leaving_quietly

Joined 13 years ago

• started 82 topics
• posted 1,676 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by leaving_quietly

• 
  30

  607 - What is it all about?

  by leaving_quietly in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  12 years ago

  some of you here have a firm belief that 607 was not the fall of jerusalem, contrary to the wt beliefs that it was.

  but, why is it important?

  frankly, i just don't get it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  12 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  Londo...

  But in a world where the 1290 days gets fulfilled at a convention held in an amusement park, and the 1335 days end with the book Deliverance that very few active JWs have even cracked open

  LOL! I hear you on this one. I shake my head every time I read the supposed fulfillment. No JW can really explain this, but these prophecies seem to be fairly important if you read Daniel 12:12: "Happy is the one who is keeping in expectation and who arrives at the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days!"

  For me, I don't need to keep trying to understand the mess made about 607/586. The realization that there is no such 2,520 years prophecy is good enough for me.

  Link
• 
  30

  607 - What is it all about?

  by leaving_quietly in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  12 years ago

  some of you here have a firm belief that 607 was not the fall of jerusalem, contrary to the wt beliefs that it was.

  but, why is it important?

  frankly, i just don't get it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  12 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  Londo, don't you wish you never had to research that in the first place? But since WT insists there's a SECOND FULFULLMENT to a prophecy that was clearly already fulfilled with Nebuchadnezzar, they have created a made-up prophecy!!!!! 607/586 is just a way to get us all driveling on about a date. I'd venture to say that none of us would care if the "Seven Times" / "2,520 years" prophecy didn't exist in the first place, which, when any sane person reading the Bible would see, does not!

  The Daniel's Prophecy book, pgs 95-96, par. 26 states: "Evidently, Nebuchadnezzar’s “seven times” involved seven years. In prophecy, a year averages 360 days, or 12 months of 30 days each. (Compare Revelation 12:6, 14.) So the king’s “seven times,” or seven years, were 360 days multiplied by 7, or 2,520 days. But what about the major fulfillment of his dream? The prophetic “seven times” lasted much longer than 2,520 days. This was indicated by Jesus’ words: “Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled.” (Luke 21:24) That ‘trampling’ began in 607 B.C.E. when Jerusalem was destroyed and the typical kingdom of God ceased to function in Judah. When would the trampling end? At “the times of restoration of all things,” when divine sovereignty would again be manifested toward the earth through symbolic Jerusalem, the Kingdom of God.—Acts 3:21."

  I can agree with the first sentence, but then they make this strange leap to a whole other prophecy that just is not alluded to at all in the Bible. The explanation doesn't even make sense. The prophecy is about a Babylonian king going mad, but then regains his mental state and has his kingdom restored, but somehow, WT makes this prophecy about Jerusalem being trampled on by the nations. Huh? This is a clear and classic example of cherry-picking completely unrelated verses to meet some odd belief system.

  I mean really... why not apply that "day for a year" rule with everything?

  Let me give it a go... (what follows is pure sattire)

  Jesus was raised up after three days, so that must represent three years! What happened three years later? Well, the first of the Gentiles came in in 36C.E. (Now I get it. Jesus death is related to the death of the Jewish nation and the birth of the Gentiles! <face palm>)

  Jesus reign is for a thousand years. Let's see, day for a year (using 360 days, of course) would mean 360 * 1000 = 360,000 years. Wow! Now there's new understanding for how long Jesus reign REALLY is. (it's all so clear now!)

  The flood of Noah's day had them in the Ark for 40 days. 40 days = 40 years. Day for a year is 360 * 40 = 14,400 years! Holy cow, the flood hasn't ended yet! It's still going on (invisibly, of course)!

  Seriously...

  Link
• 
  28

  WT 5-15-13 Can anyone find this quote from the Boston Target ?

  by trujw in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  12 years ago

  we all know about the wt's famous quotes.

  i can't find this article from the magazine on page 9 paragraph 8 from the lincolnshire boston target uk?

  can i get some help from our crack staff her on jwn.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  12 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  This is quite possibly an old quote. Note this:

  http://en.allexperts.com/q/Christianity-Youth-Issues-2346/today-youth-christianity.htm

  Yep, sure enough, and reused from the August 8, 1999 Awake page 31:

  "In a letter to the Lincolnshire Boston Target, a reader said: “People are losing their faith in religions . . . What do these church ministers do all day? They certainly do not go out like Christ did and meet the people . . . The only religion that seems to care are the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who go out and meet people and are genuinely involved in preaching the truth—they invite you to come to their services, they talk about and do something about environmental matters. I am not a JW, but I do respect these people and I listen to them.”

  Link
• 
  30

  607 - What is it all about?

  by leaving_quietly in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  12 years ago

  some of you here have a firm belief that 607 was not the fall of jerusalem, contrary to the wt beliefs that it was.

  but, why is it important?

  frankly, i just don't get it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  12 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  Thanks, everyone...

  And, thanks, especially to you, TD. I learned something.

  So, it's not just me. This is a made up prophecy. Good grief!

  Now, of course, taking Jesus words into consideration, there is something there. Jerusalem fell in <insert your favorite year here>, true, but it did not continue "trampled on by the nations." One could argue that when it fell, it was no longer trampled on because it was desolated for seventy years! I tend to think TD is right, that the Roman occupation would be the starting point, and the ending point was when it was destroyed again in 70 C.E.

  Link
• 
  30

  607 - What is it all about?

  by leaving_quietly in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  12 years ago

  some of you here have a firm belief that 607 was not the fall of jerusalem, contrary to the wt beliefs that it was.

  but, why is it important?

  frankly, i just don't get it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  12 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  Some of you here have a firm belief that 607 was NOT the fall of Jerusalem, contrary to the WT beliefs that it was. But, why is it important? Frankly, I just don't get it. I think the Society has made up a prophecy where none exists.

  The basis for 607/1914 is a statement by Jesus at Luke 21:24: "Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled."

  The "appointed times of the nations" is supposedly a major fulfillment of the seven times in Daniel 4 when Nebuchadnezzar became as a beast of the fields for seven years. Here's where it gets weird. The Society thinks this is indicative of some other future fulfillment, thus pointing out seven years constitutes 2,520 days (using a 360 day year as per Rev. 12:6, 14), and then using a "day for a year" formula based on Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6. Then, this is combined with Jesus statement as above.

  Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but when Jesus made that statement, it was (let's use WT dates) at least 637 years after Jerusalem was destroyed (607, no zero year, baptized in 29 C.E., so 607 + 30). And, he says "Jerusalem will be trampled on", indicating a future starting point, and a very loose ending point. Yet, the Society claims the starting point was some 637 years previous to his statement.

  First, there is no prophecy in the Bible of 2,520 years. It just does not exist. Or does it? Am I missing something? Or is this just another one of those "ooh, look, a prophecy... must have a TWO fulfillments!!!!" things?

  Second, why use a starting point so far in the past when Jesus clearly spoke in the future tense?

  Can someone explain this to me?

  I have wondered about the 2,520 years for a long time, and I keep seeing the 607/586 issue over and over, and frankly, it's all above my head. However, it was only a little while ago when I sat down to try to understand it that I noticed the future tense in Luke 21:24. So, I'm confused. Admittedly, I have not researched this all that much even in WT publications, except for that I know the numbers... I just don't know why the numbers are there to begin with. I had assumed there was some prophecy concerning the Gentile Times that I was missing, but frankly, I can't find it.

  Link
• 
  28

  Pro-JW website SLAMS apostates

  by yadda yadda 2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  12 years ago

  at the site, click on the pictures to read lengthy diatribes against apostates lol.. apostasy "seeing oneself as a victim denied" .

  as a result of seeing oneself as a victim denied, there can occur a powerful drive toward disaffection and apostasy.

  as is almost inevitably the case, there is a great need on the part of a leave-taker to validate their oppositional stance, and the victim-victimizer scenario greatly assists a person in justifying their course of action.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  12 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  “Deconstructing the Apostate Mentality ”
  Apostates generally take their course of action because they believe free thought is being suppressed, hence they feel a "crisis of conscience."

  However, truth be told, their complaint is not really one of suppression, but one of inclusion. When THEIR views are rejected, they often lash out. When someone dares to question them at some point in time, accusations are hurled about. What it really comes down to is not free thought after all, but only THEIR thought. Only they can be right! They are just as exclusionary as the group they have left. They SAY they want their readers to "draw his or her own conclusions" but they do this in the same breath as accusing the other side of the argument of "deception." [Carl Olof Jonnson's Gentile Times Reconsidered] Hence, there is no room for another conclusion. The line has been drawn. The apostates has the reader thinking his is the only enlightened view, and the other conclusion we can draw is mired in deception and lies.

  Ummmm.... doesn't WT do THIS VERY SAME THING?

  Link
• 
  28

  Pro-JW website SLAMS apostates

  by yadda yadda 2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  12 years ago

  at the site, click on the pictures to read lengthy diatribes against apostates lol.. apostasy "seeing oneself as a victim denied" .

  as a result of seeing oneself as a victim denied, there can occur a powerful drive toward disaffection and apostasy.

  as is almost inevitably the case, there is a great need on the part of a leave-taker to validate their oppositional stance, and the victim-victimizer scenario greatly assists a person in justifying their course of action.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  12 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  LOL! That site claims that Charles Taze Russell was NOT the founder of Jehovah's Witnesses. Oh, really? A quick look in the Publications Index under the term "founder" shows several religions, one of which is Jehovah's Witnesses. Then pops up w84 2/1 p. 11:

  "Earlier that day, after completing the formal legal requirements of the corporation, Frederick W. Franz, president of the Watch Tower Society, delivered the keynote address of the day. He traced the history of Jehovah’s Witnesses from the time of the first president of the Society, Charles T. Russell"

  Apparently Fred Franz was misinformed.

  Link
• 
  37

  Why do Jw's have to pay for CO's expenses?

  by nolongerconfused in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  12 years ago

  this is something that has always bothered me!.

  why do rank and file have to pay for co's do's expenses, car, health insurance, meals, etc, etc...?.

  didn't the apostle paul say that all christians have to be self sufficient and work?, not depending on anyone else and cause a burden?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  11 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  Neon Madman, glad you posted that. Paul was indeed the exception, as Blondie said.

  This mirrors the Levites who did not have a land inheritance from Jehovah, but instead were to receive the tithings from the rest of the tribes. When the tithing was lacking, the Levites had to do other work to support themselves.

  Neh 3:10 And I got to find out that the very portions of the Levites had not been given [them], so that the Levites and the singers doing the work went running off, each one to his own field.

  This was apparently a small issue with Paul. Not only did he mention it to the Corinthians, he commended the Phillipians for their generosity, and for all intents and purposes, put a dig into the rest of the congregations for not doing so.

  Phil 4:15, 16: In fact, YOU Phi·lip′pi·ans, also know that at [the] start of declaring the good news, when I departed from Mac·e·do′ni·a, not a congregation took a share with me in the matter of giving and receiving, except YOU alone; because, even in Thes·sa·lo·ni′ca, YOU sent something to me both once and a second time for my need.

  Don't misunderstand, though, COs get a stipend from the branch. Yes, they get insurance and a car, but actual cash is truly a stipend. What the congregation pays is for their expenses, and in my experience, those expenses are usually less than $80 USD for the week, more generally in the $50-$70 USD range. They produce receipts for their expenses, which may include groceries, gas, dry cleaning, etc. Frankly, it has never bothered me so reimburse them because it's just never been abused, in my experience.

  As for nicer suits, I have heard of some, not all, say that it's better to buy one really nice suit that will last a long time than have to keep buying suites all the time. Not sure I buy into that one, but I have heard it said.

  Link
• 
  75

  Misquotes, Lies and deception in Watchtower Publications

  by jwfacts in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  12 years ago

  i have just finished an article misquotes, deception and lies and would like your comments, proof reading, and any other examples that you think are important to add.

  most of these already appear on jwfacts.com within specific articles, but it is more powerful seeing them included together.

  there have also been a number of requests over the years for such a collection.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  4 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  BTW, excellent article on the whole.

  I remember my biology teacher in 8th grade gave me back the Creation book after I gave it to him since we were studying evolution. He told me in no uncertain terms: 'I've read many of the books quoted in here, and I can tell you that they have been misquoted.' Of course, me a twelve year old, shrugged it off and figured he was truly stupid. Now, I know differently.

  The misquotes are among the very biggest issues I have with this religion. Supposedly a truthful organization, I find they are anything but.

  Link
• 
  75

  Misquotes, Lies and deception in Watchtower Publications

  by jwfacts in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  12 years ago

  i have just finished an article misquotes, deception and lies and would like your comments, proof reading, and any other examples that you think are important to add.

  most of these already appear on jwfacts.com within specific articles, but it is more powerful seeing them included together.

  there have also been a number of requests over the years for such a collection.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  4 years ago
• 

  leaving_quietly 12 years ago

  Still reading, but just my two cents: be careful about technicalities.

  The Watchtower has regularly lied about what it used to say prior to 1914, claiming it was correct about 1914, and has held to consistent teachings regarding that date. For instance, until 1930 Jesus' heavenly rule was taught to have commenced in 1878.

  "The year A.D. 1878 … clearly marks the time for the actual assuming of power as King of kings, by our present, spiritual, invisible Lord - …" The Time is At Hand (1911 ed) p.239

  Yet it is stated now stated that the Watchtower consistently placed this event as 1914.

  "The Watchtower has consistently presented evidence to honest hearted students of Bible prophecy that Jesus’ presence in heavenly Kingdom power began in 1914." Watchtower 1993 Jan 15 p.5

  The quote you originally use is not from The Watchtower. The magazine, The Watchtower, was named such starting with the October 15, 1931 issue. They may be technically truthful in the w93 1/15 quote (though I doubt it.) The Watchtower when printed in italics as it is in the '93 article refers to the magazine, not the corporation. However, it is generallly accepted that The Watchtower is the same as The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence and before that, Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence which started in 1879. So, if you're looking for a quote, stay strictly with the magazine, preferably one post-October 15, 1931, but one prior to that will work, too, due to general acceptance that The Watchtower has always been The Watchtower, but only under a different name. (Source: Proclaimer's book, p. 252 footnote)

  Link