Hi there, this is Bert Schroeder...I`m here to...pass me that scotch, would ya...yes yes, the gentile times (takes a zip)...1874..no, we changed that, 1914...yes yes, they ended in 1914...no wait, they began then...I mean they ended then...I mean the beginning ended then, and then it began again (takes a zip)...ah goddamit, that`s water into wine for ya...thank you Jehova in the name of your son Jesus Christ...yes yes, began in 1914 and then ended in 1874 with an invisible end and beginning, and we counted backwards forwards til the beginning of the end that begun with invisible presence in 607bs which was later changed to 587 bs after the lord returned invisibly in...(takes a zip)...the Armageddon that was to take place in 1925, but we applied the really stupid ancient people-rule and counted backwards forwards till 1975 and crapped our pants...(takes a zip)...darn it, I just crapped my pants...NURSE!?
Hellrider
JoinedPosts by Hellrider
-
34
Challenge to the Watchtower Society
by Farkel inhey, you big boys in brooklyn.
you read this board.
i have yet another challenge for you.
-
-
-
26
Justification of misquotations
by gringojj ini am seriously considering taking on a jw with the issue of misquotations especially the creation book.
my question is does anyone know what his reaction is going to be?
its a strange situation because theres really no question.
-
-
Hellrider
I agree with Blondie. I doubt you`re ever going to get anywhere,it`s like talking to a brick wall. However, I do it too, when I meet them, or they ring my doorbell (I`ve moved to another town, so they don`t know I grew up in that stuff here). By the way; I remember this one particular "scientific proof" of creation, that we were taught. The argument goes: "The human eye is made up of...billions of different parts..(don`t remember the actual number, but the arguemt starts something like that) ...a clock/watch is made up of...1000? parts (don`t remember the actual number)...the laws of mathematics show us that if we were to put all the parts of the watch in a bag, and shake it, it could be shaken for millions of years, and it still would not assemble into an actual watch by itself...what then with the human eye,consisting of so many more parts, could the eye have been constructed by itself?"
...that`s how the argument basically goes, although I don`t remember the actual numbers. I remember I thought a lot about this particular example, and I think it was in the creation book. Anyone remembers this particular argument, and where it was?
-
47
How do they explain 607?
by gringojj ini am thinking of taking on a jw with the 607 question.
my problem is that i dont really understand the whole thing.
has there been a post in the past that tells how to argue it?
-
-
Hellrider
Wooow, but after having thought about what I wrote in that previous post, I think I get it now, and you`re right! Because secular science of course uses the same chronology to set the 539-date, as they use to set the 587-date. So the JWs ARE in fact using the same chronology to set 539 and their supposed date 607, and that can`t be done, because to get to the 539 date...(ok, here my brain overloaded, but I see the point!)! You`re right, Alwayshere. And the point is that by accepting SECULAR sources to set 539 (and that`s of course the only way it can be done), they ARE shooting themselves in the foot. Because if they were to insist on 607m that would make 539 wrong, as they have already accepted using the babylonian chronology. Ah, finally I understand this shit.
-
47
How do they explain 607?
by gringojj ini am thinking of taking on a jw with the 607 question.
my problem is that i dont really understand the whole thing.
has there been a post in the past that tells how to argue it?
-
-
Hellrider
Woooow, hold your horses there Alwayshere, I got out at 17, amd now 31. Noone here is making excuses for them, for my own part, I`m just trying to figure out how to debate them, if they ever ring my door bell (although I know it`s like talking to a brick wall). And we know all the UN-stuff. Just trying to learn the doctrine I guess I should have learned back then, but was to bored to pay attention to (zzzzz). The point is: IF the jews returned in 539, and the Bible CAN be interpreted to say that they were gone for 70 years, AND the following is true: That the Bible does NOT say that in the year xxx of king something-something, the jews were kicked out, IF that is a year in a chronology the JWs have agreed upon in their effort to establish 539 as the year of the return!! - then: 607 (or 609) is an acceptable date, no matter how many secular sources say 587, after all, they believe the world is 6000 years old, contrary to ALL the worlds science, that dinosaurs were made to "salt the earth", dismissing 587 would be no problem, UNLESS it interfers with a chronology that they have put their trust in, to establish the year 539! Do you understand what I`m trying to say? IF thats what they`re doing, then they`re shooting themselves in the foot.
-
14
Another resource
by Justin instrictly genteel - theocratic resources/skk theocratic library, a pro-jw site, now contains publications from the rutherford era, including: the finished mystery (1917), millions now living will never die (1920), the harp of god (1921), deliverance (1926), and creation (1927).
the russell writings are found on this site as well.
link: http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/
-
-
Hellrider
"No, the WTS demands that anytime a man is naked, he is supposed to put his hands on his head so he is not tempted to masturbate."
Well, that never worked with me.
-
13
changes in WT cd rom
by Lot incan any one please give me examples, if such exist, of substantial changes in the cd rom vs the hard copies of mags.
this would prove to be invaluable to me in helping my wife see the deception involved with the wts.
i say substantial because something that was obviously a mistake of minor importance could happen in any electronic transfer of data.. thanks so much,.
-
-
Hellrider
LooooL, that`s so funny. They`re rewriting history again (reminds me of Animal Farm...the WTBTS are the pigs).
-
47
How do they explain 607?
by gringojj ini am thinking of taking on a jw with the 607 question.
my problem is that i dont really understand the whole thing.
has there been a post in the past that tells how to argue it?
-
-
Hellrider
I read that post Alwayshere, but I didn`t understand all of it...and to stillanxjwelder, sorry, should have read the first part of the thread.
Ok, to clear things up, there are some things I want to have clearified. JWs claim the the destruction of Jerusalem and the 70 years of desolation began in 607. That would mean that they returned in 537. Secular sources claim that the destruction was in 587! What I want to know, is: If the were kicked out in 587, and they were gone 70 years, that would mean that they returned in 517. Right? The question is, were they really gone in 70 years? Because, if SECULAR sources says they returned in 537 (but still claim that they were kicked out in 587), I can understand why JWs cling to the 607 date, because no matter what secular sources say, the Bible is still (to them) the source that is considered reliable. Now, it`s of course problematic either way, that they have to depend on secular sources. But what I want to know is, what does science/historians say about the dates I metnioned in this post. Do they know ANYTHING (based on archaelogoy, babylonian texts or whatever) about WHAT YEAR the jews returned? Please, is anyone knows, answer just that question.
-
47
How do they explain 607?
by gringojj ini am thinking of taking on a jw with the 607 question.
my problem is that i dont really understand the whole thing.
has there been a post in the past that tells how to argue it?
-
-
Hellrider
Stillanxjwelder wrote: "Pivotal Date for the Hebrew Scriptures. A prominent event recorded both in the Bible and in secular history is the overthrow of the city of Babylon by the Medes and Persians under Cyrus. The Bible records this event at Daniel 5:30. Various historical sources (including Diodorus, Africanus, Eusebius, Ptolemy, and the Babylonian tablets) support 539 B.C.E. as the year for the overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus. The Nabonidus Chronicle gives the month and day of the city’s fall (the year is missing). Secular chronologers have thus set the date for the fall of Babylon as October 11, 539 B.C.E., according to the Julian calendar, or October 5 by the Gregorian calendar.
29
Following the overthrow of Babylon, and during his first year as ruler of conquered Babylon, Cyrus issued his famous decree permitting the Jews to return to Jerusalem. In view of the Bible record, the decree was likely made late in 538 B.C.E. or toward the spring of 537 B.C.E. This would give ample opportunity for the Jews to resettle in their homeland and to come up to Jerusalem to restore the worship of Jehovah in "the seventh month," Tishri, or about October 1, 537 B.C.E.—Ezra 1:1-4; 3:1"
ok...well, that brings us to 607 bc again then, doesn`t it. If they had been gone for 70 years, as the bible says, that brings us to 607 bc. Well, then either the Bible or secular sources are wrong, and if you`re a JW, you`re of course going to believe the Bible. (After all, they believe the world is 6000 years old, contrary to literally tons of evidence that is is a bit older than that....) In that case, their 607-date makes sense after all...doesn`t it?
(I`m so confused on this issue right now, that I`m about to give up..)
-
47
How do they explain 607?
by gringojj ini am thinking of taking on a jw with the 607 question.
my problem is that i dont really understand the whole thing.
has there been a post in the past that tells how to argue it?
-
-
Hellrider
LoLs @ farkel for the explanation, I loved it! "Really stupid ancient people RULE" - LOOOOOOOOOL.
(but my point was that on one or several occasions there HAD to be a date that JWs got from secular historians, a set date on which king something-something ruled, a date that could ONLY be established by secular historiy, and you showed that they did).
-
47
How do they explain 607?
by gringojj ini am thinking of taking on a jw with the 607 question.
my problem is that i dont really understand the whole thing.
has there been a post in the past that tells how to argue it?
-
-
Hellrider
By using secular sources. Every once in a while, some JW or someone still believing JW doctrine shows up, claiming that the BIBLE says that the exile began in 537 bc. But the Bible doesn`t say that (of course, Jesus hasn`t been born yet), it only says that "in the xxx year of the reign of king something-something, the people of Judeah were thrown out on their ass". Whatever year THAT means, has to be established by secular sources (babylonian chronology). So whatever and however the JWs turn and twist this, they HAVE to put their faith in secular sources EITHER WAY! The starting year of the desolation CAN NOT be determined by Biblical sources anyway, that would be impossible. So either way, the JWs are screwed.