Posts by rassillon

13

JW and the Year 0

by GermanXJW in

i am afraid this got a bit lost in this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/116944/1.ashx.

so i start a new thread.. the wts claims in the revelation-book on page 105, (footnote in the box):providentially, those bible students had not realized that there is no zero year between "b.c.

" and "a.d." later, when research made it necessary to adjust b.c.

rassillon

Thanks for pointing me to your thread. It appears that there was atleast some understanding of no zero year. I guess... Or maybe they were just confused ;) -r

20

The ZERO Year.....red herring?

by rassillon in

i have been researching and studying the 607/587/1914 thing for a while now.

not nearly as knowlegeable as leolaia alanf, etal.....

but, even though i have learned to question almost everything, i haven't really questioned the assertion that russell did not realize there was no zero year.

rassillon

OK, Alan, I guess I am just dense or something...

which, as we have shown, was 606 B.C. Consequently, in A.D. 1, 606 years.

That quote from above seems right?? No?? 1AD is 606 years from the beginning of 606BC? Am I getting the October to October thing confused? From Jan 1st 1BC to Dec 31st 1AD is 2 years right?

606	607		1
605	606		2
604	605		3
3	4		604
2	3		605
1	2	BC	606
1	1	BC	607
2	1	AD	608
3	2		609
4	3		610
5	4		611
1910	1909		2516
1911	1910		2517
1912	1911		2518
1913	1912		2519
1914	1913		2520
1915	1914		2521
1916	1915		2522
1917	1916		2523
1918	1917		2524
1919	1918		2525

I made the above in excel real quick (lots of rows hidden or it would be just too long) Anyway, am I confusing myself because I am looking at whole years and not the Oct to Oct as a year overlapping standard calendrical years. Thanks for the input guys! -r

20

The ZERO Year.....red herring?

by rassillon in

i have been researching and studying the 607/587/1914 thing for a while now.

not nearly as knowlegeable as leolaia alanf, etal.....

but, even though i have learned to question almost everything, i haven't really questioned the assertion that russell did not realize there was no zero year.

rassillon

I have been researching and studying the 607/587/1914 thing for a while now. Not nearly as knowlegeable as Leolaia AlanF, etal..... But, even though I have learned to question almost everything, I haven't really questioned the assertion that Russell did not realize there was no zero year. I just accepted it. So rarely does the society admit to making a mistake, you just accept that they wouldn't admit to making a mistake they didn't make. Anyway, I got to thinkin' and researching in my REPRINTS and Studies in the Scriptures. Well I found this. "The Time is at Hand" copyright 1889

THE END OF ISRAEL’S SEVEN TIMES

This long period (“seven times,” or 2520 years) of Israel’s punishment is the period of Gentile

dominion—the “Times of the Gentiles.” Since, as we have already shown, the “Gentile Times”

began B.C. 606, and were to continue twenty-five hundred and twenty years, they will end A.D.

1914 (2520-606=1914). Then the blessings recorded in the latter part of the same chapter

(Lev. 26:44,45) will be fulfilled. God will remember and fulfil to Israel the covenant made with

their fathers. Rom. 11:25-27

This may be shown more clearly to some thus:—

Israel’s “seven times” of chastisement

=

2520 years.

They began when the lease of power

was given to the Gentiles, which, as we

have shown, was 606 B.C.

Consequently, in A.D. 1, 606 years.

of their period had passed, and the

remainder would indicate the A.D.

date, viz.,

1914 It appears that Russell was quite aware that there was no zero year. I have not been able to find anything as of yet to indicate that he made the mistake of including a zero year in his calculations. Does anyone have any references to any of his actual writings which demonstrates his inclusion of a zero year? AlanF, JWFacts, Nark...Others??? Thanks.

35

on the trinity

by drew sagan in

i was just wondering what the opinions those on this board regarding this topic.

i know some have moved towards more orthodox theology, others have not.

curious as to what the opinions are of this.

rassillon

drew,

interesting subject. the trinity was the subject on which I gave my first public talk. people thought I was crazy because it is considered a hard subject, I guess I am a little crazy.

Anyway, When I believed that JWs were "GOD'S" organization I accepted their view. I still am not a trinitarian buy my perspective on if it is important or not has changed. I do believe we as humans try to reduce everything down to the simplest absolute. We are never satisfied with an explaination. With the nature of Jesus, etal I just don't think we have enough information to make these assertions with any sort of certainty. If it were important for us to believe something it would have been clearer in the bible. If someone wants to believe it that is fine with me, if someone doesn't want to believe it that is cool too. It is too difficult for some of us to be satisfied with saying "I don't know".

As with many other teachings which people fight over I think they are just arguments over words that benefit no one and distract from the real message of the bible and Jesus teachings.

-r

24

Long time lurker...first time poster

by Dagney in

jw
friends

i've been reading here for a while now.

i kept having problems logging in...so i hope that is over now.. i'm a fader, 5 years this summer.

my family came in in the 30's, and most all still are in... po's, elders, reg pios, pillars...you know the story.

rassillon

here here, Welcome!!!!

16

Torture stake not cross!!!

by kgav8r in

jw
friends

i'm going to try to word this carefully so that we may all understand.

the writers of the bible used a word that the wts interprets as stake.

if this word does indeed mean stake, then what word should the bible writers have used to mean cross if it is not the word the wts interprets as stake?

rassillon

"Firstly the roman bigus had two soldiers one dickus and one flexus attach the two pieces of the cross together. The Longer "body" of the cross was approx 12 ft long. The shorter crossing member was 5ft 3 inches. The two pieces were slightly notched to make attachment similar and provide a more finished look. They used 4 nails to secure the attachment point after the notches were set etc..." Mathew 28:1-50

Sounds very monty pythonish to me!
It doesn't matter what he died on.
Oh and that is a good question, what would be the right word?

15

Trinity - HELP!!!

by Hamboozled in

since being in the jw org for close to 35 years (from infant) and recently leaving i have been studying topics like the trinity because i was never allowed to before.

i'm getting so many mixed reviews from the scriptures of whether the trinity is possible or impossible.

" and john 1:18 "no one has ever seen god, but god the one and only, who is at the father's side, has made him known.

rassillon

Flash : Coolhand, Etal...

to be fair I will state that I personally don't believe in a trinity.

My perspective on the particular conundrum of why the HS gets apparently greater importance is that if the HS is GOD's commands in action, someone sinning against the HS would be activly "knowingly" working against GOD's WILL. But sinning against GOD could be something that in done unknowingly, thus GOD being willing to forgive that.

But I stand in the overall understanding of the trinity is that for us at this point it just isn't important and just distracts from the real message of the bible.

regards,

-r

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.

i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!

http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm

rassillon

To everyone,

I have tried to edit my post several times to reduce the font but I just get an error. Hopefully that will be resolved by the admins.

I apologize, I was in a bad mood (long story bad day) and the fact that thirdwitness LIED about ME and said I was doing something I was not got to me.

Sorry.

Now thirdwitness:

You lied about me and several others. I have overcome your logic several times and so have others. But what you do can be likened to a little kid who puts his hands over his ears and runs around in a circle and yells LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU....when someone makes a point.

You ARE dishonest. You will not answer questions when you know they will hurt your position. Thus you have no position.

You REFUSE to discuss this matter in a reasonable manner.

I would be happy to discuss this with you and we can examine things point by point if you are willing to answer questions put to you. If you have the truth you have nothing to worry about.

But I know, YOU know and most everyone else knows that you will never agree to this because you have proven that you will not discuss things in a reasonable manner. You will only discuss things in a way that allows you to spin them in your favor.

I challenge you to discuss some ground rules and then once they are set abide by them.

But I know that you wont because without lying, red herrings, and other such deceptive ways you have NO argument.

This saddens me too because I am still a Ministeral Servant and in good standing with a congregation. It is not an easy thing to accept that you have been taught a lie all your life and trust me I am one who is very very hard to have his mind changed. After a good two years of research trying to find things to support my beliefs I had to accept the facts, 607 is a farce. But I invite you, I entreat you, prove me wrong with reason, not deception, twisting, and ignoring of facts.

-r

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.

i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!

http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm

rassillon

thirdwitness, you are one of the biggest idiots that I have ever had the displeasure to come across.
I know I am calling names, I do this because you have lied - construed - misrepresented - acted dishonestly - etc - etc - etc
You do not know how to discuss something is a reasonable manner. Everyone was civil with you until you repeatedly ignored valid points that they made and important questions which required you to answer. You continued to reply with poor summerization of others arguments and that make a poor reply to that.

In another prophecy about Tyre Ezekiel said Tyre would never be rebuilt but it was, therefore since the Tyre prophecy is figurative then the Egypt prophecy must be figurative.

Rassillion said: The prophecy about Tyre did not get fufilled during this time period. In fact the Insight book indicates it did not until several hundred years later.

WHY then do you claim that this 40 years for Egypt must be fufilled during this time period.
AlanF concurs: The reason is that every possible way cannot contravene the simple fact that a literal fulfillment of a crucial part of the prophecy about Tyre failed, and that once that is established, all bets about the "40 year prophecy" for Egypt are off. And AlanF says: Now, if there exists in a Bible book an unambiguous prophecy whose fulfillment ("the city will never be rebuilt") can be directly observed today to be false (the city exists as a vibrant community), then other prophecies in that book that are contradicted by solid historical data are extremely likely to be false, or they were never intended to be fulfilled literally. Ezekiel's "40 year prophecy" is a case in point.... You're well aware that you cannot wiggle away from the simple fact that Ezekiel's prophecy about the ultimate fate of Tyre was false, and therefore that everything else he prophesied is called into question.

Jeffro: He is pointing to the fact that there is no reason to take the 40 years as a literal period applied specifically to Egypt, just as there is no reason to take Tyre's 70 years as a literal period applied specifically to Tyre.

In the above poor attempt to prove yourself correct you LIE and IMPLY about what me and others were ASKING YOU. You said we are saying something MUST be happening. When we are ACTUALLY ASKING you to explain WHY you say something else MUST be despite the evidence that similar prophecy in the SAME book was figurative.
YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE
YOE DON'T DARE HAVE AN HONEST DISCUSSION

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

YOU ARE A LIAR SEE ABOVE

Edited by request.

601

For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled in

just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.

i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!

http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm

rassillon

Norm, That is some great information. Thanks for posting. I have only relativly recently really understood the deception by the WTB&TS. I am not nearly as versed in it as some but it seems everything I research just reaffirms that the WTB&TS has lied to me. Big Thanks to AlanF, Leolaia, Auld Soul, Norm, and all the rest of you who should understand that you are really doing a great service in presenting this information. Not forcing anyone to believe you but letting FACTS stand on their own merit. I would give all you guys a big hug if I could. I would also like to thank scholar and thirdwitness because of your refusal to debate, discuss, whatever you want to call it, in a fair and reasonable manner like the above mentioned people, you have proved that you are not interested in truth but in pushing your own agenda. My favorite bible character was Phineas, because he stood for truth and tolorated no rivalry to Jah. You abviously don't feel that way because you would have the faith and character to stand against anyone who apposed truth, thus ultimatly Jehovah. There is no falsehood with Jehovah. Scholar and Thridwitness you two betray your true intentions and that is to support, NOT JEHOVAH, but the Watchtower, NO MATTER WHAT. You have the same mentality as a suicide bomber. Peace be with all of you, and please Alan, Leo, etal... Please Please don't fade away from this subculture, you are needed! I am sure some of us chil-rens will grow up and fight side by side with you but it is allways fun to watch yet another Jahesbola Witness get ripped another A**Hole by you guys. -r ding ding ding - The Winners in this corner, AlanF, Leolaia, Jeffro..... Hey Hey, can someone pick thirdwitness and scholar up off the mat? They are bleeding everywhere.