Disillusioned JW

Joined

• started 27 topics
• posted 2,027 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Disillusioned JW

• 
  25

  Jehovah Witness cult is Anti-christ.... proof seen in the use of BCE/CE instead of AD/BC

  by goingthruthemotions in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  so being around this cult, i always found it interesting that the rest of christianity use ad/bc and the non christians use bce/ce.

  i never put two and two together.

  but, it dawned on me that once again there is hidden proof that the witness cult is and anti-christ cult.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  goingthruthemotions, thank you very much for your forthright reply. While I was a believing JW (I am now an atheist and philosophical naturalist who tries to persuade people towards evolution, atheism and philosophical naturalism, and even towards the view of the Christ myth theory) I never thought of the JW religion as being anti-Christ at all, though in later years I wondered why they reduced their emphasis of Jesus and increased their emphasis of Jehovah over the years. I also knew they are very much against all other religions, especially other Christian groups.

  In recent years I think about how Russell and Rutherford had abandoned Christianity prior to becoming JWs. I also think that Rutherford might have joined the WT religion and took control of it in order to attack "Christendom" due to his negative experience with the churches (the WT said Rutherford said Rutherford, prior to joining the WT religion, was told he couldn't marry the Christian woman he loved because she did not have a total immersion baptism). Rutherford's negative experience turned him into an atheist (according to the WT) prior to him reading the WT's literature.

  I now think that in some sense the WT/JW religion might be anti-Christ, but I don't the religious leaders think of their religion that way. The religion condemns people turning against Christ and denying the ransom (it is something that is grounds for being thought of as an apostate and for being removed from the congregation, and/or as being thought of as someone who disassociated himself/herself from the Witnesses).
  

  The WT religion's attitude to Christ stems from Russell having considered the Trinity doctrine to be irrational and a contradiction to the OT Bible (Hebrew Scriptures). The WT says that Russell had becoming a skeptic of religion (though without rejecting belief in the God), prior to listening to a Bible sermon by a Second Adventist. In a away, the WT/JW religion is a Judaic leaning form of Christianity (Islam is also kind that way, but even more so in some particulars).

  I plan to make a much more detailed reply later.
• 
  144

  The New World Translation is a Mess

  by Amazing in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the new world translation (nwt) contains thousands of serious errors.

  the following regarding john 1:1, one of the most noteworthy verses to jehovah's witness and ex-jehovah's witnesses alike, provides a case example of how and why the nwt cannot be trusted.

  there some few scholars that translate the word was "a god" or "a god" or "divine" but they are in the very low percentages.. in greek john 1:1 says: "en arche en ho logos, kai ho logos en pros ton theon, kai theos en ho logos.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Amazing, would you consider the following to be a more literal English translation of John 1:1 and better conveying nuances of meaning?

  "In the beginning (origin) was the Word and the Word was with the God (face to face -toward) and the word was god."
• 
  25

  Jehovah Witness cult is Anti-christ.... proof seen in the use of BCE/CE instead of AD/BC

  by goingthruthemotions in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  so being around this cult, i always found it interesting that the rest of christianity use ad/bc and the non christians use bce/ce.

  i never put two and two together.

  but, it dawned on me that once again there is hidden proof that the witness cult is and anti-christ cult.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  I found an official statement by the Society on the matter and it states a number of the reasons mentioned in some of the prior posts - and it refutes the accusation of it being for anti-Christ reasons. See https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102009094 which says the following regarding it:

  "Awake!—2009

  g 3/09 p. 30

  From Our Readers

  Ancient Manuscripts​—How Are They Dated? (February 2008) This article upset me. It is my understanding that C.E. stands for “Common Era” and B.C.E. stands for “Before the Common Era.” In all of my 70 years, I have seen the terms B.C. and A.D. used as a time reference, referring to before and after the birth of Jesus. It seems to me that using B.C.E. or C.E. somehow denies the birth of Jesus.

  R. W., United States

  “Awake!” responds: Although A.D. (Anno Domini, meaning “in the year of our Lord”) and B.C. (before Christ) are used in lands where professed Christianity predominates, we have chosen to use the terms C.E. (Common Era) and B.C.E. (Before the Common Era). Why? First, there is considerable evidence pointing to the year 2 B.C.E. as the date of Jesus’ birth. Second, the literature printed by Jehovah’s Witnesses is widely distributed in languages read by many non-Christians. Third, the title “Christ” means “Anointed One.” Jesus became the Messiah, or Christ, when he was anointed with God’s spirit at the time he was baptized in 29 C.E. (Matthew 3:13-17) Thus, Jesus was not born Christ; he became Christ the year of his baptism. Significantly, the descriptions C.E. and B.C.E. are growing in usage, and they appear in almost all modern dictionaries and in many scholarly works. Please be assured that Jehovah’s Witnesses consider Jesus and his sacrifice indispensable to the outworking of God’s purposes and our personal salvation."

  ------------------

  Update: I now notice that Jeffro posted the information from the Society before me, however my post gives the web page where the Society makes its statement.
  
• 
  30

  Evolution a proven fact? LOL

  by Rex B13 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  some interesting quotes from evolutionists.

  natural history, vol.

  ' new scientist, vol.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Cygnus, thanks for providing context for the quote of Mark Ridley. But I am surprised that Mark Ridley says that it is a "... false idea that the fossil record provides an important part of the evidence that evolution took place. ... no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation." Apparently he is not the only scientist convinced of evolution who had that view prior to the year 1982. That surprises me because when I read science books and science articles published from 1970 through 1981 I see good fossil evidence for evolution! I wish I had been much more aware of them prior to early 1981, however. Fossils of Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus africanus, ER-1470, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalis had been found and published - collectively providing strong evidence of human evolution from ape-human-like beings. There were also fossils of jawless fish, early fish with jaws, Eusthenopteron (a lobe finned fish which had a passage which linked its nostrils with the roof of its mouth, unlike the earliest fishes that had nostrils), early amphibians with fish-like tales, reptile-like amphibians, mammal like-synapsids (at the time called mammal-like reptiles), early mammals, Archaeopteryx, Aegyptopithecus zeuxis, Dryopithecus, and more.

  I now have a college textbook (with CD-ROM), copyright 1996, called "EVOLUTION - Second Edition", by Mark Ridley. Chapter 19 of that book is called "The Fossil Record". Page 548 of that book says "The origin of mammals is the fossil record's best transition for the origin of a major taxon. Section 21.1 (p. 582) discusses this development as an example of a macroevolutionary change."
  
• 
  11

  Are JW's Fundamentalist Christians

  by What is Truth? in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  top ten signs you're a fundamentalist christian.

  10 - you vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.. .

  9 - you feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the biblical claim that we were created from dirt.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  I think of the JWs as being semi-fundamentalists. The WT literature spiritualizes many Bible verses (especially prophecies from the Hebrew Scriptures) that were intended (in my opinion) to be interpreted mostly literally. In contrast, Christian fundamentalists are known for interpreting scripture literally.
  
• 
  11

  Are JW's Fundamentalist Christians

  by What is Truth? in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  top ten signs you're a fundamentalist christian.

  10 - you vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.. .

  9 - you feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the biblical claim that we were created from dirt.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  done4good, I thought Christian Fundamentalism, at least officially (in the sense of when the name was adopted) came into existence in the early 20th century. I say that because it was in the years 1910-1915 that the series of essays called The Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth (generally referred to simply as The Fundamentals) were published to refute theological modernism - and apparently even the teachings of Charles Taze Russell (whose sect in the early days was often called "Millennial Dawn", due to the that being the original name of his series of books that were later named Studies in the Scriptures). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fundamentals says "According to its foreword, the publication was designed to be "a new statement of the fundamentals of Christianity."[1] However, its contents reflect a concern with certain theological innovations related to liberal Christianity, especially biblical higher criticism. It is widely considered to be the foundation of modern Christian fundamentalism.

  The project was conceived in 1909 by California businessman Lyman Stewart, the founder of Union Oil and a devout Presbyterian and dispensationalist.

  ... The volumes defended orthodox Protestant beliefs and attacked higher criticism, liberal theology, Romanism, socialism, modernism, atheism, Christian Science, Mormonism, Millennial Dawn (whose members were sometimes known as Russellites, but which later split into another group, adopting the name Jehovah's Witnesses), spiritualism, and evolutionism. "
• 
  22

  Should JW's Follow an Apostate?

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  wasn't ct russell an apostate seventh day adventist?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Russell did associate with some Second Adventists (a name used for some who were in expectation of the second advent/coming of Christ) for a time - see the Proclaimers book. It appears there were even for a time a church with the name of "Second Adventist". However I recognize (after reading one of the posts) that this topic was meant as a spoof.
  
• 
  19

  Teachings "Unique to JW's" They Hide From You Before Baptism

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah can't be your father in this life.

  'they [jw members] address him prospectively as "our father.

  jesus is not your mediator:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  When I got baptized (as an underage teenager) I knew that the WT claimed I was not going to heaven and that I would thus not be ruling with Christ and that according to the WT I was not to partake of the unleavened bread and of the wine. I don't know if during my early years as a baptized JW I thought Christ was my mediator or not, though I knew the NT says he was of those who go to heaven. [At some point as an adult I did think he was my mediator and I later was shocked when I read in the WT periodical/magazine that he is not the mediator of those who don't have the hope of going to heaven.] As a teenager I knew a number of doctrines (no Trinity, Jesus is not God in the usual sense, no hellfire torment, no inherently immortal human soul, future paradise earth, God has a personal name - namely Jehovah [later I realized the Hebrew OT says his name is YHWH/Yahweh] and he wants it to be proclaimed extensively, there will be a great tribulation and a battle of Armageddon, etc) and as a result I talked to people about the doctrines when I went door to door and I gave talks in the congregation about various doctrines. I had a good knowledge and understanding of what the "Truth" book taught - it was my main Bible study book before I got baptized as a JW. I would thus be shocked if JWs today know hardly any of the JW doctrines. However when I was pre-teenager and when I was a teenage JW (and even many years later) I did not comprehend the Babylon the Great book and the "Then is Finished the Mystery of God" book and some of the other in depth ("dense") WT books, and I had no interest at all in reading them (and I never acquired much of an interest in those books). I read them while in the congregational book study meetings because I thought I had to, but I rarely managed to force myself to study them in preparation for the meetings. In the late 1990s I found it a huge drag (very boring) to have to study the United in Worship book and some other doctrinal books in use at the time. The whole time as a JW (before and after baptism) I disliked attending the KH meetings (except when a few certain topics were discussed), but I attended them because I thought the Bible required me to do so.
  
• 
  15

  Do We Get A Clean Slate When We Die? (Watchtower View Examined)

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the watchtower teaches that the opportunity to be born again and enjoy complete justification with god ended in 1935, having been limited to only 144k since pentecost.

  so, it is very surprising that the watchtower embraces the death that is described in romans chapter 6, since this is the very death that is required to be born again…… which is denied to watchtower members!

  romans chapter 6, verse 7 is about saying goodbye to the old personality, the “old man” in the king james version.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Sea Breeze, that is a great post you made. It does show that according to the Bible's NT the literal bodily death of a sinning human does not atone for sins (or pay for sins or acquit one of sins). Furthermore at least some portions of the Bible's OT written after Jews began believing in a resurrection from the dead also teach that. For example, even Daniel 12:1 - 2 (which teaches the doctrine of the resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous) indicates, according to the Bible, death by a sinner does not pay for the sins of the sinner. I say that because verse 2 (NWT, 1950 and 1984) says the unrighteous that are resurrected are subject to "... reproaches [and] to indefinitely lasting abhorrence." In harmony with my idea regarding Daniel 12: 1- 2, the study note (commentary) in the NASB edition of the "Life Application Study Bible" - "Updated Edition" (2000) says regarding Dan. 12:2 that "This is a clear reference to the resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked, although the eternal fates of each will be quit different. ..." The NWT rendering of “acquitted” in Romans 6:7 seems incorrect to me. Thanks for drawing attention to that matter.

  You make a good point about what defines whether a person is really a Christian or not. Since the vast majority of the JWs don't believe they have a new covenant relationship with Jesus Christ and since the JW/WT religion teaches that only a literal 144,000 of Christians (with dead ones included in that number) are in the new covenant relationship, then it can be logically argued that JWs are not really Christians. All the time I was a believing JW I thought I was a Christian, but maybe I was wrong to think I was a Christian back then. But, for three years after I completely stopped thinking of myself as a JW, I thought of myself as an independent minded Christian. During those 3 years I conducted my own Lord's Evening Meal (Memorial) service privately by myself. In that service I partook of Jewish passover bread and unfermented homemade red grape juice. [Note: the Bible doesn't specifically say Jesus used wine, it says he used the "fruit of the vine" instead (for example see Mark 14:24 in the NASB), and because I don't want to consume alcohol I have very rarely ever drank an alcoholic beverage.] I partook because I had come believe that according to the Bible all devout Christians are to obey Jesus in partaking of the bread and "fruit of the vine". I made my homemade grape juice by squeezing the juice out of fresh grapes.

  However, even as an independent Christian I accepted much of the liberal higher criticism of the Bible and I saw many problems with the Bible (including numerous contradictions); and shortly after an atheist ex-Christian informed me that the geological fossil record conflicts with Genesis chapter one's creation account (even as interpreted by day age old Earth creationism) and with the biblical idea of a world wide flood, I ceased being a Christian and became a nontheist and metaphysical naturalist. A year after that I became an outright atheist (being convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that not even a deistic god exists, due to learning what scientist Steven Hawking said proves no god existed to start the big bang - or at least that none was needed to start the big bang).
  

  Bobcat, you are right in saying the NWT Bibles from before the 2013 Revision include brackets (except that the "2006 Printing" edition also excludes all single brackets, but includes some doubled brackets) in some verses. That is also the case regarding the handling of the word "his" in Romans 6:7, except the original NWT (the one in the individual "Christian Greek Scriptures" volume from 1950) and also in the volume revised in 1951) of Romans 6:7 has no brackets around the word "his".
  
• 
  19

  Ministry school

  by road to nowhere in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  what is the purpose?

  the skits are not real.

  i have been assigned a reading again.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  What was the last year and month of the Theocratic Ministry School? [Note: I stopped attending meetings (other than a small number of exceptions) of the JWs more than 15 years ago.] Has the "Our Kingdom Ministry" also been discontinued (and/or replaced with something else), and if so, when?

  I've read that the congregational book studies are now called congregational Bible studies and that they are now held at the KHs instead of in people's home. Besides the name change and the location change of those studies, has the format of the studies changed, and if so, in what ways?