Posts by TD

Unfortunately, I've stated almost as much as I can without violating a trust. (If you recall, it was during the early 80's that law enforcement became an unacceptable profession for JW's and it precipitated a wave of consternation in my neck of the woods.)

Here is an excerpt from one letter (Writer is deceased) and the reply:

Question: "In what way could Jesus' disciples be considered the "Lawless ones" of Isaiah 53:12? Is this an adjustment to the understanding found on page 86 of the book Man's Salvation out of World Distress at Hand!"

Answer: "No, the brief statement on page 19 should not be viewed as a new understanding"

It's about as satisfying as a photograph taken from 12,000 feet, but that's all I have.

As always, there are a number of ways to interpret Jesus' more cryptic comments. The 1984 reference Bible linked the prophetic reference to John 18:12, which was an allusion to the manner of his death (i.e. As a condemned criminal) The idea that Jesus was the leader of a band of brigands (Or the perception thereof) is a little off the beaten path, especially for a doctrinally conservative group like the JW's.

TBH, I'm more curious (confused) than ever now. The JW's did away with the reference in 1984 and brought it back in 2013. I wonder what they would say if they were asked point blank today (?)

11

Beyond the Watchtower

by BereanThinker7 in

https://www.ebay.com/itm/203474749415.

im a watchtower/bible students history nerd.

i find the movement that engulfed my entire family fascinating.

TD

Joseph Malik actually participated here and on Channel C way back when. (He passed away about eleven years ago)

He was an interesting person. Like you have guessed, he believed his studies had given him a superior insight into the Bible, but he was also a very clear thinker in other respects.

His untangling of the convoluted Passover timeline of JW's which results in them celebrating Memorial on the evening of the 13th/14th instead of the evening of the 14th/15th is pretty accurate IMHO

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/users/3649/JosephMalik

37

Love the don't use a gun for self defence by Gary Bro

by mickbobcat in

i just watched that stupid talk by gary while e bro on not using a gun for self defense but it went deeper.

i was that you don't defend yourself against violence.

well ain't that great from an asshat living in a gated and guarded compound.

TD

Even without the factoid above the number of assumptions you have to make for the plausibility of the explanation strains this readers credulity. (At least....)

You have to assume that Jesus either didn't know that at least a couple of his disciples had swords. or had been perfectly okay with it up to that point.

You have to ignore the clear meaning of the metaphor, καὶ...πωλησάτω τὸ ἱμάτιον αὐτοῦ, and assume that Jesus seriously expected his disciples to go out in Jerusalem on Passover and conduct this transaction if need be

And you have to interpret the references to a purse and food pouch under an entirely different rubric even though all three items are listed in the same context.

37

Love the don't use a gun for self defence by Gary Bro

by mickbobcat in

i just watched that stupid talk by gary while e bro on not using a gun for self defense but it went deeper.

i was that you don't defend yourself against violence.

well ain't that great from an asshat living in a gated and guarded compound.

TD

Interesting. Thanks Earnest.

The Watchtower endorsed the idea expressed by Yoder, Penner and other Christian pacifists that Peter's possession of a sword served as a fulfillment of Isaiah 53:12 in the 1983 article, Walking With God In a Violent World

However they explicitly walked that idea back in (at least) three private letters that I have firsthand knowledge of and said that the "brief statement" on page 19 should not be viewed as an adjustment to the existing idea that it was the manner of Jesus' execution and to a lesser degree, his trial and arrest that actually fulfilled the prophecy.

I was curious about your inclusion of the reference in the quoted passage above, so I went and looked in the 2013 edition of the NWT and sure enough, it is there now. That is a departure from their 1984 reference Bible, which did away with that reference.

37

Love the don't use a gun for self defence by Gary Bro

by mickbobcat in

i just watched that stupid talk by gary while e bro on not using a gun for self defense but it went deeper.

i was that you don't defend yourself against violence.

well ain't that great from an asshat living in a gated and guarded compound.

TD

The book, Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of the Rights Revolution sheds a little light on how the current anti-gun stance was born.

Up until the time of mob violence against Jehovah's Witnesses (1939 - 1945) self defense had been perfectly acceptable and this was explicitly stated in Rutherford's 1937 book Enemies.

When mobs appeared, Jehovah's Witnesses took to the roofs of Kingdom Halls with hunting rifles. Sometimes small town police were part and parcel of this violence.

In the long run, this did the organization more harm than good. Martyrs (i.e. People who are beaten senseless, forced to drink castor oil, tarred and feathered, castrated, etc.) arouse sympathy for a religious cause. People who shoot at police do not.

So the current anti-gun stance is entirely about the welfare of the organization. You as an individual don't even enter into the equation.

37

Love the don't use a gun for self defence by Gary Bro

by mickbobcat in

i just watched that stupid talk by gary while e bro on not using a gun for self defense but it went deeper.

i was that you don't defend yourself against violence.

well ain't that great from an asshat living in a gated and guarded compound.

TD

What is the JW explanation of Luke 22:36 these days?

They always loved to selectively quote Jesus on this issue but never had a plausible explanation for that verse

22

Did You Think The Capitol Riot Was Worse Than What Happened On 9/11?

by minimus in

jw
friends

in my lifetime 9/11 was the worst thing that i can recall.

the effect it had was incredibly horrible!

almost everyone seemed to know someone that was either directly or indirectly affected by this diabolical act.

TD

The two aren't even remotely comparable.

Having said that though, there doesn't seem to much awareness of how lucky those people are to be living today and not in a previous century.