Posts by AnnOMaly

59

BBC Radio 4 reference to 607 Babylonian conquest?

by 88JM in

was listening to bbc radio 4 late sunday night, and in a programme about migration, they referenced the "babylonian conquest of jerusalem in 607 b.c.

" which caught my attention.. did they not mean 587 b.c., or did i understand it wrong?.

the link to the programme is below - sorry if you're not in the u.k. as you probably won't be able to listen to bbc programmes.

When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed references

by GoUnion in

this topic has been covered extensively but i just wanted relate what hapopenes with this subject and my elder father.

he called me up one day to check in on me he always asks if i'm going to msettings and i always tell him no im not.

well this time he wanted to know why i didn't trust the g.b.

AnnOMaly

He said he and my mother have looked at the wt articles again and they are confident this is the truth.

But he hasn't looked at how they misused references? Then how can he verify whether your objections have any validity or not?

Do not get embroiled in any other controversy they might want to bring up. If they try to goad or guilt you into coming back to meetings, repeat what you said in your OP - you cannot trust the GB because they misrepresent scholarly sources. The ball is in their court to prove you wrong. If they don't want to even try and 'correct' or 'readjust' your thinking on this by examining your evidence (hey, your salvation is at stake! Act hurt at their apparent lack of care), then it's end of discussion. Make your dad feel ashamed that he has not done what he said he would do (OP: "He didn't believe that the watchtower would do this, but he said he would look it up.").

45

"New Book" God's Kingdom Rules

by booker-t in

i heard that on sat the jws released a new book at the convention god's kingdom rules.

is it a verse by verse of ezekiel or daniel?

does it mention the "overlapping generation"?

AnnOMaly

OK, the old literature is out-of-date and NooLite™ has replaced it. But that doesn't excuse the modern-day misrepresentation of what used to be believed and preached. At least (unlike Orwell's 'Ministry of Truth'), there are copies of the original documents to cross-check.

45

"New Book" God's Kingdom Rules

by booker-t in

i heard that on sat the jws released a new book at the convention god's kingdom rules.

is it a verse by verse of ezekiel or daniel?

does it mention the "overlapping generation"?

AnnOMaly

The WHOPPERS about the Bible Students' perceptions of 1914 and its significance - again! Tsk, tsk, tsk!

P. 15 - Russell "championed Bible truths" (caption) and "Although our brothers of that era did not yet grasp the full significance of that marked year [1914], they proclaimed what they knew far and wide, with long-lasting effects."

P. 23 - "Though the Watch Tower had rightly pointed to 1914 as the year when the Gentile Times would end, the brothers did not yet understand what would take place in that year."

Scans showing that they did grasp the full significance of 1914, and did understand what would take place that year, are found HERE. They were wrong; they were championing doctrinal falsehoods.

P. 16 - "Consider this: Would people have been prepared for the beginning of Christ's presence if they were not able to distinguish Jesus from his Father Jehovah? Surely not!"

The BSs' Arian-esque view of God and Jesus had nothing to do with preparing for the beginning of Christ's presence. Anybody who is acquianted with BS/JW history knows full well that they taught Christ's presence began in 1874, that they only started to believe his presence began in 1874 after the 'fact' in 1876, and that the first hint of Christ's presence having begun in 1914 only popped up in 1930! How can anybody be prepared for something that they missed and were clueless about for 16 more years?

P. 20 - (Caption) "In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence."

P. 22 - "Long before 1914, the Bible Students said that a time of trouble would begin in that marked year. But even they could not have imagined how accurate that prediction would turn out to be."

FALSE and FALSE! See above. See scans where it says the 'time of trouble' would END that year.

Then the writers have the gall to condemn the churches of Christendom for teaching "doctrinal lies" (p. 17)!

Absolutely shameful (again!) for an organization that has boasted it 'traces all things with accuracy' and claims to represent the God of Truth.

45

"New Book" God's Kingdom Rules

by booker-t in

i heard that on sat the jws released a new book at the convention god's kingdom rules.

is it a verse by verse of ezekiel or daniel?

does it mention the "overlapping generation"?

AnnOMaly

Thank you, wanna.

The 'overlapping generation' explanation with helpful diagram is a hoot! Not a single scripture is cited as support for this newer definition of 'generation.' Just a series of nonsensical assertions. The GB must be laughing their behinds off at the r&f's gullibility.

14

2014 International Convention East Rutherford AUDIO

by wannabefree in

for those who are interested, i have intercepted an audio transmission of the ic in east rutherford, nj from russell's celestial teapot.

these are zipped files of mp3 audio of each day, they are broken down into individual talks for your convenience.. friday https://www.sendspace.com/file/dgyeer.

saturday https://www.sendspace.com/file/a6p6my.

AnnOMaly

Thank you

51

Elders answer questions about the changes of the blood ban

by opusdei1972 in

some days ago two elders visited my sister because she has not been attending the meetings more than one year.

this time she prepared notes containing watchtower past teachings about the blood ban so as to ask them for those changes, and it seems that the elders were also prepared for her past questions.

for instance she showed them that "albumin" was considered "under scriptural ban" in 1956 (read the page 20 of awake, september 8).

AnnOMaly

"You shall not eat anything that dies of itself; you may give it to aliens residing in your towns for them to eat, or you may sell it to a foreigner. For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. "(Deut 14:21)

I've also heard this one used a lot to excuse JWs benefiting from blood components processed as a result of 'worldly' people's misuse of blood. The application of this scripture falls down on several levels.

"You shall not eat anything that dies of itself; ... "

Nothing has died. The donors are living.

Nothing is being eaten and digested. The blood is being transfused and used in the body in the way God designed it.

" ... you may give it to aliens residing in your towns for them to eat, or you may sell it to a foreigner. ... "

The 'worldly' people can use the blood. That means JWs mustn't use the blood.

The law said nothing about aliens and foreigners carving up the unbled meat and giving pieces back to the Israelites to consume and that would be OK. So why are JWs using the blood given away for only 'worldly' people to use?

Besides, JWs do not give blood at all, so how can this be analogous to an Israelite giving/selling an unbled carcass to 'worldly' people?

" ... For you are a people holy to the Lord your God."

Holiness without hypocrisy. It is hypocritical for JWs to personally benefit from the result of 'worldly' persons making an industry out of breaking God's laws and principles on blood.

75