JUST finished The Gentile Times Reconsidered! (page 2)

cantleave

There have been many threads on this subject here, you just need to search the archive.

TD......good question. Have you visited and read in detail the numerous websites that specifically argue against 607? Having visited them recently, I found it of interest that a lot of the arguments those websites used, were almost exactly the same arguments Jonnson used (not that there's anything wrong about that). Also, after reading a few older threads, its become patently obvious that this is a well respected book and hence I thought it would be interesting to a lot of people to discuss it in place of the recent preponderance of atheist/creation threads.

Jeffro.....great question. I'm actually reviewing the thread Ethos and other JWs have made here so I can spot any patterns, any remiss approaches that I perhaps could make due to my unfamiliarity with the audience of this forum and what their specific affinities and/or antipathies are when it comes to argumentation. I hope my approach to be very coherent, solidly argued, and as I said not simply a rehash of what you all have debated to death. I'd like to make sure no questions/arguments go ignored as well. So in turn I'd like to ask you: From a competent debator....what do you expect?

cedars....I did not intend my name to be construed as such. For me, its a simple reminder, everytime I log in...to never let cognitive dissonance, bias, delusion or anything else to deter from facing the facts. Face The Facts is one of my fav Rutherford-era publications as well. Hope that clears that up for ya.

FaceTheFacts

Winstonsmith.....what?! No way! I can send you a copy of it if you want.

AnnOMaly

I hope my approach to be very coherent, solidly argued, and as I said not simply a rehash of what you all have debated to death.

Riiiight. We'll see.

I can send you a copy of it if you want.

It's not the bootleg one off the internet, is it? The one tampered with by naughty boy Tönis Tönisson?

cantleave

Ohhh AnnOmaly has joined the thread ...... I look forward to FTF ass being whipped!

Stephen Colbert eating popcorn

cedars

FaceTheFacts

Thanks for the explanation of your name, and how you don't intend it to be construed as presumptuous.

You say:

Face The Facts is one of my fav Rutherford-era publications as well. Hope that clears that up for ya.

I'm curious as to what it was about this publication that makes it one of your favourites from that era? I've not read the book, but I've listened to a recording of Rutherford's "Face The Facts" talk at the Royal Albert Hall. In it he sounds pompous and arrogant, and his talk is strewn with political opinion. I find it difficult to imagine anyone being a fan of Rutherford or his writings in the modern age unless they are completely oblivious to any objective historical information about his character.

Cedars

Fencing

So, FTF... if you're really a Witness, why are you directly disobeying the Slave Class' warnings and directions by engaging in discussion with apostates?

cantleave

Fencing let FTF play. We may be convinced by irrefutable logic that we are wrong and the Watchtower scumbags are right......

TD

......good question. Have you visited and read in detail the numerous websites that specifically argue against 607? Having visited them recently, I found it of interest that a lot of the arguments those websites used, were almost exactly the same arguments Jonnson used (not that there's anything wrong about that).

I have not, but I'm not surprised and accept your word on that without reservation.

However arguing against 607 is completely backwards and kittywampus as far as I'm concerned. It is the JW's who want me to throw away my history books and reject the date almost universally accepted by academia. (I'm an 'unbelieving' spouse of a JW)

The argument, if there is one, is therefore against that date. Proponents of an alternate, esoteric viewpoint are the challengers here, not the defenders. IMHO it was not terribly honest of 'Ethos' to attempt to turn those tables and assume a luxury he wasn't entitled to.

Londo111

http://www.a2z.org/wtarchive/docs/1938_Face_The_Facts.pdf

From page 46: "Would it be Scripturally proper f or them [the Great Crowd] to now marry a nd begin to rear children? No, is the answer, which is supported by the Scriptures."

1 Timothy 4:1-3 warns, "And the Spirit expressly speaks, that in latter times shall certain fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and teachings of demons, in hypocrisy speaking lies, being seared in their own conscience, forbidding to marry..."

JUST finished The Gentile Times Reconsidered!

Share this