The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • ozziepost
    Why did he need to arrive invisibly again in 1914 since he was already there invisibly before?

    Well, the Dubs would say that it was then that he took up kingly power. Trouble is, he couldn't do much with this power 'cos God told him to wait around a while (longer).

    I think that's about it.

    Yep, I agree, it doesn't make sense.

    In any case, the only way it could be true is if the Bible got it wrong when it says that every eye will see him. (Yeah, I know, they've got an answer for that too! - why is it that whenever it's inconvenient, they say that the Bible didn't really mean what it says?)

  • ozziepost


    That's off topic - but a good point to discuss, why not start a new thread?

  • AlanF

    In his post # 369 on page 60 thirdwitness said:

    : AlanF just said: Is it that you don't believe the account of the flood or you believe that Jehovah is an unjust God?

    :: Both.

    :: First, no earthwide flood has occurred in the past 600 million years, much less the past six thousand.

    :: Second, a God who is as capricious as the Old Testament describes is obviously an ancient tribal myth, just as surely as are the gods of the Sumerian, Assyrians, Canaanites, Greeks, Romans, Norse and everyone else. A god who would kill everyone on the planet without warning, along with all animal life, can at best be described as capricious, and at worst as a monster.

    : Now, how many want this guy trying to teach you what the Bible says? Please raise your hand.

    Ah, but JWs demonstrably don't believe the Bible either. They believe the Watchtower Society, which pretends to believe the Bible but really does not. This is proved by the fact that the Society unequivocally rejects the clear statements in Exodus and Genesis that God created the entire universe in six days -- a problem that thirdwitness steadfastly refuses to address.

    Furthermore, why would anyone put stock in a religious organization or its defenders, when that organization and its founder have a collective record, going back 130 years, of complete failure of everything they've ever predicted based on their understanding of the Bible? Isn't it painfully obvious that such a record proves unalterably that these people have no idea what they're talking about?

    : I don't even know why AlanF even bothers trying to explain or argue what the Bible says at all.

    Of course you do. Or at least, you think you do. You've stated the reason enough times: AlanF wants to discredit JWs.

    Well of course, among the best ways of doing that is to show the many ways in which they reject clear Bible teaching, for whatever that's worth. That way, Bible believers get a better idea of what the Bible really says from the viewpoint of someone with no sectarian religious agenda, because my sources represent an extremely wide range of scholarship ranging from the extremely sectarian to the completely secular. Nothing like that can be said of the Watchtower Society, which self-admittedly exists only to promote the sectarian views of the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses.

    : He don't

    Your rural Texas background is showing. "He doesn't" is the proper expression. Even GWB has overcame that. [sic]

    : even believe what he's saying anyway.

    Of course I do. Anyone can make a study of any body of religious literature and understand what it has to say, and point it out to others without believing it. I can read and understand the Hindu Rig Veda and teach it to others without believing that it has any real religious import.

    : And it is obvious from his last few inaccurate posts where he misapplies and misreads scriptures that he really does not know at all what the Bible teaches about Christ's parousia.

    LOL! That's rich, coming from someone who believes and teaches that Jehovah's Witnesses have undergone a 130-fold increase in gross sexual immorality in the last 70 years, and thinks nothing of it.


  • Frank75
    Is this PMJ troll clueless, or what? Let's not feed it anymore.

    Stevenyc, as you pointed out a few posts ago, the sum total of Watchtower teaching on the matter of Noah's preaching is that he indeed preached to the entire world. While the Society has been cagey enough not to directly claim that -- after all, the Bible itself does not directly claim it -- it has done everything but directly claim it, doing its usual talking out of both sides of its mouth at the same time. I believe this has been to stave off the inevitable question that would be raised if they directly stated that Noah did not preach to the entire world: How could a just God kill an entire world of people without warning them? Indeed, the thrust of Watchtower teaching has always been that God's appointing Noah as a preacher to warn the entire world of its coming destruction is proof of his supreme justice.


    What all of this talk back and forth about Noah fails to recognize in regards to Noah and his family, is that he was found righteous before he was told about the flood. The account says specifically that the Ark was only for him and his family. If he did preach anything at all it was "good bye suckers" because there is no provision for any other people. What would not be fair is if Noah who, needed no warning of impending doom, or advance notice, proved to be righteous on his own, was joined by persons who only came aboard the Ark because the alternative was destruction. How could that possibly be fair? Same with Dubs today. They all join the WT like my parents did when my Dad's sister came and pleaded him to come back to "the Truth" (him and my mom were raised in it). Her means to get them back into the witlesses was to scare them about 1975. It worked! My dad hung on until the 1980's. Of course it is not fair. Because neither of them really changed for the better. In fact my mother put him out after he stopped going to the meetings. She lives all alone now and none of her children want anything to do with her. Alan is 100 correct in why the witlesses do not come out and say that Noah covered the earth with preaching. He couldn't have done it even if he wanted to. That fact revealed it would show God is unfair. It would also put an unattainable burden on JW's who just could never reach everyone either....again showing God to be just as unjust. This would throw a stick of dynamite into their theology. However if like Jesus said that the final judgment would be just like ones of Noah and Lot, who were saved because they were righteous first without warning, then God is proved to be fair and just in that the playing field is arguably level. So then when a world is held to account by a judge who comes as a theif in the night and an hour not expected the things Jesus really said in Matt 24 and Luke 17/21 finally make sense. Frank75

  • jayhawk1

    Frank75 said,

    It would also put an unattainable burden on JW's who just could never reach everyone either

    A former pioneer sister in my former congregation once said, "I could see the society printing pamplets and putting them on a plane and tossing them out over the countries that ban our work just before Armageddon."

    What's funny is didn't the Nazis do this in WWII?

    OUTLAW, if you want to know what happened to all the extra water, God was thirsty. Everybody knows that!


    ..I will respect your decision ozzie..I won`t press the question on this thread..My best to you...OUTLAW

  • AlanF

    In his post # 341 on page 53 thirdwitness wrote:

    : AlanF said: This is where the double lying comes in. The Society actually teaches that its use of "presence" focuses exclusively on the "subsequent presence" part of this meaning, so its 1996 Watchtower article was lying about the Society's historical usage of the term. That's why they use "presence" exclusively in the NWT. I've gone over this many times now, and the fact that you keep ignoring it proves you're a liar.

    : Perhaps it would be good to learn the teachings of JWs before criticizing them.

    Actually I know perfectly well what JWs teach, having been associated in one way or another for more than 50 years.

    : 8-15-96 WT: Hence, it is not just the moment of arrival, but a presence extending from the arrival onward.

    You've completely missed the point that I clearly stated above: "The Society actually teaches that its use of 'presence' focuses exclusively on the 'subsequent presence' part of this meaning." Having missed the import of my statement, the rest of your post is meaningless. So how about that 130-fold increase in gross sexual immorality among JWs, thirdwitness? Doesn't it remind you of Sodom and Gomorrah?



    My mistake jayhawk1,I was sure it was the toilet..LOL!!...OUTLAW

  • jayhawk1

    OUTLAW, God's only problem was the belch he had after drinking all the water. It blew up the planet between Mars and Jupiter.

  • Fisherman


    I think that it was you that wrote the article on God's Justice, no? After reading that article, I understood that God is just by definition and not because we can relate to or understand God's justice. That is why when I saw again the literature pictureso of people with silly smiles on their faces as God destroys humanity in the background, including jws own sons or daughters, I understood how silly those smiles were and I realized that I just cannot understand. I did not see it like that before when looking at the pictures.

    But I have to take sides with God because he is the life giver. But if I am given the authority to do so,I will plead for humanity. Perhaps God can change ther dna or do something to give people a break. I have heard people say: Oh well, God is going to kill my son in Armageddon, but I have many SPIRITUAL children. How can a parent say stupid things like that? I dont know. Imagine that?

    I have read Af's articles and he has a point. If the person reading Af articles just stopped and thought instead of becoming defensive he would be able to relate to what Af is saying. Who am I to judge God, that is not the point but I ceratinly can relate to AF line of thought.

    AS AF says the torture and murder of a perfect innocent man is not enough payment?. "no that may apply later depends on if you endure to the end and how much jumping around you did." and the heartache and thousand natural shock that flesh is heir too and death too."you deserve that because your a sinner" You think people deserve to be born deaf blind, natural disaster (blame satan).

    Afs articles are great.

Share this