Posts by notsurewheretogo

43

How Will Armageddon Begin?

by Cold Steel in

and how long will it last?

and who will come after that, yahweh, as the old testament says or jesus, as the new testament says?

the scriptures say he'll come to the mount of olives, but surely that's a spiritual mount of olives.

notsurewheretogo

The answer is simple...it won't begin...the bible version is fantasy...much like everything else in the bible.

Live your life with no fear of an angry god raining down sulphur...it ain't happening.

7

whoops, forum update went wrong, normally no big deal and fixable in seconds but then my internet connection cut out on me so it took a while before i could push the fix.. computers know.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_az2bdng97a.

notsurewheretogo

Thought it was JWR all over again! :)

44

The 1914 doctrine: How long it will last?

by opusdei1972 in

one hundred years have passed and the society still supports this lie, which of course, is the basis of their other lies, like that of the unfaithful and not discreet slave appointed in 1919. however, i wonder, what will happen after 50 years, when the overlapped generation will pass?.

and if you want, what will happen with this religion in 2100?, could it survive with the same lie??

?.

notsurewheretogo

The overlapping generation has bought the 1914 doctrine some time...it can last another 10 years or so...

36

This week's WT study article "Keep on the Watch" - the latest dumb article from the Gang That Couldn't Think Straight

by sir82 in

ok so this week's wt study article is entitled "why must we keep on the watch?"..

it is filled with statements on the importance of "being watchful" for the beginning of the "great tribulation".

paragraph 2: “keep looking, keep awake, for you do not know when the appointed time is.”after that, jesus admonished them repeatedly: “keep on the watch.”.

notsurewheretogo

Reminds me of the genius WT a few years ago that explained how a "short period of time" is really "an extended period of time".

Lol I missed that one!

36

This week's WT study article "Keep on the Watch" - the latest dumb article from the Gang That Couldn't Think Straight

by sir82 in

ok so this week's wt study article is entitled "why must we keep on the watch?"..

it is filled with statements on the importance of "being watchful" for the beginning of the "great tribulation".

paragraph 2: “keep looking, keep awake, for you do not know when the appointed time is.”after that, jesus admonished them repeatedly: “keep on the watch.”.

notsurewheretogo

Hasn't it "been coming" for the last 120 years though?

But given that we are so far away from 1914 it MUST be closer than ever...and yet JC said it will come when no-one expects it...

Maybe the GB are setting it up to explain why in the next ten years it hasn't come?

39

Is changing the "truth" / presenting "new light" really so bad?

by Zana in

jw
friends

playing devil's advocate here.... what's the difference between the gb changing bible interpretations compared to parliaments all over the world changing laws?

although the us constitution (=bible) remains untouched, congress passes i don't know how many new laws every year.

and of course people are expected to follow them.

notsurewheretogo

These two people accept that the GB are just imperfect men and that they will get it wrong every now and then. But they trust them to try hard enough.

That just doesn't stand up though...they are imperfect men but when they come together as the GB and IF the Holy Spirit is involved then being imperfect means nothing...they will always be right IF Holy Spirit is involved.

If they get it wrong from time to time as your example states then Holy Spirit is NOT involved and how can anyone trust anything they say? Getting it nearly right means diddly squat if a life-saving decision is involved.

Someone dies because they never took blood but hey...the GB "nearly" go it right...doesn't make an iota of a difference to the dead person!

The whole thing is flawed.

39

Is changing the "truth" / presenting "new light" really so bad?

by Zana in

jw
friends

playing devil's advocate here.... what's the difference between the gb changing bible interpretations compared to parliaments all over the world changing laws?

although the us constitution (=bible) remains untouched, congress passes i don't know how many new laws every year.

and of course people are expected to follow them.

notsurewheretogo

This is precisely why the GB has worked hard to try and remove the terms from the vocabulary of the Witnesses.
They have not used the terms in the context of doctrinal understandings for many years. The online library going back to 2000 has nothing with these phrases. "Progressive/increasing light" and "clarification" are the terms you should use. They don't even use terms that would suggest what went before has changed.

Indeed...dubs will say to me the new light doesn't replace the old...well it does if it is wrong!

Ah but it is like lighting a candle in a dark room....getting brighter and brighter they say.

Except, as new light comes on, the old light is getting blown out...is the room getting any brighter?

NO!

39

Is changing the "truth" / presenting "new light" really so bad?

by Zana in

jw
friends

playing devil's advocate here.... what's the difference between the gb changing bible interpretations compared to parliaments all over the world changing laws?

although the us constitution (=bible) remains untouched, congress passes i don't know how many new laws every year.

and of course people are expected to follow them.

notsurewheretogo

Like... on purpose?

To illustrate my point...I made a similar point on another thread and got told those are not the only two options but naturally I meant from a JW point of view...man is it hard to put that hat back on and try and think like they do again...

39

Is changing the "truth" / presenting "new light" really so bad?

by Zana in

jw
friends

playing devil's advocate here.... what's the difference between the gb changing bible interpretations compared to parliaments all over the world changing laws?

although the us constitution (=bible) remains untouched, congress passes i don't know how many new laws every year.

and of course people are expected to follow them.

notsurewheretogo

I'll go even further.

This "old light" "new light" shite really grates on me.

If "new light" comes out and replaces "old light" who got the "old light" wrong?

Does Jehovah, with his magical Holy Spirit, inspire the GB as they come to decisions on doctrines?

If He does then Jehovah is the author of the wrong doctrine, thus a God of falsehood.

Or is it a case of the GB are students of the bible, and they issue a doctrine they believe to be correct and then Jehovah corrects the doctrine if it is wrong?

If THAT is the case then how do JW's know and trust what is the current teaching is the correct one? What if life doctrines are involved like blood and they are currently wrong? How can the GB demand 100% obedience IF the above is the way it works.

To a JW it can only be one of the two situations above...either God is the author of every doctrine coming from the GB and he is getting it wrong (so who wants to follow a God like that) OR it is the GB getting it wrong and Jehovah corrects them but then you simply can never ever trust that any doctrine is right.

Either way, you wouldn't be a JW...you either follow a dick of a god or you are following men.

PS.. the two situations are the only explanation to a JW as to why old light is wrong. We know very well there are other reasons like its all bollocks but I am on a JW level of thinking to highlight the point.

39

Is changing the "truth" / presenting "new light" really so bad?

by Zana in

jw
friends

playing devil's advocate here.... what's the difference between the gb changing bible interpretations compared to parliaments all over the world changing laws?

although the us constitution (=bible) remains untouched, congress passes i don't know how many new laws every year.

and of course people are expected to follow them.

notsurewheretogo

Is this another troll post? As the OP's question is pretty stupid.

Laws and doctrines are fundamentally different...the government who makes the laws does not claim to have God's backing or claim it is "the truth".

Idiotic comparison to be honest. Sorry for being blunt.

Just put it into perspective...1969...organ transplants are a disfellowshipping offence based on the reasoning, from the GB, that it is cannibalism (your body "consumes" the organ they said) and personality transplant occurs meaning you are not in full control of your mind.

1980, organ transplants become a conscience matter based on blood.

So lets now have the same situation but in two different times...a brother, who is a father, has a kid who needs a new heart to survive and it is 1979...he wants to remain faithful to Jehovah so the kid dies because organ transplants are a disfellowshipping offence.

Same situation with another brother in the same hall, kid needs a new heart YET it is 1981...now a conscience matter...the father agrees to the kid getting a new heart.

One kid lives, one kid dies...both are deemed faithful and all because of "new light" "old light" shite...

THAT is how dangerous it is and is NOTHING compared to changing a law!