Stumping bible questions for JW's

by Dawn 23 Replies latest jw friends

  • Swan
    Swan

    It is amazing to me that a day in the library can produce abundant support to the historical date of the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians as being approximately 20 years after 607 B.C.E. Most historians place it at 587 (or possibly 586) B.C.E. The only references I could find to 607 B.C.E. were in an Internet search and only to JW related sites. So how did Russell come up with 1914 and not 1934? Why do JWs put such faith in 1914 to this day?

    I feel so foolish that out of all of that time I spent in the library researching computer science, never once did I bother to check on the Fall of Jerusalem. I just took it on BLIND faith. I could just kick myself!

    Tammy

  • petespal2002
    petespal2002

    Thomas's "my lord and my god" could simply have been an exclamation at seeing the Christ raised.

    However, in John 1:18 Jesus is called the 'only-begotten God', and in Isaiah9:6 he is prophetically referred to as 'mighty god'. John 1:1 clearly shows Jesus is divine of nature. He just isn't Almighty God as the Greek attests. Jesus is theos whereas God is Hotheos.

  • Francois
    Francois

    Saint Satan, that's one helluva HOT list.

    And here's a site that indicts them with their own words. I just love all the froth and blather about aluminum cookware and about innoculation and a zillion other things that I bet the GB wished it had kept is yap shut about:

    http://www.quotes.jehovahswitnesses.com/

    You know it's almost unethical to take on the JWs in an argument; kinda like pulling a gun on an unarmed man.

    francois

  • A Paduan
    A Paduan

    Why is it mandatory that he finds a "convincing argument" before he's a "christian"? Is it a deal? What's he "buying and selling"? Is being a christian an investment - that requires equity? Truly the measure he gives will be the measure he recieves. Why 'nail Him down' before lifting Him up.

    Importantly - tell him he's ok - now that he still knows what "christian" is. " I want kindness " - he knows that already, so why trade it. If he wants to be christian, he can do what christ did - heal, help and feed people, even tell them a story to inspire their spirits, if appropriate. Has he forgotten that most of Jesus' life was spent carpentering (making shelter for people?) So he can i mitate Jesus, not some ameri-centered fine suited false prophet - how far off track has he gone already?

    If he wants to be a 'real' christian, then be one - we won't be "dying at armageddon" if he doesn't come round to our house with his "real truth".

    paduan

    " Take heed then how you hear, for to him who has more will be given "

    " An evil generation seeks for a sign "

    Edited by - a paduan on 5 October 2002 18:7:58

  • nancee park
    nancee park

    STUDYING WITH JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES AND THINK IT'S "THE TRUTH"? THEN NOTE:

    Christ said families would be split by those doing right and those doing wrong but WTS has formal Judicial Committees destroying families via numerous formal renderings of disfellowshipment (severe shunning).

    True or false: 1 Cor 6:1 only says judge "trivial" things as in business, James 2:4-13 calls judging harmful, and Paul says the "majority" (2 Cor 2:6) followed his advice to shun a wrongdoer,
    meaning a Minority chose not to and yet he nowhere condemns them.

    JWs note that Acts 15:20 says abstain from blood but 1 Samuel 14:32-5 says Saul's army ate unBLED meat to not starve and no verses show God not forgiving them. Christ says God also forgave David's eating temple holy bread and that God wants Mercy Not Sacrifice. (Mt 12) The May 22, 1994 Awake tells of 26 JW kids who died without transfusions, and by common sense in massive bleeding as in car wrecks blood expanders won't save lives
    http://www.ajwrb.org. About 3 JWs die daily earthwide from the unscriptural policy! (Blood On The Altar by David Reed) Yet most normal identical twins transfuse whole blood to each other through a
    shared placenta and childrens' whole blood is sometimes found in mothers years after birth. So which stand follows the Bible closer?!!

    Watchtower says Christ was likely born about Oct 2, so why ignore counting back 9 months for normal conception or genetic-level birth means he was born in late December? Why insist Christmas is from the pagan Saturnalia when John 10:22-3 says Christ also celebrated the Festival of Dedication or Lights, i.e. Hannukah, which first began Dec 25 but has varied since because lunar-based? Job 1:3, 3:1-3 show Job's kids celebrated birthdays if you read all 3 verses to see day of birth is meant. At Luke 2 angels themselves celebrated Christ's birth. Santa is from Saint Nicholas, an actual red-robed Christian gift-giving
    elder of the Middle Ages, not a wizard or pagan god. The word Easter may as easily be from the Anglo-Saxon word eastern (Christianity came from East of England) as from the goddess Eastre, the eggs as likely from the Jewish passover egg as from paganry, common sense saying early Christians more likely using eggs and rabbits to symbolize the hope for new life by resurrection than as vesiges of pagan fertility or sex rites! So why go by what JWs teach on this either?

    Halloween came from All Hallows (Holy Ones/Saints) Evening when parents had children dress as saints to encourage them to be good, the normally harmless pranks coming from Ireland where maybe or maybe not taken from pagans even as wedding rings, names of days, months, some Christian names in the Bible like Apollos and Jason also came from pagans. Why does the WTS call compromises holidays that attacked and replaced paganisms especially since Colossians 2:16 says let none judge you about a holiday or Sabbaths? WTS calls a cross a repugnant murder weapon but Paul said boast in it as a symbol of resurrection over death. (Ga 6:14, 1Cor 1:17-18) They say it was a stake but human remains and inscriptions show archaeologists the stauros was a cross not stake, Dr F Zugibe's research shows suffocation would be in minutes if on a stake but in
    hours if on outstretched cross per Lu 23:44 and Mat 27:45-6, and the word stauros can mean not just stake but cross. So which is more Biblical, the JW teachings on these things or the Bibles!?

    There are countless views on the trinity concept, with almost only the United Pentecostals and a few related groups praying straight to and teaching Jesus is God Almighty (Jehovah) Himself-- the modalism view. Yet WTS says the Trinity is believing Father, Son, Spirit are one "identical" person and falsely say most all Protestant and Catholic churches teach that. The fact is that most all Protestant and Catholic groups accept the trinity idea as being three totally different entities or persons, always from when time started forming one "Godship" just as Romans 1:20 says. (Read It) One illustration is that the Son and Spirit share inherited age, power, knowledge from God remindful of how
    an acorn may be only one day old but also by its genes share the oak tree's age, capacity and information! Three different entities but one in age, power and knowledge who have always formed one God Almighty or Godship. Again, which view is "the Truth"!?

    Jehovah's Witness members are told report on each other although the Bible condemns busy-bodying. Nor are regular JWs allowed to read Judicial Committee "sin files" on themselves, many not even knowing they exist and often with misinformation and kept at Brooklyn's Bethel headquarters even if destroyed locally after seven years. Page 232 in the Insight book shows a picture of the Pay Attention To Yourselves
    And All The Flock book that elders have but do not allow non-elders to read. Page 302 in the Daniel book and pages 88 and 651 in the Proclaimers book show photos of the Knights Templar swords and the cross-with-crown-and-wreath used by Masons who sometimes use "Theocratic Warfare" tactics to change members' personalities on early WTS literature. Not surprisingly with the ongoing pedophile and other scandals (
    http://www.silentlambs.org), many good JWs have also complained of visual and electronic spying and harassment, including physically! Some old WT books also have the winged sun god Ra on front covers - never a Christian symbol.

    If you are studying with Jehovah's Witnesses, ask for the books they put out which we cite here then look up the pages. Above all read what the Bible says where we cite scriptures. You may save both yourself and the person(s) studying with you from a life-time of wrong understanding and possibly, with the blood transfusion thing, even death. Make all the copies you want to of this and feel free to use them.

  • No Apologies
    No Apologies

    Swan, I had a similar experience regarding 607. There is nothing to support it! The Let Your Kingdom Come book, printed in 1981, has an appendix that tries to explain why they still support this date, and admits that all the evidence points to 587. When I came online about a year ago, it was my research on this topic, and the flood, and then the UN involvement that finally caused the scales to fall from my eyes.

    For fun, have you checked the age of the pyramids vs. the date given for the flood? Its amazing how we all just bought this stuff!

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Francois

    Glad you liked the list.

    SS

  • drawcad_1
    drawcad_1

    Swan

    I conducted a number of searches to see if there is any literature out there to support a 607 BCE date for the destruction of Jerusalem and couldn't find it. I even put a bone out there for one of the Brothers, that if he could show me where they had come up with that date, and it was supported, I would start a bible study. After a month of diligent searching, by him and his wife, I recieved a number of answers, none of which said why they chose thier date over the one that the rest of the world uses.

  • link
    link

    Hi Dawn,

    If I were you I would try to keep it simple. Your friend is only a "Study" so may not yet have got to the problem areas. These problem areas are mostly kept hidden from people who are studying so it is good that you are looking for them now.

    They should be the sort of question that his study conductor can believe are his and not something he has been primed with.

    My all time favourite "simple dubstopper" is at

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=35634&site=3

    and its quite easy to see that a Study might ask this question.

    Also, if I were you I would go to

    http://www.freeminds.org/history/communityfacility.htm

    and print out the section titled Watchtower Indroctrination Program Explained. This will be interesting reading for yourself too as it shows what to expect if he goes ahead.

    link

  • NeonMadman
    NeonMadman
    Thomas's "my lord and my god" could simply have been an exclamation at seeing the Christ raised.

    So you think that Thomas was just taking the Lord's name in vain? Like someone who shouts, "Oh, my God!" when they're surprised by something? Is that what you really see when you read that passage in its context?

    If it is, you aren't reading very well. The text does not say, "Thomas exclaimed, 'My Lord and my God!'", it says, "Thomas said to him [Jesus]..." He was addressing Jesus with those words, not simply shouting out in surprise. And rather that rebuking him for his bad language, Jesus acknowledged in the next verse that Thomas had believed (believed what? that Jesus was indeed his Lord and God, as he stated!), and rebuked him for not believing without first seeing. Clearly, the context does not support your contention.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit