by Elsewhere 17 Replies latest jw experiences
However, by the beginning of the second century C.E., apostacy was creeping into the Christian congregation.
Then we jump all the way to the end of the 19th century when Russell suddenly recognizes the need for missionary activity. I really appreciate the fact that his version of religion didn't get tainted with apostacy all those centuries. LOL
Sincerely,
District Overbeer
However, by the beginning of the second century C.E., apostacy was creeping into the Christian congregation.
Ok, and exactly when did the bible become the bible? 2 centuries LATER? Some/Most of the "books" weren't written until the "beginning of the second century" (I assume that means 101-200).
Funny, I don't remember Paul, Peter or any of the other disciples being on the list at the Nicene Council, or at Trent.
hmmmmm.....
I remember the Sunday we studied that Watchtower. A sister ran up to me beaming, "Did you see the latest information in our Watchtower study today?!!!" I didn't know what to say. At that time my Bible study was hammering me on the multitude of false predictions by the Watchtower so I didn't have any faith in that statement whatsoever. Of course, I had to tow the party line and not say anything negative.
I've used the damning quote with a number of JWs. It never made a dent. They say, oh, but it was corrected! *faces beaming*
If the apostasy started in the second century, that would mean that the current bible cannon is corrupted.
"As every one knows, there are mistakes in the Bible" - The Watchtower, April 15, 1928, p. 126
Believe in yourself, not mythology.
<x ><
If I'm not mistaken, they changed the wording in the Bound Volume to "work that would be completed in our day."
Well, duh. Who else's day would the 'work' be 'completed' in?
Lisa
Once again the WTBTS looks like a jack-ass!
EK
"In our time" is so generic it could mean a year or a 100 years.
Since it's not tied to any specific age group or specific time, there is no meaning to that phrase. The Watchtower knows it.
megaDude...
I was giving the "in our time" some thought.
You are right, that it is very ambiguous, but think about the reader and urgency.
They are obviously loading the term so that the individual reading it will think about it within their concept of "our time", which is before he/she/they die. (but not neccisarily by the end of the 20th century!)...
Wow, to be the sole channel and have to leave _everything_ open to interpetation and "new light"... what confidence I have in the statements made by the WTBS!
