Posts by Jeffro

129

Many many books from library on 586/87

by ithinkisee in

i have listed all the books i found at the library that mention 586/87 as the fall of jerusalem.

i was also able to link to all of them (except the first one listed) on amazon.com!

many are out of print or unavailable as new books but you can buy almost all of them used on amazon.com ... some are only $10-12 each!

Jeffro

Scholar

I have been arguing WT chronology on this board for the last three years and not lost a single point to the dark side.

You never gave any reply to several of my posts, such as that at http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/87714/1580169/post.ashx#1580169. If there were a 'points' system, then you lost that one. You also did not respond to the list of problems with the 607/1914 dogma that I posted:

There is nothing in Daniel chapter 4 requiring a secondary fulfilment
The Society does not apply the same rule to the other 'times' mentioned at Daniel 7:25 and 12:7
'Removing the turban' at Ezekiel 21:25-27 is directed to Israel, not Judah
World War I started several months before the supposed October fulfilment
The original text of Luke 21:24 indicates that the 'appointed times of the nations' is a period that began at or after 70AD
Jeremiah said the 70 years were of nations serving Babylon, not specifically exile.
Babylon's king could not be called to account 2 years before the 70 years ended
The NWT rendering of Jeremiah 29:10 is inconsistent with Jeremiah 25:12 and is not recognised as correct by most scholars
Daniel 5:26-31 indicates the fulfilment of the 70 years in 539BC
Judah still had inhabitants in Nebuchadnezzar's 23rd year
The Society is inconsistent in applying the entire 70 years to Judah but not Tyre
It was Persia's beginning to reign, not payment of Sabbaths, that fulfilled the 70 years of Jeremiah
The Hebrew words chorbah - 'devastated', shamem - 'desolated', and za'am - 'denounced', do not require complete depopulation
The 70 years of Zechariah could not have ended in 537BC
Secular records exist for every year of the known Babylonian kings but absolutely no records have been found for the 20-year gap of the Society's interpretation
The Society accepts 539BC as a pivotal date using means it rejects as being unreliable
No source other than the Society recognizes any significant event regarding Babylon and Jerusalem in 607

Did I not and only I commend you for your publication of your list for the Divided Monarchy, a list which approximated the list published by celebtrated WT scholars.

Yes you did commend me, as you should have. Because my list was based on only the bible, naturally the length of the reigns was similar (but not the same) as what is stated by the Society, however the years were significantly different, and were backed up by the bible and secular history. On the other hand the 'Society hypothesis' conflicts with both the bible and secular chronology.

This proves that when it comes to chronology I am in command of the situation because I have nothing to fear from scholars or apostates.

For a start your use of the word 'apostate' is childish and borders on offensive. You also have never properly dealt with many of the contradictions of the Society hypothesis, such as it's weak (and verifiably incorrect) explanation for the alleged discrepancy between Daniel 1:1 and Jeremiah 25:1, it's conflicting application of the 70 years regarding Babylon with respect to Tyre and Jerusalem (and when that period ended), the extreme statistical improbability of having a contiguous period of 20 years of no contemporary records though records exist for every single other year... etc.

WT chronology is correct because it works historically, prophetically and theologically which cannot be said for alternate secular chronologies promoted by secular scholars and apostates.

You have not ever identified any legitimate faults in anything I have countered you with.

49

Called the information desk again about the UN

by skyman in

i have called many times in the past.

this time i was calling for a sister that wanted to know the truth from the society.

the brother from the information desk said they did join but realy they were tricked.

Jeffro

'Tricked'??? Part of being an NGO is to "keep [the UN] informed about your organization's information programme as it relates to the United Nations, including sending [the UN] issues of your relevant publications." One would think they knowingly did that or they wouldn't have remained NGOs for ten years.
I find it difficult to believe that an organisation that has teams of lawyers to make all those groundbreaking freedoms for religion in the courts, fight medical and child-abuse cases, and chase after webmasters who quote their publications would be 'tricked' into signing a document from the UN (who they claim are an integral part of Satan's system) without knowing that "By accepting association with DPI, the organization agreed to meet criteria for association, including support and respect of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and commitment and means to conduct effective information programmes with its constituents and to a broader audience about UN activities."
(Quotations taken from a letter from the UN Department of Public Information regarding the issue of the Watchtower obtaining NGO status.)

129

Many many books from library on 586/87

by ithinkisee in

i have listed all the books i found at the library that mention 586/87 as the fall of jerusalem.

i was also able to link to all of them (except the first one listed) on amazon.com!

many are out of print or unavailable as new books but you can buy almost all of them used on amazon.com ... some are only $10-12 each!

Jeffro

Scholar,
I and others have repeatedly trounced every point you have ever raised in defense of the 'Society hypothesis'. When people state the most significant problems of 607, you simply ignore the facts and parrot the same old stuff about the 'eminent' WT scholars who supposedly rely on the bible, although chronology that fits the bible and is superior to the demonstrably flawed Watchtower chronology has been given.

35

Matthew 24:14 and Preaching in the First Century

by Leolaia in

the eschatological discourse in matthew 24 (derived from mark 13 and paralleled in luke 21) concerns the destruction of jerusalem and what was to shortly follow it.

mark presents both the jerusalem invasion and the coming of the son of man in judgment as closely connected, which reflects the time when the gospel was likely written (i.e.

shortly before or after ad 70).

Jeffro

Not sure how relevant it is (if at all), but it seems suspicious that the gospel of John provides no parallel account of those found in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. Also the gospel of John only mentions the kingdom (in the context of the heavenly kindgom) a total of 7 times, limited to two conversations (with Nicodemus and with Pilate) compared with 86 times in Matthew, 29 times in Mark and 71 times in Luke. It appears that by the time the gospel of John was written, interest/belief in the heavenly kingdom had significantly waned.

16

Ozzie's weekend Poll #143 - Those experiences sessions!

by ozziepost in

jw
friends

dear fellow posters,

we are pleased to advise that mrs ozzie has qualified to serve in the polltaking department.

how pleased we are to see true posters reaching out for further privileges of posting!

Jeffro

Other - nauseated.
It was hard to keep a straight face listening to daughters of elders saying things like 'I wanted to pioneer since I was 2'. Or those nasty school teachers trying to 'pressure' young 'kingdom preachers' to give it all up for some worthless pursuit like finishing highschool.

7

Judical committee?

by Evanescence in

jw
friends

just curious, .

what is a judical committee like?

and as a jehovah's witness would you dread this?.

Jeffro

If a person is found guilty of a sin, but repentent, they might be 'reproved' by the elders, either 'privately reproved' or 'publicly reproved' depending on the supposed severity of the sin and other, (sometimes quite arbitrary) factors.
In both instances, the person would lose their 'privileges', e.g. they would not be allowed to pray in behalf of the congregation, work at the magazine counter, control the audio system, or make comments in meetings etc. (They still have the 'privilege' of door-to-door preaching.)
In the case of a 'public reproof', an announcement is made at the meeting; I think it used to be something like "[name] has been publicly reproved for conduct unbecoming a Christian" and I think the current wording is something like "[name] has been publicly reproved and remains one of Jehovah's Witnesses".)
(If anyone notices that I've missed something, gotten something wrong, or if procedures have changed, please let me know.)

7

Judical committee?

by Evanescence in

jw
friends

just curious, .

what is a judical committee like?

and as a jehovah's witness would you dread this?.

Jeffro

Evanescence,
If the elders decide that the person is unrepentant (using their special psychic powers I suppose) an announcement is made to the congregation.
The announcement used to be that "[name] has been disfellowshipped." More recently they have changed the announcement for either disfellowshipping or disassociating (telling the elders you don't want to be a JW) to simply "[name] is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses". No reason or clarification is given. I think there were legal reasons behind the change, making the announcement seem more innocent, though the result is the same. The Witnesses are then to have nothing to do with the individual, not even saying 'hello' to them.
If however they are a family member still living in the same household, normal family interactions can continue but not 'spiritual discussions'. (However, they can still conduct a bible study with a disfellowshipped [previously baptized] minor if they still live in the family home.)

1

Sodom and the Benjamites

by Jeffro in

has anyone ever noticed the similarity between genesis 19:1-9 and judges 19:14-25?.

it seems that the sodom story was created to provide a reason why the people of sodom were killed by some kind of volcanic event that they couldn't understand, being a primitive society that thought such events must be divine execution.. it also seems that the story in judges was based on the sodom story, and was politically motivated to incite and/or justify hatred toward the tribe of benjamin.. any thoughts?

Jeffro

Has anyone ever noticed the similarity between Genesis 19:1-9 and Judges 19:14-25?
It seems that the Sodom story was created to provide a reason why the people of Sodom were killed by some kind of volcanic event that they couldn't understand, being a primitive society that thought such events must be divine execution.
It also seems that the story in Judges was based on the Sodom story, and was politically motivated to incite and/or justify hatred toward the tribe of Benjamin.
Any thoughts?

13

Ahhhhhhhhh That felt good - great

by Lady Lee in

i am a firm believer that information is power.

throughout my entire childhood and early adulthood either my parents, foster parent, and the wts did a great job of controlling the information i had.

by controlling the information, they controlled me.

Jeffro

'hurt dave',
You realise now that there'll probably be a Watchtower 'life story' article about someone who learned the 'truth' from a torn up Require brochure that someone threw out of their car.

39

Corrupting historical facts

by Hellrider in

at the university of oslo, norway, there is a professor, who is also a jw.

he does not even have a degree in history, he is a professor in semittic languages, still he has now published a book (in norwegian and english, and it`s going to be translated into lots of other languages also):.

http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/chronlgy.htm.

Jeffro

scholar,

do you really think that biblical chronology is something static and cannot benefit by further research?
The date of 607 can only be the best possible candidate for the Fall of Jerusalem and for the Gentile Times doctrine leading to the epochal year of 1914.

These two statements of yours are contradictory. What you really mean is that biblical chronology can benefit from further research unless (and only until) the historians agree with the Society's supposed 607 date.
The following problems also exist in your second statement:

The original text of Luke 21:24 indicates that the 'appointed times of the nations' is a period that began at or after 70AD
Daniel 5:26-31 indicates the fulfilment of the 70 years in 539BC
Babylon's king could not be called to account 2 years before the 70 years ended, making it impossible for the 70 years to end in 537
No source other than the Society recognizes any significant event regarding Babylon and Jerusalem in 607
World War I started several months before the supposed October fulfilment