Norm

Joined

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

Posts by Norm

• 
  22

  WTBTS or IBSA

  by Jim_TX in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the other day, i was in a local half-price bookstore.

  just out of curiosity, i went down the 'religious' isle, and sure enuf, i saw a couple of publications by the witnesses wedged in with the usual other things, bible-related.. i also saw a spanish printed something-or-other... a recent publication (although i don't remember the copyright date).

  i was looking at the information, and it said something like.... published by the watchtower bible and trach society and international bible students association ... etc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  BSA is alive and well. Just up the road from the old London Bethel stands a relatively new edifice, IBSA House:

  Norm
• 
  54

  Fact Jews Returned In 538 BC Kills Off Watchtower Chronology

  by AlanF in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the watchtower society's 1914 chronology hinges on a dicey chain of claims.

  if any of these claims is wrong, then the chain is broken and watchtower chronology collapses.

  along with it goes the entire belief structure built on it, including most importantly the claim of the leaders of jehovah's witnesses to have been specially appointed in 1919 by god over "all christ's belongings" on earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Well Alan F.
  
  I am afraid that if you do continue this blustering and fail to immediately produce
  proof of C. O. Jonsson's correct shoe size and mine also, I am afraid we all including "scholar"
  can never trust anything you say or write again. I mean the illustrious WT scholars have know his shoe size
  for years but modesty forbids them to publish it. As any JW in good standing they deem it improper to draw attention to themselves.
  
  Norm
• 
  19

  Has anyone ever asked you to help them do something illegal?

  by Scully in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i got a weird call from a work mate last night.

  she's going through hell for the past year or so with her soon-to-be ex, who had been carrying on an affair and stopped sharing their family expenses.

  long story short, he's out of the house now and has left her and their kids out in the country without any transportation.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Been asked to do things that are illegal in at least 32 states Scully
  but only in bed.
  
  Norm
• 
  53

  IS EVOLUTION THE ANSWER?

  by Dansk in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm currently reading richard dawkin's book the ancestor's tale and it suddenly struck me that evolutionists believe all men are equal seeing that we all came from a common ancestor.

  that being the case, would it not serve man to believe in evolution?.

  turn on the t.v.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Siddhashunyata uttered:
  

  "There are two catagories of truths, relative and absolute ( they are intertwined giving rise to what may be called "one truth"). Evolution is a relative truth . Causes and conditions lead to changes in causes and conditions which lead to changes in causes and conditions etc, etc etc and on and on. But all of these changes are like the relative waves on the surface of the sea. They appear, they disappear, some are big and frothy some are small with little white tips etc. The absolute truth is water. All of them are water. The waves are many and varied but they remain water always. If the waves don't know they are water , they may think they have a separate existence and become threatened. This fear gives rise to the kind of world we have. So the perception of relative truth is not the answer. The answer is the perception of the relative and the absolute together. When this is achieved , life's objects have a different "quality" . This quality is sensed and expressed as..."all things are One". Walking in that One truth will transform human behavior and the world."

  
  
  Yup, all that is clear as mud.
  
  Norm
• 
  53

  IS EVOLUTION THE ANSWER?

  by Dansk in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm currently reading richard dawkin's book the ancestor's tale and it suddenly struck me that evolutionists believe all men are equal seeing that we all came from a common ancestor.

  that being the case, would it not serve man to believe in evolution?.

  turn on the t.v.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Interesting question Dansk.
  
  In Biblical times and even up until Galileo, mankind had a very earth-centric view. Because of the Bible we still have a very humano-centric view. Even among evolutionist's there has ben a tendency to view humans as the end product of evolution. Thus we have expression like "primitive" about animals and ideas that monkies and primates are just stages on the way to homo sapiens. Slowly this idea is also starting to lose ground as evolutionists realize that there is no such thing as a "primitive" or "unevolved" organism or species. All species that exist are perfect fully functioning and sucessful within their perimeter or habitat as they have been able to mate and spread their genes to the next generation. Evolution comes in when there is a need for them to change.
  
  If one subscribes to that view, which I do, humans is in no way more important and valuable then other species on this planet. The science of genetics is at it's beginning and will no doubt astound us in the future as we gain more insight into how it works. It is however no longer any doubt that we as humans are related to almost any living organism we are sharing this planet with. We share genes with mammals, reptiles, yes we share genes with yeast, worms flies and mice : http://www.hhmi.org/genesweshare/
  
  I think that human beings really need to be far more humble when it comes to our place and space on this litte planet.
  Much thanks to religion we tend to think far to highly of ourself.
  
  Norm
• 
  14

  God and Protection

  by Norm in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it is little wonder that many ask, why does god allow such suffering?

  comfort for those who suffer.

  comfort for those who suffer.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Christians always tell us how loving, caring and just God is, how he never “forgets” us etc. They also claim that God is omnipotent and everything that happens is his will and that it has a “purpose”.

  Every day and every second in a human beings life such claims are contradicted by reality in an overwhelming way, yet most Christians seem to have an almost unlimited ability to ignore reality. This discrepancy between fantasy and reality has brought forth countless articles which are pretending to deal with the obvious problem. Usually in such a helpless and nonsensical way that one wonders how anyone with their wits about them can actually buy such complete rot. An example of one such attempt to ease the fears of reality and lull the reader into the safety of their fantasy world and keep them there was printed in the Watchtower magazine in January 2003. Here are the opening lines:

  “*** w03 1/1 p. 3 ‘God, Why Did You Allow This?’ ***
  God, Why Did You Allow This?’RICARDO still remembers sitting with his wife, Maria, in the doctor’s waiting room. Neither of them had the courage to read the results of Maria’s latest medical examinations. Then, Ricardo opened the envelope, and they hastily glanced over the medical language of the report. They spotted the word “cancer,” and both began to cry as they realized the full import of that word.“The doctor was very kind,” recalls Ricardo, “but he obviously realized the gravity of the situation because he kept telling us that we had to trust in God.”
  
  Before radiation treatment had begun, Maria’s doctor noticed involuntary movements in her right foot. Further tests revealed that the cancer had spread to her brain. After just one week of treatment, the radiation was suspended. Maria slipped into a coma and died two months later. “I was glad that her suffering had ended,” explains Ricardo, “but I missed her so much that I found myself wishing that my life would come to an end too. Often, I would cry out to God: ‘Why did you allow this to happen?’”
  When Tragedy Strikes, Questions AboundLike Ricardo, countless people throughout the world are forced to face up to the reality of suffering. Many times, it is the innocent who suffer. Think of the heartrending grief caused by the relentless armed conflicts that plague mankind. Or consider the pain felt by the numerous victims of rape, child abuse, domestic violence, and other evils committed by man. Throughout history there seems to have been no limit to the injustice and pain that men and women have been willing to inflict on one another. (Ecclesiastes 4:1-3) Then there is the anguish of victims of natural disasters or of emotional, mental, and physical illnesses. It is little wonder that many ask, “Why does God allow such suffering?” Even for those with religious convictions, suffering is never easy to deal with. You too may wonder what reason a loving, all-powerful God could possibly have for permitting human suffering. Finding a satisfying and truthful answer to this puzzling question is vital for our peace of mind and our relationship with God. The Bible provides such an answer. Please consider what it has to say as presented in the following article.”

  The working hypothesis that all hinges upon seems to be that God somehow “allow” suffering. Well, if you are a true believer you can obviously achieve “peace of mind” by happily accepting the shallowest nonsense imaginable. The Watchtower goes on to present some arguments that even they seem to find quite silly, far fetched and unacceptable:

  “*** w03 1/1 p. 4 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  Comfort for Those Who Suffer
  OVER the centuries, the question of why God allows suffering has challenged many philosophers and theologians. Some have asserted that since God is all-powerful, he must ultimately be responsible for suffering. The writer of The Clementine Homilies, an apocryphal second-century work, claimed that God rules the world with both hands. With his “left hand,” the Devil, he causes suffering and affliction, and with his “right hand,” Jesus, he saves and blesses.
  
  Others, unable to accept that God could permit suffering even if he does not cause it, have chosen to deny that suffering exists. “Evil is but an illusion, and it has no real basis,” wrote Mary Baker Eddy. “If sin, sickness, and death were understood as nothingness, they would disappear.”—Science and Health With Key to the Scriptures. In the wake of the tragic events of history, especially from the first world war until our day, many have reached the conclusion that God is simply unable to prevent suffering.
  
  “The Holocaust has, I think, dismissed any easy use of omnipotence as an attribute appropriate to God,” wrote Jewish scholar David Wolf Silverman. “If God is to be intelligible in some manner,” he added, “then His goodness must be compatible with the existence of evil, and this is only if He is not all-powerful.”

  Right off at the top they try to deal with the obvious problem that even to Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Society God is indeed “all-powerful” and as the alleged “creator” of all things he was the one who started the whole circus and of course ultimately responsible for all that happened since then. But of course all that has to be “explained” away. Let’s pay attention to what the Watchtower say next as we will come back to it later:

  “*** w03 1/1 p. 4 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  Comfort for Those Who Suffer
  However, claims that God is somehow an accomplice to suffering, that he is unable to prevent it, or that suffering is a mere figment of our imagination offer scant comfort to those who suffer. And more important, such beliefs are utterly at odds with the just, dynamic, and caring God who is revealed in the pages of the Bible. (Job 34:10, 12; Jeremiah 32:17; 1 John 4:8) What, then, does the Bible say about the reason why suffering has been permitted?”

  Then the Watchtower starts to “explain” God and suffering, let us see if it has any more merit then the ones that were dismissed above:

  *** w03 1/1 pp. 4-5 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  How Did Suffering Begin?
  God did not create humans to suffer. On the contrary, he endowed the first human couple, Adam and Eve, with perfect minds and bodies, prepared a delightful garden to serve as their home, and assigned them meaningful, satisfying work. (Genesis 1:27, 28, 31; 2:8) However, their continued happiness depended on their recognizing God’s rulership and his right to decide what was good and what was bad. That divine prerogative was represented by a tree called “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.” (Genesis 2:17) Adam and Eve would demonstrate their subjection to God if they obeyed his command not to eat from that tree.
  
  Tragically, Adam and Eve failed to obey God. A rebellious spirit creature, later identified as Satan the Devil, convinced Eve that it was not in her best interests to obey God. In fact, God was supposedly depriving her of something highly desirable: independence, the right to choose for herself what was good and what was bad. Satan claimed that if she ate of the tree, ‘her eyes were bound to be opened and she was bound to be like God, knowing good and bad.’ (Genesis 3:1-6; Revelation 12:9) Seduced by the prospect of independence, Eve partook of the forbidden fruit, and Adam soon did the same.
  
  That same day, Adam and Eve began to experience the results of their rebellion. By rejecting divine rulership, they lost out on the protection and blessings that subjection to God had afforded them. God evicted them from Paradise and told Adam: “Cursed is the ground on your account. In pain you will eat its produce all the days of your life. In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground.” (Genesis 3:17, 19) Adam and Eve became subject to sickness, pain, aging, and death. Suffering had become a part of human experience.—Genesis 5:29.

  Wow!, Now we finally got it. All the crap that happens to us humans, including the latest Tsunami disaster has its explanation in a woman and a talking snake in a garden a long time ago, yup, how can anyone ever miss that one, huh? That really makes sense, eh? It ranks right up there with the earth resting on a pillar on the back of tortoise, fantastic “explanation” eh? I mean who among us would want anything as awful as independence? Of course God seemed completely powerless to prevent all this highly irregular behavior perpetrated by his “perfect” creation. He clearly was a powerless bystander helplessly watching his obviously very flawed creation screw up in a major way, plunging mankind into pain, suffering and misery. What is caring just and loving about that? Is the complete and utter nonsense presented above any less silly then the “explanations” discussed further above? Isn’t the one who supposedly started all this indeed an accomplice to it? And the simple fact that suffering is still going on is of course excellent proof that God was indeed unable to prevent it, or didn’t care particularly about it perhaps. Just look at this question again:

  “*** w03 1/1 p. 4 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  Comfort for Those Who Suffer
  What, then, does the Bible say about the reason why suffering has been permitted?”

  Think about this. Suffering was permitted, by whom? By God of course. Did he have to permit it? Yes, apparently he had to. If he permitted it to happen, he is of course responsible for it. Is there any good reasons to “permit” people to suffer in all kinds of horrible ways? Of course there isn’t. Is it a sign that a person who “permit” such horrific things care for us and love us? Of course it isn’t.

  But the “explanation” gets far worse:

  “*** w03 1/1 pp. 5-6 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  Settling the Issue
  Someone may ask, ‘Could God not have simply overlooked Adam and Eve’s sin?’ No, because that would have further undermined respect for his authority, perhaps encouraging future rebellions and resulting in even greater suffering. (Ecclesiastes 8:11) In addition, condoning such disobedience would have made God a party to wrongdoing.

  This is complete nonsense; if God is omnipotent he can overlook whatever he wants. The idea that it would “undermine his authority” is even sillier. An omni-whatever God wouldn’t even put himself in such a jam in the first place. Nothing and no one can undermine the authority of such a supreme being.

  “*** w03 1/1 pp. 5-6 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  Settling the Issue
  The Bible writer Moses reminds us: “God’s works are perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness, with whom there is no injustice; righteous and upright is he.” (Deuteronomy 32:4, footnote) To be true to himself, God had to allow Adam and Eve to suffer the consequences of their disobedience.

  Repeating such ass-kissing sucking up to drivel about how wonderful God is supposed to be doesn’t alter the facts that he seems to be a first class bungler. The Christians love to use the “father/parents motif on God, but if any parent was so completely negligent with their children, the authorities would take their children away from them immediately.

  “*** w03 1/1 pp. 5-6 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  Settling the Issue
  Why did God not immediately destroy the first human couple along with Satan, the invisible instigator of their rebellion? He had the power to do so. Adam and Eve would not have produced offspring subject to a legacy of suffering and death. However, such a demonstration of divine power would not have proved the rightfulness of God’s authority over his intelligent creatures. Furthermore, had Adam and Eve died childless, that would have signaled the failure of God’s purpose to fill the earth with their perfect descendants. (Genesis 1:28) And “God is not like men . . . Whatever he promises, he does; he speaks, and it is done.”—Numbers 23:19, Today’s English Version.

  “*** w03 1/1 pp. 5-6 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  Settling the Issue
  In his perfect wisdom, Jehovah God decided to allow the rebellion to proceed for a limited time. The rebels would have ample opportunity to experience the effects of independence from God. History would demonstrate beyond doubt mankind’s need for divine guidance and the superiority of God’s rule over man’s or Satan’s. At the same time, God took steps to ensure that his original purpose for the earth would be fulfilled. He promised that a “seed,” or “offspring,” would come who would ‘bruise Satan in the head,’ eliminating once and for all his rebellion and its damaging effects.—Genesis 3:15, footnote.”

  More completely silly claptrap and false dilemmas. This is just yet another example of the hopeless nonsensical drivel that is presented as an “explanation” This doesn’t explain anything, it is as usual just an attempt to cloud things and drown the reader with senseless words.

  “*** w03 1/1 pp. 5-6 Comfort for Those Who Suffer ***
  Settling the Issue
  Jesus Christ was that promised Seed. At 1 John 3:8, we read that “the Son of God was made manifest . . . to break up the works of the Devil.” This he did by laying down his perfect human life and paying the ransom price to redeem Adam’s children from inherited sin and death. (John 1:29; 1 Timothy 2:5, 6) Those who truly exercise faith in Jesus’ sacrifice are promised permanent relief from suffering. (John 3:16; Revelation 7:17) When will this happen?

  Then we get the song and dance about the “ransom sacrifice” which takes the biscuit in its incredible silly premise. I don’t think that this drivel even made sense to those poor superstitious shepherds that allegedly cooked up this nonsense a long time ago.

  The obvious stares us all in the face. We are here on this planet; we are a species among many in a world - a nature that doesn’t care about anything. Volcanoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, tornados are just a part of the system on the planet. We know that over 90% of all the species that has lived on the planet is extinct, we know that it has been hit several times by huge comets and that it most likely will be again. We are no more then a mere species among many on this planet. We might not be around anymore in a million years. Life isn’t fair; existence isn’t fair as we see it. There is no God that looks after us. Life as such has absolutely no meaning, we must give life meaning ourselves, we can’t expect anyone “out there” to do that for us. We can only give life meaning by behaving as ethical and moral beings, helping each other and cooperate with each other. We don’t need a fantasy, a God to do that, we don’t have to bullshit our self
  with complete nonsensical “explanations” for something that doesn’t need any explanation, as we can observe the realities around us every day. There is much comfort and satisfaction in accepting reality. Acceptance of it gives peace of mind and enable you to get on with life and stop wasting your time on superstitious nonsense.

  Norm
• 
  601

  For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

  by Swamboozled in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  just got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.

  i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!

  http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if I am posting old stuff,
  but I can prove merely by help of the Bible and the Watchtower literature that Jerusalem
  fell in 587 BCE. Of course they know full well in Brooklyn that 607 is nonsense, they really demonstrate it well in the way they "handle" the Bible texts below.
  
  Read and learn:
  
  ----------------------- The Watchtower Society, always claim that if there's a disagreement between what they call Biblical
  
  Chronology and secular chronology they take the side of the Bible.
  This sounds very nice, but is it really so? First of all, to claim that there is disharmony between secular and Biblical chronology is false. It is creating a false dilemma. It is creating confusion in the mind of the unsuspecting Witness. In particular regarding the "neo Babylonian" chronology, where there is complete harmony between the relative chronology of the Bible and the absolute secular chronology.
  In the real world the dividing lines are drawn between the well-documented secular and Biblical chronology, and the totally unfounded and unsupported Watchtower chronology.
  
  I will now present facts about how far the Watchtower are willing to go, what they are ready to do, to make their precious fabricated chronology to appear "true". They have absolutely no scruples with changing Bible text's to save their unfounded speculation, which is based on the idea that the destruction of Jerusalem took place in 607 BCE.
  Maybe the most serious examples of this we find in the book "Babylon the Great has Fallen" published in 1963. In this book the most incredible acrobatics are performed in order to preserve the precious
  
  Watchtower chronology. Take a look at this:
  

  Zion Clashes with Babylon
  
  It was at that time that the young Daniel and three special companions were taken exile to Babylon. In Daniel 1:1 he writes about it: "In the third year of the kingship of Jehoiakim the king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and proceeded to lay siege to it." Babylon the Great has fallen, 1963, page 136.

  
  This text in Daniel 1:1 strikes a devastating blow to the Watchtower chronology, so therefore its meaning must be altered at all cost's. Take a look at this fantastic piece of reasoning that follows:
  

  "This was after King Jehoiakim had rebelled against the king of Babylon, after being a vassal for about three years. Hence the expression "in the third year of the kingship of Jehoiakim the king of Judah" means in the third year of Jehoiakim as a vassal king paying tribute to Babylon. Since his vassalage began after he reigned eight years in Jerusalem, this third year of his reign as Babylon's vassal would be the eleventh year of his entire reign at Jerusalem and would be due to end by the Jewish lunar calendar on Adar 29, 617 BCE., or March 19, 617 BCE." Babylon the Great has Fallen, 1963, page 136.

  
  Here we can see the Watchtowers "loyalty" to the Bible when a simple text "MUST" mean something else than what it say's. Here Brooklyn had to tell the readers what Daniel, the poor bungler "really meant". He couldn't get anything right, after all he was just one of Jehovah's prophets and he was there at the time, so what did he know about Nebuchadnezzar and when he reigned?
  Another fact we have to take into consideration it that when you have been appointed Jesus "slave" since 1919, you are entitled to alter the Bible as you see fit. Especially if it doesn't support your own chronology. But what is it about the Society's chronology that makes the alteration of Bible texts necessary? This becomes even more apparent when the "Babylon book" comes to the text in Daniel 2:1, which states:
  

  "And in the second year of the kingship of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams; and his spirit began to feel agitated, and his very sleep was made to be something beyond him."

  
  Here Daniel states simple and clear that he was indeed present in Babylon in Nebuchadnezzar's second year of kingship. But this would of course ruin the Society's chronology completely, so therefore this Bible text HAS TO mean something else. According to the Watchtower chronology Nebuchadnezzar was crowned as king in 625, and Daniel wasn't taken into exile before 612, 8 years later. Therefore it becomes so important for the Watchtower that Daniel couldn't have been in Babylon when he himself say's he was. This Bible text therefore HAS TO mean something else then what is written there.
  
  The Watchtower, when confronted with these two texts has a clear choice. Both of these texts clearly prove that their own chronology isn't in harmony with the Bible. What do they do? Are they true to the Bible and change their chronology? The facts show what choice the Watchtower Society made. The same choice they always do when it stands between the Bible and their own teachings. They choose their own teachings over the Bibles. Just look at what the Babylon book say:

  "Waiting in Exile for Babylon's Fall
  
  How, then, shall we understand the statement in Daniel 2:1? It reads: "And in the second year of the kingship of Nebuchadnezzar,… However, the most reasonable and fitting suggestion is that this refers to the "second year" from a marked event, namely, from Nebuchadnezzar's destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C. Babylon the Great has Fallen, 1963, page 172.

  
  Notice the phrase: "the most reasonable and fitting suggestion". The most "reasonable and fitting suggestion" for whom? Why does this Bible text need any "suggestions" at all? Where is the need for any explanations at all about the very simple fact that Daniel himself states that he himself was PRESENT in Babylon in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign? What makes such an operation at all necessary? Only because of the Watchtower Society's own chronology do they have to come up with a "reasonable and fitting" way of muddling the clear statements of the Bible. To whom is the Watchtower showing loyalty? Is it the Bible? When the prophet Daniel under “inspiration” say the he himself was present in Babylon during the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, the Watchtower trough some fantastic acrobatics of rewriting the Bible want us to believe that this was really in the twentieth year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign! Is this the Society idea of standing on the side of the Bible?
  If we should take the Watchtower Society's far-fetched reasoning serious we would come into conflict with several other Bible texts. For example Jeremiah 25:1
  

  "The word that occurred to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Je•hoi'a•kim the son of Jo•si'ah, the king of Judah, that is, the first year of Neb•u•chad•rez'zar the king of Babylon;"

  (That Daniel 1:1 say the "third year" , while Jeremiah say the fourth year, are due to the fact that Daniel
  counted whole years of reign, but Jeremiah counts the accession year even though it wasn't a full year.
  Nebuchadnezzar was crowned as king the first of Nisan in 605, his first whole year was therefore 604 .)
  When according to Jeremiah, Je•hoi'a•kim the king of Judah's fourth year (third whole year) was
  Nebuchadnezzar's first year and when Daniel 1:1 say's that Nebuchadnezzar came and lay siege to
  Jerusalem and took captives, among those Daniel according to verse 6:
  

  "Now there happened to be among them some of the sons of Judah, Daniel, Han•a•ni'ah, Mish'a•el and Az•a•ri'ah." Daniel 1:6.

  
  Then we have the Bible stating that Daniel really was present in Babylon in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign! Not in his twentieth year as the Society will have us believe. Here we have got an excellent demonstration of the kind of respect the Watchtower has for the Bible.
  The self appointed prophet in Brooklyn the great F&DS treats the Bible as they see fit. They own the "truth" and therefore they define what truth is. It seems to be their private property. But how about those texts that we have been touching upon here? Can a satisfactory explanation be found? Yes, if we want to explore the very solid documentation, which exist regarding the neo Babylonian chronology that is in harmony with the Biblical. According to this chronology Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem in 605 BCE, and took away among others Daniel and his 3 friends. If you investigate this chronology you don't have to massacre Daniel 1:1 and 2:1 to make it fit a completely constructed chronology because then Daniel really was present in Babylon in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign!
  Considering that Nebuchadnezzar's first whole year of reign was 604, his 18th year of reign. (19th year, if counted from his accession year 605, like the Jew's did, cr. Jer. 52:12), would 587 BCE, be the year he destroyed Jerusalem , which is confirmed by both secular and Biblical chronology. Well, where in the Bible do you find it stated that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587, some may ask?
  This isn't surprising. The overwhelming evidence that supports the year 587, are effectively kept away from rank and file Jehovah's Witnesses. Lets us look at some real good evidence, which is accidentally given, in the Watchtowers own literature, and where we again get a good demonstration of how little Brooklyn care about the Bible. We find this in the book "Paradise restored, from 1972, where the texts in Zechariah 1: 7-12 is discussed. According to verse 7, Zechariah had this vision in the second year of the reign of Darius. The book points to the fact that this was happening in 519 BCE. Let ‘s look at the Bible text:
  

  "And they proceeded to answer the angel of Jehovah who was standing among the myrtle trees and to say: "We have walked about in the earth, and, look! The whole earth is sitting still and having no disturbance." 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?" Zechariah 1:11-12.

  
  As mentioned above, the Paradise Restored book dates this vision to the year 519 BCE. At that time
  Jehovah had denounced Jerusalem and the cities of Judah for 70 years:
  

  "No wonder that, back there in 519 BCE, the angelic scouts reported the whole earth as without disturbance!" Paradise Restored. 1972, page 128.

  
  So far, so good. But let us see what happens next. Is the Watchtower writer satisfied with the fact that in 519 B.C.E Jehovah had been denouncing, Jerusalem and the cities of Judah for 70 years? No way, this had to be explained away, and now it really gets pathetic:
  

  "Mercy to the Persecuted but Judgment to Persecutors
  So did Jehovah's angel mean that those seventy years had not yet ended, or that they had just now ended? This could not historically be true." Paradise Restored. 1972, page 131.

  Believe it or not it gets worse, the book continues on page 132:
  

  "... ,why would the angel, knowing what he did, speak as he did? Since he knew that the time period was definitely seventy years long, why would he say: "O Jehovah of armies, how long?" Paradise Restored. 1972, page 132.

  
  Yes, why indeed? Why should this angel make such problems for the Society's precious chronology about the year 607? What Jehovah's angel said couldn't: "HISTORICALLY BE TRUE"!! Hey folks, an angel whose words are recorded in the Bible can’t be TRUE! Dear oh dear. No, how can we expect that any old angel should have a clue what he talks about? Why couldn't this troublesome angel keep his mouth shut and stop creating such embarrassment for the Society's chronology?
  Well, what the angel said makes perfect sense and was in full harmony with history if you consider it in the light of the "secular/Biblical chronology". But as demonstrated here, truth and facts are without any interest whatsoever for the Watchtower Society. To them the continued existence of a totally unfounded chronology is far more important. Why is it of such outmost importance for the Watchtower to create the impression that this angel was talking trough his hat? Well, if you count 70 years from the year 519 BCE, you will end at the year 589 BCE, when the final siege of Jerusalem started, exactly as this terrible "secular" chronology states. And now this impertinent angel and consequently the Bible confirm that this is correct! But it doesn't stop here. When the "Paradise Restored" book attacks the texts at Zechariah 7: 1-5, they really take off. Here we get another sterling example of the Watchtowers "loyalty" to the Bible.
  Here we get another clear date: "Darius fourth year". When his second year was 519 BCE, his fourth year must be 517 BCE, at this time the Jew's had "fasted" and "wailed" for "seventy years" according to verse 5:
  

  "Say to all the people of the land and to the priests, 'When YOU fasted and there was a wailing in the fifth [month] and in the seventh [month], and this for seventy years, did YOU really fast to me, even me?" Zechariah 7:5.

  
  Interestingly enough the "Paradise Restored" book admits on page 235:
  

  "Fasting over God's Executed Judgments Improper
  
  It was observed evidently on the tenth day of that month (Ab), in order to commemorate how on that day Nebuzaradan, the chief of Nebuchadnezzar's bodyguard, after two days of inspection, burned down the city of Jerusalem and its temple."
  Paradise Restored 1972, page 235.

  
  So what does the Society do now? Do they let this text stand? Do they calculate 70 years back from 517 BCE to the year 587 BCE:, when Jerusalem was burned? No of course not! Instead they dedicate several pages to explaining away and create a smokescreen for their loyal readers. Instead of taking into consideration the obvious harmony between the secular dates provided by themselves in the book and the Bible texts, they desperately cling to their pet 607 year, even if it means that the Jew's then had been fasting and wailing, not as the Bible said, for 70 years, but for 90 years!
  This gives us an excellent lesson about how a speculative calculation, completely without any foundation whatsoever gets elevated to be a dogma. How it becomes an eternal "truth" that have to be defended at all costs. It is also an extremely good example of how efficient propaganda works. Just hammer on about 607, and 1914, and it becomes a "truth", which only "opposers" and "apostates" could dream of questioning. What an excellent example of how to con millions of people for years!
  
  For all their boasting about being the “only ones” who really stick to the Bible, we se how far that goes when the Bible become bothersome for them.
  Norm.
  
• 
  30

  How many exJWs are now pagan? Why?

  by Sirona in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was just wondering how many exjehovahs witnesses are now pagan?

  of the exjws i've met, quite a few either describe themselves as pagan or pretty much have "pagan" type religious views.. i wonder if it is a backlash against the control of the jws - to choose a religion which has "no rules" as such.

  also, is it rebellion?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  Christians should feel very comfortable with so-called paganism. Why?
  Because everything in Christendom is taken from paganism. Absolutely everything. Several books has been written about this and it is well known among educated people.
  
  Just have a little peek at this webite and by all means check with other sources. It is very educating and quite revealing.
  
  http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/
  
  Norm
• 
  1

  Aljazeera launches children's channel

  by Elsewhere in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://english.aljazeera.net/nr/exeres/65c9cf4c-7f02-4cc4-91b6-e85f6ecd6a92.htm .

  aljazeera launches children's channel.

  friday 09 september 2005 12:49 pm gmt .

  1. 
• 

  Norm

  Quite interesting and about time. All the regimes in the arab world hate Aljazeera because they try to report fairly and accurately what is going on in the arab countries as well as the rest of the world. Of course the Bush arministration hates them for exactly the same reason.
  
  Aljazeera is an entirely new thing in the Arab world and should be respected for what they try to do. Let us hope they succeed in bringing some sense to balance out the insane state propaganda that the other TV channels in the arab world do, much like Fox news in the US.
  
  Norm
• 
  31

  What would you do if all the gas dried up?

  by jayhawk1 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  okay, we know all the gas won't dry up soon, but it sure is expensive.

  i got to thinking, what would i do and what would others do if there simply wasn't any gas to buy?

  myself, would it no longer be worth making payments on my home and moving to another one closer to work?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Norm

  I do not feel sorry for the US consumer. It's about time you pay for the gas you use.
  In the rest of the civilized world we have been paying our way for gas for years alreay.
  Here we pay $8 a gallon at the moment. I wonder how long it will be before Rummy and pals
  will kill Chavez in Venezuela and take over the oil fields there, just to keep you in
  artificially cheap gas. Nothing seem to get the attention of the US populations as the gas
  prices.
  
  Maybe you should try to elect a thinking human being as president in the future.
  
  
  Norm