@diamondiiz:
While JW will warn you against research and give you ridiculous answers like Jerusalem being destroyed in 607 because 537-70=607 you owe it to yourself to do actual research what history and archeology shows. You owe it to yourself to research what Russell taught regards to 606 and why did he teach 606 was Jerusalem's destruction because it had nothing to do with Jews returning to Israel but rather that Cyrus conquered Babylon in 536BC. Do your research without fear.
This is a stupid thing for you to say. I said nothing about the Jews returning to Israel in 537 BC. Whatever became of the whole of Israel, the Jews returned the land of Judea -- Judea not BIG Israel (relatively speaking). You might do well to get yourself a map of this region, for it was to this small 50 mile x 30 mile (80 km x 50 km) portion of what used to be a part of Israel, called "Judea," that the former Babylonian exiles returned. This province, along with that of the provinces of Galilee, Perea and Samaria, was called "Palestine," and this region, which came under the control of the Roman government, is where together Jesus and his apostles preached (except for Samaria).
You here have advised this young man "to research what Russell taught," but Russell's chronology, which was repeated by Rutherford, was overruled by Knorr in 1943 with the release of the book, The Truth Shall Make You Free, which explains how it was that Russell had reckoned in his chronology that there were "five hundred eighty" years until Solomon became the king of Israel in his reading of 1 Kings 6:1, how he had viewed the "four hundred eighty" years stated in this verse to have been a copyist error, and so included an additional 100 years in his chronology, thus calculating Adam's creation to be in 4128 BC and, allowing an arbitrary two years for sin's entrance, went on to determine the year 1874 AD as marking the end of 6,000 years of mankind's existence on earth.
Russell's chronology allowed for a zero year, when such didn't exist, so that The Truth Shall Make You Free book not only did away with the inclusion of such and with this arbitrary two years, which moved his chronology from 4128 BC to 4126 BC, but also subtracted another 100 years from Russell's chronology, moving 4126 BC to 4026 BC. Then another adjustment needed to be made for our reading of Genesis 7:6 was in error in that we considered Noah to have been "six hundred years old," but when compared to what Genesis 7:11 states, which refers to Noah's "six hundredth year," we have instead an ordinal number, meaning that Noah was 599 years old and approaching his 600th birthday when the global deluge began, thus the need to subtract one more year from our Bible chronology moving 4026 BC to 4025 BC. What @xtreemlyconfused17 should fear is listening to you distort what things I said to him.
ps. Don't let anyone tell you, you're too young to understand. Watchtower is deceitful and it trains [its] followers to be stupid, that's one reason why higher education is looked down upon.
If I am someone that has had a college education and has earned a degree, does this mean in your opinion that someone whose education was limited to high school makes them for this reason inadequate to discuss this topic? I'm going to assume here that you have yourself obtained a college education because I don't want to hear any excuses from you as to why you cannot comprehend what I'm saying to you here. I never said to @xtreemlyconfused17 that he's "too young to understand" what things he has been taught by Jehovah's Witnesses. I never suggested to the young man that he should not consider higher education, which in my opinion would qualify him to earn an income exceeding that of a high school graduate should he decide to marry and have one or more children.
Many Jehovah's Witnesses today are in the pioneer work, but it's clear me to me that in the early 70s, some didn't much care about themselves or their families, since they knew that their circumstances wouldn't permit them to get married, let alone have children, with only a high school diploma, if they even had one, and yet some didn't really listen, and heard what they only wanted to hear, namely, that 'the year 1975 is approaching and this system of things is fast coming to an end, and so, if one's circumstances permit it, wouldn't it be better to enter the full time ministry?'
Of course, no one knew the day or hour, but no attention at all was given by some Jehovah's Witnesses to their doing the necessary things that would enable one to raise a family should Armageddon not come as soon as we had hoped, and so if one had never completed high school, or never earned a college degree, we would have married people earning only what people with no diploma or people with no college degree could earn in order to take care of four, five, six ... children. Ridiculous, yes, but these all had to learn the hard way the meaning of the words "if one's circumstances permit it," and the folly of getting so emotionally caught up due to speculation over dates.
Now those who got their high school diplomas and those that earned a college degrees did better income-wise than those that did not think these things to be very important, but some did return to school and learned a skill and some others went on to earn a degree and they are doing a little better now. If you were one of those that looked down upon higher education, then what else can I say; in hindsight, you realize that you were foolish. But no one is trained to be stupid; in fact, many Jehovah's Witnesses today have worked as doctors and lawyers for 30, 40, 50 years or more.
You're not 10 anymore, you can figure things out if you simple research. One thing you'll notice ex-JW will encourage you to research, and think, to examine what historians and archeologists have found while witnesses won't.
The OP is 16 years old and I happen to think research to be a good thing. I don't believe you would find too many Jehovah's Witnesses begrudging anyone from doing research, and the distribution of the Watchtower Library on cdrom encourages research, since many of the articles include references and footnotes to historical sources for those desirous of obtaining more detail than provided in the cdrom itself. What you might consider to be "research" may not be viewed as such by others, for you are not just referring to what historians or archaeologists have written, no, but you are referring to the mouthings of folks that have never attended college and may not have even completed high school, that they themselves to be more qualified to teach things about what Jehovah's Witnesses teach, which isn't research at all. It's bad-mouthing us for the things we teach with which you don't agree. How do you figure that someone that comes to a website and reads such dissenting views constitute "research" into that which is of historical or archaeological interest?
@xtreemlyconfused17:
its Tanzania in East Africa
Ok, thanks.
U havent encouraged me to do more research
Neither have I discouraged you from doing so.
u [advised] me to not answer the PMs
Yes, I did, for a PM is like entering a private room with someone where no one else can observe what's taking place in it, and with your being only 16 years old, I'm sure it is improper for you to be having a private discussion with an adult that you do not know, which is not unlike getting into a car with a stranger just because he asked you to do so. The internet is not safe.
and u just sound like my mum, 'i'm TOO young'.
Well, at 16 years old, you're not an adult, and to put this in another way: You're probably too young to be getting baptized while there are those that would disagree with me and allow a 10-, 11- or 12-year old to get baptized, when a 10-, 11- or 12-year-old is too young in my opinion to dedicate themselves to make up their bed when they get up in the morning. Perhaps your mother knows why you have not yet been baptized, but I've got children older than you are, so I speak from experience when I say that based upon what you have said here, you are too young to be baptized and become one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
And if i'm not a witness y do the elders call me to ask for reports?
If anyone is approved as an unbaptized publisher, he or she would be expected to report the time spent in the ministry the same as those who are baptized publishers, but someone that refers to an unbaptized publisher as "brother" or "sister" in the congregation is according you with honor, for only baptized publishers would deservedly be called "brother" or "sister," for only baptized publishers are considered to be Jehovah's Witnesses. For one thing, if the need arises for you to receive discipline by the elders, you can neither be reproved or disfellowshipped, since while Jehovah's Witnesses can be reproved or disfellowshipped, unbaptized publishers cannot because they are not Jehovah's Witnesses.
are what they're saying all lies???
Bible study involving not just studying the Bible, but doing research in order to prove to yourself what is or isn't true. You must prove the truth to yourself; no one can do this for you.
thanx for the answers to my questions but thats the problem, giving me [answers] with [reference] to watchtower publications only
You asked me three (3) questions:
(1) [D]o the anointed around the world communicate?
(2) [Which] is the most correct year for the fall of Jerusalem?
(3) Where Paul's letters inspired by the holy spirit?
I have been one of Jehovah's Witnesses for many years, so I didn't need to use Watchtower publications to answer any of these questions. I learned the answers to things questions many years ago, but it is true that I learned many of the things I believe today from having consulted Watchtower publications many years ago.
(n am [not allowed] to look for more info on other [sources])
You certainly would do well to consult as many external sources as you feel you need to determine the answer to whatever question you might have.
n i dont think i'm too young to reason
I think your ability to reason is not as sound as it will be when you are a few years older than you are at the moment. You cannot really believe that you are competent enough to make adult decisions when you probably have never earned enough money to be able to take care of yourself in the way that your mother takes care of you now, and you certainly aren't old enough to know how you would be able to marry someone and raise children. Your ability to reason will improve over time as you grow in maturity, but at your age, I think you would do well to concentrate on education and on learning how to spell words better and how to communicate better.
I'm sending u a PM thou djeggnog doesnt [approve] of it
It's not only that I don't approve of you sending anyone a PM, but I just don't think it appropriate for a child to be communicating on the internet with an adult that claims to be an elder, as if a mere claim is sufficient reason to disregard the guidelines that outline what is appropriate for an elder, since I can think of not a single reason why any elder would want to converse with a child that is not his own in secret, either at the elder's home or via a PM here on the internet, and without having first obtained the consent of at least one of that child's parents. I do think it to be improper for any adult to sequester himself or herself with a child that is not his or her own child, and so, contrary to what you might think, it is this of which I don't approve. You are a child.
@djeggnog
