Crazyguy that is so true what you say about their changes will be when they publish them. I have heard for many years that the JWs leaders study apostate literature so they can fight back the opposers. It is like a football team having the other teams playbook. You have to know what your critics are saying about you in order to be prepared. Alot of apostates/ex-jws think that the GB are trembling in their boots about apostate websites/books/tv shows, etc; but I think the JWs leaders are actually laughing at apostates/ex-jws for underestimating them. The leaders know everything critics are saying. I will never forget when the 3 elders showed up at my door for a committee meeting and I had a smug look on my face thinking I was going to show them all of the skeletons and one of the elders smiled at me at said "Oh I know about Beth Sarim and 1925" Judge Rutherford really made a blunder with that one but Jehovah did not make that prophecy Judge rutherford did".
booker-t
JoinedPosts by booker-t
-
15
Sorry posters JWs leaders will not "change" 1914 or 144,000 "literal to figurative "doctrine
by booker-t ini actually called bethel a few weeks ago and i was shocked that i actually got thru to the writing dept.
i was abit nervous but i asked the jw writer if there was going to be a change in doctrine.
i thought he was going to immediately hang up on me thinking "apostate caller" but he was actually nice and we talked for a while.
-
-
-
1
Posters that got new "release" God's kingdom rules book at assembly.
by booker-t inposters, did jws leaders/gb put in the overlapping doctrine in their new book "god's kingdom rules" book or did they put the 607 debate from the 2011 wt when was jerusalem destroyed 586 or 607?
i figured they would put that wt in a new book like they did with the 1981 let your kingdom come book in the appendix trying to dispute carl ol jonnson book "the gentile times reconsidered".
his book did alot of damage to the wt 607 argument and i was wondering if they would ever try to rebuttal his book.
-
-
booker-t
Posters, did JWs leaders/GB put in the overlapping doctrine in their new book "God's Kingdom Rules" book or did they put the 607 debate from the 2011 WT when was Jerusalem destroyed 586 or 607? I figured they would put that WT in a new book like they did with the 1981 Let your Kingdom come book in the Appendix trying to dispute Carl Ol Jonnson book "The Gentile times Reconsidered". His book did alot of damage to the WT 607 argument and I was wondering if they would ever try to rebuttal his book. The WT 2011 article totally confused me so 586/607 is still over my head.
-
15
Sorry posters JWs leaders will not "change" 1914 or 144,000 "literal to figurative "doctrine
by booker-t ini actually called bethel a few weeks ago and i was shocked that i actually got thru to the writing dept.
i was abit nervous but i asked the jw writer if there was going to be a change in doctrine.
i thought he was going to immediately hang up on me thinking "apostate caller" but he was actually nice and we talked for a while.
-
-
booker-t
I actually called Bethel a few weeks ago and I was shocked that I actually got thru to the writing dept. I was abit nervous but I asked the JW writer if there was going to be a change in doctrine. I thought he was going to immediately hang up on me thinking "apostate caller" but he was actually nice and we talked for a while. I could tell he was a company man and basically he just more or lest told me that as of now the doctrines will not be changed and if they do get changed the GB will let everyone know at the same time. I felt this was his way of saying he has not heard of any future change or talk of change. If there has been talk of change I do believe he would have fumbled and hesistated but he was straight foward with me and I was shocked because I expected dodging, fumbling, hanging up the phone from him but he was a nice guy.
-
5
Revelation Book
by Finallyfree12 inhas anyone ever called bethel and asked why they dont have the revelation book online anymore?.
-
-
booker-t
New hope and happiness you made me laugh so hard with your statement and you make a good point because I called Bethel writing dept the other day to ask them if they were going to change the 144000 doctrine from literal to figurative and the writer actually told me "he will know when I know" in other words whenever the GB decides to make a change the writers know basically the same time as the RANK AND FILE JWS. I could not understand the way the JW writer just glossed over it as it was nothing. But basically what he was telling me was they are not changing the 144000 doctrine now but the gb makes that decision. It made me feel so much hurt for JWs because they are so under mind controll.
-
78
I was "totally" stopped in my tracks by an "atheist" comment.
by booker-t ini must admit i can at times be a little "egotistical" when it comes to knowledge and the bible.
i have studied the bible for so long and have always had a passion for the bible as a jw and as an ex-jw.
i guess that is all i have left when it comes to religion and as humans we do tend to stroke our egos.
-
-
booker-t
I must admit I can at times be a little "egotistical" when it comes to knowledge and the bible. I have studied the bible for so long and have always had a passion for the bible as a jw and as an ex-jw. I guess that is all I have left when it comes to religion and as humans we do tend to stroke our egos. But I have to admit an "atheist" co-worker of mine totally caught me off guard with a comment that I was at a lost for an answer. Somehow we were talking about the Noah movie and I told her it must have been interesting to be on the ark back then. And she told me" the Noah story is full of bologna and religious people should tear the story out of their bibles". I asked her why she was so adimant about the authenticity of the Noah story? And she said"If Jehovah is so all loving as people believe, then why did he save animals over babies?" She went on to say there must have been thousands of innocent babies that drowned but Jehovah made sure animals made it on the ark. Why couldn't Jehovah save the babies and let them make it on the ark?" I could not answer this question and I still cannot answer it. It does seem cruel that Jehovah would save animals over babies. So are animals more important to Jehovah then innocent babies? She also made another good point when she said religions argue and fight over trival stuff such as doctrine, greek translations, did Jesus die on a cross, holidays, etc; but they never look at the main thing they should question and that is the bible. I think this girl was right and religious people do turn a "blind" eye to the contradictions of the bible. I cannot believe I even had the nerve to question her when I have always doubted the Noah story. Somehow I just could never swallow it as a jw and as a ex-jw. It just seem so "fairytale" and I have always wondered if it was just a "parable". Posters what do you think of this comment by my coworker? Please no jw-bashing or born-again bashing this is a human question.
-
199
Trinitarians! Who is Jesus Christ's father the Holy Spirit or the Father?
by booker-t inthis is one question that trinitarians try to avoid because they have created a very embarrassing problem.
the bible is very clear when the angel tells mary that holy spirit will overshadow her and she will become pregnant.
the angel does not say the father will overshadow her but the holy spirit will and if the holy spirit is a person that would make him the father of jesus.
-
-
booker-t
This is one question that trinitarians try to avoid because they have created a very embarrassing problem. The bible is very clear when the angel tells Mary that Holy Spirit will overshadow her and she will become pregnant. The angel does not say the Father will overshadow her but the Holy Spirit will and if the Holy Spirit is a person that would make him the father of Jesus. Trinitiarians insist the father is not the Holy Spirit and they are seperate persons in the Godhead. So the trinity doctrine falls apart when it claims the Father is the father to Jesus. Classic answer to this question is for the trinitarians to answer your question with another question. The general response I get is, "This proves the Holy Spirit is a person because how could Mary become pregnant from a non-person? As you can see the trinitarians will totally bypass the question and throw up a smoke screen without answering the question. Jehovah created the universe so it would not be a problem to create an embryo in Mary without the use of male sperm. Since Jehovah gave Jesus life this is why he is Jesus' father. He used his holy spirit to cause Mary to become pregnant. Jesus never calls the Holy Spirit "father" in the bible and if the Holy Spirit is a seperate person from the father he would have to be called Jesus father. This would cause the trinity doctrine to have 2 Fathers in the Godhead.
-
15
If the earth is going to burn up as Born Agains teach would that make Jesus a "false prophet"?
by booker-t inas i have mentioned here for many years there are some things i totally disagree with the wt society on but one thing i do believe they have right is that the earth is going to last forever.
one thing that has always amazed me with born agains that teach the earth is going to burn up is the scripture where jesus says "the meek will inherit the earth".
this is clear and plain and why would jesus outright "lie" about the earth if he knew it was going to burn up?
-
-
booker-t
As I have mentioned here for many years there are some things I totally disagree with the WT society on but one thing I do believe they have right is that the earth is going to last forever. One thing that has always amazed me with Born Agains that teach the earth is going to burn up is the scripture where Jesus says "the meek will inherit the earth". This is clear and plain and why would Jesus outright "lie" about the earth if he knew it was going to burn up? It would also make him a false prophet because he would be promising something that was not going to happen. Born Agains I believe are totally hopeless when it comes to Biblical interpretations because they see a verse and will rewrite the verse in their heads. Then they have the nerve to accuse the WT of the very thing they do themselves. And to squash the born again argument that this is only an OT teaching Jesus states this in the book of Mathew in the NT. The born agains have created this dilema because they send everybody to heaven or hell and the earth is just in their way.
-
-
-
booker-t
I was talking to a man who was trying to get me to believe Jesus took his body back to heaven(bodily reserrectioner) and he would focus on some misapplied "proof text". His favorite passage was Act 2:31 where Luke says the world would be judged by a "man". He argued that this was written many years after Jesus returned to heaven and this proves Jesus is a man of flesh and bone. In 10 seconds I totally caused his house of cards to crumble when I asked him to explain how Jesus(as a man) is going to battle Satan and the demons(who are powerful spirits)? The bible tells us man is made lower then the angels so I asked him is Jesus lower than Satan and his demons? This man fumbled and fumbled and he tried to go to another passage. But I wanted him to stay on point. I showed him the many passages in the bible in the NT where Jesus is called the "Lamb" in Rev and this was written years after Jesus returned to heaven. I asked him is Jesus an animal in heaven. He cried out "no this is symbolic" I then asked him is Jesus also symbolic in Rev. How can you say parts of the verse is symbolic and parts is real. Either Jesus has a body of a Lamb or Act 2:31 does not prove anything. And then I showed him Galatians 1:1 and asked who is Paul an apostle of? Galatians says Paul is not an apostle of a man but of Jesus Christ. So either Paul was lying to the Galatians about Jesus' nature or there is an error in the bible at Gal 1:1. Because if Jesus is a man in heaven then Paul was in total error.
-
-
-
-
46
Doesn't the ARMAGEDDON teaching foster a MORBID view of the future?
by Black Man ineven when i was dyed-in-the-wool j-dub, i felt the armageddon teaching was one of the most morbid concepts to be hammered into the psyches of jws.
think about it, only jws would survive this catastrophe, which translates to roughly .001 percent of the population would survive while everyone else would die a horrible death.
that includes people who do good things and are good people, but are just not jws.
-
-
booker-t
BlackMan I totally agree with you on this point. I remember spending most of the mid 70s scared to death in elementery school hoping Jehovah would spare me and not kill me at the Big A. It is amazing how much damage this doctrine does to the young mind. You spend most of your youth feeling disgusted with yourself and believing you are not a good person. When 1975 came and went I had to go back to school in 1976 and tell all of my classmates God spared you in 75 so you better clean up your lives. It is amazing to me now how much mind controll there is in religions. Now that I am finishing up my Masters degree in psychology a religion or church cannot pull nothing over my eyes now.