1) "Only Jehovah's Witnesses, those of the anointed remnant and the great crowd, as a united organization under the protection of the Supreme Organizer, have any Scriptural hope of surviving the impending end of this doomed system dominated by Satan the Devil." Watchtower 1989 September 1 p.19
Is it really fair that if you aren't a Jehovah's Witness you will be destroyed at Armageddon? Imagine that Jehovah's Witnesses are not the true religion, do you think it would be fair for God to destroy you because circumstances led you to being involved with the wrong religion?
2)"The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers." Awake! 1993 Mar. 22 p.4
If that is the case, then where does new light come from? If their writings are not inspired from God, then why should we listen to them?
3) 587 the fall of Jerusalem. Using a simple time-line from Watchtower publications.
Babylon fell – 539 B.C.: “Babylon fell in 539 B.C.” - Babylon the Great Has Fallen – God's Kingdom Rules p.184
Nabonidus – started ruling in 556 B.C.: “On the basis of cuneiform texts he is believed to have ruled some seventeen years (556-539 BC).” Aid to Bible Understanding – Nabonidus p.1195
Labashi-Marduk – started ruling in 557 B.C.: “Labashi-Marduk... was a vicious boy, and within nine months he had his throat cut by an asssassin.” - Babylon the Great Has Fallen – God's Kingdom Rules p.184
Neriglissar – started ruling in 561 B.C.: “Neriglissar... reigned four years.” - Babylon the Great Has Fallen – God's Kingdom Rules p.184
Evil-Merodach – started ruling in 563 B.C.: “After reigning but two years, King Evil-Merodach was murdered” - Babylon the Great Has Fallen – God's Kingdom Rules p.184
Nebuchadnezzar – started ruling in 606 B.C.: “Nebuchadnezzar ruled as king for 43 years.” - Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 2 p.480
Date for destruction would be 19 years later in 587 B.C.: “And in the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah.” - 2 Kings 25:8-9
4) "If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now; But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. … "New Light" never extinguishes older "light" but adds to it…" Zion's Watch Tower 1881 February pp.3, 188
So what Russell was saying that new light doesn't change doctrine but only refines it. It was correct but incomplete. You might say that the Governing Body is allowed doctrinal mistakes as Bible leaders in the past have made mistakes. The issue isn't whether individuals are imperfect, but whether or not their teachings are accurate. How many mistakes did God allow into the Bible?
Sure, maybe some of the early apostles made mistakes as well as ones such as Moses and David. This is a different issue all together. This isn't a question of if the Governing Body hold a perfect understanding of doctrine. The issue is whether the Governing Body is directed by the Holy Spirit as a group through prayer. Is Jehovah directing what is written in the Watchtower?
In the same line, what percentage of what the apostles wrote in the Bible wrong? The answer is zero because Jehovah directed it. What percentage of what the Governing Body has written in the Watchtower has been deemed wrong by their own admission?
5) Quotes about 1914:
"But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble. Zion's Watch Tower 1894 July 15 p.226
"...the battle of the great day of God Almighty. The date of the close of that "battle" is definitely marked in Scripture as October 1914. It is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874." Zion's Watch Tower 1892 January 15 p.23
"Now, in view of recent labor troubles and threatened anarchy, our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in the 1914 date. They do not see how present conditions can hold out so long under the strain. We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble." Zions Watch Tower 1894 July 15 p.226
6) Quotes about 1925:
"The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures because it is fixed by the law God gave to Israel. Viewing the present situation in Europe, one wonders how it will be possible to hold back the explosion much longer; and that even before 1925 the great crisis will be reached and probably passed." Watch Tower 1922 Sep. 1 p.262
"Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith then Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge." Watch Tower 1923 Apr. 1 p.106
"We cannot be blamed for presenting from the Scriptures such evidence as they afford which leads us to believe that a certain event will take place at a given time. Some times the Lord has let His people looking for the right thing at the wrong time, and more frequently they have looked for the wrong things at the right time. But all the enemies of the cause of present truth in the earth are fervently hoping that the Bible students will not be so successful in 1925 in looking for the right thing at the right time as they were in 1914. if they are, however, it will be the other fellow that will have to do the explaining, and not we." Golden Age 1924 Feb 13 p.314
The end of the book of John contains an interesting note:
ReplyDelete"Upon turning about Peter saw the disciple whom Jesus used to love [John] following, the one who at the evening meal had also leaned back upon his breast and said: 'Lord, who is the one betraying you?' Accordingly, when he caught sight of him, Peter said to Jesus: 'Lord, what will this man do?' Jesus said to him: 'If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.' In consequence, this saying went out among the brothers, that that disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but: 'If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?'" (John 21:20-23)
It may take some thought, but put yourself into that first-century congregation. Imagine that Peter and others have been teaching, perhaps for years or even decades, that Jesus would return before the apostle John would ever die. Now that's no longer the case, as an extremely aged John corrects the misunderstanding.
Do you still accept this apostolic congregation as God's people? Because they were clearly wrong on this issue, can they be trusted on anything else? Or do you reject them forever because of it? Was the mark Jesus said to look for doctrinal perfection, or something else? (Compare John 13:35)
How can you contradict yourselves the way that the Governing Body has and still hold any weight? On one hand they say they are God's instrument and he is using them. On the other hand they say they aren't inspired by God. They openly admit they are infallible yet anytime we question anything they say, you are considered a "dangerous thinker". Difference between John and the Governing Body is that John was inspired by God. Why should we put any stock into what the Governing Body says if, by their own admission, they are not inspired by God. Then they are just men. What does the Bible say about listening to the wisdom of men?
ReplyDeleteHow many of Jehovah's Witnesses died because they didn't take any blood fractions? How many Jehovah's Witnesses died because they didn't take vaccines? And then all the Governing Body can say is "oops we had it wrong". Even when you are baptised now you are baptised into the organization. They even say that. Last time I checked we were only supposed to be baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
JT, in all that, you didn't answer my question. Yes, in times past certain men were inspired by God for a purpose, but they themselves were also fallible as is admitted in their own writings. Do you really not see that, placed in the first century, you could have been making the very same argument against Peter and John? 'How could they be so contradictory?' God has always placed authority in fallible, yet sincere, men's hands.
ReplyDeleteObserve and learn from David, who subjected himself to King Saul, the one given authority by God. Even when Saul hunted David, and David had the chance to kill him, he humbly said, "Do not bring him to ruin, for who is it that has thrust his hand out against the anointed of Jehovah and has remained innocent?" (1 Samuel 26:9) I urge you to carefully consider this, as Jesus says something similar regarding how his brothers are treated. (Matthew 25:44-46)
The issues you raise are based on misinformation. Such questions that ignore historical, medical and scriptural context, only to ask 'how many died', are little more than hollow demagoguery. If you are truly and sincerely interested in these matters, find for yourself what exactly was written on the topics by our brothers (that does NOT mean going to websites with the explicit intent to oppose them and taking their word for it). You can write your local branch for that information if need be.
Research how the medical procedures themselves developed from the experimental phase to the common practice today. This information will give you more insight on the matter and you may see things very differently. Often times we view such procedures anachronistically; we might liken it to someone decades from now asking, 'How could anyone have questioned the ethics and safety of cloning? How may died because of that attitude?' These aren't static issues, and it takes time, even for the medical community, to work out the ethical issues as well as the safety ones. For example, read this article on how the issue of organ transplants developed over time.
More than this, I know that such opposition and suspicion against one's brothers usually doesn't arise out of nowhere. I haven't read much else of what you have written, but it's apparent to me that there is some deeper issue at work here; perhaps there was something for which you were disciplined that you can't get over. Whatever the case, let go of it. To be sure, it can be very unpleasant to be rebuked by some other imperfect men, but that is the arrangement that Jesus set up for us to keep us safe. How you react to it shows what's really in your heart for Jehovah. You accept it for him and for accomplishing his purpose, not for any humans.
It seems my first attempt didn't go through, so I'm rewriting this.
ReplyDeleteJT, I notice that you didn't answer my question. Do you really not see how, placed in the first century, your very same argument could be leveled at Peter and John? They were actually inspired at times, but this did not cause them to lead the congregation perfectly. Peter even had to be rebuked at times. (Galatians 2:11) Could it be that your expectations are not in line even with scriptural reality?
Carefully consider David's humble attitude towards the very imperfect King Saul, who was placed above him by God, and compare this with what Jesus says about how his brothers are to be treated. (1 Sam. 26:9; Matthew 25:44-46)
Anyone can question decisions that leave out specifics, especially scriptural, medical and historical context. But they amount to little more than demagoguery. Imagine someone decades from now cynically asking, "How many poor souls died because they didn't avail themselves to cloning?" Do you see how anachronistic that is? It takes time, even for the medical community, to work out ethical concerns as well as safety ones, not to mention that the procedures themselves are refined over time.
If you are sincere with these questions, have you written your local branch for the exact information that was published on these topics? Or did you merely peruse what other websites, with the explicit purpose of opposing Witnesses, have chosen to show you? Have you researched the medical history of such procedures, how safe they were, how well they worked in times past, how the ethical issues were worked out by others? This information may put things in a whole new perspective for you. For example, read this article on how the issue of organ transplants developed over time. It's not as simple as others might make it seem.
More than this, I realize that such suspicion and outright opposition towards one's brothers doesn't usually arise out of nowhere. I don't know much about you, but I think it's fairly evident that these accusations stem from a deeper issue. Perhaps you have been disciplined by the congregation? To be sure, being rebuked by imperfect men may be upsetting, but you show your love for God by not allowing that to stop you from serving him. Recognize the scriptural authority of the congregation, accept that God works with his people through these means, and rejoin yourself for your love of God and accomplishing his purpose; not for any humans.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Governing Body have made it clear they are not inspired of God. They have even admitted it. How many prophecies in the Bible are wrong? How many prophecies by the Governing Body have been wrong? Why should we put the same trust in them as we are supposed to of the Bible writers? We trust them because they were inspired. We should not put our trust in men who by their own admission are not inspired by God. Using Saul as an example is an awful idea. Saul was eventually removed due to his wicked ways.
ReplyDeleteI also noticed you have no response to any of the wrong teachings that the GB has put out there. There is no argument against 587 being the date of Jerusalem's destruction and even you have to admit that if that teaching goes, the whole religion goes with it. So much hinges on 1914.
JT, you missed my point. It was David's attitude towards Saul that I was highlighting, which contrasts dramatically with the one you are displaying here. Furthermore, you continue to ignore the fact that even the apostles made big mistakes at times--this is admitted in scripture--yet they still were approved by God to lead his people. But by your same standard they should be condemned as well. So is God not adjusted right or may it be that you aren't?
ReplyDeleteUnfortunatley, you're blog only allows for relatively short responses and makes it very difficult to make more than one comment at a time, so I can't really cover everything that you're asking for.
I assure you, however, the kings' timeline does work out for 607. I could really take the time to explain that if you show that you actually listen to any evidence that is presented to you that goes against what you want to hear. What is most telling is that in order to accept 587, you have to reject the Bible's clear and unambiguous testimony.
If Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BCE, as all attest to, allowing the Jews to return home by 537, this requires the complete desolation of the land to begin 70 years prior, meaning 607 BCE.
"Furthermore, [the king of the Chaldeans] carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon . . . to fulfill Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years." (2 Chronicles 36:20-21)
What can I say? History states that according to the timeline of the kings, the desolation took place in 587. This is history.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete(Evidently I'm having more posting problems, so I'm trying this again.)
ReplyDeleteJT,
"History", as you call it, is really the opinion of some men, in this case Parker and Dubberstein. Please don't tell me that now, after all your criticism of trusting in men, you are here making an appeal to trust in a couple of historians that put more faith into some shady secular sources than they do in the Bible's clear testimony, are you? Really?
The secular timeline (which guesses at 587 BCE) allows for only fifty years of the land being desolate. The Bible states unambiguously that the land was desolate for a full seventy years. Are you then accepting the secular (theorized) history over the Bible's history?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYes because it is only two men that we base the 587 year off of. This is why the only people that think 607 is a viable year is the JW's, and why is that? It's because it fits nicely into their timeline. There is ZERO evidence of 607. The thing about science and history is that if somebody is shady it gets found out. When shady scientists come up with experiments or findings they say prove some idea they have, it is run through the gauntlet to find out if it is reliable or not. The crackpots get found out real quick.
ReplyDeleteIt's not like they have just a few tablets they are using to prove 587/6 for no reason. There are tons of records kept. There is astrological evidence. Funny thing is that the same evidence they say is worthless is the same evidence they use to say that 539 is the date of Babylon's destruction. Yet they completely ignore the 586/7 proof.
Even Josephus, the historian they quote so often says that Jerusalem laid in obscurity for 50 years.
JT,
ReplyDeleteJust so you're aware, I'm having a lot of trouble posting on your blog for whatever reason.
Your comments tell me that you are indeed doing the very thing you say you detest, putting your faith in men OVER the Bible. Do you know exactly how 587 was established by the P&D chronology? It does rely on just a few tablets for that particular date. That's the point! And you don't quite have the full story on Josephus; see here.
Ultimately, what you are still side-stepping is that God's Word itself is unambiguous that the land was completely desolate for a full 70 years. The secular chronology says this can't be. Which is wrong JT, the Bible or the theorized chronology? Avoiding this issue by 'talking up' the men you're putting your faith in over the Bible doesn't make it go away.
Please take some time to read more about this issue here.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI apologize for the commenting issues but you'll have to blame blogspot for that.
ReplyDeleteYou're missing the whole point of what I'm saying about "trusting in men". I am more than willing to trust in men if they have shown no deception in the past. The GB has shown deception in the past. Did you know that the WT was a member of the UN, despite trashing them and claiming they were from the Devil? That's a double standard. That's hypocrisy.
I no longer believe the Bible is infallible. Sure, there are good lessons to learn as there are with any history book, but I don't believe it's anything more than that. I'm not here to try to bash your beliefs. I'm just presenting things I have found that have made me displeased with this religion. If you don't agree with what I say, that's perfectly fine. That is well within your right. If you are happy as a JW then that is perfectly fine. Nothing I can say will dissuade you.
And as regards records kept in Babylon, there were thousands of tablets discovered. Everything there was well documented. There are astrological records kept corresponding to rulers, records of who ruled and how long. It's not just a few tablets. There are many. Also, don't think I went into my choices about the religion on a whim. I did a lot of research to make sure of what I was doing. I've read those sites you've posted and I was not convinced.
I figured out for some reason it's picking up comments as spam.
ReplyDeleteJT,
ReplyDeleteYou said, "The GB has shown deception in the past. Did you know that the WT was a member of the UN, despite trashing them and claiming they were from the Devil? That's a double standard. That's hypocrisy."
Just because you read about something from their enemies does not make it true. Would you be there even with the Pharisees in the first century calling Jesus a sinner? A Society representative registered with the UN to get full library access, and at no time was any such language that we couldn't subscribe to presented to him.
Once when I went to the DMV to renew my license the lady behind the desk, without asking me or even telling me, registered me to vote. Are you going to condemn me as a hypocrite as well? Instead of just buying whatever someone's enemy says about them wholesale, why don't you investigate the other side of the argument. And by that I mean really read it with an open mind.
"I no longer believe the Bible is infallible."
Is that because you can't accept what it says about the seventy years of desolation over the (theorized) secular chronology? Or is it something else? Either way, you are falling prey to what Paul warned about at Colossians 2:8.
"Also, don't think I went into my choices about the religion on a whim."
To be honest, I don't think you did give it a fair investigation. You initially said, "There is no argument against 587 being the date of Jerusalem's destruction." I then gave you the biblical argument against it. Were you really aware of it? Because then you just gave the shoulder-shrug answer, "What can I say? History states that according to the timeline of the kings, the desolation took place in 587. This is history." That doesn't strike me as one as has carefully investigated all sides of the issue and know exactly why he believes what he believes.
I'll be real honest with you JT. Everything I've read on your blog smacks of one who has done something he knows is wrong, but instead of accepting discipline for it, has decided to become angry and bitter, throwing out anything he can find that says the congregation (and possibly even the Bible) is wrong. If that's the course you choose, that's up to you. It's not the mature one nor the right one though.
There are many reasons I believe the Bible is certainly fallible. And yes I didn't leave on a whim. I carefully thought about it. I could write a book with all I've found wrong about thsi religion. All I've done is pick out a few points that I thought were seriously big issues. You could say I'm nitpicking but the evidence starts to pile up. The failed prophecies, the incorrectly applied scriptures, the quoting of people out of context and showing hypocrisy. This all adds up against them.
ReplyDeleteAlso, how is knowlingly registering with the UN the same as unwittingly registering to vote? There were plenty of other libraries to choose from. There are some pretty grand ones in NY. The point is they were a member of the UN. How is that any different from brothers in Malawai filling out a 25 cent political card? How is it any different from KNOWINGLY registering to vote?
Honestly, do you think this is all because of some "sin" I've commited? Only sin I've commited is one that was made up by the Governing Body which is to not think independently. What do you mean I'm afraid of accepting discipline? Are you trying to tell me having my friends shun me and my family show outright disrespect and hostility against me isn't a form of discipline? You seem to presume a lot about me.