Freddy Franz followed in this fellow's footsteps (A Study in HUBRIS)

by Terry 12 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Terry

  I think the early days of the Watchtower Society were pretty high tech.

  Russell had 20 million readers of his newspaper column. The Photo Drama of creation was pretty cutting edge for its time.

  Rutherford's victrola recordings "Religion is a snare and a racket" must surely have capture people's attention.

  He had a radio show where he lambasted other preachers pretty vociferously.

  The Frank and Earnest radio program was popular.

  But, TV never appealed to the Watchtower Society at all. Think about that.

  Just about any weirdo with a pompadour can make millions with a TV ministry and the JW's avoid it like the plague.

  Interesting, huh?
• 

  problemaddict

  Hey Terry,

  Interesting post as usual. I am a little more interested in finding out in what ways the biblical chronology regarding events taken for granted by the good Bishop, vary from the ancient texts, but not the Masoretic?

  As far as tech is concerned, I think we are going to see the pendelum swing the other direction now because the practicality cannot be ignored. But what small amounts of video come out, will be so benign as to barely say anything at all. I think the aversion to television would be the fear of taking something seemingly out of context, or creating sound bites that hurt the cause. Words can get lost, shuffled and buried under more words. They can be accused to not fully tell the story. Video however, sets tone, context, and very clearly helps the person communicate in an almost personal way.

  Probably were afraid of getting caught with the intellectual pants down so to speak. Even now, video at conventions can be looked at as "odd" at times.
• 

  Terry

  I am a little more interested in finding out in what ways the biblical chronology regarding events taken for granted by the good Bishop, vary from the ancient texts, but not the Masoretic?

  The way the oral stories of the bible were handed down generation by generation make the aspect of accuracy of date an impossibility to explore with any hope of

  reliability. My understanding of the dissonances between manuscript families is in kingships, intervals, order of events, etc.

  Over riding almost all of these are the practical consideration of WHAT KIND OF CALENDAR systems were used in each geographic region. Hundreds if not thousands of

  differing systems of counting can be found through the long span of time covered by the O.T.

  Fred Franz tried to gimmick up his guesswork by announcing an ABSOLUTE date for the Old Testament and for the New Testament. But, it is stuff and nonsense.

  Read the opening of Matthew and look at the proffered time interval of generation count. It doesn't match the history given in the O.T.

  A chronology is not scientific, historical or feasible for determining the exact time something happened so how can it be useful

  for calculating when something else (Armageddon) is GOING TO HAPPEN??