slimboyfat
JoinedPosts by slimboyfat
-
52
Russia to liquidate Jehovah's Witnesses' organization
by processor inhttp://starconnectmedia.com/2017/01/19/russia-gets-go-ahead-to-liquidate-jehovahs-witnesses-organisation/.
-
-
-
10
Why did C T Russell choose 606 BC?
by shepherdless ini recently commented on a thread in relation to the 607 bc - 1914 ad calculation, listing problems with the logic and mathematics.
afterwards, i wondered what made ct russell choose 606 bc in the first place.
here is my research so far.. i had read somewhere a suggestion that 606 bc was a number ct russell got from nathan balbour who in turn got it from william miller of the millerites.
-
-
slimboyfat
Have you seen Alan Feuerbacher's excellent discussion of how Russell chose 606 and why JWs changed it to 607?
http://corior.blogspot.co.uk/2006/02/evolution-of-606-to-607-bce-in.html
-
13
How does the Preaching Work get done Under a Ban?
by Quarterback inthe year book tells us that some activity in fs is being performed in countries that are banned, is this accurate?
how on earth is it accomplished?
do anyone have any experience?.
-
-
slimboyfat
Depends.
Sometimes they lay low and sneak around.
Other times they poke dictators in the face publicly with predictable consequences.
There seems little rhyme or reason to it. We need to give up the idea that JW actions are rational or consistent, let alone the "one true way". They behave differently at different times according to the whim of the leadership, often apparently based on changing legal, political, internal organisational, and even personality issues.
-
43
2520-607 = 1913
by schnell ini love math, i love calendars, and somehow, this always gets me.. 2520 - 607 = 1913. not 1914.. 2520 - 606 = 1914. from what i understand, russell realized this.
he had previously used 606 bc, of course, but then he switched it to 607 bc.
i know there was something about no zero year, so it actually should be less one, correct?.
-
-
slimboyfat
As I understand it, they switched from 606 to 607 in order to make it still fit with 1914 and for no other reason. A bit like the two years before Cyrus told the Jews to go home. There's no actual reason why it's two years other than to make 1914 fit. How anyone can defend any of it is a complete mystery to me.
-
12
About 1.8 Millions disfellowshipped since 1981 and about 1.3 Million still are!
by StephaneLaliberte inthis means that for every 6 publishers, there is a disfellowshipped person.
this statistic doesn't take into account all of the kids that become/removed as publishers and receive a similar treatment from their family.
conclusion: jehovah's witnesses do break up families.
-
-
slimboyfat
The figures sound about right. But there are a few complications.
What about people who "disassociated" are they included in the 1% or the 40,000 figures? Probably not. Yet not all of these people left voluntarily, since it can include "apostates", joining military, attending another church, and more recently accepting blood.
Also until the mid 1990s unbaptised publishers could be removed and treated as if disfellowshipped.
Plus we don't know if the DFing rate has changed over the decades, either up or down, which is entirely possible.
Having said that the ball park figure of around 1 million or so DFed seems proportionate and fits with the known facts.
-
23
The goal in all this 1918/1919 change?
by careful inas some have recently posted here, there does seem to be a shift going on in their self-interpretation(s) of what happened in 1918 and 1919. if we can look past all the details that emphasize the poor thinking and poor wording (or contradictions/just plain craziness/insignificance) of their message, something bigger seems to be afoot.
they appear to be attempting to redefine the meanings for some "prophetic" scriptures in light of themselves.
1. they are trying to somehow fill the void they have themselves created from their rejecting freddie franz's (ff) type–anti-type postulations.
-
-
slimboyfat
Yes maybe the reason the link works for me is that I downloaded it months ago. I have tried to email you the PDF. Will write a proper email soon.
-
23
The goal in all this 1918/1919 change?
by careful inas some have recently posted here, there does seem to be a shift going on in their self-interpretation(s) of what happened in 1918 and 1919. if we can look past all the details that emphasize the poor thinking and poor wording (or contradictions/just plain craziness/insignificance) of their message, something bigger seems to be afoot.
they appear to be attempting to redefine the meanings for some "prophetic" scriptures in light of themselves.
1. they are trying to somehow fill the void they have themselves created from their rejecting freddie franz's (ff) type–anti-type postulations.
-
-
slimboyfat
It's a thesis with the title: "The Church in the thought of Charles Taze Russell" by Gene Edson Ahlstrom
-
23
The goal in all this 1918/1919 change?
by careful inas some have recently posted here, there does seem to be a shift going on in their self-interpretation(s) of what happened in 1918 and 1919. if we can look past all the details that emphasize the poor thinking and poor wording (or contradictions/just plain craziness/insignificance) of their message, something bigger seems to be afoot.
they appear to be attempting to redefine the meanings for some "prophetic" scriptures in light of themselves.
1. they are trying to somehow fill the void they have themselves created from their rejecting freddie franz's (ff) type–anti-type postulations.
-
-
slimboyfat
Excellent post careful. Yes their abandonment of Franz's "types" may be causing unintended problems. And they are not as creative or intelligent as Franz was.
Yes Russell had a lot more to say about the gap between the second century apostasy and the nineteenth century revival. I think the Bible Students identified the messengers of the church in Revelation as: Paul, Arius, Waldo, Wycliffe, Luther and Russell. I can't find the source for that now, but in searching for it I came across this interesting discussion of Russell's "church thought".
-
45
New light in this weeks WT?
by Indian Larry inanybody have any ideas where they are going with the "new light" they have been pushing last week and this week?
for instance in this weeks study article one section reads:.
in years gone by, we believed that jehovah became displeased with his people because they did not have a zealous share in the preaching work during world war i. we concluded that for this reason, jehovah allowed babylon the great to take them captive for a short time.
-
-
slimboyfat
It's amazing they still take themselves seriously enough to rearrange these particular deck chairs and expect people pay attention like this is relevant, important, or even coherent information.
-
40
What if Fred Franz had never existed?
by Magnum inwhat if fred franz had never existed?.
those of you who weren’t around in the days when he was the oracle of jwdom or who at least aren’t familiar with the deeper publications he was responsible for probably won’t be able to comprehend the significance of the question.
i believe he influenced jwdom greatly, and the whole feel of jwdom would have been different without him.. during the 60’s, 70’s, & 80’s (not sure about 50’s), he was considered to be almost superhuman by some (a lot?
-
-
slimboyfat
In fact some have claimed Franz was in control of WT doctrine before Rutherford died, in as much as Franz is said to have ghostwritten some of Rutherford s later books.
A textual analysis of some sort should be technically feasible these days to clear up this claim one way or another.