by BluesBrother 307 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • AuldSoul
    And let us not quibble over a hundred years here or there.

    Dave, I was putting it perspective for someone living today. This is an appropriate comparison to someone living in 1905 being told what was coming in 1914 or 1915, and what HAD ALREADY come in 1974 and 1978. The second scenario equates to the situation between 1919 and 1925, before the understanding of 1914 had changed while they were still preaching the world HAD ENDED in 1914.

    I think David2002 is getting his snapshots of what JWs were teaching from apologist Web sites, which would obviously skew the focus to current times casting back instead of looking at it as though you were alive in 1905 and being told and taught what turned out to be a load of dingos kidneys. And again pre-1925. On what basis would you trust whatever was devised to explain it away the next time it failed? Why would Jesus choose such an organization that was doing EXACTLY what he warned against believing and following?

    They claimed to know where Jesus WAS, when Jesus was COMING, what Jesus would DO when he got here, when the resurrection would begin, they claimed the Faithful and Discreet Slave was CT Russell, then that it was a group of people with no authority whatsoever over ANYTHING, except a tiny fraction who, conincidentally, were also the Board members (and wasn't that a lucky break for them?) who became the first Governing Body. The WHOLE THING stinks to high heaven, but he wants to forgive all manner of errors and STILL claim there is reason for confidence.

    Despite Jesus saying not to believe it, and not to follow it:

    Matthew 24:23-28 — “Then if anyone says to YOU, ‘Look! Here is the Christ,’ or, ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will give great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones. 25 Look! I have forewarned YOU. 26 Therefore, if people say to YOU, ‘Look! He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out; ‘Look! He is in the inner chambers,’ do not believe it. 27 For just as the lightning comes out of eastern parts and shines over to western parts, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 28 Wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
    Mark 13:21-23 — “Then, too, if anyone says to YOU, ‘See! Here is the Christ,’ ‘See! There he is,’ do not believe [it]. 22 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will give signs and wonders to lead astray, if possible, the chosen ones. 23 YOU, then, watch out; I have told YOU all things beforehand.

    I dunno if he will get the sense of it, though.


  • AuldSoul
    Prov. 4:18 clearly shows the light of the truth will get brighter.


    I don't know why, but this angers me. Not at you, but at them. Have you EVER considered the context of that verse you spit out so casually as "clearly show[ing]" something?

    For your edification, here it is in paragraph context:

    Proverbs 4:14-19 — Into the path of the wicked ones do not enter, and do not walk straight on into the way of the bad ones. 15 Shun it, do not pass along by it; turn aside from it, and pass along. 16 For they do not sleep unless they do badness, and their sleep has been snatched away unless they cause someone to stumble. 17 For they have fed themselves with the bread of wickedness, and the wine of acts of violence is what they drink. 18 But the path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established. 19 The way of the wicked ones is like the gloom; they have not known at what they keep stumbling.

    Explain to me what part of this in context CLEARLY relates to "truth" getting brighter. I think you just parrotted a lie you heard, and let yourself get trapped into twisting a Scripture to reinforce unscriptural dogma.

    Neither this verse nor its context discusses truth or teaching in any way. It discusses general life courses and the outcomes of each. It is not prophetic of this or any other organization, although MANY religions twist this Scripture identically. Which of them are actually the "true" religion whose path gets brighter, David2002? None of them, because they each prove themselves false by twisting Scripture to their own ends. Another notable Bible figure did that, too.

    2 Corinthians 11:12-15 — Now what I am doing I will still do, that I may cut off the pretext from those who are wanting a pretext for being found equal to us in the office of which they boast. 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel of light. 15 It is therefore nothing great if his ministers also keep transforming themselves into ministers of righteousness. But their end shall be according to their works.

    They worked, mind you. They had no shotage of works to show. Powerful works. But Jesus sees them as workers of lawlessness. He doesn't know them. Because of their deceit...their Theo-cratic lies. Theo being Theodore Jaracz, of course. I hope you eventually wake up and see that you stumbled into another set of humans who seated themselves in the seat of Moses. But if you still think Proverbs 4:18 CLEARLY shows what you said it shows, it is highly doubtful.


  • David2002


    Actually, you are wrong. I am an elder and my brother is a District Overseer. He has privy to information that those of us on the elder level do not have access to. The problem of sexual perversion involving children is actually a large one among Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide and it is growing exponentially. The Society is doing its best to keep this as quiet as it is possible to do. That is why people who speak out against it and who go to the media are disfellowshipped. They do not want other witnesses talking to them and finding out how extensive the problem really is. You seem like a sincere and well meaning fellow and you are not afraid to read literature and visit websites that are critical of JWs. I respect that. It is only by being fully informed that any of us can make good choices. The Watchtower shows a complete lack of respect for its members by not allowing them to explore and question what they are being taught. If their teachings were indeed the Truth, they would not shy away from its scrutiny. I wonder how you would be viewed in the congregation that you are so quick to defend if you confessed that you were reading books by Stafford and the other gentleman you mentioned? Just curious.

    The elders I spoken to said the problem is minimal, but still even a minimal problem with child molesters is bad. There is about 1% that is expelled each year, and in most cases it involves adults with other adults, or teenager with other teenagers, but rarely an adult with a child. As I mentioned in another post, the Jan. 1986 issue of the WT mentioned a list of sins people were disfellowshipped from, and it mentioned child abuse among them. That does not sound like the WTS is hiding something. JR Brown was interviewed several times, as well as other Witness attorneys, regarding some cases. They aknowledged that there have been cases & discussed the WT policy in handling. One WT official in Britian openly said he regretted what had happened to 2 young girls. The elders, of the congregation in which the girls attended, were all removed from their positions for not following WT instructions, Interestingly, some sociologists, including Rodney Stark, have spoken favorably of the WTS policy. The Website http:\\ reveals that the problem is being faced by all churches. I believe that the WTS policy of disfellowshipping pedophiles will help deter pedophiles from entering the congregation; by expelling them, they are also exposing them. Unlike some published reports by psuedo-newswires, parents have the right to report to the authorities. Articles regarding the problem has appear in the pages of the WT publications. So they are taking a pro-active role in educating the public about the problem.

    Those who were "pointing out a problem", were not only pointing out a problem. Many of those individuals were not expelled for a long time. I believe JR Brown said in an interview, that one of the individuals just "did not understand" the Witness policy. However, many of those speaking against the WTS went on to say that the WTS is worse than the Catholic Church and that they harbor pedophiles, etc. I think that when they began spreading misinformation and slandering the true Christian congregation, that it was then decided that they must be expelled. If they repent, they will be gladly accepted back to the congregation. Now, personally, I agree with the point they made that the WTS policy should be changed so that it would be required that elders in all states (not just the states that require it by law) report the accusations made against individuals. On the other hand, I understand the Witnesses viewpoint that they may not be in a position to disfellowship due to the biblical law of 2 witnesses. And the WTS has stated that if accused is brougth to court, and additional evidence comes to light, such as DNA evidence, that evidence can be taken as a second Witness. Also, it is simply not true that JW's are worse than the Catholic and other churches. The Jehovah's Christian Witnesses Congregation is the only major Christian group that expels pedophiles, thus exposing them. Also, the Jehovah's Witnesses Congregagation was the first to deny elder or teaching positions to those guilty of child abuse. And while it is true, that current policy requires elders to report in state where the law demands it, elders can themselves report it , and can encourage parents to report child abuse cases, even if there are not 2 witnesses. The cases that I knew about in early 1980's were reported to the authorities. The WTS policy of expelling child abusers and encouraging parents to report it to the proper authorities helps maintain the congregation relatively free of those unrepentant perverts. Unlike the Catholic Church, which had transferred hundreds of priests that had confessed to abusing thousands of children, Jehovah's Witnesses have immediately removed any elders from their position and expelled them from the congregation. And even, if they repent afterwards, they cannot become elders. That was a completely different approach which the Witnesses were the first to institute and proves that they want to protect children (a few other churches later followed).

    I mentioned in an earlier posts that other Witnesses have read books like from James Penton and Raymond Franz. Now-a-days, many prospective Witness converts get a library of anti-Witness books, including those written by Ex-Witnesses. Many of them still accept the true Jesus of the Bible and believe the WTS is teaching the truth, although it may take them longer to be convinced. Carolyn Wah (WT attorney) and Gregg Stafford have read their books, and they're still Witnesses. I don't know why you mention Gregg Stafford since he writes mainly pro-Witness books (although his second one on the Three Dissertations has some critisms, which I and other Witnesses disagree with, he does not viciously attack the Witneses and holds to the view that they teach the truth. In fact, he plans to releases a 3rd and updated edition of his book Jehovah's Witnesses Defended which is expected to be out in March 2006 (see . True Witnesses are not encouraged to Anti-Witness books, especially those by apostates. It has led some to have doubts. However, you cannot be expelled for reading them. A WT alluding to some reading ex-Witness books mentioned that some of them began doubting, and, in some cases, it took them awhile to overcome them. But they were helped to become firm in the faith again, not expelled. Othedr have read them and were not bothered by them, because they have a firm standing in the truth and cannot be deceived. And there appears to be more and more cases of individuals coming into the truth even after reading anti-Witness books given to them by friends or relatives. The truth is the truth, and those who study the Bible and believe it, will reject apostascy, and stand with Jehovah God and Jesus.


  • David2002


    After I looked at the 607 BCE stuff, it opened my mind to examining other doctrines and quotes from the society. Its not that they haven't taught truth... its just its intermingled with many things that are false.
    So which is more important? Unity or truth? Is it better to be united in an org with some false teachings or better to reject anything wrong, anything false and instead allow love to unite?

    I heard the arguments against 607BCE and they are not compelling. I recommend you check a JW blog which discusses the issue in very lucid and easy-to-understand way at:

    I don't believe we are united by false teachings. Jehovah's Witnesses are united because they have a firm believe in the basic and simple true teachings of the Bible.


  • AlmostAtheist

    >> >> And let us not quibble over a hundred years here or there.
    >> Dave, I was putting it perspective for someone living today.

    Open mouth, insert foot.

    Sorry, I was too stupid/tired to catch that! :-(

    Carry on, I'll go read David2's blog.


  • David2002


    Even the JWs do not teach that the "meek will inherit the earth" is referring to its inhabitatation. Don' t forget that they say the NT was written predominantly for the anointed. That scripture refers to Jesus inheriting the earth as a 'gift'. Kindly he will allow some to live on it.

    it-1 p.1201 Inheritance

    “The anointed members of the Christian congregation are spoken of as having a heavenly inheritance, sharing Jesus’ inheritance as his “brothers.” (Eph 1:14; Col 1:12; 1Pe 1:4, 5) This includes the earth.—Mt 5:5.”

    Watchtower 1958 March 1 p.139 “Blessed Are the Meek”

    “Will that mark the fulfillment of Jesus’ promise: “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth”? No, at least not primarily. Those words, first uttered by the psalmist David, apply first of all to the pre-eminently meek One, Jesus Christ, to whom his Father, Jehovah God, said: “Ask of me, that I may give nations as your inheritance and the ends of the earth as your own possession.” Inheriting the earth is part of his reward for his meek and faithful course while a man.—Matt. 5:5, AS; Ps. 2:8. Sharing this inheritance with Jesus Christ will be his “bride ,” those footstep followers of his, limited to 144,000, who will receive a heavenly reward. (Rev. 14:1, 3) Thus the apostle Paul tells them: “If, then, we are children, we are also heirs: heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ.” Jesus refers to these specially favored followers of his as a “little flock.” However, the principle enunciated at Matthew 5:5 applies also to Jesus’ other sheep who, as meek ones, will receive everlasting life on earth. How so? In that they will hold the earth in trust for Christ and his bride , permanent tenants, as it were.”

    The Jews believed that paradise referred to a place people went to after death.

    The NT teaches a NEW earth, not this present one.

    Those articles cited were from the 1950's. But even then it was argued that it applied to would live on earth forever. Matthew 5:5 is now applied to the meek who will inherit in earth by living on it. Psalms 37:10, 12, 29, which is believed by most scholars to be what Jesus was quoting, refers to those who live forever on earth. The bride of Christ will be in heaven with Jesus ruling over the earth (Rev. 5:10). The Bible clearly talks about a new earth and new heavens. That the "new earth" does not refer to a new globe can be easily by reading the entire context of 2 Peter 3:5-7, which mentions that the earth and heavens of the past were destroyed by a flood. Yet we know that we still live in the earth God originally created and the heavens are still the same. Gen. 11:1 mentions that the whole earth spoke one language, using earth as refering to people. Isa. 65:17-25 was originally applied to the nation of Israel when they returned from the Bablyon exile (most Bible scholars agree on this). There it talks about the new heavens and the new earth. Yet it was on this earth the Israelites remained in. The NT also refers to the new earth and the new heavens in the same way. It refers to a new world or a new age, when the earth is renewed and converted to a paradise, and inhabited by the meek. The new heavens refers to the Kingdom of the heavens finally taking over and destroying all other kingdoms. Isaiah 66:16-24, which also alludes to the new earth and heavens, clearly indicates in the last verses that it is on this earth in which Armageddon survivors will remain in. Isaiah 11:6-9 talks about the paradise conditions on earth. The fact of the matter is the NT as well as the OT taught that the meek will inherit and live forever on this earth.



  • Gary1914

    "Now-a-days, many prospective Witness converts get a library of anti-Witness books, including those written by Ex-Witnesses. Many of them still accept the true Jesus of the Bible and believe the WTS is teaching the truth, although it may take them longer to be convinced."

    Now Gary, I believe "indoctrinated" would be a more appropriate term than "convinced". lol
    "Many of them still accept the true Jesus of the Bible and believe the WTS is teaching the truth."

    ......and still many more of them do not believe in the WTS and believe that its teachings are bogus and so do not become witnesses, or if they do they do not remain in the organization for long.

    I see, David, that you like to equate a person's profession and educational level as proof of the validity of the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses. I have seen other do that too. After all, if this incredibly smart person with oh, so many degrees, accepts it as the truth, why it must be the truth!

    Please note that while a person may be gifted intellectually there are many that are stunted emotionally and this is where the Witnesses come in. Because for all their "educational work" and scripture sprouting and dates and charts, it is the emotions that they are after. This means that those who appear so wise to us may indeed be ready to succumb to the seductive lure of life everlasting on a paradise earth, to salivate after the dangling carrot of never having to die that is just before them.

    David, I am just a simple man, with a simple life. I don't know many things for sure, but I do know that the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is corrupt at its core. Corrupt in ways that you cannot begin to imagine and I pray that one day you will see it too.

    However, you, like many others probably need on some level the structure that the Watchtower offers. This is not a bad thing. We are all individuals and we are all seeking something or other. Anyway, the witnesses will keep you busy and off the streets!

    Just one more thing. I note that you use the JW definition of the word "apostacy" as meaning anyone who leaves the WT organization on their own volition. I have contact Merriam Webster dictionary and informed them of this new use of the word by JW's and have suggested that it be added as a sub-meaning along with the core meaning. I have not heard back from them yet, but it has only been a couple of weeks.

    By the way, just because a person writes an anti-watchtower book does not mean that he no longer believes in God and that he does not accept Jesus Christ as his saviour.

  • greendawn

    Auld Soul those were great posts (1686/1687) I can't understand why the dubs won't accept the obvious fact that the WTS and its FDS is nothing but one of the false prophets that the gospel warns about, they fulfill that aspect of prophecy, a very negative one at that.

    They are just a bunch of deceitful liars and con artists under a respectful religious guise no doubt operating under satanic inspiration despite that outward pious appearence. Many Bethelites that met them in person will tell you that they are a bunch of shameful power freaks putting up a spiritual personna.

  • David2002


    A correction on part of a statement I made:

    Russell himself emphasized the chronological bible doctrine can be read with the same absolute certainty as basic bible doctrine in the Jan. 1, 1914 WT (which I have never seen quoted in the anti-Witness sites)

    The above state should have read:Russell himself emphasized the chronological bible doctrine cannot be read with the same absolute certainty as basic bible doctrines in the Jan. 1, 1914 WT (which I have never seen quoted in the anti-Witness sites)


  • AuldSoul

    Thank you for taht correction, David2002. I would like to address one point on the blog you directed attention to.

    When Did Nebuchadnezzar Begin His Reign
    Jehovah's Witnesses agree with secular historians that 539BCE is the year in which Babylon was conquered by Medo-Persia. There is so much evidence that it is called an absolute date and there is no Biblical evidence that would contradict this date. But here is where the discrepancy comes in. Secular historians believe Neb (Nebuchadnezzar) began his reign in 605BCE. Jehovah's Witnesses believe his reign began in 625BCE. What accounts for the 20 year discrepancy?
    Jehovah's Witnesses reason that the Jews returned to their homeland after Cyrus made his decree in his first year and Jerusalem at last became inhabited once again in 537BCE. Ezra 1:1 "And in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia, that Jehovah’s word from the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, Jehovah roused the spirit of Cyrus the king of Persia so that he caused a cry to pass through all his realm, and also in writing, saying:
    2 “This is what Cyrus the king of Persia has said, ‘All the kingdoms of the earth Jehovah the God of the heavens has given me, and he himself has commissioned me to build him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. 3 Whoever there is among YOU of all his people, may his God prove to be with him. So let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and rebuild the house of Jehovah the God of Israel—he is the [true] God—which was in Jerusalem." 607BCE is then arrived at by counting 70 years back from 537BCE in conjunction with prophecy of the 70 years of desolation.
    Jeremiah 52:12 tells us exactly when Neb sacked Jerusalem, "And in the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month, that is, [in] the nineteenth year of King Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, the king of Babylon, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard, who was standing before the king of Babylon, came into Jerusalem. 13 And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the house of the king and all the houses of Jerusalem; and every great house he burned with fire. 14 And all the walls of Jerusalem, round about, all the military forces of the Chal·de´ans that were with the chief of the bodyguard pulled down." Since the destruction occurred in Neb's 19th year then we count 18 years back from 607BCE and we have the date that Neb began his rule, 625BCE.
    On the other hand secular historians rely upon Babylonian inscriptions and tablets. They count back from 539BCE, piecing together the archaeological evidence, then adding together the years that they believe each king ruled. In this way they determine the year of 605BCE to be the first year of Neb's reign. Then they count forward 18 years and arrive at 587BCE as the year that Jerusalem was desolated.
    The following evidence will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that 607BCE is the actual date of the desolation of Jerusalem. It will also prove that 587BCE cannot possibly be the date for that desolation. Let us now show you why that is the case.

    To try this portion of the case fairly (the portion which I find to be the most grievously in error) I would like to find out if you and I agree on a couple of unmentioned details.

    (1) Does the Bible say anything about 539 BC at all?

    (2) How does secular history arrive at that date?

    I really believe that a misunderstanding in this area is they key to the reason so many Witnesses attempt to defend an indefensible position on this issue. I await you considered response. I will clue you in that any response you offer should include a discussion of the Hillah Stele (Nabon. No. 8), just as a friendly tip. So that you know the importance of this document, without it 539 BC would not be a fixed date. I encourage you to find references to it in the WT publications first, then expand your search.


Share this