Posts by Doug Mason

8

Jesus Christ vs Christ Jesus

by runForever in

mentions in the wt.

christ jesus:.

jesus christ:.

Don't be too simplistic over the term "FDS", inasmuch as its meaning has been amended over their history. For example, even though he said he was not keen on the idea, people such as Maria Russell applied the term to her husband Charles Taze.

Of interest, is to determine when they shifted from its meaning as a particular individual to a group. I have personal doubts that Rutherford would be too keen to share his decision-making. A complete autocrat.

Further, until 2013, the term included all Spirit-anointed; it is only since 2013 that the GB has drawn it exclusively to its own group.

There is a difference between data and information.

Doug

8

Now it’s Definite about the FDS and GB being one and the same and When does Jesus return?

by 7Starz in

it was explained that the faithful slave is the governing body, while the domestics are all those who are fed spiritually, whether of the anointed or of the other sheep..

the july 15, 2013 study edition of the watchtower stated on page 22, paragraph 10: in keeping with jesus pattern of feeding many through the hands of a few, that slave is made up of a small group of anointed brothers who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food during christs presence.

throughout the last days, the anointed brothers who make up the faithful and discreet slave have served together at headquarters.

Doug Mason

As far as I had understood, the WTS has had two "arrivals" - one was the past secret "presence" (parousia) and the other is the future "coming" (erchomenon) associated with "Armageddon".

I have not unearthed that 2013 Watchtower magazine, but I think they are differentiating between the two Greek words.

A study into the NT usage would show that these two Greek words describe the same event.

Doug

5

The Watchtower Still Depends on "1914"

by Doug Mason in

my latest study, "the watchtower still depends on '1914'" is available at:.

http://www.jwstudies.com/the_watchtower_still_depends_on_1914.pdf .

please tell me of the corrections i need to make.

Doug Mason

I found a couple of grammatical issues. I fixed them and I have given the update as Version 1.1

Doug

5

The Watchtower Still Depends on "1914"

by Doug Mason in

my latest study, "the watchtower still depends on '1914'" is available at:.

http://www.jwstudies.com/the_watchtower_still_depends_on_1914.pdf .

please tell me of the corrections i need to make.

Doug Mason

My latest study, "The Watchtower Still Depends on '1914'" is available at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Watchtower_still_depends_on_1914.pdf

Please tell me of the corrections I need to make. The Study is not exhaustive and I am fully aware that more could have been included.

The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society [WTS] is maintaining its focus on “1914”. In December 2014, the WTS released: What Does the Bible Really Teach? This is a revision of the 2005 publication. Examination of the section under review in this Study indicates that the revision incorporates the text of the WTS’s Bible that was released in 2013. This is further suggested through the revised colour of the book’s cover, which is similar to the colour of the WTS’s 2013 Bible.

The dominant feature of WTS teaching is that God’s Kingdom, which for the WTS means “Government”, was set up in heaven in 1914, and that it assigned the WTS’s Governing Body [GB] to be its sole representative on Earth. The ingrained dependence on 1914 is shown in the 2015 WTS publication Examining the Scriptures Daily, where “1914” is mentioned 25 times.

Doug

6

The WTSs 2520 years did not commence at the same time as their 70 years

by Doug Mason in

the wts says that the 70 years began when the last jews entered egypt (7th month, feast of gedaliah), and that this final exodus took place in 607 bce.. they then say that jerusalem was destroyed 2 months earlier (5th month) and that this event marked the end of the davidic kingdom, which commenced the 2520 years.

on that basis, if my reading is correct, their 2520 years ended on the 5th month of 1914, not in october.. further confusion reigns, since according to parker and dubberstein, in 607 bce the babylonians inserted an intercalary second elul before tishri.

from memory, thiele says that jeremiah used the babylonian calendar.. i know that their chronology and eisgeses are totally fanciful; i am simply addressing the logic in the thinking that they appear to present.. i have elsewhere shown that it is more likely that the time fom the destruction of jerusalem to the exodus into egypt is more likely to have been at least 2 years, perhaps as long as 4, so i am not canvassing that issue here either.. doug.

Doug Mason

St George,

I know this is all unreal WTS thinking, but I am simply pointing out what they are saying, and its implications for them.

The WTS starts the "70 years" from the moment that the last Jews, including Jeremiah, went into Egypt. This took place in the 7th month. (See The Watchtower, October 1, 2011, pages 27-28

The WTS starts its 2520 years from the timing of Jerusalem's destruction. This took place in the 5th month. (Jer 52:12)

The WTS assumes that these events took place in the same year. It assumes, without any evidence, that the first returnees assembled at the site of the destroyed temple in 537 BCE. This took place in the 7th month.

They then count back 70 years to the exodus into Egypt; ergo 607 BCE. They then go back a further two months to date the destruction of Jerusalem in the same calendar year, thereby locating its start of the 2520 years. The have a two month link between the exodus and the destruction, which I say is inconceivable:

http://www.jwstudies.com/Did_Jews_exit_after_two_months.pdf

Ann, I take your point. Thanks.

Doug

6

The WTSs 2520 years did not commence at the same time as their 70 years

by Doug Mason in

the wts says that the 70 years began when the last jews entered egypt (7th month, feast of gedaliah), and that this final exodus took place in 607 bce.. they then say that jerusalem was destroyed 2 months earlier (5th month) and that this event marked the end of the davidic kingdom, which commenced the 2520 years.

on that basis, if my reading is correct, their 2520 years ended on the 5th month of 1914, not in october.. further confusion reigns, since according to parker and dubberstein, in 607 bce the babylonians inserted an intercalary second elul before tishri.

from memory, thiele says that jeremiah used the babylonian calendar.. i know that their chronology and eisgeses are totally fanciful; i am simply addressing the logic in the thinking that they appear to present.. i have elsewhere shown that it is more likely that the time fom the destruction of jerusalem to the exodus into egypt is more likely to have been at least 2 years, perhaps as long as 4, so i am not canvassing that issue here either.. doug.

Doug Mason

The WTS says that the 70 years began when the last Jews entered Egypt (7th month, Feast of Gedaliah), and that this final exodus took place in 607 BCE.

They then say that Jerusalem was destroyed 2 months earlier (5th month) and that this event marked the end of the Davidic kingdom, which commenced the 2520 years. On that basis, if my reading is correct, their 2520 years ended on the 5th month of 1914, not in October.

Further confusion reigns, since according to Parker and Dubberstein, in 607 BCE the Babylonians inserted an intercalary second Elul before Tishri. From memory, Thiele says that Jeremiah used the Babylonian calendar.

I know that their chronology and eisgeses are totally fanciful; I am simply addressing the logic in the thinking that they appear to present.

I have elsewhere shown that it is more likely that the time fom the destruction of Jerusalem to the exodus into Egypt is more likely to have been at least 2 years, perhaps as long as 4, so I am not canvassing that issue here either.

Doug

13

RNWT Bible Needs to be Revised Again!

by The Searcher in

i'll restrain myself from commenting on jw.org's perversion of this scripture - i'll leave that to others.. however, for lurkers and active witnesses here, why not ask one of your local glorious ones to explain how these non-scriptural words found their way into the silver sword, but don't appear in the original greek, or even in the kingdom interlinear.. (2 corinthians 9:13) "through the proof that this relief ministry gives, they glorify god because you are submissive to the good news about the christ, as you publicly declared, and because you are generous in your contribution to them and to all.".

https://www.blueletterbible.org/bible.cfm?b=2co&c=9&t=kjv#s=t_conc_1087013.

.

Doug Mason

Why do they provide any translation of a collection of writings that were selected by 4th century ("apostate") Christendom?

Doug

16

Is this why the book is grey?

by Doug Mason in

the 2014 revised edition of "what does the bible really teach?

" uses the text of the 2013 nwt.

i therefore assume this is the reason for the grey colour of the "bible teach" book.. examples of the adjustments appear at pages 216 and 217 of the book:.

Doug Mason

The 2014 revised edition of "What Does the Bible Really Teach?" uses the text of the 2013 NWT. I therefore assume this is the reason for the grey colour of the "Bible Teach" book.

Examples of the adjustments appear at pages 216 and 217 of the book:

(1) The revised text of Ezekiel 21:26, 27

(2) Use of "tree of enormous height" instead of "an immense tree", to match the change at Daniel 4:10

(3) Use of "1,260 days" instead of "a thousand two hundred and sixty days" to match the revision at Revelation 12:6.

Doug

24

Bible Teach book

by factfinder in

the revised edition of the bible teach book is up on jw.org with a new cover..

Doug Mason

Exactly where has it been revised?

Thanks,

Doug

25

Watchtower 'Experts' on Being Gay?

by jw07 in

have you seen this article?.

the watchtower is trying to be experts on all things having to do with human sexuality.. repressing sexual desires, gay or straight only creates more problems.. http://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/family/teenagers/ask/pressure-to-be-gay/.

.

Doug Mason

SoJo,

Your comment about the force that a piece of paper has reminded me of my paternal grandparents. (I know this story is a total distraction, but it is informative).

My grandparents lived during the Austria-Hungary empire. Austria does not recognise religious marriages; it only recognises civil ceremonies conducted under the auspices of the State. That situation did not interest my Jewish Grandparents: they were fully satisfied that their union had been blessed by their Rabbi.

But as far as the State was concerned, they were not legally married and the Birth certificates of their first 3 children were marked as "illegitimate". Finally, in 1907, when she was carrying their 4th child, they bowed to the State's pressures and they went through a civil ceremony in Vienna. Their children's certificates were retrospectively amended.

It was not unknown for a Jewish couple to go through a civil ceremony after having lived together for 60 years after receiving their Rabbi's blessing. My gradmother was permanently listed as illegitimate because her mother died before her parents had a civil ceremony, only a religious one by their Rabbi.

The power of the State; the power of a piece of paper.

I suppose the legal situation is not dissimilar for modren same-sex couples when it comes to passing on the estate of a deceased partner, or regarding the legal status of their children. Although I think that is addressed in the State where I live, even though same-sex unions are not legal here in Oz.

Doug