so the wt used ex 1:6 to define a generation from the very beginning.
then in the this september broadcast the same person (splain) who spent 20 min with charts to explain a generation, makes a point that joseph and his brothers were very close in age?
(min 4:29).
So the WT used Ex 1:6 to define a generation from the very beginning. Then in the This September broadcast the SAME person (Splain) who spent 20 min with charts to explain a generation, makes a point that Joseph and his brothers were very close in age? (min 4:29)
Am I missing something here that they could contradict themselves so easily? I know they do, but this really tops the list for things I've noticed.
i'm cringing because the video is very empty in the way of presenting any credible evidence or logical reasoning for rejecting evolution in preference for creationism.
but it's not the only reason.the video wreaks of propagandistic manipulation.
first, angel gives very stereotypic reasons for why he accepted evolution in the past.
I don't understand how people could see childbirth as designed. It's so extremely dangerous. Bringing new life into the world is both beautiful and amazing, but I can't see how you can read design into it.
i'm sure we've all heard this argument by theists employing the fine-tuning argument.
are you aware, however, of exactly how much this "little bit" really is?
theists would have us think that the slightest change in the distance would have drastic implications for survivability.
sorry for this matter has been already discussed.. i got shocked after watching this video:.
kingdom hall disaster demonstration.
this is really insane !!!
Island Man, I have to disagree with you. I have no problem with being prepared, but the constant repeating and harping on this by the org is just fanning the flames of Armageddon fear. It's true that they are just talking about a natural disaster here, but like everything about this org, they have to drag out every minute detail. It's just another one size fits all solution that keeps the sheep on edge.
very strange behavior by the attendants and elders after the duluth, ga, rc.
on the first link the attendants start to exit the arena, then line up and turn their backs on the street preachers.
(around the 6:00 mark).. elders and attendants after duluth rc.
Doesn't this reaction bring more attention to this idiot?
I'm all for free speech, but free speech shouldn't include an amplifier.
has anyone noticed that with each new child abuse case that involves the watchtower, there is no apology to the victims but only their standard cookie cutter response:.
"jehovah's witnesses abhor child abuse".
they "abhor child abuse", but they do not acknowledge any guilt.. i give them a g for repetition for emphasis.
The lawyers told them to say that, would look bad for them to admit how they really feel.
But I think it can be rightfully said they abhor child abuse. The travesty is they consider it a sin, not a crime.
video is entitled "beware of deceit" he uses the letter of jude to show that current day apostates are deceitful and that they use "trickery" to and "twist facts" to try to "grab our mind".
warning: your head might explode.
especially past the 5:30 mark.
Here is the context of that chapter he refers to. I have not heard of this before, ive not seen it an "issue" brought up here or elsewhere, so I think they cherry picked this and probably outright fabricated the whole thing. Following this chapter is just some talk about Esau. What I pasted is the end of the subject. You can find this PDF here starting on page 687.
"THEY SHALL BE ALL TAUGHT OF GOD" We would conclude, practically, that we could not understand anything about the Bible except as it was revealed. We would, therefore, not waste a great deal of time doing what we know some people do, reading chapter after chapter, to no profit. We would not think of doing it. We would not think we were studying the Scriptures at all. We would think we were following the course that had been anything but profitable to ourselves and many others in the past--merely reading over the Scriptures.
We would say that the same Heavenly Father who had guided us to this Truth, to this understanding of the Scriptures as his children, if he had some further information for us he would bring it to our attention in some manner; and therefore we would not see the necessity of reading the New Testament every day or every year; we would not consider that necessary.
We would consider that the Scripture which says, "They shall be all taught of God," would imply that in his own appointed way God would bring to our attention whatever feature of Divine truth would be "meat in due season for the household of faith." Further, we would say that now, having satisfied ourselves respecting what the Divine Plan is, we would understand that we had reached the place that the Apostle speaks of as being a qualified ambassador of God, a qualified minister of the New Covenant, and that, as a servant or minister of the New Covenant, we now had a responsibility in making known these things that we had learned; that we were not put here primarily to read the Bible, but primarily to serve the Lord and his Truth.
It was quite proper, however, that before we came to a knowledge of the Truth, and when we were in measurable discontent of mind as to what was the Truth, that we should refrain from telling anybody else.
We remember very well in our own personal experience that after we had tried some street preaching, etc., we came to the conclusion that there was something wrong; that we did not understand what we were trying to tell to others; that we did not understand with sufficient clearness to properly present it and make sure that we were representing the Lord and his message aright, and we said to ourself, "I will stop any endeavor to teach others until I know what I believe." We think that should be the attitude of every one of us.
Why should we attempt to preach or teach anything that we do not understand? So, after God favors us in this time with an understanding of Present Truth, he has given us a knowledge of more truth than we could have gained in a thousand years if we had read and studied unaided; and now we can attempt to present it to others. Why has he given us a knowledge of this Truth?
He wishes us to be "thoroughly furnished unto every good word and work." Therefore, we should study that we may be able to speak the word of the Lord freely and know that we are not misrepresenting the Divine purpose and plan and character; and we ought therefore to give the more earnest heed to the opportunities for service and consider that the information which has been given us has been given for the very purpose that we may impart it to others--to those brethren and sisters of the Lord's family, some of whom are in Babylon yet, honest at heart, perhaps, and very desirous of knowing the truth, though perhaps very much blinded as we once were.
"SCRIPTURE STUDIES" NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE
This is not, therefore, putting the SCRIPTURE STUDIES as a substitute for the Bible, because so far as substituting for the Bible, the STUDIES, on the contrary, continually refer to the Bible; and if one has any doubt as to a reference or if one's recollection should lapse in any degree, one should refresh his memory, and, in fact, should see that his every thought is in harmony with the Bible --not merely in accord with the SCRIPTURE STUDIES, but in accord with the Bible.
We might remark that quite a number of the friends in the Truth are making it a rule to read twelve pages of the SCRIPTURE STUDIES a day, and that we do not know one who has been following this course and making use of the various means of grace the Lord has provided (Dawn and testimony meetings and Sunday meetings and Pilgrim meetings and the Berean lessons, Manna text, etc.), who has gone out of the Truth.
We know a great many who, on the contrary, have been of the opinion that they knew these things long ago, while in fact they do not know half of what they did know--they have forgotten more than half of what they read and they are those who are now stumbling--going into outer darkness. We are not wishing in this to say anything against one's poring over chapters that he does not understand and others do not understand, hoping that he might light on some truth. We have no objection to this. He has a perfect right to do so if he wishes. He has a right to spend weeks and years in this way if he chooses, but the chances even then are that when he does light on something he will have it all wrong.
Furthermore, we would suggest that merely reading twelve pages of the SCRIPTURE STUDIES would not be studying in the proper sense of the word--neither studying the Bible nor studying the SCRIPTURE STUDIES. A proper study would be to think of the meaning of every word and every sentence. The thought is, it is not to see how much one can read, but to make sure that one goes no further than he comprehends or understands, whether that means one page or twenty pages.
We should not consider it a Scripture study in any sense of the word unless our thought has grasped the matter from the standpoint of seeking to know what the Scriptures teach and seeking to call to mind these Scriptures that are being explained and to call to mind other texts, perhaps, that are not cited, or of which only a small portion is cited. If one will do all this it will not be merely a reading but a study; and from this standpoint, whoever reads two pages of SCRIPTURE STUDIES each day with the suggested passages connected with those two pages, would do more Scripture studying in that time than he could do by any other method.
Whenever he reads these pages and calls the corresponding or connecting Scriptures to mind he is drawing from the whole Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, with practically every page he reads. Now is it possible to find any other Bible study that would accomplish as much for us in the same time as this would do? If there is we ought to take it. If there is not, then we have our option.
so real quick, i know this comes up now and then and i've looked over some of the posts from the past but here's the thing.. when i was a jw i drank all the cool aid, i was 100% and so i have all my own arguments (from the jw's) for why the bible is inspired.
i no longer believe this but i'd really like to read something that is pretty much 100% academic on this subject.
i want to read what scholars have to say about the authenticity of the bible and it's claim at being the inspired word of god.
My favorite Bar Ehrman book was Lost Christianities. I'm don't recall how well it fits the OP request, but I think it said more for the context (at least the Pauline books) of the bible than his other books.
Also for an amazing book on the old testament check out Richard E. Friedman "Who wrote the Bible"
all they did was invite us to a convention on the other side of town in mid-july.
my husband tried to engage them and asked where he could send them some information.
they showed him the address for the convention center across town-yeah, they are going to get it there.
My wife was told not to stop and engage the H/H in conversation....just thrust the invite in his hand
Yes, that's what they are told to do both with the convention tract and the memorial tract.
i'm going to relate a jw family that i know of that highlight how disproportionate disfellowshipping is.
both dad (elder) and mum are die hard jw.
the son was always a nasty boy and when he got into drugs it just intensified his personality 10 fold.
guess who will be taking care of them?
The Daughter, I agree.
I wonder who will be taking care of my parents, I assume I won't know when they die, who is going to tell me?
