Posts by AnnOMaly

100

Can anyone disprove 607 BCE date using only the NWT and WT literature?

by Bart Belteshassur in

i haven't come across any arguement that does not involve secular history and external references.

in fact the wt can not get to 607 bce without using external sources as in knowing that they need to get back from 1914 ce to 607 bce, and botching an argument using an external date as reference to create their start point at 537 bce.. i realize that to get the final date we must provide a fixed figure from somewhere which can only be a historical source, but the objective would be to disprove the wt flim flam.

once that is achieve we can use which ever fixed historical point they wish to chose.

AnnOMaly

Bart,

Not 'disproved' per se, but serious doubt can be cast on the Org's skewed interpretation of certain scriptures. wizzstick has already mentioned a good one - Jer. 25:12.

Jer. 29:10 is another. How could Jehovah say the exiles would be there 'at' Babylon when a) the exiles He was addressing were taken 10 years before Jerusalem was destroyed (so these exiles would, in fact, have been 'at' Babylon 80 years, not 70), and b) Jerusalem may never have been destroyed and further exiles taken if Zedekiah and the people had obeyed Jehovah's instructions (Jer. 27:11,12,17)? Why start the '70 years clock' at an indeterminate time in those exiles' future - a future that was not set? Why mislead those exiles by saying they would only be there 70 years when God really meant 80?

If the 70 years 'desolation, without an inhabitant' period could only start to be counted after Gedaliah's murder in the 7th month of '607,' why did Jehovah tell Ezekiel to prophesy to the 'inhabitants of these ruins' in the 10th month (Ezek. 33:21-29)?

Also, going back to Jer. 29, the Bible says the 70 years would be fulfilled, then the exiles would pray, then Jehovah would bring them back home. Daniel (ch. 9) discerned the 70 years were up and then entreated God for His forgiveness, to turn away His reproach and bless Jerusalem and its sanctuary. If the 70 years finished once the Jews were back home (thereby evidence of God's forgiveness and blessing), why then entreat Him for his forgiveness and blessing?

Just having 539 BCE as the end point of Babylon's 70 years, of the exiles' servitude to Babylon, of Babylon's king being called to account, will screw up the WTS's 607-based timeline.

9

Interesting site in the UK for lurkers

by *lost* in

site is housechurchesuk.weebly.com/jehovahswitness-cult-or-christian.html.

make of it what you will.

AnnOMaly

*Snort*

Illuminati? Chem trails? Yeah sure, a reliable source of information.

Haig's Law and the Time Cube Law are both well represented here!

56

JWs: not creationists but believe in creation...

by TheStumbler in

i've been having a bit of an email exchange with elder dad and i need some advice.

i thought i was getting through to him but i think my criticism and tone became a bit too strident in my last email and now he thinks that i am attacking him personally.

i think he has dismissed everything i said because he perceived me as 'overally critical, and rude.. .

AnnOMaly

Suggestion for future discussions with your dad. Ask questions. Get your dad to explain himself. Questions can be less threatening. And keep a sense of humor.

E.g. something like this:

"How can it be that JWs believe in creation but they deny they are creationists?"

"Ah creationists believe God created everything in 6 24-hour days and JWs don't believe that."

"But you're describing Young Earth creationists. Are you aware other types of creationists exist? Can't JWs be classified as Old Earth creationists?"

"No. JWs are not creationists."

"I don't understand. The dictionary and encyclopedia definitions say creationism means [blah, blah]. JW beliefs fall within that description, don't they?"

"The dictionaries and encyclopedias have it wrong."

"ROFL! Really? What do you think the proper definition should be?"

[Allow response.]

"LOL. Maybe you should write in and correct them, dad. You're a hoot. Hey, let's meet up for lunch."

56

JWs: not creationists but believe in creation...

by TheStumbler in

i've been having a bit of an email exchange with elder dad and i need some advice.

i thought i was getting through to him but i think my criticism and tone became a bit too strident in my last email and now he thinks that i am attacking him personally.

i think he has dismissed everything i said because he perceived me as 'overally critical, and rude.. .

AnnOMaly

It's classic Orwellian double-think.

JWs say they abstain from blood, but they take from blood (in fractionated form);

JWs say they don't follow human leaders, but they follow the Governing Body's lead (w.10, 9/15, pp. 21, 23);

JWs say they are not creationists, but they believe the universe was created.

Your dad can't back down even on this no-brainer, trivial matter. If he admits he's wrong on this, he'll also have to admit the Org's wrong on this and he senses where that could lead. You've more than adequately made your point. Having been confronted with the glaringly obvious, once your JW insists that black is white, you've gone as far as you can for the present. It's time to smile knowingly and change the subject.

43

On A Scale of 1 to 10 How Would You Rate Your Looks?

by minimus in

jw
friends

1 is undesirable.

AnnOMaly

Depends on the lighting, the time of day, which way the wind's blowing and how many glasses of wine I've had before looking in the mirror and assessing myself, but I'd say anywhere between 3 and 11.

34

Indianapolis Assembly Hall Chorus AMAZING!

by NoMoreHustle in

jw
friends

this is what wt has been producing, this had my bottom jaw on the carpet while i was watching (like the footloose one).

and they say there different from other religions yeah right!!.

i hope this link works https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vahglagd2i.

AnnOMaly

Now THAT was classy! And it was more appropriate for a JW place of worship (bearing in mind the past JW mindset about 'entertainment' and music in the KH, etc.).

It's sad in a way: a factor in prompting me to join a 'worldly' choir before fully leaving was the new songbook which ruined many of the older songs and where the pre-recorded piano arrangements had become so bland, so robotic. These Indianapolis guys breathe life and passion into the songs. The sad thing is, this is likely a one-off.

Blondie says she remembers the time many decades ago when the older songbooks had SATB notation to allow bringing more color and depth to the songs. But they cut that out and it has long been one of the deficiencies in JW services - taking a pride in the music, using it creatively and expressively to stir the soul, and having the songs sung well or led by a choir.

------

As an aside, there's a recent and interesting article on JW music and its development over the years:

THE JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES’ CHANGING HYMNODY
by George D. Chryssides, University of Birmingham UK
A paper presented at the CESNUR 2013

38

Paul - GB Member (W 9/15/14)

by pixel in

ok, is this a "new understanding" or what?

up until this point i thought that the borg refered paul as a co or do, but never gb member:.

p. 12 now, why would paul a spiritual giant who likely was a member of the first-century governing bodycall himself a miserable man?.

AnnOMaly

Not new.

*** w85 12/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***

Was the apostle Paul part of the Christian governing body?

It is reasonable to conclude that Paul was a part of the Christian governing body in the first century. ... ...

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.

AnnOMaly

Good one, Londo!

29

THAT "Resurrection" Video

by rory-ks in

jw
friends

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqr51qsvf2o.

AnnOMaly

It looks like I killed this thread as well the other one!

32

AN ALTERNATIVE CONVERSATION WITH A NEIGHBOR - Watchtower, October 2014

by AnnOMaly in

the contrived and unrealistic conversation that one of jehovahs witnesses imagined having with a neighbor in the october 2014 watchtower will not be reproduced here.

instead let us imagine another conversation another witness named andre (ahem, sorry) cameron has at the home of another man who is also named jon.keep searching for a suckercameron: jon, ive really enjoyed the regular discussions weve been having about the bible.

* the last time we spoke, you raised a question about gods kingdom.

AnnOMaly

LOLOL @ Ding!