SBF, I found the same link you provided on a google search, but when I hit it, it was just as dead as when I clicked on the link you provided. A search on worldcat reveals that Ahlstrom's work is a 1990 dissertation done at the University of California Santa Barbara, likely before all such dissertations were microfilmed. Someone beside the UCSB library, which holds the lone hard copy available and likely did not make a pdf of it (or it would be on their catalogue entry), must have made a pdf and uploaded on some website which is no longer is hosting the link. Do you have a pdf version in your files that you can share here?
careful
JoinedPosts by careful
-
23
The goal in all this 1918/1919 change?
by careful inas some have recently posted here, there does seem to be a shift going on in their self-interpretation(s) of what happened in 1918 and 1919. if we can look past all the details that emphasize the poor thinking and poor wording (or contradictions/just plain craziness/insignificance) of their message, something bigger seems to be afoot.
they appear to be attempting to redefine the meanings for some "prophetic" scriptures in light of themselves.
1. they are trying to somehow fill the void they have themselves created from their rejecting freddie franz's (ff) type–anti-type postulations.
-
-
careful
-
23
The goal in all this 1918/1919 change?
by careful inas some have recently posted here, there does seem to be a shift going on in their self-interpretation(s) of what happened in 1918 and 1919. if we can look past all the details that emphasize the poor thinking and poor wording (or contradictions/just plain craziness/insignificance) of their message, something bigger seems to be afoot.
they appear to be attempting to redefine the meanings for some "prophetic" scriptures in light of themselves.
1. they are trying to somehow fill the void they have themselves created from their rejecting freddie franz's (ff) type–anti-type postulations.
-
-
careful
Thanks, SBF. Yes, I remember reading those IDs of Russell years ago. I cannot get the link to work. Would you repost, please?
-
40
What if Fred Franz had never existed?
by Magnum inwhat if fred franz had never existed?.
those of you who weren’t around in the days when he was the oracle of jwdom or who at least aren’t familiar with the deeper publications he was responsible for probably won’t be able to comprehend the significance of the question.
i believe he influenced jwdom greatly, and the whole feel of jwdom would have been different without him.. during the 60’s, 70’s, & 80’s (not sure about 50’s), he was considered to be almost superhuman by some (a lot?
-
-
careful
Many of us who were around during Franz’s heyday remember how JWdom was then. It was not shiny and shallow as it is now. Yeah, it was wrong then, too, but it was still different. It was deeper. It had a scholarly feel to it. It was bold and there was more dignity. Individual JWs and the org loved doctrine and deeper discussions back then; they weren’t scared of such as are individual JWs and the org of today. There was excitement in the air; the end of the world and our deliverance were imminent. JWdom attracted some really smart, stable people. I was there; I saw it. I remember the deep, exciting poolside discussions after district convention sessions. The look and feel of JWdom were just so different back then.
Right on, Magnum. I remember these things too.
BTW, FF became the WTS oracle from JFR's death on, long before the 1960s.
-
23
The goal in all this 1918/1919 change?
by careful inas some have recently posted here, there does seem to be a shift going on in their self-interpretation(s) of what happened in 1918 and 1919. if we can look past all the details that emphasize the poor thinking and poor wording (or contradictions/just plain craziness/insignificance) of their message, something bigger seems to be afoot.
they appear to be attempting to redefine the meanings for some "prophetic" scriptures in light of themselves.
1. they are trying to somehow fill the void they have themselves created from their rejecting freddie franz's (ff) type–anti-type postulations.
-
-
careful
As some have recently posted here, there does seem to be a shift going on in their self-interpretation(s) of what happened in 1918 and 1919. If we can look past all the details that emphasize the poor thinking and poor wording (or contradictions/just plain craziness/insignificance) of their message, something bigger seems to be afoot. What is it? They appear to be attempting to redefine the meanings for some "prophetic" scriptures in light of themselves. A few ideas/observations:
1. They are trying to somehow fill the void they have themselves created from their rejecting Freddie Franz's (FF) type–anti-type postulations. They are not as intelligent as he was, in fact, are much dumber, so are struggling to make their new proposals in some way work, at least in their own minds.
2. Many Witnesses have often felt that some small assembly in Ohio during the 1920s seemed too insignificant for a plague in the book of Revelation to have been poured out upon the earth, etc., etc., and that such an interpretation was just too obscure to believe. Likewise FF's ideas that the big gap in Western civilization's history from the end of the first century when the apostles were gone (or the Roman empire falling) to Charles Taze Russell's (CTR) day (or the rise of the "Anglo-American world power") had more significance than FF would allow.
3. What we may be witnessing then is a return to CTR's ideas that people/key figures from the Protestant Reformation (or even earlier) onward, or certain features of Western civilization's history, were foretold in scripture. He identified Luther, Wycliffe, and others with passages in Revelation and the Hebrew prophets. GB 2.0 seem like they may be going back to such a view. Reported on this forum was a post that a Bethel heavy recently made a statement in harmony with this. Furthermore, the Bible display/museum they are working on contains copies of translations they have been collecting that would also be in agreement with this. Evidently if you were some figure in pre-WTS Protestantism and you used "Jehovah" for the divine name in your Bible translation, then you may rate a place in upcoming WTS pontifications of prophecy!
Of course, another factor likely at work now is their interest in maintaining the importance of 1914, so that might somehow figure in here as well.
Just some thoughts...
-
63
Is it possible to decline preaching in the carts?
by Skepsis inhi folks,.
i have a difficult dilemma.
since i'm not pioneering any more, i'm reducing my hours wasted at that artifact known as cart or trolley.
-
-
careful
If you're in the USA, you could grow a beard! Of course, that might be a problem with the family too.
But your comment is revealing on one point: back when those carts first appeared, it was only pioneers and other "highly privileged ones" who could work them. So now it's just about anyone???
-
28
A question for those who still go to the meetings
by no-zombie inand it is ... why do most at the hall prefer to sit at the back and leave front rows empty?.
-
-
careful
In addition to the comments above:
1. Less visibility. If you sit in the front, people behind you can see your every move. What little privacy JWs have can be better preserved is you sit in the back.
2. If you want to duck outside for a breather, it's easier done from the rear.
-
10
Forever Young
by AllTimeJeff inhey everyone.
so this is what 10 years out feels like.
employed, paying bills, and watching the slow demise of planet earth.
-
-
careful
Thanks for stopping in ATJ. I've enjoyed your posts from the past, and thanks for your comments on my post re: the current Gilead (or whatever it's called now) curriculum. You may well be right about Jackson et al. wanting to quietly do away with the type/anti-type stuff of FF. Now there is nothing of depth at all.
It really is remarkable how much has changed in the last decade or so within the org. ANYTHING of depth seems to be gone.
-
45
Are there any doctrines which all Christian religions follow.
by jwfacts ini cannot think of a single doctrine that is so clearly laid out in the bible that every christian sect teaches the same point.
are there any doctrine where there is total consensus amongst all christian religions, including jehovah's witnesses?.
-
-
careful
Do they all collect money?
As for the resurrection, while some believers, of course, ≠ a denomination, there is this:
and the idea is dropping in belief in the USA:
-
3
Had to share this
by careful inforgive me if this has already been posted.
i laughed when i saw it and figured others might enjoy it as well.. .
.
-
-
careful
Forgive me if this has already been posted. I laughed when I saw it and figured others might enjoy it as well.
-
14
Reaching the most distant parts - Geoffrey Jackson praising Bible translators and missionaries as "faithful ones" or even "anointed ones"
by TheWonderofYou inafter we heard some time ago that before the time of russel there was no "faitful slave" or no anointed ones who formed a faitful slave class, now we learn that we dont know if before russel there were not "faitful ones" or "anointed".
indeed jackson says that we know the bible teaches that throughout the history there would be a large number of "sons of the kingdom" ..or anointed ones.. beginning from this month in several projects including a film about christian bible translators who gave an example of "faithfulness" and "discretness" in translating the bible, the christian bibletranslators and missionionaries who used "jehovah" by the way are receiving ultimate praise of the governing body, in the first place at the moment is shown the video about tyndale, wo so is very much supposedly a "faithful one" and perhaps even "anointed" because he loved the bible.. jackson says that those early missionaries of the christendom already "preached the message" before russell.
january broadcast.
-
-
careful
This is part of the preparation for their new "Bible Museum" at Warwick. It's supposed to be some kind of collection of old looking Bible translations from the Protestant Reformation on. The translations are ones that used the name Jehovah somewhere in them. No doubt the faithful sheeple will visit the new exhibit and "ooh and ahh" over the old looking Bibles and feel the org has the truth all the more.
It seems a bit odd to me since the WT publications have long called the people at that time "unfaithful Christendom," a highly derogatory term as we all can remember. Maybe they are now giving some kind of exception to those who produced translations that had the sacred name as Jehovah in them (?). Their thinking: "They must have been okay because they used Jehovah." Or evidently, more than okay, even "anointed"? In the Witness world, there can be no greater approval than calling a person "anointed."