IN 1924 Rutherford suggested in a Watch Tower article that the behavior other Witnesses was the biggest stumbling block. I think that remains true. Some offenses appear unforgivable. Elders and others prominent in the Witness organization are the 'face' of the religion. If they are insulting, as they often are, or domineering or self-entitled, they will drive others away. I have no reliable statistical data, but from incidental interviews with lapsed Witnesses this and a desire to live a life style different that that expected of adherents seems to be the most significant cause of disaffection.
Posts by vienne
-
38Is There Any Thing That Would Make A JW SERIOUSLY Question Their Religion?
by minimus ini realize that jehovah’s witnesses have been dumbed down for long time now.
.
still, i think there must be something that would make them really question their beliefs, even their life.. i think that if witnesses were told they could take blood or that disfellowshipping was unloving, they might stop and take a hard look at everything they have sacrificed their lives for.. i know the organization has muddled these subjects before but the i think even die hard witnesses might start to second guess the governing body..
-
-
vienne
-
12
Important Question about Bible Examiner Vol. XXI No. 1 (whole No. 313), October 1876, pages 27, 28
by Saename inso i was just comparing several quotes from different watchtower publications related to 1914. in my experience, pre–1914 publications point to this year as the end, and post–1914 publications point to this year as the start of the last days.
so i was reading awake!
from 1973 january 22 p. 8 where it claims that jehovah's witnesses have always pointed to year 1914 as the beginning of the last days.
-
-
vienne
Smid, that's not Russell's teaching on 1914. He believed a time of anarchy would follow the end of gentile times and that eventually nations would submit to God's kingdom as represented by a reestablished Jewish kingdom. Russell did not believe in a world ending event either. Nor did he believe in an Armageddon similar to what Witnesses believe. Current Witness doctrine developed in 1929.
The vignette on the front of the Golden Age from the mid to late 1920s shows the Russell view. In the illustration capital and labour face of while God's earthly kingdom prospers. See page 90 in Time is at Hand. [1915 edition].
-
12
Important Question about Bible Examiner Vol. XXI No. 1 (whole No. 313), October 1876, pages 27, 28
by Saename inso i was just comparing several quotes from different watchtower publications related to 1914. in my experience, pre–1914 publications point to this year as the end, and post–1914 publications point to this year as the start of the last days.
so i was reading awake!
from 1973 january 22 p. 8 where it claims that jehovah's witnesses have always pointed to year 1914 as the beginning of the last days.
-
-
vienne
I would like to see the actual quotation. First in Studies in Plan of the Ages, later called The Divine Plan of the Ages.
-
12
Important Question about Bible Examiner Vol. XXI No. 1 (whole No. 313), October 1876, pages 27, 28
by Saename inso i was just comparing several quotes from different watchtower publications related to 1914. in my experience, pre–1914 publications point to this year as the end, and post–1914 publications point to this year as the start of the last days.
so i was reading awake!
from 1973 january 22 p. 8 where it claims that jehovah's witnesses have always pointed to year 1914 as the beginning of the last days.
-
-
vienne
Russell's first book was the 160 page [aprox] Food for Thinking Christians, 1881. It's a small paper back book. The second was Tabernacle teachings. Then he published Millennial Dawn: Plan of the Ages. Time is at Hand is volume 2 in the Millennial Dawn, later Studies in the Scriptures, series. Russell did not teach about Armageddon as do Jehovah's Witnesses. He expected different things.He never taught end of the world doctrine. He was an age to come believer, which meant he did not believe in Adventist world-burning doctrine.
The text of all his books is online.
-
12
Important Question about Bible Examiner Vol. XXI No. 1 (whole No. 313), October 1876, pages 27, 28
by Saename inso i was just comparing several quotes from different watchtower publications related to 1914. in my experience, pre–1914 publications point to this year as the end, and post–1914 publications point to this year as the start of the last days.
so i was reading awake!
from 1973 january 22 p. 8 where it claims that jehovah's witnesses have always pointed to year 1914 as the beginning of the last days.
-
-
vienne
A partial rough draft of the introductory essay to volume 2 of Separate Identity is up on our blog. https://truthhistory.blogspot.com/
In it Dr. Schulz, my coauthor, discusses the manipulation of Watch Tower history, including this issue. It's about ten pages long but worth a read I think.
People always ask about publication date. To forestall that: We don't know yet. Still work to do.
-
1
E. C. Gruss
by vienne inis gruss still alive?
he claimed a thd and a history degree.
do we know the name of the university or universities from which he graduated?
-
-
vienne
Never mind. I have that information now.
-
1
E. C. Gruss
by vienne inis gruss still alive?
he claimed a thd and a history degree.
do we know the name of the university or universities from which he graduated?
-
-
vienne
Is Gruss still alive? He claimed a ThD and a history degree. Do we know the name of the university or universities from which he graduated?
-
2
Rough draft - partial to Preface Separate Identity vol. 2
by vienne insome of you may find this interesting.
feel free to comment, but remember this is a history only blog.
we do not discuss anything but history.. http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2017/10/temporary-post-for-comments.html.
-
-
vienne
As I said, it's a very rough draft. But certainly, your observations are welcome. You can leave them here or as a comment on the blog post.
-
2
Rough draft - partial to Preface Separate Identity vol. 2
by vienne insome of you may find this interesting.
feel free to comment, but remember this is a history only blog.
we do not discuss anything but history.. http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2017/10/temporary-post-for-comments.html.
-
-
vienne
Some of you may find this interesting. Feel free to comment, but remember this is a history only blog. We do not discuss anything but history.
http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2017/10/temporary-post-for-comments.html
-
32
Counter-Watchtower / Answers-in-Watchtower First Draft Issue 1
by Counter-Watchtower inplease proof read the draft and comment any edits, corrects or changes of any kind needed.
also i need help with the cover page, what the title should be and plain text or whatnot, whatever would be more appealing to a jw to get them to open and read.. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0b2s6sigyikwhmglhqk5fcmxwzwc/view?usp=sharing.
-
-
vienne
It does not take years. I cannot engage in polemical writing. It would taint what I hope is an honest and even handed approach to history.
Thinking is physically painful. Truly. It swells your brain cells. Ever hear someone say, "This is giving me a headache"? But ... you can do this. My suggestion is that you watch some of the youtube videos on formal logic and logic flaws. They will teach you how to reason. Good writing comes from sound reasoning. It's not hard to learn but it does take persistence.
I did not answer a previous comment. You suggested that if they were wrong in the past, might they not be now. Yes, of course. But that's the course of human reasoning, of human learning. So the issue is: are they wrong now? If so, prove it. One of the great flaws of opposition writing is that much of it simply restates 'orthodox' belief. Because it is 'orthodox', then every view in conflict must be wrong. This is one of the major logic flaws. And historically we find Jesus and the passage of time correcting the apostles' false views. Merely changing what we believe is not a sign of flawed belief; it's a sign of intellectual activity.
You do realize that every major religion, those often seen as orthodox had a doctrinal development that included changed views, what some here call 'flip flops.' So get down to a single point. Do you object to Witness anti-Trinitarianism? Is Jesus God? Are they wrong about John 1:1? If so, say so and prove it. But be prepared for a response you may not be able to handle without solid research. For instance, Why does John say Jesus was God instead of is God? How does this connect with a later verse that says Jesus became flesh? Does the Greek word for 'flesh' identify him as a person or does it identify his nature? Witnesses will ask you these questions and rightly so because if flesh identifies his nature then so does the anarthrous theos. There ARE Witnesses competent enough to present you with this argument.
Right now you simply believe Witness theology is wrong. Next you must prove it to yourself. Belief is not proof. Tracts such as you envision work best if they are narrowly focused. Pick an issue, explore it fully. Ask yourself if your 'proofs' could convince you. Try it out on a Witness friend, especially one well versed in their belief system.
Do you object to the Witness concept of a Governing Body and the application of the Faithful Servant parable to it? There are a multitude of differing conclusions about the Faithful Servant parable. In the 18th and 19th Centuries, Clergy saw that as fulfilled in themselves. That's not much different than the Witness view. There are three approaches to church governance that find a home within Christian churches. Do you know what they are? Are any of them similar to Witness belief?Are any of them scriptural?
You can learn grammar and spelling on the fly. But research is hard work. You must do your research if you wish to succeed. Volume 1 of our current book was written between 2007 and 2014. It required a huge amount of research. You're not writing anything like that. Not if you pick a single subject and write a pithy, well-researched rebuttal of Watchtower belief.