Jump to content
The World News Media

Watchtower Mis-Quotations


Micah Ong

Recommended Posts

  • Member

The Watchtower quotes the Gazette for support that in 1914 War War 1 changed the world for the worse. Taken in context the article says something quite different.

“News columnists recently commented on the end of World War I 60 years ago. Gwynne Dyer of the Montreal “Gazette” wrote: “World War I—simply The Great War to its survivors—remains the watershed of modern history in men’s minds. Before 1914, the figures in the fading photographs live in another world . . . marked by a peculiar innocence. . . . It was the period before 1914 that was the island in time, when men could believe that progress was changing us as quickly as it was changing our machines. Then World War I tumbled us back into reality.” Watchtower 1979 Fe 15 p.13

Between these carefully chosen comments and the ellipses the Gazette includes the following paragraph.

 

"This is of course a hopelessly romantic view of the world we are idealizing the past, and over-dramatizing our own circumstances. The 20th century is certainly no worse than the 13th for mass slaughter, nor than the ancient empires for regimentation." Gazette 11 Nov 1976

 

607 B.C.E.

The year 607 B.C. is pivotal to Jehovah's Witnesses, as it is the foundation for calculating 1914 as the start of the Last Days. This topic is so detailed that it warrants its own discussion at 607 - 1914 - Last Days. Relevant to this article is that while the Watchtower says Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C., virtually every other source, including encyclopaedias, historians and scholars, state that Jerusalem fell in either 587 B.C. or 586 B.C.

To arrive at the spurious date of 607 B.C., the Watchtower needs to re-work the dates for other significant events, also without any historical support. For this reason, the Watchtower has resorted to misrepresenting quotes to make it appear its date system is correct. For example, in the following quote the Insight Book inserts the year 624 B.C.E. as the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar. Though done correctly by use of [ ], the reader is left with the impression this date is supported by the original source.

"In this his accession year he returned to Hattu, and "in the month Shebat [January-February, 624 B.C.E.] he took the vast booty of Hattu to Babylon." (Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. K. Grayson, 1975, p. 100)" Insight on the Scriptures - Volume 2 p.480

However, on checking Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, Grayson does not use the date of 624 B.C., but rather on page 19 gives the accession date as 605 B.C.

jeremiah-book-jr-p55.jpg

In the 2010 book God's Word for Us Through Jeremiah, a statement is made regarding a find by Eilat Mazar, supporting two Characters mentioned in Jeremiah.

"Archaeologist Eilat Mazar reports unearthing a small clay seal impression, or bulla. (below left) It was found in 2005 during a supervised excavation of a layer dating back to when Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C.E." God's Word for Us Through Jeremiah p.55

The reader may get the impression that Eilat is supporting the year 607 B.C.E., whereas she presents that the destruction was in 587 B.C. (See articles at jpost.com and archaeology.hui.ac.il) There was no need to mention the date 607 B.C.E., as it was not relevant to the topic, and for the sake of accuracy the writer could have referred to "when Jerusalem was destroyed by Babylon." The Watchtower inserts this date to deceitfully condition Jehovah's Witnesses that 607 B.C.E. is historically accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 1.6k
  • Replies 8
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

No their assumption are also based on scriptures. The dates are points in time used to give reference. Many are hung up on 1975. I was never lost about this date. It was the end of 6000 yrs of man bei

The Watchtower quotes the Gazette for support that in 1914 War War 1 changed the world for the worse. Taken in context the article says something quite different. Between these carefully chosen

Micah, I have never based my faith on math or dates. 3 things occurred that are proved scripturally and historically;[1]-Jerusalem was destroyed [2] the land was exiled for some 70 years, and [3] the

  • Member

Micah, I have never based my faith on math or dates. 3 things occurred that are proved scripturally and historically;[1]-Jerusalem was destroyed [2] the land was exiled for some 70 years, and [3] the Word went out to return to the homeland and the temple was rebuilt. Are these not facts? 607; 587 are not why I believe in the scriptures. Try something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • Member
On 5/21/2017 at 8:25 PM, John Houston said:

Micah, I have never based my faith on math or dates. 3 things occurred that are proved scripturally and historically;[1]-Jerusalem was destroyed [2] the land was exiled for some 70 years, and [3] the Word went out to return to the homeland and the temple was rebuilt. Are these not facts? 607; 587 are not why I believe in the scriptures. Try something else.

I too believe the scriptures.........however, I do not believe in the gb and their assumptions of 1914/1918/1925/1975 based on their "math" from 607 or pyramid counting. It isn't so much about math, but rather what the leaders of the wt attribute their math with and demand the rnf to adhere to or face not being in harmony with the group and possible punishment. 

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but I do believe that is the basis of what Micah was getting at.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

No their assumption are also based on scriptures. The dates are points in time used to give reference. Many are hung up on 1975. I was never lost about this date. It was the end of 6000 yrs of man being here on earth. Many began to look forward to the end of things, Armageddon and the new system, forgetting that we knew not the day those things would actually occurr. And as imperfect humans even the anointed, the word went out like gossip. And those who took it as gospel, sold their homes, stop,living almost thinking the end was that near. I am glad my father did not teach us that way. We went to college continue to progress spiritually, understanding what was going on. The dates, not important, only if you are married or a history buff. Since Jesus said no one knows the day or the hour, why need to know dates?

 Serve faithfully, don't give up, endure until the end, isn't that what the scriptures teach? That is all I need to know. When the time comes I will be ready. And hope everyone else will also!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
9 hours ago, John Houston said:

And those who took it as gospel, sold their homes, stop,living almost thinking the end was that near.

Didn't the wt say that it was a "fine" decision to such a thing? They even printed it in their mag on how it was great for those to do so in these last times. Talk about encouraging someones downfall. 

 

9 hours ago, John Houston said:

Since Jesus said no one knows the day or the hour, why need to know dates?

So why did the wt need to pick dates? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
11 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

They had been "helpfully" inserted, since, as one might paraphrase, "EVERYONE knows  the date of  the battle of Carchemish!  605, right? [ Well, no: "wrong", actually.]

605 BCE is correct, actually.

11 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

The British Museum  "   "inserts this date to deceitfully condition Jehovah's Witnesses you that 605 B.C.E. is historically accurate."  for the battle of Carchemish.

605 BCE is historically accurate for the battle of Carchemish.

11 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

Interestingly, from the 1st time I was directed to the British Museum link, and from that day forward, BM21946 became no longer the featured British Museum exhibit at that link and appears to have moved into the background_ or back room_ of the British Museum website!

9_9 The British Museum features special exhibitions for limited periods before other special exhibitions replace them. BM 21946 is still prominently and publicly displayed with other tablets, cylinders and stelae of that period in Room 55. You can also go to the 'Collections' part of the website, type in the BM number and see a nice picture and description of it with the correct dates. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Member

similar is with "cross" I comment about it under some other conversation, but will copy/paste my comm here also;  

Reasoning from the Scriptures, page 89, Cross, JWorg library;

The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·rosʹ], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. . . . Even amongst the Romans the crux(from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.

BUT GO TO ORIGINAL TEXT and see dropped text. WT put dots (...) instead text.

The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·rosʹ], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. But a modification was introduced as the dominion and usages of Rome extended themselves through Greek speaking countries.

Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole and this always reminded the more prominent part. But from the time that it began to be used as an instrument of punishment a transverse piece of wood was commonly added; not, however, always even than.....The following text continues, describing the types of crosses and the ways in which the convicts were murdered...,others extending their arms on a patibulum. There can be no doubt, however, that the latter sort was the more common and that about the period of the gospel age crucifixion was usually accomplished by suspending the criminal on a cross piece of wood. But this does not itself determine the precise form of the cross; .... The following text continues by describing 3 types of crosses.  —Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,381

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • 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.