by Lady Liberty 58 Replies latest watchtower bible
Hey Dozy et. al.-
These bastards are liars who deserve the Lake of Fire, aside from being sodomites, pedophiles, drunks, and arrogant false prophets. Brackets, correct punctuation, or rules of syntax are ridiculous discussion points - look at the blood record, look at Malawi, look at the families ruined, look at 1799, 1914, 1925, and 1975, then look at the remainder of their track record. How can anyone side with the Devil's Organization? Satan get behind us! Bye Bye Crookland!
Boy!! Am I glad that we've got the bracket thing worked out. Let me get this straight. The Watchtower Society produced the Insight book, they compiled all the information in it, and they can say whatever they want, about anything they want, in whatever way they want, and the only people that will probably read their masterpiece would be those that don't think it really matters anyway. Evidently it's OK for the society to put in a bogus date in another man's quotation, as long as it is done with the proper punctuation. Why doesn't this suprise me? After all, back in the 1920's the Society was telling the whole world that Christ's second coming took place in 1874, and that this was no man's opinion , but God's dates . And when Christ, "The Master" came to his temple, the date 1874 was approved, and then along came 1943 and God's date of 1874 was changed by the Faithful? Slave to 1914. I don't recall that when God's date was changed to 1914, that brackets were used to indicate that the year 1914 was just a clarification of God's original date. To be consistent, it should be [1914] bracket this and [1914] bracket that. Opps!!! another bogus date. If the Faithful Slave can be so cavalier with God's date of 1874, should we be suprised when this bastille of truth and integrity does a little side slip in their math. All these changing dates are really hard to keep track of. We not only have to keep track of all the actual dates when events took place, but we also have to try to keep track of all the old light, new light, maybe light, the possible light, the impossible light, and not to exclude northern lights all laced with dates that mostly by now have all gone to where all Watchtower dates finally end up, in old discarded books cluttering the book shelves at the "Good Will" store. And NOW, I've got to try and figure out where all those brackets should go. Woe is me!!!
Keep up the good work, Lady Liberty, you have come a long way in a very short time, and we all appreciate your time and effort to be of help to those on this site. You can show the world what A.K. Grayson actually said, and what dates he as the translator, assigned to the events discribed on clay tablets. This isn't rocket science friends, so our choice shouldn't take to much effort. The choice is between the efforts that A.K. Grayson, a world known expert on, and translator of babylonian tablets and the efforts of a world wide magazine publishing company run by mostly high school graduates. That way those who wish to can make up their own mind weather the Watchtower acted properly. Who can say? Evidently, as some posters have pointed out, they got the brackets right. I'm sure that even more truths could be found ( commas, peroids, question marks,etc.) by the more astute of the faithful. Some may feel after comparing Grayson's work with that of the Watchtower, that their life and time are better served not trying to play the pin the date (tail) on the future( donkey) game. I had the blindfold on for 40 years, and all I got was dizzy!!!
ROCKHOUND
Even though everyone seems to be sick of 607 info, I think it's worth keeping to the fore for "lurkers" who havn't a clue that there is a mojor problem here. 607 is just one of many problems the Wt has.
Little Bo Peep
I know this is an old post, but I just wanted to correct that Dozer guy regarding brackets:
YES IT IS OKAY to put in brackets even if the writer does not agree with the work they are quoting from.
NO IT IS NOT OKAY to actually misrepresent what an author says.
-ithinkisee
Just bookmarking this. Thank you for your research, Lady Liberty!
Dear Friends,
In light of the recent elder visit and my refering to this book, several are asking me about it so I decided to bump it to the top.
SIncerely,
Lady Liberty
Thanks lady Liberty. Another nail in the coffin of the WT's integrity. SHAME ON THEM!!!
Reminds me of another example of a misquote regarding 607 BCE that can be found at jw.facts:
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.
Thanks for bumping and the additional information :-D
