t33ap80c

Joined

• started 12 topics
• posted 103 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by t33ap80c

• 
  82

  January 15, 2008 Watchtower & The One Mistake We All Made:

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the one mistake we all made.

  and the january 15, 2008 watchtower.

  page 24 the governing body makes the following statement: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  Hi Gary,

  In the past I had heard several times that 1874 was changed to 1914 some time in the 1930's but nobody ever came up with an actual quote until I saw TD's reference in that December 1, 1933 Watchtower. It is interesting how none of the writers of the "Proclaimers" book or the members of Governing Body were aware of that reference. But then again, perhaps it is just another indication that the ones Jehovah's Witnesses look to for spiritual guidance are not as 'sharp' as those men would have everyone (including themselves) believe.

  Fortunately the change doesn't have any effect on the point I make in the book. The incorrect 1874 date is the one Jesus would have noticed during his food-at-the-proper-time examination the Society says he gave them in 1918-1919. According to the above Watchtower the Society didn't come up with the correct answer (assuming that 1914 is the correct answer) until 14 years after Jesus' exam was over. And as everyone knows, the time to pass a test is when it is given, not several years after it is over.

  Don
• 
  82

  January 15, 2008 Watchtower & The One Mistake We All Made:

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the one mistake we all made.

  and the january 15, 2008 watchtower.

  page 24 the governing body makes the following statement: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  Thomas,

  One of the things I noticed about your research is that you quoted from the 1889 Edition of "The Time Is At Hand" where it said that 1914 "will be the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men" on page 77. Most everyone else (including "Bible Students") quote Russell's revised 1916 Edition in which he quietly changed some of the things he had originally said was going to happen 1914. Ray Franz is the only other person who quoted from the 1889 Edition.

  It makes me wonder how you had access to the 1889 Edition. Ray had the Society's library there at the world headquarters at his disposal. Did you also?

  Don
• 
  53

  How FAST can you type?

  by JH in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  take the test and see .

  i remember in high school, i was able to type at 40 words per minute after counting my errors, and they way they counted it, if i remember well, was your total words minus the errors you made to give an approximate speed.. here is the test.

  it's only a fun quiz so don't be mad if i type faster than you .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  If you don't count the mistakes I can type about 5000 words/minute. If you do count the mistakes it drops down to about 10 words/minute!

  Don
• 
  82

  January 15, 2008 Watchtower & The One Mistake We All Made:

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the one mistake we all made.

  and the january 15, 2008 watchtower.

  page 24 the governing body makes the following statement: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  Hello TD (Thomas?),

  I assume that you are the author of the extremely well documented PDF at the address you gave us: http://www.catholic-forum.com/members/popestleo/Historical%20Idealism%20and%20Jehovahs%20Witnesses.pdf

  In "Captives of a Concept" I state that according to the "Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom" book the date of Jesus’ Second Coming was not changed from 1874 to 1914 until 1943.

  But you said, "The Proclaimers book is incorrect on this point." On page 37 of your PDF you quote the December 1, 1933Watchtower where Rutherford clearly stated: "The year 1914 marks the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, the King of glory."

  It is interesting that even the writers of the "Proclaimes" book missed this. One thing it means is that I need to update my book to acknowledge this fact. In my original footnote 38 page 22 I said this:

  NOTE: There is some evidence that Rutherford first mentioned 1914 as the beginning of Christ’s Second Coming in the 1930’s. But the Proclaimers book doesn’t mention any date prior to 1943. Either way it wouldn’t make any difference because the change of date was made long after Jesus’ examination was over.

  It has now been changed to read as follows:

  NOTE:

  Rutherford first mentioned 1914 as the beginning of Christ’s Second Coming in the December 1, 1933 Watchtower, p. 362. But the Proclaimers book doesn’t mention any date prior to 1943. Either way it wouldn’t make any difference because the change of date was made long after Jesus’ examination was over.

  Although I had heard that Rutherford may have changed the date to 1914 sometime in the 1930’s I had never seen the evidence until your PDF. And so I wanted to thank you for bringing this matter to my attention.

  But as my footnote says, as far as the point I’m trying to make in the book is concerned, it doesn’t matter whether the date was changed in 1943 or ten years earlier in 1933. Jesus’ claimed food-at-proper-time examination was over in the spring of 1919. And according to what the Society has been teaching since 1933 their 1874 date would have failed his exam.

  You obviously put a lot of time and effort in the production of your work, "Historical Idealism and Jehovah’s Witnesses - A Critical Analysis of How They Present Their History." I would recommend it to others on the forum.

  Thank you again Thomas,

  Don Cameron
• 
  82

  January 15, 2008 Watchtower & The One Mistake We All Made:

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the one mistake we all made.

  and the january 15, 2008 watchtower.

  page 24 the governing body makes the following statement: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  Hi again Bud,

  NOTE: This is a resubmission of my above post to you. I don't know why most of it was in such small print. I hope I corrected it in this post so that it easier to read.

  ___________________________

  You said, "That certain wrong things were being taught prior to 1919 is irrelevant."

  But their interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47 sure seems to make those pre-1919 teachings relevant. Here is how they explain their relevance in the January 15, 2008 Watchtower:

  "When Christ inspected’ the faithful and discreet slave’ in 1918, he found those anointed ones on earth to be faithful in providing spiritual ‘food at the proper time.’ Hence, Jesus was pleased thereafter to appoint them ‘over all his belongings.’ (Read Matthew 24:45-47)"

  I notice that whether or not they had been considered "faithful" and therefore receive the above appointment was determined solely on the basis of what they had been providing in the way of spiritual food. And that Jesus' appointment was going to be based solely on what they had been teaching down till that time.

  Former President Frederick Franz carefully explained the relevance of those teachings this way:

  "The serving of food, the right sort of food at the proper time was the issue. It had to be according to this that a decision must be rendered by the returned master [Jesus]…On inspecting [the Society] in the year 1919 C.E… Jesus Christ did find the appointed "slave" faithful and discreet in the feeding of his [disciples]… "Could they, by even their latest record [of teachings] down till 1919 prove that they themselves were the composite "faithful and discreet slave" class of Jesus Christ?… The quality of the food itself was to be considered."

  – "God's Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached." See "The 'Slave' Who Lived To See the Sign."

  Again Bud, how can we read these things and conclude that the Society feels that what they had been teaching down till 1919 was "irrelevant"? Can the word "irrelevant" be inserted into either the above 2008 Watchtower statement or in any of Franz’s comments?

  Although you feel that what they had been teaching down till 1919 was irrelevant, apparently the Governing Body feels that what they were teaching was essential to their claim to being "God's faithful and discreet slave organization" today .

  Don Cameron
• 
  82

  January 15, 2008 Watchtower & The One Mistake We All Made:

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the one mistake we all made.

  and the january 15, 2008 watchtower.

  page 24 the governing body makes the following statement: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  Hi again oompa,

  You asked…

  So when/where exactly did WT change the date of Christ presence?

  According to the "Proclaimers" book the date was changed to 1914 in 1943. The footnote on page 133 explains that the change is found in their 1943 book "The Truth Will Make You Free." –

  See also the footnote 38 on page 22 of "Captives of a Concept."

  I noticed that you referred to the "dimmer switch" I mention in the book. But in the book I suggest that the Society doesn’t use a dimmer switch according to the ‘gradual, progressive’ way they interpret Proverbs 4:18. Rather in actual practice they use a simple ON/OFF switch that turns old teachings off and calls them "old light" and new ones on and calls them "new light."

  Don Cameron
• 
  82

  January 15, 2008 Watchtower & The One Mistake We All Made:

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the one mistake we all made.

  and the january 15, 2008 watchtower.

  page 24 the governing body makes the following statement: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  Hi Bud,

  You said, "That certain wrong things were being taught prior to 1919 is irrelevant."

  But their interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47 sure seems to make those pre-1919 teachings relevant. Here is how they explain their relevance in the January 15, 2008 Watchtower:

  "When Christ inspected’ the faithful and discreet slave’ in 1918, he found those anointed ones on earth to be faithful in providing spiritual ‘food at the proper time.’ Hence, Jesus was pleased thereafter to appoint them ‘over all his belongings.’ (Read Matthew 24:45-47)"

  I notice that whether or not they had been considered "faithful" and therefore receive the above appointment was determined solely on the basis of what they had been providing in the way of spiritual food. And that Jesus' appointment was going to be based solely on what they had been teaching down till that time.

  Former President Frederick Franz carefully explained the relevance of those teachings this way:

  "The serving of food, the right sort of food at the proper time was the issue. It had to be according to this that a decision must be rendered by the returned master [Jesus]…On inspecting [the Society] in the year 1919 C.E… Jesus Christ did find the appointed "slave" faithful and discreet in the feeding of his [disciples]…

  "Could they, by even their latest record [of teachings] down till 1919 prove that they themselves were the composite "faithful and discreet slave" class of Jesus Christ?… The quality of the food itself was to be considered."

  – "Captives of a Concept" p. 19

  Again Bud, how can we read these things and conclude that the Society feels that what they had been teaching down till 1919 was "irrelevant"? Can the word "irrelevant" be inserted into either the above 2008 Watchtower statement or in any of Franz’s comments?

  Although you feel that what they had been teaching down till 1919 was irrelevant, apparently the Governing Body feels that what they were teaching was essential to their claim to being "God's faithful and discreet slave organization" today.

  Don Cameron
• 
  82

  January 15, 2008 Watchtower & The One Mistake We All Made:

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the one mistake we all made.

  and the january 15, 2008 watchtower.

  page 24 the governing body makes the following statement: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  Hi oompa

  You mentioned that when you try to bring up some of the Society’s pre-1919 teachings that have changed, your dad brings up some of their teachings that have not changed and then he says, "The Society was more correct than anyone else."

  You then asked, "How to get around this?"

  Page 40 of "Captives of a Concept" says this: "There are some teachings that have not changed since 1919. They include: God’s Name is not "God," God is not a Trinity, the soul is not immortal, hell is not hot, the dead are not conscious and the earth will not be destroyed. But there were others who taught these same things.* If these teachings would have passed an examination by Jesus they would have passed no matter who was teaching them."

  *A footnote explains: On page 622 of the "Proclaimers" book it acknowledges that Russell was not the only one who taught these things but it was just that he did a better job of publishing them than anyone else. See also page 45 under the heading, "Influence of Others."

  What the "Proclaimers" book acknowledges (above) may help you "get around" your dad's present argument, but unless he is ready to face the possibility that the Society may not be "Jehovah’s organization" he will likely come up with some other reason (like Proverbs 4:18’s "new light") that will allows him to continue to believe what he wants (or needs) to believe no matter the Society was or wasn’t teaching down till 1919.

  To help keep me from getting frustrated when this happens I always try to keep in mind what Paul explained to Timothy when he said how we need to be as gentle and mild as we can when presenting what we have learned in hope that "God may give them repentance leading to an accurate knowledge of the truth" about the Watchtower Society "and (then) they may come back to their proper senses." – 2 Timothy 2:23-26

  I was surprised to notice that it isn’t the evidence that we have that will lead them to the knowledge of the truth. It is God giving them repentance that will do it.

  Don Cameron
• 
  82

  January 15, 2008 Watchtower & The One Mistake We All Made:

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the one mistake we all made.

  and the january 15, 2008 watchtower.

  page 24 the governing body makes the following statement: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  The One Mistake We All Made And the January 15, 2008 Watchtower

  Page 24 the Governing Body makes the following statement:

  "When Christ inspected’ the faithful and discreet slave’ in 1918, he found those anointed ones on earth

  (Joseph Rutherford and his associates) to be faithful in providing spiritual ‘food at the proper time.’ Hence, Jesus was pleased thereafter to appoint them ‘over all his belongings.’ (Read Matthew 24:45-47)"

  Question: If Jesus did inspect the Society in 1918 would he have found that the Society had been faithful in providing the right spiritual food at the right time’? The only way to know if the Society could have passed a food-at-the-proper-time examination by Jesus Christ in 1918 is to make the same examination they say Jesus made.

  The one mistake that all former Witnesses and all present Witnesses have made, and the one mistake all future Witnesses will make is the failure to make that examination before deciding to get baptized. As essential as passing that exam is to the Society’s claim to being Jesus’ "faithful and discreet slave organization," nobody checks for themselves to see if the Society could have passed it.

  Even Raymond Franz made this mistake for some 60 years before he finally corrected it in "the late 1970s’" when he began to examine for himself what they Society had been teaching down till 1919 .- Crisis of Conscience, p.138, paragraph 7

  After completing his examination he concluded the following: "It would be an insult to Christ Jesus to say that he selected this organization on the basis of what it was teaching as of 1919." - - In Search of Christian Freedom, p. 145

  It is much easier to correct this mistake today then it was in the 1970’s. Much of the Society’s pre-1919 teachings are now plastered all over the Internet for the whole world to see. But the source of information I like the best is their most up-to-date history book, "JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES: Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom." Although it contains thousands of details that don’t matter, it contains several that do. It’s just a matter of knowing what to look for and where to find them.

  For example, the first surprising thing the book taught me is that the Society’s first three presidents never realized that Jesus’ returned in 1914 to begin his "invisible presence" (assuming that he did return in that year). How faithful could those men have been when God never allowed them to understand when His Son returned? And how discreet could they have been since they all announced the wrong date of 1874 for almost seven decades (67 years)?

  The more the "Proclaimers" book taught me the more I could understand why Ray Franz said what he said. I too cannot understand how anyone could know what the Society had been teaching down till 1919 and still conclude that ‘Jesus would have been pleased thereafter to appoint them ‘over all his belongings as the January 15, 2008 Watchtower asserts.

  The point being that without the above appointment the Society cannot be God's organization today no matter what they are teaching today.

  Don Cameron
• 
  31

  Definitions of Faith

  by Shawn10538 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i just had an interesting conversation, though frustrating, with a student about the subject of faith.

  i have never heard a definition for faith that i could understand.

  every conversation i have had on the subject has only fallen short of establishing what it is.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  t33ap80c

  Narkissos ,

  My understanding has been that in order to confidently believe in something we can not see with our eyes or understand with our mind will require "faith." For example, believing that an invisible God exists requires faith. But in order to be able to believe that God exists requires evidence.

  This seems to be the line of reasoning that Paul used with the Romans when he explained how 'God's invisible qualities can be clearly seen by the world's creation onward.'

  What about that example I mentioned previously that believing that the sun came up this morning does not require faith because we saw it come up this morning. But believing that it will come up tomorrow morning will require faith because we have not seen tomorrow morning yet. And that the reason we can have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow morning is because of the scientific evidence we have to base that faith on?

  How about this:

  What if we have the assured expectation that sun will come up tomorrow morning because as far as we know it has always come up every other morning in the past? If that is not "faith" what would you call it?

  Don