Posts by robhic

10

Reasons for Moving to Wallkill ?

by robhic in

i read a while back about selling the brooklyn facility and moving the printing operations to wallkill (???).

i know it's all about money for the wts, but what reasons did they give for actually going through this involved, expensive process when, bottom line, the end is soon and everything is gonna be killed and destroyed?

why not just "wait on jehovah?".

robhic

Thanks for the responses but, so far, most have just said that it was to raise even more money for the WTS. I kinda knew that, I was mainly curious about what reason they used to justify such a move to the R&F when, in light of the end being so near or soon, it seems to me (admittedly not a JW) that a huge expensive move like this would require some explanation or justification. Am I wrong? Do the masses really not care?

I'm trying to understand the blind allegiance that must be involved but I can't seem to grasp something this big being done without a slight explanation other than needing more space. So what? It'll all be over "soon" won't it?

Robert

10

Reasons for Moving to Wallkill ?

by robhic in

i read a while back about selling the brooklyn facility and moving the printing operations to wallkill (???).

i know it's all about money for the wts, but what reasons did they give for actually going through this involved, expensive process when, bottom line, the end is soon and everything is gonna be killed and destroyed?

why not just "wait on jehovah?".

robhic

I read a while back about selling the Brooklyn facility and moving the printing operations to Wallkill (???). I know it's all about money for the WTS, but what reasons did they give for actually going through this involved, expensive process when, bottom line, the end is soon and everything is gonna be killed and destroyed? Why not just "wait on jehovah?"

I searched this site but found nothing giving a reason for the move just that it is taking place. Any ideas or comments? Publications?

Thanks,

Robert

6

Earthquake Frequency

by robhic in

i could swear i read on this particular forum a comment that the wts finally admitted that earthquakes were not more frequent as they have contended for such a long time.

i thought someone mentioned a wt or awake!

in which this statement was made.. i did a search on this forum and another but no luck.

robhic

Thanks, guys, those weren't either of the article/references I remembered seeing (I just saw it recently) but those references were perfect! Exactly what I was looking for and more. I just don't know why my search didn't turn one or more of these up?

Robert

6

Earthquake Frequency

by robhic in

i could swear i read on this particular forum a comment that the wts finally admitted that earthquakes were not more frequent as they have contended for such a long time.

i thought someone mentioned a wt or awake!

in which this statement was made.. i did a search on this forum and another but no luck.

robhic

I could swear I read on this particular forum a comment that the WTS finally admitted that earthquakes were not more frequent as they have contended for such a long time. I thought someone mentioned a WT or Awake! in which this statement was made.

I did a search on this forum and another but no luck. I am curious if anyone can remember the publication in which this admission was made. Or else tell me if I am mistaken because I thought sure I noticed it in a thread within the last week or two at most.

Any help is appreciated and thanks in advance.

Robert

20

The WTBS Inc. and ?.the iceberg

by MacHislopp in

in the year 1984 :

in the year 1990

watch tower society?s publications

robhic

" Since the slave class was loyally doing the Master's work at his invisible return in 1914 there is evidence that it was entrusted with enlarged responsabilities in 1919'

Is it just me -- a non-JW -- but does "invisible return" and then the word "evidence" in the same sentence seem odd? If something was invisible (I mean, really invisible...) then how in the world do you get evidence ... of invisibility? Wouldn't something, somewhere be not invisible?

Robert

35

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 1-25-04 WT Study

by blondie in

review comments

will be in black and parentheses ()

wt quotes

robhic

As a non-JW I can only imagine the effect these publications must have on the "true-believers." When I read these excellent reviews by Blondie I am struck by one thing: Just how many times can a person hear a word or phrase before it becomes meaningless?

Not to diminish the spirit and intelligence of former JWs, and this is not meant to be derogatory, but after hearing the specific word NEAR over and over and over again in all of its associated contexts can someone not become immune to its meaning? I mean, if every publication every week of every year stresses something is "near" yet it fails to become reality (except maybe by those darn "invisible" things...) how can anyone take this seriously? When you tell someone something repeatedly -- "the check is in the mail" for example -- yet it fails to materialize, at what point to you eventually realize that it is an outright falsehood? I don't think it would take me upwards of 90 years to realize my check ain't coming!

I find this amazing. I suppose not being brought up in the religion (I got here looking for information to help me understand a woman I was/am involved with who became a JW 3 years ago and 2 years after we had been together) these writings seem not only nonsensical but downright stupid.

Just reading one of Blondie's incisive reviews of one WT article makes me shake my head. And I don't even know why but they make me angry! I guess being a pragmatic, realistic sort, I find these rantings about stuff that sounds like utter BS to be annoying. How can folks go on for years listening to this stuff and continue buying into it? It is so sad and astounding at the same time.

Thanks to all here for the information I have gained by reading your stories and insights and thanks to Blondie for doing these labor-intensive reviews in such a loving, selfless manner. I don't know how you can stand it.

Robert

12

Genesis 6:3

by Globetrotter in

i know that this has been talked about already under a different context, but i had another question about it.... .

the december 15 wt claims that genesis 6:3 started a 120 year countdown to the flood.

our watchfulness takes on greater urgency .

robhic

main problem, though, is that they don't fully separate the possible "real story" from any preexisting Flood stories the Sumerians might have had from living for hundreds of years along the Tigris and Euphrates.

Leolaia, I read another book (must have too much time on my hands ) that was quite interesting and backed by a lot of scientific evidence and data. In a nutshell, the author states that it seems a very real possibility that the flood did indeed happen -- just not when and how the bible renders it.

It seems that the evidence shows that during a period of global warming, the resulting increase in sea levels from melting ice caps and glaciers resulted in a huge flood that overflowed the Mediterranean Sea into the Black Sea (which was more like the Black Lake before this flood) thru the Bosphorus Strait and raised the level as much as a hundred feet or more (if my memory is correct).

This is all backed up by geological, scientific and photographic evidence from the sea floor done by Dr. Robert Ballard of 'Titanic' fame. It is fascinating and quite convincing. The flood is a reality -- its biblical circumstances and chronology are not.

Robert

12

Genesis 6:3

by Globetrotter in

i know that this has been talked about already under a different context, but i had another question about it.... .

the december 15 wt claims that genesis 6:3 started a 120 year countdown to the flood.

our watchfulness takes on greater urgency .

robhic

Interesting, also, because a little further down "giants" are mentioned and then something about the offspring of the "sons of god" who went unto (we all know what that means... ) the women of men. Is this alluding to the possibility that the union of angels and earthly women produced giants? Was Goliath's daddy an angel? Hmm...

Then it goes on to talk about the iniquity of these men. Now, wait a minute -- aren't many of the earthly beings the offspring of angels by the above statement? Why did man get the full force of the J-man's vengance when some of the population were by his minions, the angels? It seems to me that some of the blame falls squarely on the angels and by default on their heavenly creator jehovah! Somebody's playing favorites.

The wickedness of the earth was furthered by the damn angels spawning iniquitous offspring with our women and then man takes the hit. Pretty unfair, IMO.

Robert

41

Simon, Cephas, Peter, Judas, Thomas, Didymus

by Leolaia in

this post is in response to peacefulpete's interesting post from my king david thread, which i quote below: .

leolaia...if you look again at 1cor you'll see peter is not there only an ebionite named cephas is.

the only reference to "peter" in any of "pauline" works is gal 2:7 and it is an interpolation made for the very reasons being discussed.

robhic

This is more a fringe-related topic than anything. I am reading a book about the "Lost Scriptures" and in it some ancient works from Christianity's beginning and early centuries are discussed. Some were recently discovered and others were known, just disregarded.

Now some of these Epistles/Letters/Gospels/ Apocalypses were included in the early bible. After they were later removed, did they become "un-inspired" writings? Like being taken out of what eventually became the bible we have today removed their pedigree? If all writings of the bible are supposedly inspired, what makes some better then others? And "inspired" also doesn't mean "dictated" so I've always thought that that left a whole lot or room for human error and bias.

The final form of today's bible wasn't completed for a few centuries (I think?) so how do previously inspired writings get tossed and other inspired writings make the cut? I thought this thread with you who seem obviously well-schooled in these matters might be good place to get some intelligent opinions.

Thanks,

Robert

4

The winter the aliens arrived

by TD in

the writers of jw publications have never read a doom and gloom scenario that they didn?t thoroughly enjoy.

the accuracy of the information apparently is only a secondary consideration.

this may sound a little harsh, but consider the following example: .

robhic

Speaking of convoluted time-lines and calculations, this just occured to me. If Adam and Eve were created 6000 years ago (plus or minus according to the WTS), how is it that the Egyptian civilization had started (for lack of better term) almost 5000-5500 years ago and had already started building pyramids 4000-5000 years ago according to some sources? I won't even get into the caveman dilemma...

Did ancient Egypt become a huge nation in only 1000 years or so of in-breeding by Adam and Eve's descendants? That sounds like a stretch. And how did a nation that was the same age and lineage as the Hebrews/Isrealites grow to such proportions AND be able to enslave their (technically) siblings so easily? Kinda makes me go "Hmmmmmm..."

Any insights or thoughts?

Robert