oh no! why another 2 day-no-reply-thread? :(
it seems like wt bashing for fun is way more popular than actually discussing why we CAN bash them...
just found it in the news and wanna know watcha think about it.
its about the 1914 doctrine and why it is false using the bible alone.. 607 bce vs. jeremiah the prophet .
according to jeremiah 52:12-13, the babylonian king nebuchadnezzar destroyed jerusalem and the first temple in the nineteenth year of his reign.
oh no! why another 2 day-no-reply-thread? :(
it seems like wt bashing for fun is way more popular than actually discussing why we CAN bash them...
the perfect man and woman, soon after being created, failed short of god's requirements and so sin was introduced into the world.
according to the watchtower, god's law required a "life for a life" and so a perfect human needed to be sacrificed, i.e., killed, in order for humanity to be redeemed.. my simple question concerning this doctrine is....why?.
how does the death of a human, perfect or otherwise, help matters?
@VM44
i can somehow relate to your question but the answer you search is:
what is the purpose of getting someone punished when he hit you or stole something? because it feels righteous. when god would gave humankind back their privileges without having their debts paid it wouldnt be righteous. since humans couldnt pay it alone he helped them by giving them jesus.
so god was loving to give us the chance even though we couldnt help us alone.
[attention! only the jw doctrines i learned]
this morning it occured to me how much death is in the bible.
just off the top of my head: cain & abel, the flood, the guy who was going to sacrifice his son (isaac?
), the slaughter at jericho, jesus (and that includes torture), and all the death in revelation.
sodom&gomorra
i'm noticing a trend in the modern world.
everything comes with a scare story.
this was prompted by the shark steak thread and the talk about mercury in the food chain.
every sane person fears death, because its a strong instinct which helps us not do die unnecessarily. ppl who say they arent afraid arent lying because they dont fear it while sitting in a save enviroment reasoning with themselves why death is not very bad at all. if a murderer with a gun is after them they'll run nevertheless. they fear to die. its completely normal.
the fear of pain is similar. noone wants to get hurt for nothing. its dangerous and unpleasent so we fear it.
despite our instincts i too can say that i dont fear death. BUT...
in some way im very sad about it. it makes me feel helpless and out of control. i would like to see the next centuries but i just CANT. i dont have a chance. by 2070 in best case im very likely dead. likely even much earlierer (like 2051 when im 70) or even tomorrow.
i cant control it. it scares me to some degree. what will there be in 1000 years? in 2000? i dont know. i wont know it EVER! but i WANNA know. im too curious :)
thats the only real problem with death for me.
if you cannot "reach" someone because of certain psychological "blocks," wouldn't that indicate you need to get into their head more, rather than just use pure reason?
and if people are just more receptive at certain times, doesn't that imply knowing it well enough to see when that is?
(and unfortunately, they may not be posting at the time) messy as it may be, you gotta know people and be good at it.
i dont get it either O_o
i was told i'd not see the end of primary school - i did.. i was told i'd not see my teens - i did.. i was told i'd not finish high school - i did.. i was told i'd not start college - i did.. i was told i'd not have time to start a family of my own - i did.. -------.
there was a lot of emphasis placed on the end of this system coming soon...they were wrong.
no wonder people are screwed up or having a hard time.
when i grew up in the 80s and 90s i was told the same.
my mum was 100% sure that i wont see the end of highschool (in worst case).
its scary that she still tells similar stuff (like it cant be 5 more years). just like the other predictions never happened.
jesus said noone knows. so if it will happen noone will know! it maybe tomorrow or in a thousand years. thats the truth.
the dragons post about wether satan was a hypocrite got me thinking.. .
if according to gen 3:15 and the prophecy thats supposed to mean satan was going to kill jesus (brusing in the heel) and then jesus is going to destroy satan (bruising in the head) that would mean satan would know at an early stage what his life would entail right?.
if i was satan (i'm not by the way) i might have 'looked' at this and other prophecies and decided i'm not going to help fulfill them.
its where the idea of destiny comes from.someone tells the future and even though the individum knows the future it cant change it. its his destiny. when i brought up this question as a kid i was told that satan is SOOOO angry he doesnt care fulfilling prophecies. he knows he gonna die and trys to create as much chaos as possible.
make me wonder why we dont have a a-bomb in a random city per day...
just found it in the news and wanna know watcha think about it.
its about the 1914 doctrine and why it is false using the bible alone.. 607 bce vs. jeremiah the prophet .
according to jeremiah 52:12-13, the babylonian king nebuchadnezzar destroyed jerusalem and the first temple in the nineteenth year of his reign.
i dont get the point of the text. my problem is here:
Witnesses and secular historians agree that this servitude ended when Persian king Cyrus the Great conquered the Neo-Babylonian Empire in 539 BCE and the Jews had returned to their homeland by 537 BCE, but they disagree as to when this servitude began. The position of the Bible and secular historians is that it started right before Nebuchadnezzar officially became king (Jeremiah 25:1-8; 27:1-7; Daniel 1:1-6; 2:1-13), yet the position of the Witnesses is that it started four years later.
What?
Where in these scriptures or at least in the literature does it say that the servitude began in nebus first years edit: before he became officially king? And what does that mean? Can someone point it out for me?
I always thought the doctrine is 537 + 70 years = 607, when jerusalem was destroyed in the 19th year of nebus reign and the desolation began.
thank you
freeme
just found it in the news and wanna know watcha think about it.
its about the 1914 doctrine and why it is false using the bible alone.. 607 bce vs. jeremiah the prophet .
according to jeremiah 52:12-13, the babylonian king nebuchadnezzar destroyed jerusalem and the first temple in the nineteenth year of his reign.
Hello!
Just found it in the News and wanna know watcha think about it. Its about the 1914 doctrine and why it is false using the bible alone.
607 BCE vs. Jeremiah the Prophet
According to Jeremiah 52:12-13, the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and the First Temple in the nineteenth year of his reign. Since Jehovah's Witnesses consider this year to be 607 BCE, this puts Nebuchadnezzar's first year as king at around 625 BCE.
Now according to Jeremiah 25:11-12, the land of Judah was to serve the kings of Babylon for 70 years, and after the 70 years, the Neo-Babylonian Empire was to be made desolate. Witnesses and secular historians agree that this servitude ended when Persian king Cyrus the Great conquered the Neo-Babylonian Empire in 539 BCE and the Jews had returned to their homeland by 537 BCE, but they disagree as to when this servitude began. The position of the Bible and secular historians is that it started right before Nebuchadnezzar officially became king (Jeremiah 25:1-8; 27:1-7; Daniel 1:1-6; 2:1-13), yet the position of the Witnesses is that it started four years later. Surprisingly, even when the bible chronology of the Witnesses is used, a huge problem emerges.
Counting from the fourth reigning year of Nebuchadnezzar (621/620 BCE according to the Witnesses) to 537 BCE is at least 83 years. This is well over the 70 years spoken by Jeremiah even if one decides to count instead to 539 BCE. However, when one uses the dates accepted by historians, counting from the first reigning year of Nebuchadnezzar (606/605 BCE) to 537 BCE gives the necessary 70 years.
A counter-argument that Jehovah's Witnesses often use is that Jeremiah 25:11-12 means that the land of Judah would be desolate for 70 years and that the land was desolate when there were no inhabitants (Jeremiah 9:11). This supposedly occurred in 607 BCE. However, the problem with this counter-argument is that even after Jerusalem was destroyed, there were still people in Judah with a man named Gedaliah as their ruler (2 Kings 25:22; Jeremiah 39:10). These were not exiled until four years later (Jeremiah 52:30), which equals only 66 years of desolation instead of the 70 required.
To counter this argument, some Witnesses will argue that the land of Judah was considered desolate when Jerusalem's Temple was destroyed and that this occurred in 607 BCE. Yet, under this line of reasoning, the land of Judah would continue to be desolate until the Temple was rebuilt, which both Witnesses and historians agree did not occur until 516 BCE. This creates a period of 91 years, well over the 70 years foretold by Jeremiah. Interestingly again, when one uses the date of 586 BCE to count to 516 BCE, the needed 70 years is obtained.
Despite their counter-arguments, the bible chronology of Jehovah's Witnesses simply fails to add up. It is apparent that 607 BCE is 70 years before 537 BCE, but why do Witnesses insist that the destruction of Jerusalem took place in that year? And what does this have to do with 1914 and World War I.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/8/prweb546361.htm
freeme
i just unfortunately came back from the jw convention and ive only heard their side of the story i know that they use mind control tactics but i need to know what is wrong with there doctrines biblically.
i took a king james bible and seemed like what the were saying about the bible was true.
im never going to try going back to that religion again but i need to know that the only thing wrong with their religion isnt the mind control tactics they use.
hi lotus65!
of course when someone wants to teach a doctrine the scripture he uses will fit what he teaches. and in many occasions the doctrine of the jws is accurate or at least can be viewed this way they teach it (theres even quiet quality stuff... like the moral stuff and the doctrines about social interaction and faith which are clearly in the bible). but... theres stuff that is grabbed by the hairs.
have you never wondered about the scripture jumping which is done to make the 1914 doctrine work? how do you know that specific prophecy actually HAS a second fulfillment? how do you know that the "times" in revelation actually are the SAME times? why does the day for a year "rule" apply here?! why not on other occasions? How comes that the society teaches jerusalem came down in 607 BC? when the scripture and science work together when its 587? where in the bible does it tell us to CALCULATE dates at all?! even an annointed one i knew when i was a kid said that she thinks all this calculating is completely false. and in the end... why didnt happen anything in 1914? oh it was christs 2nd coming was invisible? EVERY other prophecy from the wts failed because it was supposed to be visible and nothing happened. so whats about 1914? it was supposed to be visible too. but nothing happened. now its invisible... what are the chances that THIS one is true? very, very, very small...
so many things are incredibly unsure on this doctrine but its one of the most important if not THE most important doctrine of all. if this isnt true the "slave" isnt the chosen one. we even might not living in the endtime. there might be much more to come. maybe this prophecy and others do mean something else? its incredible what possibilities you see when you read the context and put your JW glasses down.
as long as you dont read the bible, but jw literature and listening to jw talks with the bible as an addon to justify something it cant be the right way. the bible itself tells us to examine the scriptures. are we bible students? no, we arent. we sacrficed this long ago for complete enforced unity. and the bible doesnt say that "unity" means that noone is allowed to think and/or studying/reading the bible on his own (in fact its only allowed for the gb to do this). the bible is powerful... we as jws had put human literature on top of this. we literally believed that noone can get anything from the bible, gods word, at all without human aid. we trusted those humans so much that we even allowed them to make up new rules like the pharisees did. jesus made it very clear how he views such stuff. a detailed plan on which blood fracture is ok and which is not. a minimum of 10h service a month or youre spiritually "weak". put in a monthly service report. detailed orders how to punish the sinner on what sin. skirt length, which music is appopriate... and much much more stuff. you name it.
jehovah says: "mine is the revenge". jesus didnt shunned the woman who had leprosy and violated the law because she came to him within the crowd. he blessed her.
somethings wrong with the organization on so many levels. i cant act like a perfect jw seeing all this. even if i liked to... i cant. i feel like a criminal doing it.
freeme