607 B.C.E. - A Trip To The Local Library! With Pictures!

by mentallyfree31 74 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Gayle
    Gayle

    Wow, Mentally Free, this is great! The true "facts" stack to "high-heaven."

  • Balsam
    Balsam

    Isn't it nice to be able to confirm what you have been told by outside sources. I did the same thing after I left the witness and it really finalized my exit knowing that that the witness didn't know what the heck they were talking about and were blindly accepting the leadership. Excellent benefit to us all to have you done all these photos and sharing them here. Ruth

  • Black Sheep
    Black Sheep
    Well, however, I think that you also surely know that Jehovah's Witnesses put faith in the Bible instead of those materials.

    Rubbish Possible-San

    My father only gives lip service to believing the Bible and he has been a Rutherford convert since long before you were even born. Every time I have shown him from his own Bible that he is full of shit, he trashes the Bible in favour of the notion that his preferred Watchtower scholars are directed by holey spirt.

  • possible-san
    possible-san

    Black Sheep.

    Thank you for your reply.

    My father only gives lip service to believing the Bible and he has been a Rutherford convert since long before you were even born. Every time I have shown him from his own Bible that he is full of shit, he trashes the Bible in favour of the notion that his preferred Watchtower scholars are directed by holey spirt.

    You are right.
    Especially, the part "holey."

    But, as for that, since you are released from the WTS's brainwash, you can see the "truth."
    Probably, when I and you were active Jehovah's Witnesses, we had not noticed such a thing.

    Well, I think that you understand my explanation if you are an ex-JW.
    Jehovah's Witnesses believe not the date that historians show but the "Biblical Chronology."
    For instance, it has written on their publication (Insight) like this.

    *** it-2 p. 36 Jericho ***
    Therefore, the fact that the interpretations of archaeologists do not agree with Biblical chronology in pointing to 1473 B.C.E. as the date for Jericho’s destruction is no reason for concern. The difference in the viewpoint of Garstang and other archaeologists about Jericho illustrates the need for caution in accepting archaeological testimony regardless of whether it seems to confirm or to contradict the Bible record and its chronology.

    possible

  • Desilusionnee
    Desilusionnee

    Not enough for m husband. I showed him the pictures and asked him to read the whole thread: he didn't. He took the WLibrary and gave me the Awake 8.8.1972 as proof the GB is right. I can't wait till I have the book of Ray Franz. Hope I'll get it soon.
    Maybe it'll be easier for him...

    Desilusionnee

  • mentallyfree31
    mentallyfree31

    Desilusionnee - give it time. It takes multiple things. Slowly but surely. Even if he doesn't believe it, he has seen it and will remember it. Once you have put many things out there that don't make sense, it starts to build up. And here's a key point: you won't ever know what point really HIT HOME exactly until he is out and can tell you what did it. But by using many different topics, you can lay a firm foundation of things he believes that are not supported by facts - and hopefully eventually something will stimulate serious thinking.

  • mentallyfree31
    mentallyfree31

    And Desilusionnee - one more thing. When a person reaches the point where they have an open mind, it only takes about 15 to 30 minutes with the right book in their hand and they are OUT. It takes a lot of work to get the mind open, but once it's there - you are over the hump.

  • Desilusionnee
    Desilusionnee

    Thanks mentallyfree. The "UN membership problem" did a goog work in his head. He was upset. The "pedophile pb" also did. So I hope he will understand...

  • NiceDream
    NiceDream

    Desilusionnee - All that "secular evidence" wasn't enough for my husband either. He felt the historians were wrong and couldn't be trusted. I agreed and wondered how we could be sure of any ancient dates...including 539. He didn't know why 539 BCE was considered an "absolute date" and said he would need to research that. Whether he will or not, I'm not sure, but I hope that little seed of doubt will germinate.

  • NiceDream
    NiceDream

    Thank you for posting all your research MentallyFree. I will be sure to show my kids the evidence in the encyclopedias when they're older!

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit