Jeffro

Joined

• started 46 topics
• posted 6,803 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Jeffro

• 
  35

  "would you drink a glass of water if it had just a tiny bit of poison in it?"

  by stuckinarut2 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  no doubt we have all heard that well used "illustration" in public talks etc over the years:.

  "if you were handed a glass of water that looked pure, but were told it has just a tiny drop of poison in it, would you drink it?".

  the society has used that illustration at length to say we should avoid all influences of every part of the world.. but, as we know, the society has had a track record of errors, false ideas and doctrines.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  "would you drink a glass of water if it had just a tiny bit of poison in it?"

  That would basically be the definition of homeopathy. So, no.
  
• 
  13

  AUST: QLD Cairns Post - Tablelands police charge former JW with offences against children

  by darkspilver in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  i believe this has appeared into today's edition of the cairns post print newspaper (saturday 4 february 2017) at the top of page 4 under the headline: "indecent charges for man" - the actual text of the article is apparently the same as the online version below:.

  cairns post - saturday 4 february 2017. tablelands police charge former jehovah’s witness with offences against children.

  an elderly tablelands man and former jehovah’s witness member will appear in court this month amid allegations he molested three young girls from the church more than 25 years ago.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  gerry:

  This is the elder from Mareeba congregation. I would have a guess that Angus is questioning the elder about this case.

  Very damming if it is the same case as in the lead up to this questioning, Angus is asking the elder how do you protect the congregation from an abuser if he is deemed repentant and no one knows he is an abuser.. check it out.

  The Cairns Post article is not the same as the BCG case. In the case involving BCG, her father was found guilty and imprisoned. Though it was also brought out that the father also abused BCG's sisters, the ages reported in the Cairns Post article do not seem to match their circumstances either. It could be the other case mentioned in the linked video, but it's not entirely clear.
  

  It is quite disturbing to learn of yet another case in that small town.
  
• 
  82

  the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

  by pleaseresearch in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  so a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Rattigan350:

  JWs are correct about 607 and 1914. Somewhat. The theory behind it is that Jehovah told David that his offspring would sit on Jehovah's throne forever culminating in Jesus. But when Jesus was on earth he didn't become king. Infact at that time, David's offspring were no longer in power on Jehovah's throne. Did Jehovah's statement fail?

  No, it was paused. The kings in the line of David lost power when they became subject to another government. That happened in 607. In 587 Jerusalem was destroyed. 11 years prior, in 598, Zedekiah became king. 11 years and months prior to that in 610, Jehoiakim became king. Daniel said that 3 years after that, 607, captives were taken. Thus 607 is when the kings in the line of David lost sovereignty for 2520 years until 1914 when Jesus became king.

  Nope. Only one person is ever described as being on 'Jehovah's throne' in the 'Old Testament'. Solomon. No one else. Jeremiah 3:14-17 indicates that even during the reign of 'good' king Josiah, rule from Jerusalem was not considered to represent “Jehovah’s throne”, which was only seen as a future event.

  Additionally, not only is the starting year Rattigan has provided for Jehoiakim's reign completely wrong, but his reckoning of Daniel's reference to 'third year' is also wrong, because it fails to take into account the fact that Daniel uses accession-year dating. The reference to Jehoiakim's 'third year' in Daniel in fact refers to Jehoiakim's paying tribute to Nebuchadnezzar in early 604 BCE, which can be verified by comparison with BM 21946. After 3 full years (604, 603 and 602, all starting from Nisan) of paying tribute, he refused, in early 600 BCE (before Nisan, meaning 601 was not a full year of paying tribute), which can also be verified from 2 Kings 24:1 and BM 21946.
  
• 
  82

  the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

  by pleaseresearch in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  so a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Hoffnung:

  and the city of Babylon was eventually destroyed more than 1000 years ago and has not been rebuilt until today. and nobody is living there. not that i care now, but also in this the bible was right.

  Actually, the area that 'has not been rebuilt' (which has actually been partially rebuilt) only refers to a small area of ruins a few hundred metres across that is preserved as a heritage site. Anyone who thinks that small area was the entire city of Babylon is either unaware of the facts, or extremely dishonest (and apparently they think that the Babylonians as well as all the exiled Jews as well as exiles from other nations - supposedly including the entire population of Egypt for a time - were confined to that small area??!!). The ruins are just outside the city of Hillah, which has a population of a few hundred thousand, and is the administrative city of Babylon Province, which has over 1 million people.
  
• 
  56

  GB bites off more than they can chew!

  by biblexaminer in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  the gb bit off more than they can chew.

  they promised that the nwt revised would be available in so many languages by now, and they have failed miserably.. english stands alone.

  as a result, they are in damage control mode.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  The 2015 article also claims:

  In time, the revised New World Translation will be made available in more languages. Satan tries to block such efforts, but we trust that Jehovah wants to have all his people listen as he speaks to them in clear, understandable language.
  

  Paranoid much?
  
• 
  475

  What is the alternative to JW?

  by Formerbrother in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i mean this with all due respect, i would like to hear from genuine people who think jw have it wrong and then what is the truth?.

  im not talking about silly little quibbles here and there.. is jehovah real?

  the the bible is word?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  God does not need us to believe in Him for His purpose to come to fruition, which would beg the question what that purpose is.

  The existence of a god is an unfalsifiable claim, since proponents of the concept claim that such a deity is a 'spirit' (whatever that means) that is separate in some undefined way to the natural universe. And that is a separate broader issue to then having to establish the existence of the god as represented in the Bible.
  

  Any claim about what the biblical god 'wants' or 'needs' without first providing evidence that the god of the Bible exists is nothing more than philosophical speculation.
  
• 
  27

  The WTBTS' Webmaster Caught In Another Lie!

  by JW GoneBad in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  wt's i. t. personnel have no shame putting this content into their website.

  in the 'frequently asked questions about jehovah's witnesses' section of their website the following appears: .

  how do you know how many are actively witnessing?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  oppostate:

  As our COBE commented during a WT study meeting.
  "Not turning in your service time is worse than watching extreme pornography."

  Not just 'pornography' but "extreme pornography". Sounds like your 'COBE' is trying to minimize the seriousness of something by saying failing to report is 'worse'.
  
• 
  475

  What is the alternative to JW?

  by Formerbrother in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i mean this with all due respect, i would like to hear from genuine people who think jw have it wrong and then what is the truth?.

  im not talking about silly little quibbles here and there.. is jehovah real?

  the the bible is word?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  I would like to hear from genuine people who think JW have it wrong and then what is the truth?

  The premise of the question is a plain old false dichotomy. Many people have religious (or other irrational) beliefs that are unfalsifiable. This includes all the usual claims about the existence of the God of the Bible, souls floating around after people die, etc. People can believe unfalsifiable things all they like - though shouldn't be surprised when other people don't believe their unprovable claims.
  

  But JW end-times beliefs are demonstrably false. They directly contradict what is supposed to be their source material - the Bible. The JW religion is not even a candidate for being 'truth'. It is not necessary to provide any kind of alternative 'absolute' 'truth' in place of something that is not and was not ever true.
  
• 
  16

  Do People Have Spirits? What Do the Early Texts Say?

  by Cold Steel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  for years adventist sects, including the jws, have believed that the dead sleep at death and remain non-existent until the resurrection.

  its strongest argument seems to be text in the non-escchatological book of ecclesiastes in the old testament.

  although a part of the canon of scripture, the book is not written by a prophet, nor is there any prophecy or recognizable doctrine contained therein.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Cold Steel:

  I hope you have something better to do this fine Saturday evening than sit around answering this thread, Jeffro. We just went for a walk, had a nice dinner, filled the car for less than two bucks a gallon and returned to find three responses from you on this topic.

  Huh... I made a few responses in the space of just a few minutes, but for some reason you felt the need to imply that I'd spent the whole day dwelling on your silly thread while you went about much more exciting things like... fuelling your car.
  

  Now, regarding the above, I reckon it all depends on what one means by "demonstrated" and "evidence." I recall the words of Thomas Jefferson who, after hearing an account of meteorites falling over Connecticut on December 14, 1807, was reported to have said: "I would more easily believe that two Yankee professors would lie than that stones would fall from heaven."

  A 19th century politician is not an authority on meteorites.
  

  At that time, even the most learned of scholars would have laughed their heads off at the notion that rocks could fall out of the sky, even though there were credible witnesses who claimed otherwise. In like manner, there are numerous witnesses from all religions and walks of life who claim to have left their bodies, seen and conversed with God, angels; seen visions, and we use various criteria to judge the veracity of what they say. The more skeptical someone is in any given area, whether it be the existence of God, the reality of revelation, life after death, Bigfoot, the Big Bang or the theory of evolution, the more resistance will be exerted as part of the cognitive process. And the more invested someone is to a certain way of thinking, the less resistance will be exerted. I've had personal friends that I've known for years and whom I trust. And though none has ever had a near death experience, they have had experiences that fall into the paranormal range.

  There is evidence of meteorites. Anecdotes are not evidence, and nor is the sincerity of the claimant. It's amusing how you try to shoehorn the 'theory of evolution' into your little list of things about which to be skeptical. There is evidence for evolution (and I do hope you're not abusing the word 'theory' in some unscientific context).
  

  The question of the paranormal is one, the question of the theological is another. It seems to me that if one is true, so is the other. If there are evil spirits roaming the earth, it stands to reason that it is balanced by good.

  Theological claims are a subset of paranormal claims.There is no evidence for either the subset or the superset. Even if 'spirits' did exist, that provides no basis for asserting that 'good' and 'evil' ones would necessarily be 'balanced', nor by what standard said spirits would be judged to be 'good' or 'evil'.
  

  You attempt to explain away near death experiences by saying they're the result of the uncontrolled release of neurotransmitters in the brain. This has never been proven to be the cause of near death experiences, especially when brain activity is flat. Also, this theory cannot explain the exchange of intelligence that takes place -- such as learning things one didn't know, but which are true. Some people can recite conversations that were taking place in other rooms between hospital staff or family members, or scenes they had witnessed many miles away that they were later able to recall in detail.

  Citation needed. I am not aware of any such verified cases carried out under controlled conditions.
  

  Atheists shut out things they can't understand, or don't want to understand. Then they resort to ad hominem attacks and ridicule in an attempt to discredit it.

  You seem to be employing an invalid definition of atheist. Atheists do not believe there is evidence of a deity. That's all. There is nothing precluding any particular atheist from having a belief in any other 'paranormal' phenomena (though many atheists are also skeptical about other things for which there is no evidence).

  Most skeptics examine evidence rather than resorting to ad hominem (which was itself a false ad hominem attack on your part). Skeptics are generally skeptical where there is a lack of evidence.
  
• 
  27

  Kinda Sad Re: Cart "Witnessing"

  by Captain Schmideo2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  slightly redacted for privacy of those involved.. so, this is "park witnessing" in oklahoma.. the parks in this community are basically walking trails and some tatty playground equipment.

  most of the time, sparsely used, and today was a very blustery day.. notice the justifying comment- "quite a few" checking out the cart.

  i am sure they were..... .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  2 + 2 = 5:

  JWs are loving this new cart witnessing from what I have heard.

  Head down to the waterfront, set up your cart, find a comfy seat and wait for two hours.

  Repeat this at weekly intervals and receive everlasting life and many fruit platters.

  And a panda. Obviously.