by undercover 40 Replies latest jw friends
Also, since the Dubs used to celebrate Christmas, I'm sure some others here have seen that picture way back when with the Christmas up at Bethel. Why was it OK then and it's not OK now.
Which scriptures supported the Dubs celebrating Christmas and which scipture does not?
Since the JWs are to be the only true religion, why did it just come to be in the late 1800's ? Religion has been around since the beginning of time and the only true one just came to be in the 1800's? ? ?
why did it take until the 1950's to figure out that accepting a blood transfusion was violating Gods law?
You chose some really good errors. You are 100% correct on their failed HISTORY of prophecy. Watchtowerism is very simply TIME-PROVEN FALSE, not the opinion of disgruntled apostates but TIME all by itself is the factual proof that the leadership of the JW movement have NEVER had a clue about the future. This claim of knowing the future based upon Bible prophecy is their only distinguishing characteristic, their only claim to fame, the only reason to be a JW. If they (the JW leadership including the new GB) can't correctly interpret Bible prophecy then they are worse than useless because all their "wolf-crying" makes a laughing stock of God and desensitizes the world's population to any genuine apocalyptic warnings.
Keep in mind that I don't think there are any such things as Armageddon, Jehovah, Jesus, Satan, or a god of any kind but the point here is that I'm giving the benifit of the doubt by accepting the JW worldview that such things are possible. It is not about what apostates or atheistic opposers think, but rather it is all about the Watchtower leadership's own claims throughout their 130+ year history and of the resulting 100% failure at predicting any future events.
Very simply, there cannot be an urgent life-saving ministry for people who are warned of imminent Armageddon if they keep dying from old age generation after generation. Since all who were warned have now died without seeing Armageddon over numerous generations then there has factually been NO life-saving ministry since none were saved from a non-event that couldn't have killed them in the first place. If there was a God He would not "spirit direct" an organization to engage in such a self-defeating waste of time and energy which would only benifit Satan and his demons. This lack of any Armageddon is a HARD FACT and not a debatable point of disagreement.
The Flood is another logical conundrum for JWs. Not only is it 100% impossible by every scientific measure, evidence, and field but the whole idea behind it is completely insane. If you built a beautiful house (the Earth) and it became infested with cockroaches (genetically sinful humans and halfbreed evil angels-just for giggles-) would you flood it to get rid of them while preserving some cockroaches (Noah and his family) in a box (the Ark) to repopulate your house after it is drained and restored? What did you accomplish? Within just a short period of time the house (Earth) is over run again with cockroaches (sinful humans). Not to mention that an all-knowing god should have been able to conjure up the equivalent of bug spray to target the specific pests he wanted to get rid of without ruining his house by flooding. Heck, God should have just been able to make the bad pests disappear cleanly since He created it all to begin with.
"Very simply, there cannot be an urgent life-saving ministry for people who are warned of imminent Armageddon if they keep dying from old age generation after generation"
Liberty, that whole paragraph above from which I did the cut&paste says it all !!
But yet, they still follow along blindly . . . !
- Information control (we provide all the study material you need, no need for independent research, and avoid anyone critical of our beliefs)
- Discouraging doubt/questioning
- Totalistic, Black and White thinking
- Loading the Language (i.e. language not just as a communication tool, but also as a tool to control how a person thinks about something)
1: Numerous failed prophecies, esp. 1975. I was told I would never have time for a career in this system of things. I am facing retirement now.
2: tearing families apart due to disfellowshipping policies and shunning.
3: Watchtower two witness rule and other child abuse policies that allow molestors to lie and continue to be considered brothers in good standing, letting them prey among the congregation at will
I target something covered in recent or future articles.
Changes and unsavory doctrines are really good. Stay one step ahead so that you can get them to take a position that is contradicted in a study mag they won't have read yet.
Has anyone brought up organ transplants being cannibalism? That is a fairly simple one. You can ask if they would obey an unscriptural command if the FDS told them to. You don't have to get into prophecy or anything complex. Just ask them if they were alive at that time would they have let thier spouse or child receive a life saving transplant sinc the Bible is silent on the matter. Or would they have just done what they were told? Of course it changed pretty soon, but people still died, was that God's fault?
They say god is permitting suffering sothat the angels and satan can be proven wrong, that man cant guide himself and decide right snd wrong for himself.
However it was not a level playing field. God made Adam and Eve imperfect, made them sick, made the ground difficult to cultivate and also made them sinful and prone to sin. According to their understanding, god ensured that it would all go wrong. H didnt allow them to decide right and wrong as perfect, healthy not prone to sin people.
This is significant as jesus DOES NOT balance out Adam in the scales. Also all the 'bad' angels or Satan has to say is "well maybe they could run things themselves if you hadnt intefered and made them imperfect and sinful."
This is a recent thought of mine, but I have shared it with JWs successfully.
snare x
FERNANDO...Great questions!
To borrow a play from Blondie's book, this was published in the w8/1 '97
The Loyalist and the Legalist
Back in 1916 the Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics noted that “this distinction between the loyalist and the legalist may be found in all times and all places.” It explained: “There is the legalist who does what he is told, breaks no rules; he keeps faith to the word that is written and can be read. There is the loyalist who does this but can . . . be counted on for more, who puts his whole mind into his duty, who forms his spirit in accordance with the spirit of the purpose to be served.” Later, this same work observed: “To be loyal is to be much more than law-abiding. . . . The loyal man is distinguished from the law-abiding man as one who serves with whole heart and mind . . . No voluntary sins of commission, omission, or ignorance does he permit himself.”
I put the last sentence in italics...So the loyalist is, what? Perfect?
