moggy lover

Joined

• started 15 topics
• posted 797 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by moggy lover

• 
  5

  Witnessess are like...

  by beautifulisfree in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my 'worldly' friend told me this the other day and i thought it was pretty funny.

  jdubs are like mushrooms they are kept in the dark and fed sh!t.. .

  okay your turn- witnessess are like:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  ...... are like a confused godfather:

  They're always making you an offer you can't understand

  Cheers
• 
  4

  researchers and those with access to cd..

  by candidlynuts in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  .

  i'm listening to sickoflies jc committee meeting and the elders use the si book to show how the society gets to the date 607 by using cyrus's date of 537 and adding 70 yrs... could someone post that si article or direct me to a post that already has it posted?.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  Hi Candidlynuts: the thing that we need to remember is that the WTS position on the date 607 BC is arrived at through a unique INTERPRETATION of theirs, and NOT from a historical analysis of the text of scripture. In this respect the crucial text is Jer 25:11. JWs are only permitted to read this text through the tinted glasses provided by the FDS. However, when we actually read the text for ourselves, we discover that TWO facts [and not one as the WTS insists] are spoken of. Here is the text [NWT]:

  1 "And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment"

  2 "And these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years''

  We are now in a position to ask the following questions:

  1 How long was the land [of Judah] to be a devastated place? 70 years? Where does it say that? As you can plainly see, the time period for the devastation is left undetirmined! Yet when you read WTS literature, for ex from Legolas' post the Society ALWAYS, ALWAYS places the 70 years at the period of the devastaion of Judah. Never underestimate the vital importance to the WTS of this misapplication. Time and again they have fooled their own people, and by extension us, with this interpretation.

  2 Then what does the 70 years apply to? Well, just read the text. As you can see the 70 years applies to the nationS [note the plural] who were to be in servitude to Babylon.The context is thus showing that more than just Judah was involved in the prophecy of Jer 25:11.

  As you yourself have noted, the folly of the WTS is simply to add 70 to the year 537 BC to arrive at 607. Their "logic" goes something like this: We know that the desolation ended in 537, and we know from Jer 25:11, that the desolation was to last 70 years [ WRONG! WRONG!], so the desolation must then have begun in 607. See how, from a false premise, one gets a false conclusion?

  CO Jonsson has sucesfully shown that the first of the nations to come into servitude to Babylon was Philistia, adjacent to Judah, when Ashkelon, one of their principal cities fell in 604 BC, in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, not in his 19th as the WTS contends.

  Cheers
• 
  16

  Special WT Issue in 2014 - What articles will it contain?

  by VM44 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the year 2014 will be 100 years after the "end of the gentile times" year 1914.

  .

  in october of that anniversary year, the watchtower will published a special commenorative issue.. any ideas as to what articles that issue will contain?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  No doubt the cover would read "The Generation That Would Never Die - Just Died!"

  cheers
• 
  40

  Another Elder bites the dust!!!!

  by Lady Liberty in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my sister and her husband finally told a elder friend of theirs why they have been absent from the meetings for all these months.

  ) our family has chosen to only use the 607 issue when dealing with the elders.

  because it seems to be the only issue they cannot answer!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  Unfortunately, KW13, there is no one place in the society's literature where you will find the information you are looking for. It takes a bit of searching. Here's what I found:

  1 The "Babylon the Great has Fallen" book has a chart on pg 183 showing the lineage of the Babylonian kings. The chart shows Nabopolassar as the father of Nebuchadnezzar, who in turn was suceeded by his son-in-law Amel Marduk, who in turn was suceeded by another son-in-law, Neriglissar, who was in turn was suceeded by Labashi Marduk, and finally he himself was suceeded by Nabonidus. From this one source we know that the WTS accepts the fact that the Neo-Babylonian Dynasty consisted of exactly 6 kings. No more, no less.

  The book itself does not give the length of the reigns of these kings [naturally, because if you counted the years, you would find it short by 19 years of WTS chronology.]

  2 So to establish the lengths of the kings, you have to go elsewhere in WTS publications:

  A: "Aid" book pg 1212, acknowledges that Nebuchadnezzar ruled for 43 years

  B: "Babylon The Great Has Fallen" pg 184 acknowledges that Amel Marduk [called by his Anglicized name Evil Merodach] ruled for 2 years

  C: Same reference acknowledges that Neriglissar ruled 4 years [ie BTGHF pg 184]

  D Again the same reference acknowledges Labashi Marduk ruled for "about 9 months" [BTGHF pg 184]

  E "Aid" book again acknowledges that Nabonidus ruled for 17 years ending in 539 BC [ Aid pg 1195]

  Adding them up from the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar in 607 BC [as WTS presents it] will leave you short by exactly 19 years leading up to 539 BC!!

  Hope this helps

  Cheers
• 
  36

  Optical Illusion: Can You See The Waterfall?

  by OpenFireGlass in

  1. social
  2. humour
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  Waddaya mean "background" - who's looking at the background??

  Dribble....bribble

  Cheers
• 
  21

  Can Anyone Scan "A People For His Name" by Timothy White?

  by cabasilas in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  just wondering if anyone here has the capability to scan timothy white's book "a people for his name"?

  and then upload it to reexamine.org?

  it would be a great asset to those researching jw history.. cabasilas

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  Oddly enough I came across this site that had the book on-line, however it became impossible to either read or download because it had a big anti-virus window in front warning me that I may be subject to a virus invasion and needed to download a virus scan for my computer.

  It was a while back so I can't remember the name of the site, but I suppose typing in "Timothy White" or "A People For His Name" may produce someyhing.

  Cheers
• 
  36

  "Evil Slave" or Apostate which term do you prefer used on ex-JW's?

  by booker-t in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i hate both terms to describe ex-jws.

  i know most people say "apostate" when they refer to an ex-jw that is an opposer now but some will say "so and so" is an "evil slave" now.

  evil slave sounds so "boogie man under the bed" that i just laugh when i hear the term.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  Nah, sorry, don't like either term. Too restrictive. Facile. I prefer something more .... shall we say...dynamic... something that could even be used as a movie title. Let me seeee...... Howabout: "Renegade" "Freedom Fighter" "False Tower Buster" ..oops a bit theatrical you reckon?

  cheers
• 
  3

  Immortal Soul

  by TheListener in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  touchstone forum is having an interesting discussion on immortality of the soul.

  i've pasted two separate thread links.

  both are very interesting.. wrench, the moderator, is discussing the issue with a poster named letsobeychrist.. it's lengthy but i would be interested in any comments or new lines of thought that letsobeychrist missed.. i'm not letsobeychrist.. http://www.touchstoneforum.com/htdocs/dcforum/dcforumid2/1643.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  My initial response is that this is a debate revolving around the WTS position of the "resurrection"

  Since the WTS insists that at death, a person passes into non-existence, then at the "resurrection" God does not in fact "resurrect" that unique person, since he/she not longer exists in any matrix of reality. The only obvious conclusion, then, must be that the WTS teaches that God "clones" ANOTHER person, a "copy" if you like, of the original, based on the memory pattern that God has of the original.

  The WTS apologist is trying to insist that since the "cloning" is perfect, it is not in fact a ''copy'' but the real McCoy. Allusions are drawn to "hard drives" ''floppy disks" and ''computer programs'' to prove one side or the other.

  The debate will continue. Each one of us has to face the question: When I die WHO is it that God will resurrect, not WHAT is it that will be resurrected.

  If that person who is resurrected is to be REALLY you, then in some way, in some amorphous form, you must survive, to be reclothed with a phisical reality.

  The issue to be resolved is: Does "resurrection" mean merely "coming back to life" as the WTS contends, or does it mean "coming back to life OF THE BODY'' as the Bible seems to suggest

  Cheers
• 
  11

  When did Jesus return?

  by 2112 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i know this has been talked about before but i still find it ...interesting.. if jesus did return in 1914(invisibly) why do the jw still observe passover.

  was it not to be observed until he arrived?

  maybe that is the new light jesus did not come in 1914 he is coming now, and that would explain why this may be the last memorial.. just a thought

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  Darn... that last paragraph but one, should have had a Bible reference: Rev 1:7

  Carry on

  Cheers
• 
  11

  When did Jesus return?

  by 2112 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i know this has been talked about before but i still find it ...interesting.. if jesus did return in 1914(invisibly) why do the jw still observe passover.

  was it not to be observed until he arrived?

  maybe that is the new light jesus did not come in 1914 he is coming now, and that would explain why this may be the last memorial.. just a thought

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  moggy lover

  As Gumby has mentioned above, the WTS draws this hair-splitting difference between "Presence-Parousia" and "Coming-Erchomai" [Don't be fooled by the use of the word "arrive" at 1Cor 11:26, the verse we are discussing. The WTS "translates" this same word as "coming" at Jo 11:56, and 2Th1:10 - which incidently should put to rest the vaunted claim by the WTS that their "translation" is the most "consistent" in being a word-equivalent version]

  According to WTS theology, Jesus had His "Parousia" in 1874, oops I mean 1914, but His "erchomai" will be at Armageddon. So the "anointed" will be partaking of the memorial till Christ "comes", ie at Armageddon.

  Funny, that. Especially since the words "erchomai" and "parousia" are used interchangeably at several passags in the NT. Passages even acknowledged by the WTS.

  At Matt 24:45, the most Sacred Text for the JWs in the Bible [I'm almost certain that the JWs genuflect or kiss their NWT Bibles everytime they read this passage], Jesus tells of the FDS which will be at His "erchomai" vs 44. [Notice how the JWs never actually connect the 2 verses of 44, and 45 together. If the "erchomai" of Christ is future, then inevitably,so is the FDS]

  Since 1874, oops - again I mean 1914, Christ has been seen with "spiritual eyes of understanding", and his followers have been pierced for the sake of an invisible Christ, because he "came" [erchomai] when? at Armageddon? no 1914.

  In maintaining artificial distinctions and propounding doctrines that reflect human wisdom, the WTS has shown how bankrupt its theology is