.
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.
QuoteWe have Bible translations in over a thousand languages (...or is it just some Bible literature?) ... but how good are those translations?
Pretty spotty, I expect.
-
TrueTomHarley said:
Quote1 hour ago, AlanF said:
I heard several JWs in the 1980s talking about 2000.
I heard several JWs in the 1980s talking about zebras. Coming from the Master of Rationality, I’d say that this bit of “evidence” is rather weak.
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.
Quote1 hour ago, AlanF said:
And today we see Arauna vaguely warning that Real Soon Now world leaders will do all manner of vile deeds.
Another bit of proof!
Yes indeed. That paragon of scholastic aptitude gets all of the Real Soon Now nonsense from the Watchtower Society.
Quote1 hour ago, AlanF said:
In online forums in the late 1990s, many JW apologists threatened: "You'll get yours when 2000 rolls around!"
What is wrong with you? There is 1975 and only 1975 in anyone’s lifetime. And, as stated, even that one is arguable.
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.
QuoteYou’re just steamed that there has not been counsel: “Remember, brothers, how Jesus said ‘Keep on the watch?’ He’s nuts. Fogedaboutit!”
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:
Quote59 minutes ago, AlanF said:
To be more precise, interpretations of 'yohm' are such personal interpretations.
Put in another thread. Start one if you have to. Your hostess, the Librarian has (repeatedly) requested it.
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:Quote3 hours ago, AlanF said:
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.
3 hours ago, AlanF said: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.
Viewing these two statements of yours, one after the other, it’s apparent you that must have done something so as not to burn your head out with cognitive dissonance.
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:
QuoteYou haven’t said what, but it must be that you decided either
1. that translating the Bible is so easy that any orangutan can do it, or
2. it is perfectly possible for talented persons to accomplish the task without going In for the higher education that you insist is so essential.
Wrong on both counts. A classic instance of the fallacy known as The False Dilemma.
QuoteIf it is #2, you will find yourself in another beef with @James Thomas Rook Jr.. You should have heard him carry on about the impossibilities of translating without advanced education on another thread.
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.
-
Anna said:
Quote4 hours ago, AlanF said:
The prediction for 2000 was made at various times from the 1970s through 2000
I don't remember anything being said about the year 2000. It must have been very obscure. All I remember is it worried computer programers a little, and got people's panties in a twist.
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
Leo K. Greenlees
in Topics
Posted
Look beneath the surface, Anna.
Your last post was excellent and well describes the attitude shown by TTH and so many elders, including and especially the Governing Body. "We abhor child molestation! But not as much as we abhor public exposure of anything that makes us look bad."