Posts by rocketman

13

E Watchman letter to the elders

by teela(2) in

jw
friends

if you follow his website, read his latest essay, to the elders, if he keeps going at this rate, he will be posting here soon.

rocketman

It's always nice to have a person with total credibility taking on the elders on such major issues as child abuse and the UN involvement. While we don't quite get that with Robert (You Know), I'm still not going to trash the guy for at least making a stand. Of course, if a guy is viewed as a wack job than his efforts may end up causing more harm than good.

The main problem for me is that he still views the JW organization as one in a special relationship with God, and that God is directing judgements toward it rather than Christendom. Hence, he still gives exclusivity of righteousness to the jws, even if only individuals within the organization.

However, of all the jw apologetics that ever posted here, I kind of liked the guy's effort in some off-beat way. He at least seemed pretty respectful around here, and if memory serves, at least he didn't engage in personal attacks. So, if he wants to have at the elders, then I think the letter he wrote, while duly considering his propensity for blathering on, still may serve a good purpose.

48

586/607

by carla in

did finding out that the 607 date was wrong matter to any of you?

and doesn't that in fact make all the other dates fall apart?

or did you rationalize and say what's 20 years or so?

rocketman

The Faithful Slave

Wow, and here all this time I thought CT Russell was the Faithful Slave.

111

June 6, 2006 Why be worried?

by robhic in

on may 5, 2005 the thought occured to me: it's 05/05/05.

now, next year do you think jws -- and/or all fundamentalist groups, etc -- will be anticipating or freak out on june 6, 2006?

it'll be 06/06/06 or, more diabolically extrapolated (as they do so well...), 666!!!

rocketman

Well, it's actually 06-06-06, so I'm not worried....though I might by some extra bottled water next year just in case.

13

E Watchman letter to the elders

by teela(2) in

jw
friends

if you follow his website, read his latest essay, to the elders, if he keeps going at this rate, he will be posting here soon.

rocketman

Oh, I was referring to E-watchy's posts here in the past under the username "You Know" (Several others here also suspect that the two are one and the same). He was forecasting economic doom quite often. He was also heavily into Isaiah and Jeremiah - and in his letter posted at his site those are the two books he quotes from.

But I must say he wrote quite the letter. Good job YK.

13

E Watchman letter to the elders

by teela(2) in

jw
friends

if you follow his website, read his latest essay, to the elders, if he keeps going at this rate, he will be posting here soon.

rocketman

Interesting, and a pretty darned fine letter. The committee event log is very interesting too (though e-watchyman has been eagerly awaiting economic collapse for quite a while now...reminiscent of good 'ol You Know) and right-on in terms of how elders would react when prsented with evidence of WTS duplicity and hypocrisy.

53

Did Jesus ever use the name Jehovah?

by LMS-Chef in

just wondering.

rocketman

Interestingly, in that lengthy prayer recorded in John 17, Jesus does not utter God's name a single time. One would expect that he'd at least be recorded as saying it on that occasion.

The Society also reasons that Jesus would not be afraid to use God's name around those who thought it blasphemous to utter it. However, the question isn't one of fear, but of simply going with the flow of the prevailing view of the time. The bottom line is that in the available written record we have (the Gospels and Acts 1) of Jesus' actual words, we do not find God's name being used, save for the possibility of the quote from Isaiah 61 at Luke 4. And even that is based mainly on supposition - i.e., 'the divine name was there in the Hebrew text, so Jesus likely used it'.

37

When you left the JW's, did you keep all your books & magazines?

by Rod P in

i had a collection of older publications almost second to none.

along with the 30-year publications index, i felt invincible in the research department.. then i got disfellowshipped and divorced, and my ex kept them all.

" i couldn't tell her "for research" because that would have sounded like i was going to write a book exposing jw's, which would have made things even worse.

rocketman

I did my civic duty by recycling them.

....Environmentally-Minded Class....

35

Has your relationship with Jesus changed?

by Honesty in

since you either left the organisation or started to objectively examine wts doctrine.

rocketman

After 30 years in the .org, Jesus and religion in general were pretty much ruined for me. But lately I've been taking a renewed look at the Bible, including Jesus, simply using a different translation (the NWT makes Bible reading a drag) and online Bible commentaries.

One of the problems with jw teaching is that the emphasis is so much on a personal relationship with Jehovah that Jesus seems to be effectively neutralized. It's as if you can't talk to him or think of him as having any real impact on daily life. After 30 years of that, it's difficult to actually find the degree to which Jesus can influence my life. But I am making some effort, and I'm interested in hearing how others here have come to regard Christ. Good thread.

26

If you could create a new canon - what books/ writings would you include?

by Qcmbr in

ok so the bible is a work of the early roman church - if you could add any books to a new canon of 'scripture' what would you add - would you take anything out?

my starter for ten: .

i think i'd take out song of soloman.

rocketman

2 Peter is also strongly apocalyptic (especially in ch. 3), and it dates to the second century AD (it is probably the latest book in the NT).

In response to Leolaia's comment, part of which is highlighted above: I was referring to conventional Christian teaching - and I must emphasize conventional, which places the writing of 2 Peter at about 67 AD. I'm sure that you (Leolaia) could post, or already have posted elsewhere, much info on a contradictory view, which would obviously include the view that 2 Peter was not written by Peter.....either that, or the guy lived pretty long.

Matthew is generally viewed, again conventionally, as being written around 60-65 AD.

However, I must be careful not to get off the beaten path. The thrust of this thread being which book(s) we might add/subtract from the generally (and again, conventionally) accepted Bible cannon, maybe we can just chuck 2 Peter and Matthew - there'd still be lots of interesting stuff left over.

26

If you could create a new canon - what books/ writings would you include?

by Qcmbr in

ok so the bible is a work of the early roman church - if you could add any books to a new canon of 'scripture' what would you add - would you take anything out?

my starter for ten: .

i think i'd take out song of soloman.

rocketman

I don't know the so-called "Apocryphal" books well enough to vouch for the possible inclusion of any of them. I'm sure Leoleia would be qualified to comment on whether any of them should be added, since she's made many an interesting post in which she skillfully uses them.

On the other hand, if Revelation were omitted, I think the Bible would be quite a bit more 'tidy' for lack of a better word. For example, it seems to be the only bible book written after the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in 70 AD that contains judgement messages. If not for Revelation, I think the Preterist argument that such prophecies were completely fulfilled in that destruction of Jerusalem would be pretty iron-clad. But since Revelation is generally accepted (except by the Preterists) as having been written nearly 30 years later, the judgements and prophetic pictures therein would seem to apply to a later time.