i'm seeing tons of comments from sad jws on my facebook feed saying that the beloved golden calf jw.org is offline.. what are you seeing when you try it?
*crosses fingers* i wish it could never ever return.. are they getting too much traffic to support?.
work of hackers?
Ignoranceisbliss:
According to isitdownrightnow.com it has been down for over 9 hours.
According to isitdownrightnow.com, jw.org is still down 15 hours later, even though the site is actually available. That probably means Watch Tower have started blocking ping requests (ICMP).
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.
Bart Belteshassur:
AnnO Haggai, during the 2nd year of Darius, claims that Jehovah states that his house is still a waste whilst the returnees have build their own own homes 1:9. This shows that the returnees have made no effort to build his house but have built their own instead, and planted crops which Jehovah with held the dew from. He continues to say that Jehovah then rouse up the spirit of Zerubbabel and Joshua and all the people and then they began the work on his house. This indicates that this was the first they did any work on the house, other wise he would have said continued.
It's easy to have this mistaken impression if Haggai is read in isolation. However, when all the available sources are considered together, it is evident that work on the temple foundations began in Cyrus' second year, then construction was interrupted, and was later resumed with greater impetus in Darius' second year.
Ezra 4:1-7 explicitly states that temple work began during the reign of Cyrus, and then was halted during Cyrus' reign, remained on hold throughout the the reigns of 'Ahasuerus' (Cambyses II) and 'Artaxerxes' (Bardiya), and then resumed in Darius' second year.
When the enemies of Judah and Benjamin heard that the returned exiles were building a temple to Jehovah the God of Israel, 2 they immediately approached Ze·rub′ba·bel and the heads of the paternal houses and said to them: “Let us build along with you; for like you, we worship your God and we have been sacrificing to him since the days of King E′sar-had′don of As·syr′i·a, who brought us here.” 3 However, Ze·rub′ba·bel and Jesh′u·a and the rest of the heads of the paternal houses of Israel said to them: “You have no share with us in building a house to our God, for we alone will build it to Jehovah the God of Israel, just as King Cyrus the king of Persia has commanded us.”
4 Then the people of the land were continually discouraging the people of Judah and disheartening them from building. 5 They hired advisers against them to frustrate their plans all the days of King Cyrus of Persia until the reign of King Da·ri′us of Persia. 6 At the beginning of the reign of A·has·u·e′rus, they wrote an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem. 7 And in the days of King Ar·ta·xerx′es of Persia, Bish′lam, Mith′re·dath, Tab′e·el, and the rest of his colleagues wrote to Ar·ta·xerx′es the king; they translated the letter into Ar·a·ma′ic, writing it with Ar·a·ma′ic characters.
Josephus (Against Apion Book I, chapter 21) also states: "in the second year of the reign of Cyrus its foundations were laid, and it was finished again in the second year of Darius."
If deferring to a claim of 'scriptural infallibility' (without basis), interpreting Haggai 2:15 literally means calling Ezra a liar, invalidating the premise anyway. On the other hand, hyperbole is frequently used in the Bible, and there is no reason why it should not be applied to Haggai's description.
due to the recent postings about the #3 edit ranking for the jw wikipedia page, (.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/scandals/282138/1/interesting-article-about-wikipedia-edit-wars-jws-rank-near-the-top-of-religious-editing#.u95gnn-9ksm.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/282124/1/wikipedia-jw-editing.
I have a special place in my heart for you Jeffro . Keep up the good fight!
Awww... thanks.
due to the recent postings about the #3 edit ranking for the jw wikipedia page, (.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/scandals/282138/1/interesting-article-about-wikipedia-edit-wars-jws-rank-near-the-top-of-religious-editing#.u95gnn-9ksm.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/282124/1/wikipedia-jw-editing.
baltar447:
If this is the guy, then he's an apostate. So that's cool that he's got that many edits, he probably makes a hobby of fixing white washed edits from the WTBS.
Incorrect. Being an "apostate" would require having previously believed JW teachings.
due to the recent postings about the #3 edit ranking for the jw wikipedia page, (.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/scandals/282138/1/interesting-article-about-wikipedia-edit-wars-jws-rank-near-the-top-of-religious-editing#.u95gnn-9ksm.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/282124/1/wikipedia-jw-editing.
ADJUSTMENTS:
I decided to do a little digging and came up with the name Jeffro77 who has more than 20,000 edits on the JW Wikipedia site.
'20,000 edits on the JW Wikipedia site'? That's obviously false.
Analysis of the user's edits (https://tools.wmflabs.org/supercount/index.php?user=Jeffro77&project=en.wikipedia) indicates:
Unique Pages Edited: 2,527
Average edits per page: 8.27
Live edits: 20,898
There are not anywhere near 2500 JW-related pages, so the editor obviously can't have 20,000 edits on JW-related articles.
The editor has 1553 edits on the main JW article. The remaining approx. 8300 edits of article pages are divided among over 2500 different articles. Most of the editor's edits are on various discussion pages.
first of all i want to express my sincere gratitude to atlantis and his good friends for making this 2014 book available.. ------------.
as i see it, and i am absolutely open to contradiction, the wts appears to be giving another new meaning to this generation.
this time the term means all of his anointed followers, including his immediate disciples.
There's no reason to believe that there is any special significance at all to the 'gospel' stories about Jesus, all written decades after the alleged events, containing a hodge-podge of unoriginal stories re-attributed to Jesus.
Aside from that, there is no reason to re-interpret the use of "generation" attributed to Jesus as anything other than the usual use of the word.
Any attempt to apply anything at all from the 'gospels' to 1914 is entirely baseless. Although it is amusing watching the Watch Tower Society re-hash their ridiculous superstitions.
(And it's mildly disturbing that the lives of dead JWs are represented by a brown smear.)
hi,.
please review my article (so far) on the quotes in the creation book.... thanks!.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/trsrdw4ojs9fec7/quotes%20in%20the%20book%20-%20formal%20article.pdf.
Looks good so far! Please keep up the good work. :)
found in 2000 with a group of antiquity smugglers this bible contains the gospel of barnabas according to the report in the national turk.. written in aramaic this gospel account was omitted by the church during the period of the council of nicea.. the text maintains a story similar to islam regarding jesus being a great prophet.. is has a reported value of $28million and is said to be in the museum of ankara.. http://moorishharem.com/culture-detail/1500-year-old-bible-that-jesus-christ-was-not-crucified-vatican-in-awe/.
.
Cold Steel:
So, who was the man's father and mother? And who was the father and mother of the woman?
These questions seem to indicate a misunderstanding (or no undertanding) of the term "most recent common ancestor". The parents of such an individual would also be a common ancestor. But they're not the most recent. Any two specific people may have a more recent common ancestors (especially if they're of the same ethnicity), and this is why it was previously thought that the most recent common male ancestor was more recent, because it had not yet been established that that individual wasn't common to everyone.
A similar common misunderstanding involves confusion about the fact that the most recent common male ancestor doesn't have to be alive at the same time as the most recent common female ancestor.
just heard from an elder.
he told me that there is another change to be announced in august.
he didn't know more about it.. any other info?.
just heard from an elder.
he told me that there is another change to be announced in august.
he didn't know more about it.. any other info?.
It is likely that the two will be merged into one new 32 page monthly mini-magaziine designed specifically for the public.
AwakeTower!
Happifyingly resplendent, and aluminum-free
