http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgfv6rxjmca.
this is an entertaining and moving documentary on the idiocy of religion.
i especially liked the closing speech.. "the plain fact is, religion must die for mankind to live.
I like this: Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking.
There's this absolute nutcase on A.M. radio named Michael Savage (he makes Limbaugh and Hannity look like moderates, but that's another conversation)--he has a book called "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." I would like to revise his tagline as follows: Faith is a mental disorder.
my father (who's an elder) just sent me this link...and i'd like to get yall opinions on it before i call him back:.
apostates and other opposers argue that jerusalem was not destroyed in 607 bce, but in 587 bce, and provide what they claim is archaeological evidence to support this.
if 607 bce is wrong, then the seven times prophecy ending in 1914 ce would be wrong also.. .
"I know that I may not be able to convince you on this point (((of Dan 4 having a fulfillment beyond Nebu))), or on the year 607 as the starting year, or whether the succession of Babylonian kings fit the timeline. I do not have the command of history or mathematics like you do. I do know this, though, that there was a beginning to the bad course man has taken in disobedience to God, and that there will be an ending of it at God's hands (Dan. 2:44). In Daniel 2 there is succession of world powers that are represented in Neb's dream by a large image, and that we are living in the days (at the feet of the image) that the destruction of all human governments will take place. My great desire for sharing this with you is because I care too much about you and want you and your family very much to be there in the new system of things to enjoy God's blessings with the rest of us... for "he that does the will of God remains forever". (1 John 2:15-17). "
This is the kind of "reasoning" you can expect when discussing 607/1914 with a Witness. Once someone says this, it's clear that logic and truth don't matter. He's going to believe what he wants to believe--facts be damned.
And isn't this attitude exactly like churchgoers we met in the JW ministry? We could show them dozens of verses about, say, the Trinity--but they would not be convinced. I remember walking away from such conversations feeling sorry for such ones who were "blinded by Satan" and weren't open-minded and receptive to my message. But I didn't realize that I was exactly the same.
ok i'm trying to prove certain points to a jw i know who has questions.
i need to know what the new light is about the "generation" and if possible where this new light was launched from eg watchtower, which article etc.... also it has been said here that there is a new thinking about 1935, that happened in 2008 i need to know for definate what this thinking is, and again where it was stated in the wbst litriture.... .
please help this could mean alot to alot of trapped jw's... i can think of 4 already....
To piggy-back on what Undercover said, the "new light" / "old light" terminology is probably not something you'll see in print, esp. in the last couple decades or so. Sort of like the old term "present truth" which has died a merciful death.
Terms like this are part of the unofficial JW vocabulary. Another classic example is calling the JW religion "the Truth." I don't recall seeing it in print much (if at all), but I guarantee you that if you say "the Truth," every single JW in the room will know exactly what you're talking about. And if you're a JW and refer to your faith in other terms (such as "the JW religion," the "JW faith," etc.), you'll get funny looks from your fellow JWs.
Oh, and the "light gets brighter" scripture is Proverbs 4:18. If you read the whole chapter, you will soon realize what a ridiculous interpretation the WTS has! That passage has nothing to do with changing doctrine, rather it's a very general illustration about how the life of a righteous person is better than that of an unrighteous person. Nothing more; nothing less.
my father (who's an elder) just sent me this link...and i'd like to get yall opinions on it before i call him back:.
apostates and other opposers argue that jerusalem was not destroyed in 607 bce, but in 587 bce, and provide what they claim is archaeological evidence to support this.
if 607 bce is wrong, then the seven times prophecy ending in 1914 ce would be wrong also.. .
@tryingtoexit: Thanks; glad to help. When you present your counterpoints, be prepared to get a response like "are you just trying to prove the JWs wrong?" or "where are you getting this info?" Witnesses typically expect you to be convinced by their first argument. If you present them with a counterpoint, then you're just being argumentative, hard-headed, and not "sheep-like." So be prepared for that.
Also, if you want to read some more in-depth analysis of the 587/607 argument, check out AlanF's site: http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/part-1-summary.html.
As you've likely already figured out, the 587/607 argument can become bogged down very easily. Try to keep control of the conversation and keep the focus on facts, not emotions, motives, etc. Remember that every single reference work dates the destruction of Jerusalem to 587 and that the 587 date has just as much archaelogical support as the 539 date (which the WTS uses to arrive at 607!!). Thus, anyone who accepts 539 but rejects 587 has the burden of proof.
Finally, have you and your dad discussed the issue of whether there's a second fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy? If I was going to discuss the whole Gentile Times issue, that's the approach I would take. Basically, the whole idea of having a second fulfillment of that prophecy is a JOKE--it's not in the Bible at all...it's something that Russell borrowed from Adventist preachers of the 1800s and we're stuck with it today.
Go ahead and read Daniel chapter 4 in its entirety and tell me how in the world you could get the idea that there are two fulfillments of that prophecy! It's such a load of bunk...it's embarrassing that I ever believed this nonsense.
so we had our circuit assembly this past weekend, and it was the first one in my life that i told my wife i would not be attending.
we had a brief conversation on why, and she said well just go to this last one with me, and then when we can discuss what we learn and compare it to why you've been expressing your "new" feelings towards the wts.. i love my wife, and as much as i thought i was gonna hate it i decided to go.
now that i no longer want to be a jehovah's witness it really didnt bother me that nobody hardly talked to me despite me living in this same area for 4 1/2 years, everybody views me as spiritually weak because i dont go out in service, rarely attend meetings, dont comment, lesson is never underlined, so the "friends" never interact with me anyway and i'm use to it, actually that's the way i prefer it.
If you have a profile on a social network YOU ARE BAD ASSOCIATION.
Man, I hope this ends up in an article! I know tons of JWs "in good standing" who have Facebook profiles. These include elders' wives, pioneers, and even some elders. For some reason, I think the understanding is that Myspace is bad but Facebook is ok.
ok i'm trying to prove certain points to a jw i know who has questions.
i need to know what the new light is about the "generation" and if possible where this new light was launched from eg watchtower, which article etc.... also it has been said here that there is a new thinking about 1935, that happened in 2008 i need to know for definate what this thinking is, and again where it was stated in the wbst litriture.... .
please help this could mean alot to alot of trapped jw's... i can think of 4 already....
Regarding the Generation doctrine, here's the "Cliff's Notes" version:
Regarding the 1935 change, I believe it was 2007. This was a Questions From Readers article in a 2007 (I'm thinking May) Watchtower. Before this article, the WTS taught that the heavenly calling ended in 1935. This meant that any post-1935 anointed JWs were "replacements" for pre-1935 anointed who became unfaithful.
The 2007 article changed that. I don't recall the exact wording, but it was to the effect that it's possible that there are "new anointed" after 1935. This was not met with much fanfare in the JW world (as far as I can tell), because it's an arcane theological point and most JWs don't really care about such things. But it's pretty interesting to "us" because it shows that the WTS locked the gates of heaven from 1935 to 2007, but then opened them again. Pretty wild when you think about it!
my father (who's an elder) just sent me this link...and i'd like to get yall opinions on it before i call him back:.
apostates and other opposers argue that jerusalem was not destroyed in 607 bce, but in 587 bce, and provide what they claim is archaeological evidence to support this.
if 607 bce is wrong, then the seven times prophecy ending in 1914 ce would be wrong also.. .
These websites/emails are excellent examples of a typical JW/607 apologist tactic. That tactic is to provide a particular interpretation of Bible verses and then explain how that interpretation fails unless 607 is correct. They want you to conclude that you can't believe the Bible unless you believe in 607.
Rather than try to reconcile the scriptures with the mountains of archaeological evidence favoring 587, these apologists take a hard-line fundamentalist view. Such an approach is similar to that of "young earth creationists" who say that Genesis teaches that God created the universe in six literal days. According to them, the Bible clearly describes six literal days--with "evenings' and "mornings"; thus anyone who tries to say the days not literal 24-hour days is contradicting scripture.
Now, even JWs don't follow such a literal interpretation of Genesis. Rather, they realize that there's indisputable scientific evidence that the earth is billions of years old and that there's been life of some sort for many millions of years. Thus, they take a less literal view of Genesis (arguing for a "creative day" that could be thousands or millions of years in length). Thus, they're able to attempt to rationalize science and the Bible--at least to some extent. But they're not able to rationalize archaeology and the Bible because it destroys their end-times timeline.
Sorry for the digression...So, when reading these 607 arguments, you need to keep two things in mind:
Also, note the ad hominems and general bluster of the Third Witness site (from the first post in this thread). As another poster pointed out, he's putting words in the mouths of Ray Franz and C.O. Jonsson. Always be wary of books/websites that resort to these tactics. You may even want to point this out to your dad. At the very least, it should cause you to view the content of that site with skepticism.
we're seeing a lot of changes that suggest that a drift in attitude may be occuring in regard to the "preaching" work.
the latest info on having (real) love for your neighbor(i.e.
charity) is just more of the same.. they cut literature, magazines - and distribution of magazines and pray, pray, pray and still the donations don't come in to allow them to do what they want.
Great observations on this thread. I remember the change to the "complete donation arrangement" and the more recent migration to softbound books. (even the Bible is now a paperback!)
In my area, most of the friends didn't mention the donation arrangement at the doors. Rather, they just gave the literature away. On service meeting parts, we were instructed to always mention the donation arrangement in our demonstrations...so we did. But this didn't translate into actually mentioning it in the ministry.
Also, I recall being proud of the fact that the WTS produced such high-quality hardbound books. Before the donation arrangement kicked in, we sold the 192-page books for $1.00 and the large Live Forever book was $2.50, I think. A hardback Bible was $3.50 and a leather-bound Bible was $7.00 if I recall correctly. Even in the 1980s, that was a pretty good deal!
And remember, if you were a pioneer, you could buy the literature at a cheaper price. Thus, pioneers could make a profit on the literature they sold! Now don't take it the wrong way--I'm not saying pioneers were getting rich by selling WT literature--but a profit could be made!
i realize that the latest clarification of the generation teaching has been discussed quite a bit on this thread.. but i think that there are at least two other important points from the annual meeting that have been, for the most part, overlooked:.
1. the weeds of matthew 13 are not the churches of christendom, but apostates.. 2. showing love to our neighbors involves more than just the preaching work.
(thanks for mentioning this rubadub).
If #1 is correct, this would involve a dramatic reworking of the WTS "wheat and the weeds" theology. At one level it makes some sense, right? Apostates and "true Christians" are indistinguishable in the congregation until the wicked apostates show their true colors. Then those apostates are cut down and thrown into the fire (disfellowshiped).
But how does that affect the traditional WTS view that the wheat and weeds were indistinguishable throughout the middle ages? Wouldn't those weeds have been part of the churches? Perhaps the speaker meant that today the weeds aren't in the churches--rather they're apostate JWs. It still doesn't make a whole lot of sense when you really analyze it...but what else is new...
And #2 is nice; kinda reminds me of the late 1970s interpretation of "sacred service," courtesy of Ray Franz. That didn't last too long.
a good friend and long-time elder just back from patterson, asked me what i thought is he most prevalent problem elders are facing today....told him i had no idea.... he said "pornography" by far the most vexing problem for them... hard to believe, no?.
Not surprising at all.
Back in the 1980s, I recall an elder telling me that I would be shocked at the number of brothers who had issues with pornography. And this was before the Internet!
