Posts by pirata

3

I know it's Friday but let me tell you a experience from my youth

by TotallyADD in

jw
friends

i was 14 years old at the time and was having a discusssion with one of my so called worldly friends.

he asked me what jw believed?

so from what i knew i explained how we were the only true reglion, that our god's name was jehovah and he was going to kill everybody who was not a jw and you need to become a jw or you are going to be killed also.

pirata

If more JWs were as straightforward, then people would have a better idea of what they're getting into!

18

What will the excuse be?!?

by brotherdan in

so we've all heard the ramblings of obves and larsinger about the coming end of the world this year or next.

i want to know what you think the exuses will be when they do not come.. harold camping is the one proclaiming may 21, 2011 as the time of the rapture and october 21, 2011 as the end of the world.

when no one disappears on may 21st, what do you think his excuse will be?

pirata

Sure, we were wrong, but it just shows our EAGER EXPECTATION, proof that we are the Lord's true people!

26

Does The Watchtower even try to prove 607BCE anymore?

by VM44 in

when was the last time that the watchtower published an article that attempted to prove the year 607 b.c.e.

was correct over the year 587 b.c.e.?.

the watchtower now simply mentions the year in its publications without attempting to justify it.. proof through repetition?.

pirata

I double checked and Blondie's quotes are the most recent. The last time they touched 587 BCE in a publication was 21 years ago!

81

Here i am....

by makersmark in

here i am - born in truth, hard-core spiritual everything all my life, early reg.pioneer, ms, elder, assembly parts, tour at bethel, etc, married now...... i'm trying to examine jw teachings a little closer...... i've spent the last two weeks reading many many posts, info , references on where ex-jw's are coming from.

i'm kind of concerned about a few things lately..... honestly - some points make sense to me - some don't - here are my general thoughts:.

-wt getting un membership for access to library - doesnt bother me - some passports and other governement documents have similar forms and requirements..... -blood issue - some counterpoints to the jw 'rules' makes sense (original intent of scripture is unbled animals, white blood cells similar in mothers milk) etc -however a lot of 'apostate' reasonings and proof are inaccurate.

pirata

makersmark, I replied to your PM. Check the envelope on the top right to see your PMS. If there's an error, hit the back button and then reclick on the PM. If there's still an error, try a non-IE browser.

35

Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 02-27-11 WT Study (SING)

by blondie in

jw
friends

review comments will be headed by comments.

book of psalms._read psalm 8:3, 4, 7-9.. .

praise god in song.. .

pirata

Do they bring in Prince, George Benson, Rebbie Jackson, etc.?

They did bring in George Benson. Then the GB decided it sounded too Christendom and prevented it's release. I managed to find a copy and they are the best sounding English renditions I have ever heard.

*** km 3/05 p. 3 Announcements ***

? A number of publishers have telephoned the branch office regarding certain recordings of Kingdom songs sung in a popular style that are presently being circulated among Jehovah’s Witnesses. They wonder if these recordings have the organization’s approval. We are aware of these recordings and would like to inform you that they do not have our approval. Please do not circulate or download these recordings from the Internet. We trust this information will clarify matters.

So does the new songbook have the harmony lines any more? Does that mean no one can sing harmony?

The re-used older songs (at least there was no melody change) still preserve the 4 part harmony. Some of the newly added songs do not use 4-part harmony, they seemt to be written for piano playback. There may be a few exceptions to these statements, I didn't look through every single song in the book.

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.

carl o. jonsson).

along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.

pirata

The evidence is overwhelming even if some choose to ignore the evidence.

The evidence for 607 is interpretation of the 70 years. That's it. The only other evidence offered is an attempt to discredit secular evidence pointing to 587 BCE. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The evidence for 587 is interpretation of the 70 years AND secular history.

I must say though that I admire your tenacity. I had not thought about the "nations" as applying to the ten-tribe kingdom before you brought it up here.

If you choose to go this route simply to disprove the divine prophecy, the prophecy in still has direct application to Jerusalem as foretold in Daniel 9:1-2:

In the first year of Da·ri′us the son of A·has·u·e′rus of the seed of the Medes, who had been made king over the kingdom of the Chal·de′ans; in the first year of his reigning I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years. Daniel 9:1-2

I'm not trying to disprove the prophecy. I am discussing an interpretation of the prophecy that jives with secular evidence. The prophecy in Daniel, which refers directly to Jeremiah's prophecy, should be understood in the light of what Jeremiah's prophecy says, that it applies to the servitude of Judah (Jerusalem) AND the "surrounding nations". As far as I can tell, Daniel refers to the aspect of the prophecy that he is most interested in, which is Jerusalem. Taken in isolation I would agree with you, but considering what the reference, Jeremiah's recorded prophecy, says I can't. I'm not saying this because I want to hang on to all shreds of evidence in order to prove the witnesses wrong. When I first started researching this topic I WANTED 607 BCE to be right, at least to put my mind at ease. After looking at the arguments on both sides I couldn't justify 607 as being more correct than 587.

PS. correction to my previous post:

When this prophecy was uttered the ten-tribe kingdom no longer existed. According to secular records the 10-tribe kingdom was destroyed in 720BC (or according to the WT Chronology it was destroyed in 740 BC). By the time Jeremiah uttered his prophecy the ten-tribe kingdom had ceased to exist as a nation.

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.

carl o. jonsson).

along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.

pirata

The reason “these nations” was used in Jeremiah 25:11 is because the nation of Israel divided in 997 B.C.E. The Northern Kingdom was taken by Assyria and the Southern Kingdom by Babylon. Although Nebuchadnezzar held supreme rulership during Jerusalem's destruction, not every nation and surrounding region could have become a devastated place and taken into captivity. The context clearly indicates the prophecy was primarily against the tribe of Judah:

*** w63 1/15 p. 45 par. 16 The Challenge of the “Good News” ***
following the death of King Solomon in 997 B.C., the original nation of Israel was divided into two kingdoms, the ten-tribe kingdom of Israel to the north with Samaria as capital, and the two-tribe kingdom of Judah to the south with Jerusalem as capital. The northern ten-tribe kingdom was destroyed by the Assyrians in 740 B.C., and then in 607 B.C. the kingdom of Judah was destroyed by the Babylonians.

When this prophecy was uttered the ten-tribe kingdom no longer existed. According to secular records the 10-tribe kingdom was destroyed in 720BC (or according to the WT Chronology it was destroyed in 720 BC). By the time Jeremiah uttered his prophecy the ten-tribe kingdom had ceased to exist as a nation.

81

Here i am....

by makersmark in

here i am - born in truth, hard-core spiritual everything all my life, early reg.pioneer, ms, elder, assembly parts, tour at bethel, etc, married now...... i'm trying to examine jw teachings a little closer...... i've spent the last two weeks reading many many posts, info , references on where ex-jw's are coming from.

i'm kind of concerned about a few things lately..... honestly - some points make sense to me - some don't - here are my general thoughts:.

-wt getting un membership for access to library - doesnt bother me - some passports and other governement documents have similar forms and requirements..... -blood issue - some counterpoints to the jw 'rules' makes sense (original intent of scripture is unbled animals, white blood cells similar in mothers milk) etc -however a lot of 'apostate' reasonings and proof are inaccurate.

pirata

makersmark, welcome to the board!

Here's my thoughts:

-WT getting UN membership for access to library - doesnt bother me - some passports and other governement documents have similar forms and requirements....

This isn't a huge biggie for me either. But I do find it a bit disturbing because of what I see as a double standard for the organization and for individual members. For example:

*** w79 1/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
In joining the YMCA as a member a person accepts or endorses the general objectives and principles of the organization. He is not simply paying for something he receives, such as when buying things being sold to the public at a store. (Compare 1 Corinthians 8:10; 10:25.) Nor is his membership merely an entry pass, as when a person buys a theater ticket. Membership means that one has become an integral part of this organization founded with definite religious objectives, including the promotion of interfaith. Hence, for one of Jehovah’s Witnesses to become a member of such a so-called “Christian” association would amount to apostasy.

I guess the real biggie for me here here is the myriad of rules that have been built up over the years instead of trusting the brothers to use their bible based conscience in various matters

-blood issue - some counterpoints to the JW 'rules' makes sense (original intent of scripture is unbled animals, white blood cells similar in mothers milk) etc -however a lot of 'apostate' reasonings and proof are inaccurate

Would need a bit more detail on what you believe is innacurate. I do feel that the intent of the mosaic laws on blood is that pouring out the blood was an atonement for a life that was taken. The Christian repitition of a few of the Jewish rules should be understood based on how the Jews interpreted the Mosaic law, and since a life is not taken in a blood transfusion, then their is no lost life to atone for (as even the most hard-core conservative Jews also see the matter). Life should be more important that it's symbol (Ironically, organ transplants, which are often taken from people who died are not seen as a problem because they don't involve the "symbol" of life, blood (though they are usually saturated with white blood cells))

- 587 vs 607 BCE leading to 1914: some points make sense - is there an actual hard and fast proof from a scholarly source of Babylons destuction date? - i've read the KISS method of explaining - to me it's as confusing as what JW's are accused of...

You will definitely want to read Carl O. Johnson's book (the gentile times reconsidered). It provides 18 seperate lines of scholarly proof for the 587 BCE date in excrutiating detail, as well as an explanation of the 70 years of Babylon that jives both with Bible and Secular chronology. It also addresses the Society's printed arguments against 587 BCE. PM if you want more details (to PM you can click on my avatar, then select "send message".).

- when a poster uses derogatory word-play on witness terms - what is the purpose? Kingdumb Hell? PLEASE - being offensive and childish is no way to influence a questioning mind. I understand the rage and past hurt but cmon - be mature....

agreed, immature and turns off curious JWs. I think it's some form of therapy for exJws...

- disfellowshipping - a hot issue - yes it can be a terrible consequence for some people - as an elder i have been involved in DF'ing situations - but honestly, believe it or not - this form of discipline has improved the persons life (turned them around from drug abuse or extreme unprotected sex) - however if DF-ing is misused by imperfect men and a wrong is indeed committed - i can understand the opposition. When i've read thru the many posts discussing DF'ing i have noticed that never is the JW explanation for this practise ever mentioned.......

I have talked to more than one Christian who has helped their fellow Christians deal with serious problems and or sin. They didn't need to disfellowship them. I'm not convinced the JWs practice of disfellowshipping is indeed scriptural, at least in it's current form. The scriptures talk of not associating with "so-called brothers" (which I interpret as hypocritical christians), the anti-christ (which JWs define as members of religious and political organizations today; in Christian times, it was those who preached that Jesus was not resurrected). A "rebuke given by the many" is sufficient. I do not beleive their is enough scriptural support for a forced shunning of those who are disfellowshipped. We all know that JWs now explain this as a loving provision to discipline the wrongdoer, but I feel that withdrawing familial love is not necessary to show one's dissaproval of a wrong course. Especially when one who has left no longer believes that the JWs have the true religion, or that God even exists, does disfellowshipping look more like a reason to keep ideas that oppose official doctrine from spreading in the JW community.

- constant attacks of old Russell, Rutherford teachings, etc.... using 100 year old watchtower quotes as proof - cmon - i know we celebrated Christmas, I know about the pyramids, i know JW have similar historical roots to other religions - the point is what we believe NOW...Those quotes from 1898 and even some 1930's 1950's quotes - we dont believe either....... dont use antiquated proof - If you want to sway me or other 'doubters' get some actual proof and ill listen.......

- finally - constant attacks on the governing body.... yes i know Knorr, Franz were hard core - I actually met and have close relatives that worked along side of them. Yes they said and did weird things, they got senile but not to the devilish picture that is being painted of them... No one is perfect..... When i was at bethel for a brief time - it was amazing, loving - not really the same story that experience after experience in these forums show...

When it comes down to it, these are the people who are claiming to be God's channel, that must be listened to, even when an individual feels that the matter should be a conscience matter or is an incorrect interpretation. Whenever the quote was pulled from was "NOW" for JWs listening at that time. The fact that some of these ideas have changed, been dropped, returned, etc. seriously make me doubt that the Holy Spirit is behind the "new light" that we received. I think it is more that we are receiving the interpretations of whomever is the decisions maker at the time. They may be honest and sincere, but it doesn't mean they have any more special connection to the holy spirit to understand the "deep things of God" than you or I.

Saying that - i do realize that people have got the shaft as a witness, i understand their pain and actually feel quite bad - I'm trying to be a loving shepard, imitating good qualites of the scriptures - i cant help think why bad things happen to good people even in my organization.....

"I'm trying to be a loving shepard, imitating good qualites of the scriptures", a very good quality in an Elder that may get you into trouble one day.

I think most things happen by chance and we label them according to our beliefs. When something goes good we thank God. When something goes bad, we attribute it to time and unforseen occurence or a lack of God's approval or a test from Satan. Good things and bad things happen to good and bad people.

Finally - the 1995 and 2010 changes about generations really really bothers me - scriptures dont say "and this overlapping generation will by no means pass away". Im scared crapless about this - all concept of armagedon coming is changed and not many of my fellow bros and sisters even realized this? am i wrong?

Most are conditioned to accept whatever changes come as new light. I have had to clarify the meaning of the overlapping generation to a few elders in my hall who didn't understand all the details. The latest change prompted me to research the generation teaching and I was very suprised to learn that Russell thought it was originally a literal generation (1874-1914), Rutherford taught it was the "chosen ones" (anointed), then it became the generation of 1914 (with continuous tweaks to extend the time frame), then the wicked people, then the anointed again, then the overlapping thing. This was the first thing (along with the flip-flop of the meaning of the superior authorities (Wordly governments => Jehovah/Jesus => Wordlly governments) that led me to the conclusion that our beliefs were really the "best guesses" of the leadership at the time in order to meet the needs of the organization at the time. I belive the main reasons behind the overlapping teaching was to restore a sense of urgency lost in the 1995 change and to make JWs more mentally comfortable with the original "1914" generation dying off (as was very visibly represented by with the passing of Brother Barr and Brother Jaracz this year).

There you have it folks - my mind is critically open to you - hit me with proof.........

Stick around for a while. Rome wasn't dismantled in a day

35

Does anyone out there understand how i feel?

by TimothyT in

my name is tim, im 23, from the uk, and im currently a jw!.

ok... to cut a long story short... i love serving jehovah but ive begun now to embrace my sexuality as a gay man.. although im still attending the meetings, praying to jehovah and trying my hardest, i can no longer lie to myself about my sexuality.. i have had enough of feeling depressed and confused now - its killing me!!!.

does anyone else know what i feel like?

pirata

Welcome TimothyT

Some past threads that may be of interest:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/experiences/54814/1/Growing-up-a-gay-Jehovahs-Witness-My-Life-Story

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/experiences/158123/1/What-Its-Like-To-Be-A-Gay-Ex-JW

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/experiences/168294/1/Brothers-who-were-Gay-but-couldnt-admit-accept-it-Did-you-have-some

382

The Gentile Times Reconsidered

by Spade in

disproving the date 1914 as a significant year in bible prophecy is of great importance to some (e.g.

carl o. jonsson).

along with the meticulous details of bible and secular chronology, broadening one's horizons when assessing exactly what this date represents when compared against the 6000 years of human history likewise has merit.

pirata

Spade, did you read The Gentile Times Reconsidered? If you are interested in reading it, send me a PM.

It presents a logical explanation to the 70 years, and that a 587BCE date for destruction of Jerusalem only conflicts with the Biblical 70 years if one insists on applying Jeremiah's prophecy to ONLY Jerusalem's destruction and lying desolate. But that's not the case. Jeremiah prohpecies that Judah, and the surrounding nations, would be in servitude to Babylon, a time period which started before Jerusalem's destruction:

(Jeremiah 25:8-11) 8 “Therefore this is what Jehovah of armies has said, ‘“For the reason that YOU did not obey my words, 9 here I am sending and I will take all the families of the north,” is the utterance of Jehovah, “even [sending] to Neb?u?chad?rez′zar the king of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these nations round about; and I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of astonishment and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite. 10 And I will destroy out of them the sound of exultation and the sound of rejoicing, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the hand mill and the light of the lamp. 11 And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.”’

With the date of Jerusalem's destruction at 587 BCE, what Zechariah wrote in about 519 BCE:

(Zechariah 1:12) 12 So the angel of Jehovah answered and said: “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you yourself not show mercy to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah, whom you have denounced these seventy years?”

would be written about 70 years later, versus a destruction of Jerusalem in 607BCE, which would have made the angel's words in Zechariah 90 years after the destruction of Jerusalem. The 1972 "Paradise Restored" book (chapter 8) has an extension discussion of this and acknowledges, and proposes, an explanation to the 20 year discrepancy. It does not however mention that the 20 years could be cleared up by moving the destruction of Jerusalem to 587BCE and understanding Jeremiah's 70 year prophecy as the nations servitude to Babylon. This explanation makes Biblical history and secular history agree.