Norm

Joined

• started 158 topics
• posted 659 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Norm

• 
  290

  The Global Flood

  by coldfish in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i've just read an intersting article on the flood to do with dates and whether is was truly global or a regional flood.. http://www.commentarypress.com/essay-flood.html.

  my father used to be an elder for many years and the flood was one of the things that made him walk away not just from the jw but also belief in the bible.

  he was hung up on issues like the flood taking place about 3500 bc and how that fit in with the pyramids.. i don't know much about egyptian history or the ages of the big pyramids, but his reasoning was if the flood wiped out every human on earth except noah etc then at 3500 bc there were only 8 people on earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Hello there a christian
  
  In your last post you said among other things:
  
  "For few here are willing to now dig any deeper into the Bible than they did as JWs,
  which was not very deep. As JWs were all told exactly how every passage in the Bible
  was to be understood. In my opinion, most exJWs here are now far too willing to
  throw the baby (the God of the Bible) out with the dirty bath water (the JW religion)."
  
  With all due respect, how do you know how much effort any of us has spent "digging deeper"
  into the Bible? Alan has most certainly done that, and personally I have used many years doing
  the same. That's exactly why I have come to the conlusion that the Bible contains for the most
  part hopeless superstitious nonsense. You see, many of us has used many years searching for
  the alleged "baby" in the famous "bath water" and discovered that there never was a "baby" there,
  just dirty water. Just because some of us has come to a different conclusion then you from
  delving "deeper" into the Bible, doesn't mean that we have never done research.
  
  You see, rooting around in the Bible to find texts to support ones more or less preconceived
  ideas will be like running around in circles. Paralell to a "Bible study" One has to educate
  oneself in evolution, some biology, geology, and even a little archeology. And it is extremely
  important that you do study information that is critical to both positions.
  
  I have no idea what you have done, but judging from what I have read so far, it doesn't appear to
  be the case.
  
  You also said:
  
  "As I think Abaddon's post makes plain, regardless of how well anyone here may show that the
  scriptures may actually speak in harmony with proven scientific realities, it is unlikely that
  the scriptures or the one defending them will ever be very much respected on this forum".
  
  Personally I have never ever seen anyone show "well" that the Bible is in "harmony with
  proven science". I know however that I would be the first to respect anyone who do as I think
  most people here would. So far no one has come close.
  
  The you said:
  
  "Why? I admit that the Bible itself is largely to blame. For, if God did inspire the writing
  of the Bible as I believe He did, He clearly did so in a way that would permit many to fail
  to recognize its supernatural inspiration. Why is that? It could be that God always provides
  just enough evidence to convince those who are willing to believe and never enough to convince
  those who prefer not to believe."
  
  The above is just another reason why it is very hard to take Bible apologists serious. It must
  indeed be a strange God you worship that seems to deliberately muddle his allegedly life and death
  important information so that people can misunderstand it to their demise, another example of what
  a strange God you worship. Or it might be that you haven't thought about what faith is.
  Things that are impossible to prove or verify in any meanigful way, one has to believe. Things
  that are possible to prove or verify need no faith, they are facts and as such do not reguire
  any sort of belief.
  
  This is what i find so strange with many "belivers" that they constantly try
  to harmonize complete hopeless superstitious drivel, written down by bronzeage people with science.
  Why do you have to do that? If this boils down to being "willing to believe" as you state above,
  you don't need to prove anything.
  
  Norm
• 
  1

  Religious Freedom & The Care of Children

  by Valis in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/7/81980/1.ashx

  it got me thinking about instances where the authorities have stepped in because of kids being put in harms way.

  we already know about several cases where one parent is at odds with another about blood transfusions for their child, or the authrotities step in.

  1. 
• 

  Norm

  Hey Valis,

  In Norway the "law" steps in in every case where JW parents refuse to treat their children with the
  "forbidden" blood products. This is routine, as far as I know. Of course in most cases this suits both
  the parents and the WT fine. Imagine how their name would stink if the hospital actually took them serious.
  I bet you that after a few dead children, the GB would get "new light" awfully fast.

  In general all children should be protected against all kind of religion, it is probably one of the most
  harmful thing you can do to a child, filling it's head with religious nonsens.

  Norm
• 
  290

  The Global Flood

  by coldfish in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i've just read an intersting article on the flood to do with dates and whether is was truly global or a regional flood.. http://www.commentarypress.com/essay-flood.html.

  my father used to be an elder for many years and the flood was one of the things that made him walk away not just from the jw but also belief in the bible.

  he was hung up on issues like the flood taking place about 3500 bc and how that fit in with the pyramids.. i don't know much about egyptian history or the ages of the big pyramids, but his reasoning was if the flood wiped out every human on earth except noah etc then at 3500 bc there were only 8 people on earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Reading the discussion about the flood, Adam and such, makes me wonder about a whole lot of things.
  Adam is no doubt a mythical figure, just as Moses, Abraham, the patriarchs and the whole spiel about
  the exodus.

  When it comes to the idea of the "ransome sacrifice" it seems particularly ludicrous.
  Only extremely superstitious, primitive and legalistic people could come up with the silly idea
  that "God" had to arrange anything into such nonsensical legal mumbo jumbo that one "perfect" life
  should "atone" for all mankind. "I just have to get my son killed and then all will be all right."

  It really must be an unforgiving task to try to make sense of the incredible nonsense in the Bible
  about the flood, Adam etc. I really don't understand what's the use. Why not simply be satisfied
  with the fact that this is something you just have to believe.Accept it on faith.
  The WT Society has tried to "explain" all matter of things in the Bible and look at all the
  complete rot they have produced.

  The God of the Bible is the last person who should have the audacity to blab about "sin".
  As an ordinary human being I can say with conviction that I am a far better person then he is, as
  is most human beings. If anyone should ask for forgiveness it must be the Biblical God, we
  human beings are simply incapable of committing such acts of cruelty and barbarisms as God has
  committed. As a father I would never treat my children in such a horrible way as he has treated
  his alleged "children". As an example to us, he must be the worst ever.

  Norm
• 
  8

  I Challenge Another Dub About 1975.

  by Englishman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  number 1 son, simon, is now living in coventry with his beloved lady and his little lad, charlie.. yesterday, hl and i went to visit them.

  it's only a 2 1/2 hour run, so we just popped up for lunch.. while we were eating our lunch by the window, we spotted several people walking slowly up the street.

  i said to simon: "them's witnesses!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Excellent Mike,

  You are a true gentleman. I would however have asked the lady when: "she asked me if I couldn't overlook them having made just one mistake!" To ask her if why she really did think that the WTS had made only 1, ONE mistake, then excused yourself and gone back to your lunch. I mean for someone who has never ever managed to get anything right, it is a bit rich to let them off with the delution that they have made one mistake, isn't it?
  Basically they are one big huge mistake, like the rest of Christianity.

  Take care,

  Norm
• 
  9

  The age of Enlightenment seems to be over.

  by Norm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  an excellent british author francis wheen has written a humorous yet very serious book on how enlightenment has lost out to what he calls ?mumbo jumbo among most people.. in his book ?how mumbo jumbo conquered the world a short history of modern delutions?

  he demonstrates how widespread this is.

  comparing the presidents back 200 years ago with the ones running in the election of 2000 he notes: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Thanks to all of you for your thoughtful answers. Wheen has some gerat quotes from Menken in his book.
  There are also some pretty hard hitting quotes about the late President R. Reagan's use of astrologers.

  Just read this

  "columnist Alexander Cockburn, a tireless critic of Ronald Reagan, declined to make a fuss this time. `The image of two women, one of them peering into a crystal ball, guiding the policies of the United States, is irresistible in prompting coarse calumnies both on the termagant Nancy and on her pliant husband's abdication of executive responsibility,' he wrote in the Nation. `But reflection should excite a more kindly analysis. For most of human history, leaders burdened with at least as many cares as Ronald Reagan have sought counsel from planets or entrails, and who now chastises the Emperor Augustus for his naivete?' Besides, why should any-one be astonished to learn that in his credulity, as in much else, Reagan was a fair representative of mainstream America? `The United States retains, unusually for an advanced industrial society, about the same per capita level of religious superstition as Bangladesh. What one of Jimmy Carter's aides once referred to as the "abracadabra vote" is ample ... [Reagan] has been nurtured in the same rich loam of folk ignorance, historical figment and paranormal intellectual constructs as millions of his fellow citizens.' Astrology was entirely conson¬ant with Reaganism and the twinkling penumbra of its faith in the `free market' ? an equally imaginary cosmic dispensation whose methods and purposes were beyond human under-standing or challenge."

  Pretty interesting observations that really explains a lot.

  Norm
• 
  9

  The age of Enlightenment seems to be over.

  by Norm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  an excellent british author francis wheen has written a humorous yet very serious book on how enlightenment has lost out to what he calls ?mumbo jumbo among most people.. in his book ?how mumbo jumbo conquered the world a short history of modern delutions?

  he demonstrates how widespread this is.

  comparing the presidents back 200 years ago with the ones running in the election of 2000 he notes: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  An excellent British author Francis Wheen has written a humorous yet very serious book on how enlightenment has lost out to what he calls ?mumbo jumbo among most people.

  In his book ?How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World A Short History of Modern Delutions? He demonstrates how widespread this is. Comparing the presidents back 200 years ago with the ones running in the election of 2000 he notes:

  ?In the American presidential election of 1800, John Adams stood against his old friend Thomas Jefferson, also happened to be a contest between two men who were, at the time, the president of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the president of the American Philosophical Society. The historian Henry May described this as `a coincidence very unlikely ever to be repeated in American politics', and his prediction looks increasingly solid. Exactly two centuries later, the main contenders for the presidency were George W. Bush, a genial chump, and Al Gore, a moderately intelligent liar and influence-peddler ? a choice summarized by one British newspaper as `Dumbo vs. Pinocchio'.

  The contrast between 1800 and 2000 went further than mere intellectual power and integrity. Adams and Jefferson, though flawed and complex characters, were both major figures of the American Enlightenment who believed that what the Europeans had merely imagined was being realized and fulfilled in the New World. Many of the European philosophers of the late eighteenth century thought so too: to the Marquis de Condorcet, America was of all nations `the most enlightened, the freest and the least burdened by prejudices'; Diderot saw it as `offering all the inhabitants of Europe an asylum against fanaticism and tyranny'. Tom Paine described the cause of America as `the cause of all mankind', since political or clerical aristocracies would hold no sway in a state founded on secular reason and equal opportunity. Two hundred years later, the candidates Gore and Bush were respectively the son of a president and the son of a senator. (The one serious and substantial contender, Ralph Nader, was excluded from the televised debates and largely ignored by the mainstream media, perhaps for fear that he might show up his rivals as a couple of bozos. Liberal Democrats warned potential Nader supporters that unless they voted for Gore as `the lesser of two evils' they would be responsible for letting Bush into the Oval Office, a counsel of despair and desperation likened by the columnist Alexander Cockburn to `a man on a raft facing the decision of whether to drink seawater or his own urine'.)?
  How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World, page 106-7.

  In America the ?ground? seem to be more ?fertile? then ever before regarding sheer superstition and incredible stupidity.:

  ?But loopiness is not confined to senior common rooms. In their assault on reason, the post-modernists had far more allies than perhaps even they had realised. A Gallup poll in June 1993 found that only 11 per cent of Americans accepted the standard secular account of evolution, that `human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process'; 35 per cent thought that humans evolved over millions of years, but with divine guidance; and 47 per cent maintained that `God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so' ? the creation story as told in the Book of Genesis. Other polls at about the same time discovered that 49 per cent of Americans believed in demonic possession, 36 per cent in telepathy and 25 per cent in astrology; and that no fewer than 68 per cent approved of creationism being taught in biology classes. By then, however, few of creationism's advocates actually used the word any more. `Religious America is awakening,' President Reagan had announced jubilantly in 1980, shortly before the states of Arkansas and Louisiana passed Bills obliging public schools to teach creationism in science lessons. But the laws were struck down by the Supreme Court, which ruled that because creationism was indeed a religious belief it could not be added to the biology curriculum without infringing the constitutional ban on promoting religion, and thereafter the fundamentalists adopted a more scientific-sounding phraseology ? `abrupt appearance theory', `intelligent-design theory' ? to disguise the fact that their only textbook was the Old Testament.? How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World, page 103-4.

  That the nation is heading from bad to worse there can be no doubt, look at this:

  ?During his presidential campaign of 2000, George W. Bush often attacked the relativism that `liberals' had inflicted on America ? the idea that nothing was right or wrong, true or false. Yet only a few months earlier, when Christian fanatics on the Kansas board of education voted to remove evolution from the state's science curriculum, Bush paraded his own relativism by arguing that creationism should be taught along-side evolution since `the jury is still out' and `children ought to be exposed to different theories about how the world started'. Some theories, as George Orwell might have said, are more different than others. `Science is about fact,' a Kansas newspaper, the Topeka Capital journal, editorialised. `But it's also about hypotheses; and creationism is as good a hypothesis as any for how the universe began.' To judge by the news-paper's letters page, many readers agreed. `I am writing in response to the poor souls out there who believe that the state board of education has taken education back to the Dark Ages,' one wrote. `I say it's about time! . . . Take my children back to the Dark Ages, where truth was taught and they received the education they deserved.' No wonder some wags wondered if the Kansas board had decided to solve the Y2K problem by turning the clock back to Y1K. `In one pan of the scales,' Salman Rushdie wrote in the Toronto Globe and Mail, `we now have General Relativity, the Hubble Telescope and all the imperfect but painstakingly accumulated learning of the human race, and, in the other, the Book of Genesis. In Kansas, the scales balance.' And not only in Kansas. Even Al Gore, who had acquired a reputation as the `Mr Science' of the Clinton administration, seemed reluctant to disturb this bogus equilibrium. A few months earlier one of his chief policy advisers had told the Boston Globe that `the Democratic party is going to take God back this time', and on hearing the news from Kansas the candidate said that although he personally favoured the teaching of evolution, `localities should be free to teach creationism as well'.
  Gore thus maintained the ignoble tradition of politicians from Tennessee ? the same state which made itself the laughing stock of the civilised world in 1925 by prosecuting a young high-school teacher, John Scopes, for teaching Darwinian theory in biology class.? How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World, page 104-5

  Wheen shows how this all harken back to the Scopes trial:

  ?The great reporter H. L. Mencken, in one of his many lacerating despatches from the Scopes trial, suggested that Tennessee hillbillies `are not more stupid than the city proletariat; they are only less informed'. Why, then, were even the most intelligent Tennesseans so reluctant to assist the cause of enlightenment by repudiating the antediluvian nonsense taught in local schools and endorsed by local nabobs? `I suspect that politics is what keeps them silent and makes their state ridiculous. Most of them seem to be candidates for office, and a candidate for office, if he would get the votes of fundamentalists, must bawl for Genesis before he begins to bawl for anything else.' The `typical Tennessee politician' was a man such as the then governor, Austin Peay, who sought to exploit the Scopes trial for his own political advantage before it had even begun. `The local papers print a telegram that he has sent to Attorney-General A. T. Stewart whooping for prayer,' Mencken reported. `In the North a governor who indulged in such monkey shines would be rebuked for trying to influence the conduct of a case in court. And he would be derided as a cheap mountebank. But not here.'
  Al Gore, who might best be characterised as an expensive mountebank, was another great whooper for prayer. As vice-president, he had on his desk a placard with the toe-curling motto `WWJD' ? What Would Jesus Do? Apparently he never pondered a more pertinent question: what would the founding fathers think?? How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World, page 105-6.

  Another really striking contrast between the presidential candidates in 1800 and 2000 was also quite clear:

  ?One could appear to prove the point by marking further distinctions between the presidential candidates of 1800 and 2000. Jefferson commissioned for his library a composite portrait of Francis Bacon, John Locke and Isaac Newton, the English prophets of Enlightenment, hailing them as `the three greatest men who ever lived, without any exception'. In his book Earth in the Balance, Al Gore described the same Francis Bacon as the greatest villain who ever lived: `Bacon's moral confusion ? the confusion at the heart of much modern science ? came from his assumption, echoing Plato, that human intellect could safely analyse and understand the natural world without reference to any moral principles defining our relationship and duties to both God and God's creation.' Jefferson advised his nephew to `question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must approve the homage of reason rather than of blindfolded fear'; both Al Gore and George W. Bush, however, proudly proclaimed their blindfolded allegiance as born-again evangelical protestants. (At a hustings in December 1999, Republican hopefuls were asked `what political philosopher or thinker do you most identify with and why?' Whereas Steve Forbes spoke of the enduring significance of John Locke, Bush replied simply: `Christ, because he changed my heart.')? How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World, page 108.

  Looking at other American presidents notes significant differences in thinking and attitude:

  ?A more general respect for the secular, liberal humanism of the founding fathers ? and for the spirit of scientific inquiry embodied by Benjamin Franklin, extravagantly depicted by the French Enlightenment philosopher Turgot as a liberating hero who `seized fire from the heavens and the sceptre from the tyrant's hand' - endured far beyond the lifetime of Thomas Jefferson. `Thank heaven I sat at the feet of Darwin and Huxley,' Theodore Roosevelt wrote in 1918, explaining how he became a naturalist. Woodrow Wilson, asked in 1922 for his thoughts on evolution, replied that `of course like every other man of intelligence and education I do believe in organic evolution. It surprises me that at this late date such questions should be raised.' Only three years later, they were propelled on to every front page by the Scopes trial.? How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World, page 108-9.

  All I can say is that Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson would probably be quite shocked had they seen the spectacle of the two latest candidates competing about being the most devoted to old superstition. It doesn?t bode well for the good old US of A. Anyway, get Wheen?s book and read it, read it and weep, because sheer stupidity rules the world today.

  Norm

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• 
  27

  Jehovah's gonna get ya. Or is He?

  by Lady Lee in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ok. most of us here at one time believed in the teachings of the wts.

  thankfully most of us are beyond that.. i have noticed that at times i will find some other way, any other way, to avoid using the name jehovah.. and i know i'm not alone.

  i see what you post!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Since "Jehovah" is at best a figment of some pretty superstitious persons imagination, I can only say
  this obvious fantasy figure is in all probability as much of a prick as the guy who invented him.

  Apart from that I will in the best Monty Phyton tradition say that I fart in his general direction.

  Norm
• 
  14

  Conned By Black & Decker.

  by Englishman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i don't use b & d stuff much.

  i much prefer to buy my tools from makita or bosch.

  they last for years too.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Aw, comeone Mike,

  Go for Hitatchi their professsional tools last a lifetime. Everything else are for sissies.

  Take care,

  Norm
• 
  3

  Courageous in the face of Nazi?s?

  by Norm in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  you will find a very good example of what the watchtower liars and spin doctors do when they want to gloss over their despicable history from nazi germany.

  let us take a look at all the claims made in that article and examine them in the light of reality.

  *** g98 7/8 p. 10 jehovah?s witnesses?courageous in the face of nazi peril ***by awake!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  You will find a very good example of what the Watchtower liars and spin doctors do when they want to gloss over their despicable history from Nazi Germany. Let us take a look at all the claims made in that article and examine them in the light of reality.
  

  *** g98 7/8 p. 10 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril ***BY AWAKE! CORRESPONDENT IN GERMANY JEHOVAH?S WITNESSES are well-known for their firm adherence to God?s Word, the Bible. This often calls for courage, and it certainly affects their lives and their relationships with others.?

  They are no doubt well known for their firm adherence to what their leaders consider ?God?s Word? and naturally that kind of unlimited stupidity is bound to affect you life and your relationships with others.

  *** g98 7/8 p. 10 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** For example, the Witnesses have deep regard for people of all ethnic and cultural backgrounds. They love God and their neighbor. (Matthew 22:35-40) Indeed, they are in full agreement with the apostle Peter, who declared: ?For a certainty I perceive that God is not partial, but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.??Acts 10:34, 35.?

  The Witnesses has absolutely no regard for anyone regardless ?of all ethnic and cultural backgrounds?. They live and pray for the day when their God is going to slaughter them all; they even know the percentage of mankind that will ?perish?:

  w58 10/15 p614-615:
  "On Satan's side will be all the rest of mankind, more than 99.9 percent, even as we read: "The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one." That includes all the governments of the world together with their supporters, the commercial, religious and social institutions. Even the professedly Christian organizations? Yes, because all such that are friends of the world are making themselves enemies of God."

  The above quote doesn?t seem to be containing much respect for anyone but themselves, does it?
  

  ?*** g98 7/8 p. 10 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril ***Jehovah?s Witnesses are also known worldwide for their respect for law, order, and governmental authority. They have never been a seedbed of insurrection and never will be. This is true even when they are persecuted in some lands because of their taking the apostolic position: ?We must obey God as ruler rather than men.? (Acts 5:29; Matthew 24:9) At the same time, the Witnesses recognize the right of others to worship in harmony with the dictates of their conscience.?

  Well, they don?t respect the law when it comes to reporting child molesters, they don?t respect the law when they subject people who want to vote in political elections to sanctions. They don?t respect confidentiality in medical institutions where they rat on fellow Jehovah's Witnesses which has ?transgressed? against Watchtower rules. All in all they only ?respect? what they want. The ?persecution? they harp on is usually caused by some completely idiotic behavior from themselves, like in Malawi, Africa.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 10 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril ***The courageous Christian stand of Jehovah?s Witnesses in Germany and other lands dominated by Adolf Hitler is a matter of record. A notable event in Berlin, Germany, in 1933 illustrates their courage, their love for God and neighbor, and their respect for law, order, and religious freedom.?

  Some individual Bible students were no doubt quite courageous, completely misguided of course but still very brave. The Watchtower Society represented by their sovereign leader and dictator J. F. Rutherford was however very far from courageous or firm with Hitler as the real facts about that ?event? in Wilmersdorf Sporthalle in Berlin in 1933 will demonstrate.
  

  *** g98 7/8 p. 10. No Compromise With Hitler
  It was more than 50 years ago that Hitler?s monstrous 12-year reign of racism and murder came to an end. Yet, that Nazi regime inflicted wounds that grieve humanity to this day.

  History recognizes that only a few groups courageously stood up and spoke out against Nazi terror. Among them were Jehovah?s Witnesses, described as ?a tiny island of unflagging [moral] resistance existing in the bosom of a terrorized nation.? Their courageous stand is well documented by respected historians.?

  Those ?historians? might be respected but I am afraid that in regard to their information about Jehovah's Witnesses their research is extremely inadequate. I am not an historian, but yet I have been able to find a lot of very interesting facts about the Watchtower history fraud by just researching the Watchtower Society literature alone. I sincerely hope the above mentioned historians have done a better job with the rest of the material they write. Regarding the so-called documentation about the alleged Jehovah's Witnesses ?resistance? it is very far from well documented.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 10 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** A few critics, however, including some former associates of Jehovah?s Witnesses, charge that the Witnesses attempted to compromise with the Hitler regime in its early days. They claim that representatives of the Watch Tower Society tried unsuccessfully to curry favor with the new government and that, at least for a time, they endorsed the racist ideology of the Nazis, which eventually led to the murder of six million Jews.

  These serious allegations are absolutely false. The following is a frank examination of the events in question, based on available documentation and historical context.?

  Well. As we are about to see whatever one might call this ?examination? it is very far from frank.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 pp. 10-11 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Jehovah?s Witnesses have been active in Germany for more than 100 years. By 1933, there were about 25,000 Witnesses worshiping Jehovah God and distributing Bible literature throughout Germany.?

  Already here the expression ?frank? is blown out of the water, as the Watchtower Society use the false figure of 25000 witnesses in Germany in 1933. The truth is that this number was reported as being present at the ?memorial supper? that year and anyone with the most rudimentary knowledge of Jehovah's Witnesses knows that the majority of those present at those gathering is very far from ?worshiping Jehovah?. Still the Watchtower Society don?t hesitate to use this number in the manner they do thus revealing their devious nature.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 11 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Despite the freedoms granted by the German constitution of that time, Jehovah?s Witnesses were frequently the target of defamation campaigns, launched primarily by religious opponents. As early as 1921, the Witnesses, then called Ernste Bibelforscher (Earnest Bible Students), were accused of being linked with the Jews in subversive political movements. The Bible Students were branded as the dangerous Bolshevik ?Jewish worm,? though no proof of the charges was ever produced. Swiss theologian Karl Barth later wrote: ?The accusation that Jehovah?s Witnesses are linked with the Communists can only be due to an involuntary or even intentional misunderstanding.?

  Like the Watchtower Society the Nazi?s wasn?t very concerned with truth and reality, so all kinds of fanciful and stupid accusations was thrown around. The Watchtower Society first president C.T. Russell was very pro Jewish according to Historian and Professor J. Penton:
  

  ?During the first half of their history, the Bible Student-Jehovah's Witnesses were notable for their sympathy to the Jews. Even more than most late nineteenth- and twentieth-century American Protestant premillennialists, the Watch Tower's first president, Charles T. Russell, was a thoroughgoing supporter of Zionist causes. He refused to attempt the conversion of the Jews, believed in the Jewish resettlement of Palestine, and in 1910, led a New York Jewish audience in singing the Zionist anthem, Hatikva. For more than a decade after Russell's death in 1916, Judge Rutherford followed in his footsteps.?

  http://watchtower.observer.org/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?SearchID=73184545936141&Avis=WO&Dato=20040306&Kategori=JWANDHITLER&Lopenr=10608028&Ref=AR

  This simple fact might have been more then sufficient to convince the Nazi?s that the Watchtower Society was suspect.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 11 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** A church magazine in Germany charged that the Witnesses and the Jews were coconspirators in revolutionary movements. In response, the April 15, 1930, German edition of The Golden Age (forerunner of Awake!) stated: ?We have no reason to regard this false accusation as an insult?as we are convinced that the Jew is at least as valuable a person as a nominal Christian; but we reject the above untruth of the church tabloid because it is aimed at deprecating our work, as if it were being done not for the sake of the Gospel but for the Jews.?

  Thus, professor of history John Weiss wrote: ?The Witnesses were free of German racial nationalism and had not brooded for centuries over the failure of the Jews to convert. The Witnesses still held to the original, if patronizing, Christian belief of the need to persuade all potential converts to Christ.?

  It must have been very hard to find anything sensible to quote from the Golden Age Magazine, which mostly contained material which would be extremely embarrassing to the Watchtower Society today.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 11 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** What Happened When Hitler Came to Power?
  On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was appointed Germany?s new chancellor. In the beginning, the Hitler government worked to conceal its violent and extremist nature. Hence, the Witnesses, along with millions of other Germans in early 1933, viewed the National Socialist Party as the legitimate ruling authority of the time. The Witnesses hoped that the National Socialist (Nazi) government would realize that this peaceable, law-abiding Christian group posed no subversive threat to the State. This was no offer to compromise Bible principles. As has been the case in other lands, the Witnesses wanted to inform the government of the true nonpolitical nature of their religion.?

  Just like the Nazi?s the Watchtower Society today struggle fiercely to conceal it?s extremist nature, where the ultimate result is the extermination of 99,9% of mankind.
  Lying about and falsifying their history during the Nazi years seem to be a very important part of that effort. The Watchtower Society couldn?t care less about Hitler and the Nazi?s and what they did to other people. It was first when the Nazi?s laid their hands on the most holy of holies in the Watchtower Society world which is Watchtower property that Rutherford jumped into action.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 11 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** It quickly became apparent that Jehovah?s Witnesses were to be among the first targets of brutal Nazi suppression. The Witnesses were again branded as accomplices in an alleged Bolshevik-Jewish conspiracy. A campaign of persecution began.
  Why would such a small religious community attract the fury of the new regime? Historian Brian Dunn identifies three fundamental reasons: (1) the international scope of the Witnesses, (2) their opposition to racism, and (3) their position of neutrality toward the State. Because of their Scriptural views, the German Witnesses refused to give the Hitler salute, to support the National Socialist Party, or later on to participate in military activities.?Exodus 20:4, 5; Isaiah 2:4; John 17:16.?

  The real reason for the Nazi?s interest in the Watchtower Society was in all probability quite accidental. It was all because of one particular man, a certain Ewald Vorsteher this was a man that really did show courage and actually did stand up against Hitler.
  This man had been a Bible student working in the Watchtower Society branch office in Barmen. According to Mehmet Aslan: who has researched the history of Vorsteher it was all quite accidental, Aslan writes:
  

  ?In 1921 and 1922, Ewald Vorsteher from Wuppertal-Barmen was a fellow worker at the branch office of the Watch Tower Society in Barmen. In 1923, he was disfellowshipped or excommunicated for having conscientiously refused to follow the religious and political dictates of Judge J. F. Rutherford, the Watch Tower's American president. Others gathered around him, calling themselves 'Friends of Truth'. The Nazis held Jehovah's Witnesses responsible for Ewald Vorsteher's activities. This was an error on their part, but it gave them a substantial basis for outlawing the Witness movement.?

  The German Watchtower officials knew very well of this misunderstanding and tried desperately to distance themselves from Ewald Vorsteher, whom they had kicked out long ago, but the Nazi?s didn?t listen. Read it all here:
  

  http://watchtower.observer.org/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040306/JWANDHITLER/10630001

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 11 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** As a result, the Witnesses endured threats, interrogations, house searches, and other harassment by the police and SA (Hitler?s Sturmabteilung, storm troopers, or Brownshirts). On April 24, 1933, officials seized and shut down the Watch Tower office in Magdeburg, Germany. After a thorough search yielded no incriminating evidence, and under pressure from the U.S. State Department, the police returned the property. By May 1933, though, the Witnesses were banned in several German states.?

  As Aslan show above this was due to the activities of Vorsteher which which really did stand firm against Hitler and the Nazi?s. In a letter to the Nazi regime, a Watchtower spokesman, Hans Dollinger really demonstrate how ?firm? they were with Hitler. They really couldn?t demonstrate eagerly enough how much they distanced themselves from Vorsteher, Aslan notes:
  

  'The cause of the proscription [of Jehovah's Witnesses by the German government] of 24 June 1933, and the only specific incident affecting that proscription was the report given by the chief of police in Wuppertal on 31 May 1933, Ref.-Nr. I Ad 60001. This report was given erroneously, as the police headquarters in Wuppertal concedes. The report to the police headquarters in Wuppertal was given on the assumption that the incident in question related to the Bible Students Association [Jehovah's Witnesses]. This was subsequently recognized as an error.'
  'The incident reported by the police headquarters, which subsequently lead to the prohibitive order against the society, consisted of spiteful charges against the Chancellor of the Reich made by a certain Ewald Vorsteher from Barmen on 31 May 1933, who was arrested immediately . . . . After 1923, he no longer maintained any contact with the Bible Students Association, the society, on its part, having disfellowshipped him officially (1923).

  Dollingers plea that they had gotten rid of this horrible Nazi critic 10 years ago didn?t impress the German Nazi government. The Awake! Goes on to boast and sugarcoat their history:
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 12 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Witnesses Take Courageous Action
  During this early period, Hitler carefully cultivated his public image as a champion of Christianity. He proclaimed his commitment to religious freedom, promising to treat Christian denominations ?with objective justice.? In order to enhance his image, the new chancellor made appearances in churches. This was a time when many people in countries that later would be at war with Germany were expressing admiration for Hitler?s achievements..?

  Indeed, Hitler?s propaganda machine had a lot to teach the Watchtower Society in those days. And no doubt Rutherford was very impressed with the guy until he was confiscating Watchtower property.

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 12 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Concerned about the rising tensions in Germany, Joseph F. Rutherford, then president of the Watch Tower Society, together with the Germany branch office manager, Paul Balzereit, decided to mount a campaign to inform Chancellor Hitler, government officials, and the public that Jehovah?s Witnesses posed no threat to the German people and the State. Rutherford evidently believed that Hitler was unaware of the attacks against Jehovah?s Witnesses or that he had been misinformed by religious elements regarding the Witnesses..?

  Yes, Rutherford composed a letter to Hitler that was to be accompanied by a Declaration which was supposed to be ?approved? or ?adopted? by the delegates of the upcoming assembly.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 12 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Therefore, the Magdeburg office arranged a convention to make use of the German citizens? right of petition. On short notice, Jehovah?s Witnesses from all over Germany were invited to the Wilmersdorfer Tennishallen in Berlin on June 25, 1933. About 5,000 delegates were expected. Despite the hostile atmosphere, more than 7,000 courageously attended. The delegates adopted a resolution entitled ?Declaration of Facts.? This document protested the restrictions that had been put on the work of the Witnesses. It made a clear statement of their position and denied charges of seditious links with political causes of any sort. It stated:

  Again we get an excellent example of how ?frank? the Watchtower Society is. In the declaration which was published in the 1934 yearbook it is clearly stated that there were 5000 delegates present. This number was in all probability already quite inflated. Old people who were present have estimated the real number to be between 3000-3500. But of course they had to pump it up to 5000 in the letter that was sent to Hitler. Today, that isn?t good enough so now they inflate it further to 7000 thousand, ?frank? indeed.
  Then we get two short quotes in the best Watchtower Society tradition is quite nondescript and safe to quote but tell you nothing about the real content because they surgically avoid the most embarrassing parts:
  

  " *** g98 7/8 p. 12 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** ?We are wrongfully charged before the ruling powers of this government . . . We do respectfully ask the rulers of the nation and the people to give a fair and impartial consideration to the statement of facts here made.?

  ?We have no fight with any persons or religious teachers, but we must call attention to the fact that it is generally those who claim to represent God and Christ Jesus who are in fact our persecutors and who misrepresent us before the governments.?

  Then comes some really weasel worded sentences which set up straw men:
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 12 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Convention of Courage or Compromise?
  Some now hold that the 1933 Berlin convention and the ?Declaration of Facts? were attempts on the part of prominent Witnesses to show support for the Nazi government and its hatred of the Jews. But their assertions are not true. They are based on misinformation and on misinterpretation of the facts.
  For instance, critics claim that the Witnesses decorated the Wilmersdorfer Tennishallen with swastika flags. Photographs of the 1933 convention clearly show that they displayed no swastikas in the hall. Eyewitnesses confirm that there were no flags inside.?

  Absolutely false, no ?critics? on the face of the earth has ever claimed that the Bible students placed any such Nazi symbols in and around the hall. No critic has ever suggested that any Bible student ever saluted any of those symbols. What we have claimed, me included is that there were indeed such symbols in and around the hall and we are all grateful to the Watchtower Society that they now finally admit to this fact as they do in the next paragraph:
  

  ?*** g98 7/8 p. 12 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** It is possible, however, that there were flags on the building?s exterior. A Nazi combat troop had used the hall on June 21, the Wednesday prior to the convention. Then just the day before the convention, crowds of young people along with units of the SS (Schutzstaffel, originally Hitler?s Blackshirt bodyguards), SA, and others celebrated the summer solstice nearby. So Witnesses arriving at the Sunday convention might have been greeted with the sight of a building decked with swastika flags.

  Had there been swastika flags decorating the hall?s exterior, corridors, or even its interior, the Witnesses would have left them alone. Even today, when Jehovah?s Witnesses rent public facilities for meetings and conventions, they do not remove national symbols. But there is no evidence that the Witnesses themselves hung any flags or that they saluted them.?

  Then to the next weasel worded paragraph with a new straw man argument:
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 pp. 12-13 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Critics further state that the Witnesses opened the convention with the German national anthem. Actually, the convention began with ?Zion?s Glorious Hope,? Song 64 in the Witnesses? religious songbook. The words of this song were set to music composed by Joseph Haydn in 1797. Song 64 had been in the Bible Students? songbook since at least 1905. In 1922 the German government adopted Haydn?s melody with words by Hoffmann von Fallersleben as their national anthem. Nevertheless, the Bible Students in Germany still sang their Song 64 occasionally, as did Bible Students in other countries.

  The singing of a song about Zion could hardly be construed as an effort to placate the Nazis. Under pressure from anti-Semitic Nazis, other churches removed Hebrew terms such as ?Judah,? ?Jehovah,? and ?Zion? from their hymnals and liturgies. Jehovah?s Witnesses did not. The convention organizers, then, certainly did not expect to win favor with the government by singing a song extolling Zion. Possibly, some delegates may have been reluctant to sing ?Zion?s Glorious Hope,? since the melody of this composition by Haydn was the same as that of the national anthem.?

  Again it is great that the Watchtower Society finally admit what we have been claiming all along. The song they did sing had the same melody as the German national anthem. No one - no critic has ever suggested that they did sing the German national anthem.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 13 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** A Statement of Intent
  With the government in transition and the country in turmoil, the Witnesses wanted to make a clear statement of their position. By means of the ?Declaration,? the Witnesses strongly denied accusations of financial involvement or political ties with Jews. Thus, the document stated:?

  Now they have to thread lightly as quoting the declaration is indeed a hazardous undertaking. Let us see what they have left out. What is NOT quoted is in bold.
  

  "It is falsely charged by our enemies that we have received financial support for our work from the Jews. Nothing is farther from the truth. Up to this hour there never has been the slightest bit of money contributed to our work by Jews." We are the faithful followers of Christ Jesus and believe upon Him as the Savior of the world, whereas the Jews entirely reject Jesus Christ and emphatically deny that he is the Savior of the world sent of God for man's good. This of itself should be sufficient proof to show that we receive no support from Jews and that therefore the charges against us are maliciously false and could proceed only from Satan, our great enemy."

  Then it continues and this time you can see the full text before and after their quote, again what they didn?t ?see fit? to quote is in bold:
  

  ?Having mentioned money, the "Declaration" went on to denounce unfair practices of big business. It said: The greatest and the most oppressive empire on earth is the Anglo-American empire. By that is meant the British Empire, of which the United States of America forms a part. "It has been the commercial Jews of the British-American empire that have built up and carried on Big Business as a means of exploiting and oppressing the peoples of many nations." This fact particularly applies to the cities of London and New York, the stronghold of Big Business. This fact is so manifest in America that there is a proverb concerning the city of New York which says: 'The Jews own it, the Irish Catholics rule it, and the Americans pay the bills.'

  Then follows another bit of helpless spin:
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 14 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** This statement clearly did not refer to the Jewish people in general, and it is regrettable if it has been misunderstood and has given cause for any offense. Some have claimed that Jehovah?s Witnesses shared the hostility toward the Jews that was commonly taught in the German churches at the time. This is absolutely untrue. By their literature and conduct during the Nazi era, the Witnesses rejected anti-Semitic views and condemned the Nazi mistreatment of the Jews. Certainly, their kindness toward Jews who shared their lot in the concentration camps provides a resounding rebuttal to this false accusation.?

  No of course not, they didn?t know about the well known conspiracy theory of the Jews taking over the world and exploiting the masses? They didn?t try to suck up to Hitler by their nice anecdote about the greedy Jews owning New York? This Declaration reeks of servility to the Nazi?s. Was this servile bleating Rutherford?s idea of standing firm against Hitler? Then follows more helpless spin:
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 14 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** The ?Declaration? defined the Witnesses? work as religious in character, stating: ?Our organization is not political in any sense. We only insist on teaching the Word of Jehovah God to the people.

  The ?Declaration? also reminded the government of its own promises. The Witnesses upheld certain high ideals, and these happened to be publicly espoused also by the German government. Among these were family values and religious freedom.
  

  In this regard, the "Declaration" added: "A careful examination of our books and literature will disclose the fact that the very high ideals held and promulgated by the present national government are set forth in and endorsed and strongly emphasized in our publications, and show that Jehovah God will see to it that these high ideals in due time will be attained by all persons who love righteousness."

  The little quotes above were from a far safer part of the declaration. It is however quite interesting that there is no mention of the letter to Hitler accompanying the declaration. This letter is very interesting as we shall see in the next claim from the Watchtower Society.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 14 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Thus, the Witnesses never expressed support for the Nazi Party. Moreover, in the exercise of religious freedom, they did not intend to stop their public preaching.?Matthew 24:14; 28:19, 20.

  Indeed? In that case take a look at this little love song from the letter to Hitler:

  ?Further, it was stated at the five-thousand-delegate convention-a expressed in the Declaration-that Bible Students are fighting for the same high, ethical goals and ideals that the National Government a the German Reich proclaimed regarding the relationship of man to God, namely: honesty of the created towards the Creator!? Letter to Hitler, June 25. 1933.?

  Not only did the WTS share the ?high ethical goals? of the Nazi regime but they were ?fighting? for them. The Declaration itself also praises the Nazi regime:
  

  ?Instead of being against the principles advocated by the government
  of Germany, we stand squarely for such principles, and point out that Jehovah God through Christ Jesus will bring about the full realization of these principles and will give to the people peace and prosperity and the greatest desire of every honest heart.?

  As we can see, even Jehovah and Christ were behind the principles of the German government.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 14 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** According to the account in the 1974 Yearbook of Jehovah?s Witnesses, some German Witnesses were disappointed that the language of the ?Declaration? was not more explicit in tone. Had the branch office manager, Paul Balzereit, weakened the text of the document? No, for a comparison of the German and the English texts shows that this is not the case. Evidently, an impression to the contrary was based on the subjective observations of some who were not directly involved in the preparation of the ?Declaration.? Their conclusions may also have been influenced by the fact that Balzereit renounced his faith only two years later.?

  Quite interesting to see that this article clear Paul Balzereit of the accusations made against him in the 1974 Yearbook. It is however no wonder that the delegates at the convention was appalled at the declaration. Many of them were probably quite shocked at the blatant kissing up to the Nazi?s. No doubt the rumor about Balzerzeit was planted to protect Rutherford from being regarded as the opportunist he was.
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 14 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** It is now known that a ban on Jehovah?s Witnesses in Germany had been issued on Saturday, June 24, 1933, just the day before the Berlin convention. The convention organizers and the police learned of this ban a few days later. In view of the climate of tension and the evident hostility of Nazi officials, it is remarkable that the convention was held at all. It is no exaggeration to say that 7,000 Witnesses courageously put their liberty at risk by attending the gathering.?

  Again they are continuing with the falsification of numbers. Somehow it is so important to them to inflate numbers. Was this because of the upcoming claims of compensation made to Swiss banks?
  

  ? *** g98 7/8 p. 14 Jehovah?s Witnesses?Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril *** Following the convention, the Witnesses distributed 2.1 million copies of the ?Declaration.? Some Witnesses were arrested immediately and sent to labor camps. Thus, the Nazi government fully revealed its oppressive, violent nature and soon launched an all-out attack on this small group of Christians.
  Wrote Professor Christine King: ?Brute force could not suppress the Witnesses, the Nazis were to learn.? It was as the ?Declaration? stated: ?The power of Jehovah God is supreme and there is no power that can successfully resist him.?

  Rutherford was really in a hurry to get out of Germany and he was of course furious that his attempt to get chummy with Hitler had failed. So he ordered the poor idiots to irritate the Nazi?s further by sending them out to distribute the incredible Declaration crap. Of course the Nazi?s didn?t tolerate such activity, but Rutherford was safe, far away from harm so it didn?t matter much to him, 635 of the ?faithful? however paid with their lives. The faithful Witnesses proved to be even more fanatical then the Nazi?s.
  

  Norm
• 
  9

  To Norm, My old Friend

  by Farkel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  hey norm, .

  would you mind reposting your magnficent essay on the wts lies about the dubs who actually died in the holocaust?

  new ones here need to see it, but i know a researcher who also needs to see it, and run with it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Hello Lady Lee,

  Yes I will post it again as a separate thread. I wasn't aware that there was a "best of" section.

  Take care,

  Norm