Selection of the JWs in 1918/1919 - how might a JW attempt to show from the Bible

by insearchoftruth 55 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  insearchoftruth

  Also, you asked about whether it would be wise to mention that modern Bible Student groups adhere more closely to what the WTS taught in 1918-19. I don't think it would add much to the conversation to bring this up. The JW response is that the light gets brighter and those Bible Students are stuck in the past. It would be a distraction and would likely lead off on a tangent.

  I guess the only reason I would ask this question is to show that the folks who are presently known as JWs were not exclusive to their beliefs/thinking at that time...
• 

  bluecanary

  insearchoftruth, you have a pm.
• 

  drew sagan

  insearchoftruth,

  I think your best bet is to stick to the Isaiah book quote. The Watchter heavily relies upon the idea that 70 years is literal, yet in that book they say that a different 70 years was figurative without skipping a beat.

  The less technical your argument is the better it will come off. Relying upon detailed chronology dating is not the way to go imo. You want something simple. I think the Isaiah book provides that. A few things to consider.

  - Don't actually apply negative lables to your arguments. JWs typcially see everything as a battle between "good and evil". If they end up being wrong on a certain point, they automatically infer that you feel that they are on the side of evil (or something along those lines).\

  - The main point about 1918/1919 is that the story promulgated by the Watchtower is a myth, something people within the organization slowly developed to explain and rationalize their own exsistance as a religion. This is something that is found in many faiths (modern ones such as the seventh day adventists and mormons are good comparisons, but traiditonal faiths like catholocism are good as well). Emphasis shoudn't be placed on assigning blame or casing negative accusations (e.g. The Watchtower are liars!), instead you should focus on how their beliefs are something that are common, i.e. "many religions create elaborate myths to validate their own exsistance, why are your bizzare stories backed up with dubious evidence any different?."

  So using the Isaiah book quote as a starting point, you defend your belief that the 1918/1919 is something created by someone who had an interest to construct a myth to validate the Watchtowers exsistance (i.e. Rutherford). I would really focus on the individual (unknown of course) who thought up this idea. You can even ask rhetorical questions. Who was this guys? What were his motives? What did he (or his organization) seek to get by creating this doctrine or teaching?

  You might also consider finding common ground. Get them to acknowledge first that other religions do actually create elaborte myths and stoires that validate the god given authority of the leaders of the group. One they agree that it has happened in other religions, you now turn it back to them. Why should the JWs be seen as different?
• 

  I quit!

  I think it is important to keep in mind that all the so call proof that Christ came back in 1914 and then chose them some time around 1918/1919 comes from them. The proof that they are God's chosen is based on their current teaching that Christ came back in 1914 not the belief they held back then which was that Christ had returned to earth in 1874 (See the Prophecy book copyright 1929, page 65) a belief they held till some time in the 1940's when they re-wrote the date of Christ's return to be 1914. There is no evidence outside of their words that any of this ever happened and the proof is always so strong that it can be changed with the stroke of a pen. A Jehovah's Witnesses understanding of the history of the Watchtower is base on the fictitous version given to them by the WT Society. Not by their own research. My question to JWs is why doesn't the Watchtower encourage them to read their old publications in order to understand why God chose them. If a JW is truthful would have to admit that they are not encouraged to do this and would be view with suspicion if they were found out to be doing this type of research. They would be one step away from being DF'd as an apostate.
• 

  wobble

  I Quit,

  so to summarise, Jesus came in 1914 coz the WT says so,he came to inspect in 1918/9 and found Rutherford and Co. to be just tickety-boo,coz the WT says so.

  What more proof could a Dub want. A thinking person may want just a little more.

  Love

  Wobble

  p. s isn't it strange that you don't find the JW apologists leaping in on a thread like this with all the Biblical proof they have ??????
• 

  drew sagan

  My question to JWs is why doesn't the Watchtower encourage them to read their old publications in order to understand why God chose them.

  This is because the "evidence" used to convince people that the 1918/19 events are true rests upon their concept of a "pagan free theology", not specific facts surrounding that particuliar time (hence the vague dates and reasoning used to "prove" it true).

  Most individuals who are given the Watchtowers arguments about 1918/19 are supposed to already have been converted into a set of unique beliefs (the name Jehovah is important, other churches are corrupt and full of pagan doctrines, ect.) The divine selection is a teaching that is tacked on, with the expectation that a person will simply accept it without much evidence. Thus, when you question this validity of the 1918 selection most JWs will automatically revert to discussions about the name Jehovah or the corruption of the curches, all the while asking their favorite question: "where else will we go?"

  But what if an individual isn't properly "briefed" before they confront these teachings. Most likely people in this postiions will see them for what they are, silly, strange and self-serving.
• 

  insearchoftruth

  But what if an individual isn't properly "briefed" before they confront these teachings. Most likely people in this postiions will see them for what they are, silly, strange and self-serving.

  And I am hoping that my wife is not too far down the primrose path to not see how ridiculous this supposition is......
• 

  bennyk

  Also, you asked about whether it would be wise to mention that modern Bible Student groups adhere more closely to what the WTS taught in 1918-19. I don't think it would add much to the conversation to bring this up. The JW response is that the light gets brighter and those Bible Students are stuck in the past. It would be a distraction and would likely lead off on a tangent.

  I guess the only reason I would ask this question is to show that the folks who are presently known as JWs were not exclusive to their beliefs/thinking at that time...

  I would be inclined to ask why Jesus did not choose the Associated Bible Students (Pastoral Bible Institute). They were teaching everything the Watch Tower Society was in 1918, excepting the bizarre new doctrines found in The Finished Mystery and Millions Now Living Will Never Die! (e.g. the false prophecies regarding 1918, 1920 and 1925).
• 

  insearchoftruth

  bttt, any more comments on this would be appreciated....
• 

  Black Sheep

  When sticking to dates, if he attempts to go on with the presentation on how they came to 1914, would this be the time to mention 586/587, or wait a week and 'do some research?'

  As soon as he mentions 607, disagree with him. Use Wikipedia if neccessary. Gently coerce him into agreeing to find an independent source that agrees with it.

  You don't need to know Allymom's KISS aproach to use it. You should be able to get him to do it for you. You need to try to get him to give you a list of kings from Nebuchadnezzar to Nabonidus, showing what years each king reigned in. What he gives you should match Wikipedia. If it doesn't, ask him where the mistake is? If it does match, he has just flushed 1914 down your toilet.

  His best option will be to divert your attention, by showing you all the reasons why he thinks Neb's reign begins in 625 instead of 605. Don't fall for it. All of his reasoning is irrelevent if his answer is contradicted by history, which it is. Make sure he gets that point. Restate your request for a correct list of kings from Nebuchadnezzar to Nabonidus, showing the dates of the reigns.

  I think he can get all of the info he needs to do this from the Jan 1, 1965 Watchtower, but you might want to pretend you don't know that unless you have one.

  You must control the direction of the conversation at all times. They are masters of redirection. For example, rather than discuss the item/scripture you brought up, they will show you something that they feel contradicts it, and hope you forget your item/scripture. Nip it in the bud, and get them back on your 'proof'.

  If he says he will get back to you next week about that, and wants to discuss another subject with you now, it's time to go fishing/whatever and you're in a hurry.

  Cheers

  Chris