Posts by Essan

82

So...is David Splaine the new bible scholar (or Fred Franz) of the WTBTS?

by Joliette in

was watching the faith dvd yesterday, and he seems like a smarty pants know it all?

he doesnt seem like a hard hitter or bad ass or anything, but it seems like the kinda guy, that if you went out in field service with, that he would constantly correct you, and have smart ass comments to make about the householders who arent intrested in owning a watchtower or awake..

Essan

If someone got to that unleavened bread at Bethel we could take out all these power-mad morons in one night :)

Death by cracker.

Now, that would be an event I'd happily memorialize every year!

13

WTS and the Corporate Model

by stuckinamovement in

jw
friends

i came to the belated realization that the way the org is structured is simply based on the classic 1950's corporate model.

note the similarities.

they are just another failing business.. board of directors- governing body.

Essan

Great OP.

Think about it, JW's commonly speak of "The Society" and "The Organization". Isn't that terminology bizarre for a religion? It's creepy. Cultish. (We know they are a cult, but at least they could try to hide it a little better).

The Society was actually proud of this and didn't shy from using such language openly:

"'The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society is the greatest corporation in the world, because from the time of its organization until now the Lord has used it as his channel through which to make known the glad tidings...'" The Watchtower, 1917, p 22.

You might also want to research the Society's use of the terminology of business and law, which was extensive and shows their true nature, and which has been glossed over a little these days.

Think about terms like Presiding Overseer, Circuit Overseer, District Overseer, and the old "Company Servants".

209

Challenge to DJeggnog Regarding his Lies.

by Essan in

i'm disgusted.

so, i'm formally challenging djeggnog to either substantiate or retract his outrageous claim that:.

1. russell made no predictions about 1914.. 2. specifically, russell never predicted christ's "coming" for 1914.

Essan

Thanks for the support and the bumps people. This is indeed a cast iron case, completely proven, and it's bizarre to me to have people like DJ and Debator argue that black is white and even demand apologies from people who present undeniable facts. How do you reason with people like that? It's a very strange feeling. It's like all the rules of logic and truth have been ditched and they simply will not play on the "pitch' of reasonableness and honesty where everyone else is expected to play. Bizarre.

I'm not sure there is any way to deal with that. As some have said, perhaps the only real benefit is for onlookers.

I still hold some remote hope, even though I am monumentally irritated and exasperated by DJ, that he may have some shreds of honesty left and may acknowledge that he is referencing 'doctored' literature, from which Russell's failed predictions have been sneakily erased or rewritten, while Russell's original writings, right up to 1914 did indeed predict Christ's coming and all that entails. The problem is, I have been presenting these quotes and links to where this evidence can be found for over a week now, and DJ evidently doesn't bother to read or research them at all.

Does he care about the truth? Not enough to research it before making false claims, nor indeed after. Not so far. Is he just deeply confused and bewildered and so intently focused on playing the role of teacher and imagining he has nothing to learn that he's just continually missing the significance of the evidence and so attempts to rebut things he's ignorant of, just because rebuttal is his knee-jerk reaction?

I really don't know. We'll see.

Whatever, the fact is that Russell certainly did predict Christ's "Coming" for 1914, and a whole host of other things as has been proven repeatedly, all of which DJ still flatly denies.

209

Challenge to DJeggnog Regarding his Lies.

by Essan in

i'm disgusted.

so, i'm formally challenging djeggnog to either substantiate or retract his outrageous claim that:.

1. russell made no predictions about 1914.. 2. specifically, russell never predicted christ's "coming" for 1914.

Essan

DJeggnog, I found one Watchtower reference to some of the changes made in 1915 in "The Time is at Hand" and another SS volume following the failure of Russell's predictions for 1914. There have been many, many more such alterations. Rewriting their history was a full time job for the Society. Thankfully, they could not destroy all original copies. This should help you get started in your research:

The 1915 March 1 issue of the Watch Tower admitted to these changes in the following article. Although, changing definite statements that Armageddon, the Christ and his Kingdom would have come in the fullest sense by the end of 1914 to say that they will come sometime after 1914 could not be any further from the "slight" and "trivial" change they lyingly claim:

"CHANGES IN "SCRIPTURE STUDIES"

We call attention to a few slight changes which have been made in four pages of Vol. II. and six pages of Vol. III., "STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES." These are all trivial and do not alter the real sense and lesson, but conform to the facts as we have them today. The pages containing these corrections are as follows:

Vol. II., page 77, line 1, "will be the farthest limit," reads "will see the disintegration."
Vol. II., page 77, line 6, "will obtain full universal control," reads "will begin to assume control."
Vol. II., page 77, lines 16,17, "end of A.D. 1914," reads "end of the overthrow."
Vol. II., page 81, line 9, "can date only from A.D. 1914," reads "could not precede A.D. 1915."
Vol. II., page 170, line 16, "at that time they will all be overturned."*
*How long it will require to accomplish this overturning we are not informed, but have reason to believe the period will be short.
Vol. II., page 221, line 25, "full favor until A.D. 1914," reads "full favor until after 1915."
Vol. III., page 94, line 29, "in this end or harvest," reads "at the end of this harvest."
Vol. III., page 126, line 12, "at A.D. 1914," reads "after 1914."
Vol. III., page 133, line 21, "ere the harvest is fully ended."+
+The end of the harvest will probably include the burning of the tares.
Vol. III., page 228, line 11, "

some time before 1914

," reads "

very soon after 1914

."
Vol. III., page 228, line 15, "just how long before," reads "just how long after."
Vol. III., page 362, line 11, "some time before," reads "some time near."
Vol. III., page 364, line 14, "must not only witness," reads "may not only witness.""

T

JWfacts

209

Challenge to DJeggnog Regarding his Lies.

by Essan in

i'm disgusted.

so, i'm formally challenging djeggnog to either substantiate or retract his outrageous claim that:.

1. russell made no predictions about 1914.. 2. specifically, russell never predicted christ's "coming" for 1914.

Essan

Debator, see my last post. Then please shut up. Go back to the "Who are the False Prophets Today" thread where your comments would be on topic. You are off topic here.

209

Challenge to DJeggnog Regarding his Lies.

by Essan in

i'm disgusted.

so, i'm formally challenging djeggnog to either substantiate or retract his outrageous claim that:.

1. russell made no predictions about 1914.. 2. specifically, russell never predicted christ's "coming" for 1914.

Essan

Debator, 2 things.

1. Predict means "say beforehand". Russell said, for instance, before 1914 that "A. D. 1914; at the end of which, Babylon the great, will have fallen, and the "dragon" be bound: that is, the nations will be subdued, and "the prince of this world cast out."" Three Worlds and The Harvest of This World (1877) p.143"

So, he predicted it. He said in 1877 that several things would happen in 1914. That's a prediction.

2. Go away. Stop trying to muddy the waters and use this thread as a vehicle to peddle your lies. This thread isn't about whether Russell's predictions constitute 'Prophesy' or not, that's another issue. It's about facing what was actually said by Russell about 1914 before 1914. Buzz off. It's hard enough to get DJ to be concise and to comprehend and address the relevant points without your distractions, although I know you thrive on causing such confusion.

209

Challenge to DJeggnog Regarding his Lies.

by Essan in

i'm disgusted.

so, i'm formally challenging djeggnog to either substantiate or retract his outrageous claim that:.

1. russell made no predictions about 1914.. 2. specifically, russell never predicted christ's "coming" for 1914.

Essan

Well, Isaac, both DJeggnog and Debator have been informed that:

1. The original text of Russell's writing contained all the predictions I have quoted and referred to and many more besides for 1914. They show that he predicted Christ's "COMING" for 1914, while they claim he was "PRESENT" from 1874.

2. Later printings of these writings deceptively edited out these failed predictions which had become an embarrassment.

3. These original texts exist and can easily be checked, and this deceptive editing verified, even online where there are scans.

4. I have provided a link to scans of the original text.

So they really have no excuse for them peddling this lie any further. Their ignorance is willful, from now on at least. That is assuming that did not already know this, which, at least I Debators case, I seriously doubt.

DJ you have all the evidence now at your disposal to learn the truth about what Russell actually predicted in his original writings- before the Society re-wrote history - if you continue ignoring this then you make yourself as much a liar as Debator. If you do this research - which is quite easy - you will learn that all that I said Russell predicted regarding 1914 was true and that you owe an apology and a retraction. You also owe yourself serious reflection on the significance of this deception by the Society - which you have fallen for hook line and sinker.

You think what you read in your reprints and later editions is what Russell actually originally wrote. You're dead wrong.

209

Challenge to DJeggnog Regarding his Lies.

by Essan in

i'm disgusted.

so, i'm formally challenging djeggnog to either substantiate or retract his outrageous claim that:.

1. russell made no predictions about 1914.. 2. specifically, russell never predicted christ's "coming" for 1914.

Essan

Debator, you should have read the second post on page one which shows conclusively with countless quotes from that Russell that he did DID INDEED PREDICT MANY THINGS FOR 1914, the fact that the Society later deceptively edited out these predictions from Russell's writings in subsequent reprints after they failed is irrelevant. The originals exist and can be checked.

You depend on their deception to peddle your own.

The original text can be viewed here:

http://www.a2z.org/wtarchive/archive.htm#russell

209

Challenge to DJeggnog Regarding his Lies.

by Essan in

i'm disgusted.

so, i'm formally challenging djeggnog to either substantiate or retract his outrageous claim that:.

1. russell made no predictions about 1914.. 2. specifically, russell never predicted christ's "coming" for 1914.

Essan

DJ, I am looking online to try to find a comprehensive list of the changes that were made to "The Time is At Hand". But in the meantime please read what Internet Archive has to say under it's listing for this book. (My highlights in bold):

"The Time Is At Hand by Charles Taze Russell

Description

"The Time is at Hand!," by Charles Taze Russell. Volume 2 of Millennial Dawn. First published in 1889 by the Watch Tower Society. The series was later re-titled Studies in the Scriptures. Predictions for the year 1914 were changed in later printings. Russell was succeeded by J.F. Rutherford, who later renamed the group Jehovah's Witnesses."

http://www.archive.org/details/TheTimeIsAtHandByCharlesTazeRussell

I was telling the truth about what Russell predicted for 1914. You have been deceived, but not by me.

209

Challenge to DJeggnog Regarding his Lies.

by Essan in

i'm disgusted.

so, i'm formally challenging djeggnog to either substantiate or retract his outrageous claim that:.

1. russell made no predictions about 1914.. 2. specifically, russell never predicted christ's "coming" for 1914.

Essan

Are there any DJ-whisperers here who understand the issues under discussion and may have the patience and conciseness to explain the pertinent points in a way that will somehow reach him? I don't seem to have the 'knack'.

I will take a very special kind of someone I think. LOL