More interesting talks from Bill Cetnar, available at: http://cetnar-search-downloads.kohit.net/_/
Aurelius
JoinedPosts by Aurelius
-
28
A very good video series on why the Jehovah's Witnesses are so illicitly corrupt of an organization
by Homerovah the Almighty inthis video series on you-tube is one of the better ones explaining the decisive corruption of the organization.
and how people are treated by the organization when they are just simply seeking the truth.. its bit long winded at times but the speakers get directly to the point and makes things quite clear.. the people commenting are all ex-jws of course but they were very close to the higher levels of the organization.. have a watch and listen and see what you think for yourself.......hta.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb46qprzhu0&feature=playlist&p=953316d83286ccaf&index=0.
-
-
-
28
Stumper for JWs
by JimmyPage injws say everything they believe is based on the bible.
so name a jw belief that can't be proven using a bible alone and no wt publications.
i'll start with a hint... one of them has to do with the year 1919..
-
-
Aurelius
Prohibition on Beards (you can't be used on the platform) The requirement to hand in a monthly report
-
82
HERE'S A BOMBSHELL ABOUT THE 144,000 DOCTRINE......
by Mary injust when you think you've heard it all............in my research for my project, i was doing some digging around on the subject of the 144,000 and came across something in the wts's literature that absolutely stunned me and, being the generous soul that i am , wanted to pass it on to you to get your thoughts on this.. .
we all know that the society teaches that the 144,000 mentioned in revelation is speaking of "spiritual israel" and not 'fleshly israel' or even other christians in general right?
there are countless quotes throughout the literature that we are all familiar with that specifically state this, but to drive home a point, here are a few:.
-
-
Aurelius
Kinda reminds me of the totally illogical explanation provided in the Revelation Climax book for Revelations 20: 7-9 (NWT)
7. Now as soon as the thousand years have been ended, Satan will be let loose out of his prison,
8 and he will go out to mislead those nations in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Ma´gog, to gather them together for the war. The number of these is as the sand of the sea.
9 And they advanced over the breadth of the earth and encircled the camp of the holy ones and the beloved city. But fire came down out of heaven and devoured them.As most are us a aware the WTBS generally teaches that the 'Holy Ones' are the Anointed / 144,000 / Spiritual Israel, etc and after the Great Tribulation they will be transported up to heaven to rule with Christ. However the above verses mention that the Holy Ones are in fact on earth and will be confronted by Satan. So after reading the verses many will logically conclude that the 144,000 / anointed are still on earth and have not been raptured. After-all who else could the Holy Ones be?
The WTBS inconsistently explains it this way! Interestingly within the same chapter of the Revelation book two definitions are provided for the Holy Ones. Excepts from the CD-Rom:
*** re chap. 40 pp. 288-289 par. 8-9 Crushing the Serpent's Head ***
"And I saw thrones, and there were those who sat down on them, and power of judging was given them." (Revelation 20:4a) Who are these ones sitting on thrones and ruling in the heavens with the glorified Jesus? They are "the holy ones" that Daniel described as ruling in the Kingdom with the One "like a son of man" (Daniel 7:13, 14,18) They are the same as the 24 elders who sit on heavenly thrones in the very presence of Jehovah. (Revelation 4:4) They include the 12 apostles, to whom Jesus gave the promise: "In the re-creation, when the Son of man sits down upon his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also yourselves sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (Matthew 19:28)
*** re chap. 40 p. 292 pars. 24 Crushing the Serpent's Head ***
"The beloved city" must be the city that is spoken of by the glorified Jesus Christ to his followers at Revelation 3:12 and that he calls "the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which descends out of heaven from my God." Since this is a heavenly organization, how could those earthly forces 'encircle' it? In that they encircle "the camp of the holy ones." A camp is outside a city; therefore, "the camp of the holy ones" must represent those on earth outside the heavenly location of New Jerusalem who loyally support Jehovahís governmental arrangement. When the rebels under Satan attack those faithful ones, the Lord Jesus regards it as an assault on him. (Matthew 25:40, 45) "Those nations" will try to wipe out all that the heavenly New Jerusalem has accomplished in making earth a paradise. So in attacking "the camp of the holy ones," they are also attacking "the beloved city."
*** re chap. 42 p. 304 par. 12 A New Heaven and a New Earth ***
The great crowd out of all nations also look to this promise. They too must conquer, loyally serving God until they come out of the great tribulation. Then they will enter into their earthly inheritance, 'the kingdom prepared for them from the founding of the world.' (Matthew 25:34) These and others of the Lord's earthly sheep who pass the test at the end of the thousand years are called "holy ones." (Revelation 20:9) They will enjoy a sacred and filial relationship with their Creator, Jehovah God, as members of his universal organization.- Isaiah 66:22; John 20:31; Romans 8:21.
In conclusion
From the above we see that according the WTBS the "Holy ones" can be what ever they decide in order to support their doctrine.Either:
1. Anointed, 144,000
2. Great Crowd who survive the 'final test' -
28
Can the holy spirit be a person???
by leaving-jws inmy mom and i got into a debate about the trinity doctrine.
she claims that the holy spirit cannot be a person which invalidates the trinity doctrine.
she says in genesis that the holy spirit was depicted as "roving about the earth" as an "active force".
-
-
Aurelius
Amen
-
-
-
Aurelius
With the release of the 2006 "mechanically adjusted" version obviously the last paragraph is NO longer the case
Rbi8 = (2007 CDRom) New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures—With References
Appendix:
***
Rbi8p.15806CWiththeBloodofGod’sOwnSon***6C
WiththeBloodofGod’sOwnSonAc
20:28—Gr.,d??t??a?µat??t???d???(di·a´
touhai´ma·tostoui·di´ou)1903 "with the blood of His own Son" TheHolyBiblein
ModernEnglish, by
F. Fenton, London.
1950 "with the blood of his own [Son]" NewWorldTranslation
oftheChristianGreek
Scriptures, Brooklyn.
1966 "through the death of his own Son" Today’sEnglish
Version, American Bible
Society, New York.
Grammatically, this passage could be translated as in the KingJamesVersion and DouayVersion, "with his own blood." That has been a difficult thought for many. That is doubtless why ACDSy h (margin) (followed by Moffatt’s translation) read "the congregation of the Lord," instead of "the congregation of God." When the text reads that way it furnishes no difficulty for the reading, "with his own blood." However, ?BVg read "God" (articulate), and the usual translation would be ‘God’s blood.’
The Greek words t?? ?d??? (toui·di´ou) follow the phrase "with the blood." The entire expression could be translated "with the blood of his own." A noun in the singular number would be understood after "his own," most likely God’s closest relative, his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ. On this point J. H. Moulton in AGrammarofNewTestamentGreek, Vol. 1 (Prolegomena), 1930 ed., p. 90, says: "Before leaving ?d??? [i´di·os] something should be said about the use of ? ?d??? [hoi´di·os] without a noun expressed. This occurs in Jn 1 11 13 1 , Ac 4 23 24 23 . In the papyri we find the singular used thus as a term of endearment to near relations . . . . In Expos. VI. iii. 277 I ventured to cite this as a possible encouragement to those (including B. Weiss) who would translate Acts 20 28 ‘the blood of one who was his own.’"
Alternately, in TheNewTestamentintheOriginalGreek, by Westcott and Hort, Vol., 2, London, 1881, pp. 99, 100 of the Appendix, Hort stated: "it is by no means impossible that ???? [hui·ou´, "of the Son"] dropped out after ???????? [toui·di´ou, "of his own"] at some very early transcription affecting all existing documents. Its insertion leaves the whole passage free from difficulty of any kind."
The NewWorldTranslation renders the passage literally, adding "Son" in brackets after ?d??? to read: "with the blood of his own [Son]."
-
-
-
Aurelius
Here goes Kifoy... scan of Matthew 23:5:
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=wbcx0snwxrj&thumb=4
-
-
-
Aurelius
Np.
Many thanks for the welcome!
-
-
-
Aurelius
3rd attempt...
Clearer scans now uploaded to a file hosting site:
NWT_2006_InsideCover
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=b1ncznt1le2&thumb=4NWT_2006_Confirmation of the "mechanical adjustments"
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=d1y4k7boco4&thumb=4NWT_2006_Colossians Chapter1
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=5xzzxsuxdeo&thumb=4NWT_2006_Colossians Chapter1 cont...
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=vc3b3hmdsee&thumb=4NWT_2006_New information in the appendix
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=jsiuy0njh1u&thumb=4NWT_1994_Brackets explanation
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=gfjsz08m2yz&thumb=4NWT_2006_no mention of brackets
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=y3ytv9zwsc2&thumb=4 -
-
-
Aurelius
Larger scans this time, hopefully will be clearer.
-
-
-
Aurelius
Some scans from the "mechanical adjustments” version.
I understand mechanical to cover changes like (type font; new/changed branch addresses; number of printed editions; printed languages; etc)
You will observe form the scans of Colossians chapter 1 that the brackets have clearly been removed. This is just one example. The removal of brackets is consistent through-out the whole of this version.
Interestingly the "mechanical adjustments” version removes the 1984 version explanation for providing brackets!