I think I can boil it down a bit,
- Real truth is never afraid of scrutiny.
RB
Awakening thoughts
by aqwsed12345 20 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
ThomasMore
aqwsed12345 - please add to the list:
4. They totally lack a sense of humor.
Ding - Dang! Brainwashing is such a strong term. And yet, "Most people could use a good brain-washing". THERE! Does that bring back memories of over-used, canned replies?!
-
Beth Sarim
Just to say something.
Vinnie Vincent had a great video today. He related that if you're still PIMI after 2020 you've likely to stay that way,,,,likely to not ""waken'' at all.
I can say "woken"" to the Borgs ways in 2006-07,, about that winter.
-
LostintheFog1999
The witnesses used to ridicule the church services for their scripted parroting, such as Priest: "The Lord be with you", Congregation: "And with you also."
But when you reflect on the content of any WT or book study they are parroting in a similar manner. True the person answering might put it into their own words but the answer won't deviate from what is printed in the paragraph. Elder reads out printed question, congregant responds with printed answer.
-
punkofnice
aqw - I don't wish to mean but your posts are way too long.
If you can keep it short and sweet, I'd read them.
-
Beth Sarim
And,
Its Monday. Stacy's latest voice video is up on Surviving Paradise!
Be sure to enjoy.
-
Konagirl
"It is precisely for this reason that I am puzzled by the fact that it was this organization that unfairly deceived and misled me, hiding its actions from me, and trying to treat me like a forever debtor, a helpless lamb, an empty cabbage head, who is unable to cope without the watchful eye of Big Brother."
26 "...for wicked men live among my people.
They watch like hunters lying in wait.
They set a trap;
they catch men.
27 Like a cage full of birds,
so their houses are full of deceit.
Therefore they have grown powerful and rich.
28 They have become fat and sleek.
They have also excelled in evil matters.
They have not taken up cases,
such as the case of the fatherless, so they might prosper,
and they have not defended the rights of the needy." Jer 5:26-28"The whole methodology basically aims to maintain an illusion: the illusion of unity, and the illusion that the learner gains serious biblical knowledge. But he doesn't."
"The Lord continued, “Never spread false rumors. Don’t join forces with wicked people by giving false testimony. 2 Never follow a crowd in doing wrong. When you testify in court, don’t side with the majority to pervert justice." Exod 23:1-2
-
Ding
ThomasMore,
Yes, I remember an elder proudly telling me, "If I've been brainwashed, I consider that a good thing. It means I have a clean mind."
I wonder how he'd feel about having a programmed mind...
-
-
aqwsed12345
"I'm giving the Jehovah's Witnesses a task. Explain on what Biblical evidence can Nebuchadnezzar's vision - which related to 7 times, and which the Bible states was fulfilled in the 7 years when Nebuchadnezzar was insane - be interpreted to also have a larger fulfillment. What rule states that Nebuchadnezzar's 7-year madness foreshadows a 2,520-year (the so-called "seven times") period. Prove from the Bible that Nebuchadnezzar's vision of the "seven times" (Daniel 4:7-14) not only had a one-time fulfillment but also has a larger fulfillment (which ended in 1914).
Read Daniel Chapter 4. The whole thing is about how this vision has already been fulfilled once: "All this befell Nebuchadnezzar the king." Daniel 4:28. So, this vision has already been fulfilled once. That's why I'm asking what the evidence is that it needs to be fulfilled again. I'm not interested in the calculation because I'm familiar with it. I'm interested in what biblical evidence exists that this particular vision has a larger fulfillment. Besides, there is another problem related to this. You know, when Nebuchadnezzar had this vision, Daniel was already in Babylon. So Nebuchadnezzar had this vision after 607 BC. So how is it possible that the larger fulfillment of this vision began in 607 BC, meaning the vision began to be fulfilled earlier than when Nebuchadnezzar received it?
Let's assume that this tree really represents God's earthly kingdom, which ended in 607 BC. However, in 1914, the kingdom was not restored on earth, only in heaven. The story would be complete if God's earthly rule had returned in 1914, just as God's earthly rule ended in 607 BC."
Ezekiel 21:26. "This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said, ‘Remove the turban, and lift off the crown. This will not be the same. Put on high even what is low, and bring low even the high one.'
This part simply asserts that Zedekiah will lose his throne, so, generously assuming that it also means that God's earthly rule ends in 607 BC. But I still can't derive from this biblical part that this "end" will last 7 times. Because the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy in Nebuchadnezzar's madness has already happened. I still don't see the biblical evidence that the "Remove the turban, lift off the crown!" condition will last 7 times, so I don't see evidence that the duration of the "Remove the turban, lift off the crown!" condition is determined by a vision that the Bible says has already been fulfilled. So I still don't see evidence that there is a larger fulfillment of the 7 times. Does the Bible mention this specific "seven times" anywhere else?"
The first sentence you wrote:
"If you read the Bible, Daniel 4:10, 34 describes the prophecy related to King Nebuchadnezzar of 7 times which was fulfilled in Nebuchadnezzar, this period would be short to appoint a new king by Jehovah God at the head of Israel."
Alright, let's stick with that. This is true. However, this above part doesn't talk about God wanting to place a king at the head of Israel, but about God taking away the government from Nebuchadnezzar for 7 years.
Then you write:
"Jehovah God showed Nebuchadnezzar that he is not the only king as a world power, he had to recognize that Jehovah is mightier"
This is true too. Nebuchadnezzar recognized this.
But I still don't see any evidence that Nebuchadnezzar's 7-year animal fate symbolizes something bigger. There's not a word about this in Daniel's text, the story is closed. The king was in an animal-like condition for 7 years, then by the grace of Jehovah, he could return to the throne, but there is no evidence that this 7-year period symbolizes 7 times, that is, 2,520 years. There is no concrete evidence for this. No biblical part that says this 7-year period has a larger fulfillment."
"You write:
"Nebuchadnezzar's power was not so great that it "reaches to heaven, and your dominion to the ends of the earth", but the power of Jesus is such, it suits him..."
Is this the proof? This is simply interpreted into the text. In the Bible, it says: "You are that one, oh king, who has grown and become strong, whose greatness has increased and reaches to heaven, and your dominion to the ends of the earth." Daniel 4:20 - God himself says, "whose greatness has increased and reaches to heaven, and your dominion to the ends of the earth" - and you say this is not true? This is true, but it is what we call a poetic exaggeration. There are many such exaggerations in the Bible, or for example, personifications of inanimate things can also be found. E.g. strong as a buffalo. Is he really as strong as a buffalo? :-) This does not prove at all that this vision can also be applied to something else. By the way, the Bible also states that "All this happened to King Nebuchadnezzar." It happened, meaning it was fulfilled. You understand? Show me where it says that there is also some kind of later fulfillment."
Luke 21:24 - "and they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled.”
What information does this verse convey? - It says that the time of Jerusalem's destruction (AD 70) falls within a so-called "times of the Gentiles". When this interval ends, this verse does not mention. Nor does it mention when it began.
Ezekiel 21:25-27: “And as for you, O deadly wounded, wicked chieftain of Israel, whose day has come in the time of the error of [the] end, this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said, ‘Remove the turban, and lift off the crown. This will not be the same. Put on high even what is low, and bring low even the high one. A ruin, a ruin, a ruin I shall make it. As for this* also, it will certainly become no [one’s] until he comes who has the legal right, and I must give [it] to him.’"
This part is about the divine right of rule being taken away from Zedekiah. If we connect it with the previous verse, we can say that the times of the Gentiles began then.
So far it's logical.
So, we know that the times of the Gentiles began in 607 BC and it was still ongoing in 70 AD.
However, what is the proof that Daniel's vision will determine the end of the times of the Gentiles? There is no biblical evidence that there is a greater fulfillment of Daniel's vision. I admit that it's convenient to say that the greater fulfillment determines the end of the times of the Gentiles. You can come up with this, but there is no evidence for it. There is no evidence that Nebuchadnezzar's dream determines the end of the times of the Gentiles, by linking it to the prophecies of Luke and Ezekiel. Understand, I'm not claiming that this is definitely not possible, but that there is no clear biblical evidence for it. If only there was some faint hint in the book of Daniel that this vision should be interpreted differently. But Daniel explained exactly to Nebuchadnezzar the dream, and did not even hint at a kind of greater fulfillment.
Then if it was true, would Nebuchadnezzar represent God? Would Nebuchadnezzar's earthly empire represent God's earthly kingdom? And if this is the case, then why did Jesus begin to reign in heaven in 1914? Why not on earth? After all, after his 7 years of madness, Nebuchadnezzar did not move his capital to heaven, but began to reign where he had left off 7 years before!! Or perhaps since 1914, the right to rule on earth also belongs to Jesus? However, if this is the case, then the "higher authorities" (letter to the Romans) are not the same as the worldly higher authorities, but Jesus Christ. So there are many contradictions in the whole story."
"You write:
"this period would be too short for Jehovah God to set up a new king over Israel"
Indeed, this would be too short for that, but what does this fact have to do with this prophecy? If I read Daniel 4, why should I speculate while reading it what this 7 years might be enough for? Why should I care about it? After all, Daniel interpreted Nebuchadnezzar's dream!!
You also didn't answer why, if it's as you say, Jesus began to reign in heaven? After all, Nebuchadnezzar also began to rule exactly where he had stopped ruling before he went mad, after the 7 years were over. So if Zedekiah ruled on earth until 607 BC, then in 1914 Jesus should have also started ruling on earth. This would only fit.
The calculations, please do not explain any more, because I have long understood that. I don't understand the basics, that once in the Bible with my own eyes I read that this prophecy of 7 times was fulfilled in Nebuchadnezzar's 7 years of madness (""All this befell Nebuchadnezzar the king", Daniel 4:28), then someone on what basis can say that it has not been completely fulfilled. On what basis can you claim that Nebuchadnezzar represents God, and the Babylonian Empire represents God's earthly rule? Isn't this a bit morbid?
I just don't understand from this whole story, were these people completely idiots? How did they dare to announce the year 1915 after the failure of 1914, and then 1916? Then 1925?? What were they hoping for?
"Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all tribes of the earth will mourn over him." (Revelation 1:7)
What nonsense is it that Jesus came invisibly in 1914? According to the Bible, Jesus comes in such a way that "every eye will see him, even those who pierced him." This is written in the Bible. How can this be turned into invisibility? How can this Bible verse be interpreted exactly the opposite way, as any sane person would interpret it, as every Christian in the world has interpreted it for 1900 years???
The claim that "every eye will see him" means just the opposite. It means that no one will see Him, only a very few, in fact, those who pierced Him will not see Him (since they are dead), but only those who have similar characteristics to those who actually crucified Jesus.
It seems that words do not mean what they should mean. It's not the text that matters, but the explanation. More precisely: sometimes the text is taken very seriously, sometimes it's some kind of explanation.
Do you know what theoretical problem would arise if this verse could really be interpreted as you think? This would mean that any clear words or sentences of the Bible could be claimed not to mean what we read, but - like some secret code - something completely different. This would essentially make the whole Scripture uncertain, and we would end up with the conclusion that the entire Bible could not have been understood for 1900 years.
From this statement: "Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over him" - nothing is as it seems!!!
1./ He doesn't come with clouds, but invisibly.
2./ It's not the eye that sees Jesus, but the mind that comprehends it.
3./ He doesn't even come, his presence just becomes apparent.
4./ His presence only means that he turns his attention to earthly things, so in reality, he is not present.
5./ Those who pierced him can't see him because they have long been dead. So if vision means mental comprehension, this can only refer to the evildoers who are similar to those who crucified Jesus, and for these evildoers, the presence of Jesus should be apparent - but even this is not true because for these evildoers, the presence of Jesus is not at all apparent, because they think the whole thing is nonsense. So even symbolically it's not true that "even those who pierced Him will see him."
Have you finally understood what I'm talking about? If there is a passage in the Bible like this one, which requires a Ph.D. to explain, then the whole thing is worthless and it was not written for ordinary people. It's as if I were reading the following:
"My grandmother said to love your siblings."
Then someone would explain that my grandmother is not my grandmother, but the 12-year-old son of my neighbor (not even a woman), and she didn't say anything, but she was throwing stones, and it was not about siblings but about my windows, and not about love but about breaking my head. So this is how it should be interpreted: The son of my neighbor was angry with me, so he threw stones at my windows with the intention of breaking them and accidentally hitting me on the head with a stone.
If he comes with the clouds, and if the clouds hide Him, then at least the clouds should have been seen, more precisely should have been seen in 1914. Anyway, this explanation is not good either. Because according to the Bible, Jesus has to come in a similar way as he left. Read the Bible. It says there that Jesus ascended in the sight of his disciples, and while he was ascending, a cloud obscured him. But when he started ascending, there was no cloud yet because if it had been there, they wouldn't even have seen that he started ascending, so they wouldn't have known who started ascending. Now play this event backwards - like a video recording. So first Jesus is still obscured by the cloud (i.e., invisible), then gradually becomes visible. Then in 1914, either the cloud or something should have been visible. But essentially nothing happened in 1914. World War I was not all over the world, but in most parts of the globe there was no war in 1914. However, the Bible says that "every eye" will see him. Well, indeed, "every eye" essentially means very few eyes. Is this another secret code?? Moreover, in 1914, the Bible students did not see his coming, not even symbolically, because even in the 1920s the belief was that Jesus came invisibly in 1874. I read this with my own eyes in Rutherford's book, "The Harp of God", which was published after 1920. So then the explanation is 100 percent wrong, in other words, nobody saw anything in 1914, not even symbolically, not even in the sense that they would have understood it spiritually. They did not understand anything, but later they invented an explanation to prevent the misguided masses from lynching them for their deception."
"This is what you write, now I think correctly:
"They only started to think about whether they interpreted it correctly when it was over."
This is fine. So they only started to think about whether they interpreted things correctly after 1914. But then - you essentially admit it yourself - they interpreted things wrongly in 1914. So with this, you are exactly refuting the thesis that Jesus came invisibly in 1914, because even if we take it symbolically (even if we take the statement "every eye will see him" in the sense that "a few chosen ones recognized his invisible coming from the signs"), things do not fit, because even in 1914 they did not see his coming, not even symbolically, because only after 1920 did they start to "correctly" interpret what they saw. So if in 1914 they had seen His coming symbolically, they should at least have recognized the invisible coming, they should have recognized it when Jesus came, not 10 years later!!!
In the JWs' teachings, it's not the teachings themselves that are repugnant, because indeed: there's a lot of truth in them, and there are plenty of errors and mistakes in other denominations as well - it's not the teaching that's repugnant, but this sycophantic, insincere, leadership-excusing nature of the simple Witnesses. Your answer is an example of this. The problem is buried in this foolish sentence of yours. Because you said:
"They didn't prophesy, but rather, there was an overheated hope in them."
What is this? Wordplay? And who are "they"? In whom? Maybe in Mrs. Johnson and Mr. Smith? Certainly not in them!!! These were just victims who were brainwashed. Because in the 1970s among JWs, such terror reigned that the slightest disagreement resulted in Mr. Smith being ostracized. So Mr. Smith believed what he believed because this ornate group of con artists, long ago having surpassed the boundaries of normality in their pride and arrogance, proclaimed that you should not study, not marry, not court, not do anything (except recruit more members, replicate like some mad virus), because the End is so near. And when it turned out that all of this was not true, then they say that there was an "overheated hope in Jehovah's people". But the overheatedness was not in the people, but in its ruling class, which, when there's trouble, blurs the outlines to distribute the responsibility between themselves and the powerless membership. Disgusting. Not a single leader had enough backbone to stand before the people and say, "Gentlemen, I was mistaken, but I also lied when I claimed that I received this information from the Creator."
This is nothing more than blending the Witnesses with the Governing Body.
1./ "The Witnesses" have no teachings of their own, the teachings are not theirs, since they can only say what the Governing Body deems good. There is no such thing as a Witness giving a talk. This is only an appearance. In reality, everything is written down for them, and they cannot deviate from the predetermined points, let alone biblical quotes. There is no such thing as someone voluntarily speaking up in a group and giving a talk that does not go according to the program.
2./ "They", the Witnesses, cannot interpret anything. But they can only repeat what the Governing Body publishes. So it is very misleading to say things like "they looked forward with great anticipation" and "they realized that they had misinterpreted certain things". This wording is essentially cheating, as these two "they" refer to two completely different groups. One "they" is the passive "they", who cannot have their own opinion about the faith, the other "they" is the active "they", who tell what the Creator's current daily message is. If you use the word "they" for both groups, you blur the difference and at the same time take the responsibility off the Governing Body's shoulders.
You write:
"[1975] It was emphasized, but nothing concrete was stated, only probable."
An educated person can distinguish between:
"it was not explicitly stated, only probable" and "it was explicitly stated".
But 99% of JWs absolutely do not have a sense of this!! The vast majority take the elder's talk as identical to the Scriptures and want to do it to the point of nosebleeds. So the Society can always cunningly hide behind words, because they make a statement (knowing that 99% will interpret it this way and take it as cash), and when this fails, they show that the statement should have been interpreted differently, and the common man will be the fool again because he was the one who misinterpreted it and had "unwarranted, overheated expectations" :-))
It's well done, just like the big money people and politicians manipulate the masses. The bottom line is: the smarter one always messes with the less smart one.
My parents were Witnesses and from morning till night at that time the record played that it's not even worth having children because the end is so near. And I believed it - why wouldn't I believe it, if everyone said for sure and even included it in prayers? At that time, an elder had much more power within the congregation than now. If I had gone to college, maybe my mom would have been kicked out, for much smaller things people were kicked out at that time. But why would I have gone if everyone really said the end was just a few years away?
Lastly, they burned themselves by spreading in millions of copies for decades that the Creator has a promise that the generation that experienced 1914 will not pass away until Armageddon. That's a big fall, isn't it? I know an old JW who in the 1970s preached that a specific large building wouldn't be built because Armageddon would come. And indeed, the building was built and still stands today. Then I know another person who was told in his youth not to play football because he could play enough football in the New World after Armageddon. And today he is so sick that he couldn't even play button football."
"A lot of arguments are made against JWs here, but essentially most of the arguments are too complicated and beyond the scope of an average Witness.
In my opinion, there is one argument that cannot be twisted and is a serious charge:
Until 1995, on the third page of every Awake! magazine, at the bottom, it was written that the Creator has a promise that the generation of 1914 will not pass away until God's new world comes. It was written exactly like this: "Most important, this magazine builds confidence in the Creator's promise of a peaceful and secure world before the generation that saw the events of 1914 passes away."
This statement essentially even overturns the theory of gradual understanding, so it overturns that "the path of the righteous ... is like the light of dawn, which becomes brighter and brighter, until full daylight" (Proverbs 4:18).
Why does it overturn it?
Because they call this interpretation directly the promise of the Creator. So they don't write that according to the current state of bible study the Governing Body believes, etc. etc., but they lie that this invention is the promise of the Creator "FOR POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS" (thus to manipulate the Jehovah's Witnesses and instill an "urgency consciousness" in them). This is not mere ignorance, but deliberate lying, because the person (or persons) who first wrote this, and gave permission for it to be disseminated in millions of copies, knew best that the Creator did not promise such a thing.
They should not have written that this was the "the Creator's promise" because this statement was a lie even at the moment of its writing. Those who wrote this knew best that it was not the promise of the Creator, but they only concluded that the Creator probably wanted to convey this. But they couldn't be sure either, because they received no revelation from God. But if they themselves were not sure about this, then how dare they expect ordinary Witnesses to believe this?? And if anyone had voiced that it might not be certain, would they have been disfellowshipped? Well, what kind of work is this?? Is organizational unity more important than truth?? And after all this, how can we believe the words of the "faithful and discreet slave"? Or do we not have to believe, but just pretend as if we would believe, not to cause disturbance, and not to shake the faith of those with lower IQ???
How can one believe that "faithful and discreet slave" who wrote this until 1995 (on page 4 of the Awake! magazine distributed in millions of copies). Then this completely changed. Today this is not true. The February 2008 Watchtower states that this generation is not the same as the 1914 generation, but the 144,000.
Even this would not be such a big problem, after all, the light increases to full daylight. But why did they have to say that this was the promise of the Creator?? Why did they have to put a lie in the Creator's mouth?? Why couldn't this "realization" be proclaimed in a more humble style, for example, "we think our biblical interpretation is correct, which suggests a peaceful and secure new world will come into existence before the generation that witnessed the events of 1914 passes away." If this had been formulated so humbly, there would be no problem today. But why is there always this pride, this arrogance??
You write: "we just nod our heads..."
But this is really true!! Just try to say something differently, especially publicly. For example, in February 2008, they changed the definition of the "generation", the definition they gave in 1995. By the way, in 1995 they changed the previous definition. But someone should have questioned the current truth! At a minimum, he should not have been able to contribute to the studies anymore, and if he became too stubborn, they would have disfellowshipped him, on the grounds of causing others to stumble. The same situation was in the past as well. In 1990 it was still valid that young people could not choose civil service instead of military service. They argued with such nonsense that civil service is under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Defense, just like military service. Then suddenly an Watchtower article appeared, which stated that deciding this is a matter of conscience. So if he wants to, he refuses civil service, if he doesn't want to, he doesn't refuse, but takes it. Everyone can decide according to their conscience. The most shocking thing was that suddenly no one was willing to choose jail. So this proves that before, when this article had not yet appeared, those who chose to go to jail were not guided by their conscience, but by fear of being disfellowshipped, or marginalized. Because I don't believe that everyone's conscience would have changed 180 degrees within a few months, and after the article appeared suddenly there would be no one whose conscience would still dictate that they should go to jail. Because the article did not call for civil service, it just said that everyone can choose according to their conscience.
With simple peasant logic, it can be seen that the part of the JW teaching that speaks about the constant closeness of Armageddon is also a mind manipulation. The story of the JWs essentially speaks of nothing else than "don't do anything, just preach, because the end is coming, and if you don't preach, you will die". This is how the "good news" could be briefly summed up. I just wonder why lawyers worldwide have not yet taken action against this, as it is nothing but spreading panic. Especially because they have been doing this for 100 years. JW generations are born and die with the consciousness of "urgency". Then when they get old, they can go to a Catholic nursing home, since they are not even able to maintain a miserable nursing home in a country. Their assembly is characterized by total lovelessness. It is no wonder they use the words "showing love" instead of the simple word "love". Yes, always the demonstration of things is important, the surface, the smiling, the raving about the "truth", that someone sits through the whole thing elegantly, in a tie, answers the questions posed, and gives such well-groomed answers that best reflect the words of the Watchtower. That's why many people don't even bother, they simply read the answers that have been underlined at home. And this home underlining is called "preparation", and "study". Even the questions are designed in such a way that thoughts don't accidentally veer off in an inappropriate direction. And this directed thinking is called "contemplation." Here is Orwell's 1984 realized, where words mean something other than what they should, right in front of our eyes, the language of "newspeak." The leader of the Watchtower study has to ask these prescribed questions, and the audience, in turn, has to recite the answers they underlined at home, albeit slightly rephrased. Like some kind of acting circle. Perhaps the most important thing is to prevent any manifestation of spontaneity."