Actually the WT shot themselves in the foot!. In their KJV translation they had Usher's Chronology. It gives 587BC not 607 BCE as the date of Jerusalem's destruction in Kings/Chronicles/Jeremiah/Lamentations/Obadiah? and perhaps other areas. Thus I highly doubt many witnesses in the pre-NWT era was 100% on board with 607BCE.
Jehovah Witness cult is Anti-christ.... proof seen in the use of BCE/CE instead of AD/BC
by goingthruthemotions 25 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Disillusioned JW
goingthruthemotions, thank you very much for your forthright reply. While I was a believing JW (I am now an atheist and philosophical naturalist who tries to persuade people towards evolution, atheism and philosophical naturalism, and even towards the view of the Christ myth theory) I never thought of the JW religion as being anti-Christ at all, though in later years I wondered why they reduced their emphasis of Jesus and increased their emphasis of Jehovah over the years. I also knew they are very much against all other religions, especially other Christian groups.
In recent years I think about how Russell and Rutherford had abandoned Christianity prior to becoming JWs. I also think that Rutherford might have joined the WT religion and took control of it in order to attack "Christendom" due to his negative experience with the churches (the WT said Rutherford said Rutherford, prior to joining the WT religion, was told he couldn't marry the Christian woman he loved because she did not have a total immersion baptism). Rutherford's negative experience turned him into an atheist (according to the WT) prior to him reading the WT's literature.
I now think that in some sense the WT/JW religion might be anti-Christ, but I don't the religious leaders think of their religion that way. The religion condemns people turning against Christ and denying the ransom (it is something that is grounds for being thought of as an apostate and for being removed from the congregation, and/or as being thought of as someone who disassociated himself/herself from the Witnesses).
The WT religion's attitude to Christ stems from Russell having considered the Trinity doctrine to be irrational and a contradiction to the OT Bible (Hebrew Scriptures). The WT says that Russell had becoming a skeptic of religion (though without rejecting belief in the God), prior to listening to a Bible sermon by a Second Adventist. In a away, the WT/JW religion is a Judaic leaning form of Christianity (Islam is also kind that way, but even more so in some particulars).
I plan to make a much more detailed reply later.
-
Disillusioned JW
goingthruthemotions, regarding the claim that the JW religion doesn't honor Jesus Christ, I completely disagree with that. They teach that Jesus is the Christ/Messiah, the son of God, the first born (though partly in the sense of being first created) of God, that Jehovah God created all things (other than Jehovah and Jesus) through (by means of) Jesus, and that Jesus is perfect and is perfect in his worship of Jehovah God, etc.
While I was a young child being taught by my JW father in family Bible study, I studied (among other books) the WT book called "Listening to the Great Teacher" - a book (written for children) about Jesus. The WT has also published the book called "The Greatest MAN Who Ever Lived" - another book about Jesus. That latter book was used in congregational book studies. More recently the WT published the book "Learn from the GREAT TEACHER" - another book (written for children and also for adults with limited reading skills) about Jesus.
The Memorial Service of the JW religion honors Jesus Christ - it is a memorial of Jesus Christ. It is done in obedience to the words attributed in the Bible to Jesus, in which the Bible says Jesus said to do such in remembrance of him. Granted, I think/believe the Bible means Jesus wanted all devout Christians to partake of the emblems, not just to pass them around in conjunction to listening to a talk and prayers about them, and not just limiting the partaking to only a literal 144,000 persons over the past some 2000 years.
[Correction: In my prior post where I said "... the WT said Rutherford said Rutherford, prior to joining the WT religion, was told he couldn't marry the .." I should have said "... the WT said that Rutherford said he was told, prior to joining and learning of the WT religion, that he couldn't marry the ..."]
During the time that Rutherford was president of the WT, the WT religion made the odd claim that Jehovah's Witnesses were not a religion, though they did say they practiced pure true worship of Jehovah. [They now say that though false religion exists, true religion also exists and that the JW religion is the modern day true religion.] Interestingly, many Bible Church nondenominational Christians today claim that Christianity is not a religion, but rather a relationship with Jesus. Furthermore some JWs today while witnessing say they have a personal relationship with Jehovah and some of the WT literature uses the expression of 'relationship with Jehovah. In regards to the theme of the latter they even published a book called "Draw Close to Jehovah".
HowTheBibleWasCreated, regarding the KJV Bible currently published (or at least most recently published) by the WT it has the 587 BC (B.C. 587) date because the scripture text pages (including the scripture cross references, page headings, alternate readings and renderings) of that edition are printed from printing plates purchased from Holman. Holman was and still is a major publisher of the KJV Bible. See page 607 (there is that number again) of the Proclaimers' book which says "... plates for the King James Version with marginal references were purchased in 1942 form A. J. Holman Company ..." However, the WT edition did include a concordance and helps prepared by JWs. In the early 1900s an edition of the KJV published by the WT (see page 606 of the Proclaimers' book) included a Bible Students appendix. I once had a copy of that edition. I noticed that in the appendix it had instructions to cross out specific verses and specific parts of verses that are not in critical text editions of the Greek New Testament (and/or Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus) - words that are thought to be spurious. In the pre-NWT era the WT probably made clear that the dates in the KJV edition published by the WT were not calculated by the WT/JWs.
The Proclaimers book (see page 604 and 605) mentions that the WT had distributed an edition of Leeser's translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into English. Some WT literature has also quoted from Leeser's translation. I have a copy of a different edition of Leeser's translation and I notice he makes reference to the 586/587 date and uses the phrasing of before the common era. Leeser was a practicing Jew. The edition I have of his translation is published by "Bloch Publishing company" in 1905 and it has the double triangle six-pointed Jewish star on the title page. In that book the first sentence of the "General Remarks" says "According to Dr. Zunz, the creation of the world dates 3988 before the common era" (in other words 3988 B.C.E). The paragraph says Jerusalem was conquered in the year 3402 after the creation of the world. 3402 years after 3988 "before the common era" equals the year 586 "before the common era". That is just one year off from the year 587 BCE, but one year probably should be added back to 586 BCE because the page said the "the year 3402 after the creation" instead of "3402 years after the year of the creation" and I think it thus includes the first year of the creation. -
goingthruthemotions
Disillusioned JW, I respect your knowledge, great research. My hat is off to you.
Bottom line is, I believe it's all fairytales. Just like the lord of the rings or the hobbit.
History is history, While the Israelites were in the desert. The Chinese and other lands were creating there own history. Who's right? who's wrong? not sure I care.
This religion has stole so many peoples minds and destroyed families and marriages.
So for this reason I hate this religion and all other religions.
And if there is a God or a Creator. He or she doesn't give a crap about us and/or has his/hers favorite individuals whom they choose to bless.
-
dropoffyourkeylee
I recently looked through a reprint of Ussher's Chronology and I am pretty sure he had the date 606 BC for the fall of Jerusalem. His work dated to about 1650.
As an aside, I was simply astounded at the monumental work he produced; it is really impressive for one guy in the 1600's. Many of the dates, etc have been proven incorrect, but it was an impressive work of scholarship for the time.
-
Disillusioned JW
Thanks goingthruthemotions for your post clarifying matters. For some reason I had mistakenly misread an earlier post of yours as saying you believe in God, and in thinking you had become an evangelical Christian. Funny. I agree the biblical text consists of fairytales (though I would say "primarily" instead of "all"). I also agree that religions have done much harm and I also want for religion (at least the kind which claims something supernatural exists) to come to an end.
For a site called "Jehovahs-witness.com" there surprisingly seems to be virtually no believing Jehovah's Witnesses making posts on this site. When I first joined this site I identified as a JW, but one who had become disillusioned and who acquired many doubts. Reading posts on this site about 10 - 15 years ago likely contributed to me ceasing to believe in the JW religion.
dropoffyourkeylee, I would like to read what you find out regarding Ussher using the date of 606 BC for the fall of Jerusalem. I once found a Seventh-day Adventist book that was nearly 100 years old which gave the date of 606 BC (or maybe 607 BC) for the fall of Jerusalem. Online there seems to be some non-JW's religious groups using that date also or 607 BC. In the WT edition of the KJV it has a range of dates in the ball park of 587 BC on its pages, but I'm not actually sure if it specifically had the date of 587 BC for the destruction of Jerusalem. I largely took the word of HowTheBibleWasCreated on that specific matter. The pages of that Bible for 2 Kings chapter 25 do say "B.C. 588" however.