Posts by Disillusioned JW

38

Watchtower Change On Origins from 42,000 Years to the "Day Age" Theory

by Sea Breeze in

does anyone know when and how the change took place?

is the "day age" theory still the current position of watchtower?.

Disillusioned JW

Sea Breeze, while I think you are probably correct in thinking that the Genesis chapter one account of creation has in mind a literal 6 solar days of creation (followed by a day of rest for Yahweh Elohim [Jehovah God]), I am convinced that such an interpretation is completely incompatible with modern scientific evidence. I invite you to read and study the following two books since they both point out the major problems with the ideas of young earth proponents of creationism (so called 'creation science' and 'scientific creationism'). The two books also point out the overwhelming modern scientific evidence for evolution (both biological and cosmological). The books are:

The books also document how the young Earth 'creation scientists' don't come to their creationist views from scientific knowledge, but rather they start from a position of biblical faith and heavily distort/twist (mislead and sometimes even lie about) some cherry picked scientific evidence (often out of context) in an effort to support young Earth biblical creationism.

Please see also the book called "Only A Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul" (copyright 2008) by Kenneth R. Miller (who is both a devout Catholic, a cell biologist and molecular biologist, and a biology professor who is convinced of evolution and who has written scientific papers). That author believes in the existence of the Christian God (at least a Catholic concept of it) and is a view I don't share, but the scientific evidence he provides for evolution and against intelligent design are excellent. Also please see the book called "Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design" (copyright 2006) by Michael Shermer. That author is a former born-again evangelical Christian and a former creationist who had accepted "... that the biblical story of creation was to be taken literally", but who know accepts evolution and who no longer believes the biblical god exists and he is a skeptic. He is also a former professor. He says as a result of studying evolution in graduate school that he discovered "... the preponderance of evidence from numerous converging lines of scientific inquiry--geology, paleontology, zoology, botany, comparative anatomy, molecular biology, population genetics, biogeography, embryology, and others--all independently converge to the same conclusion: Evolution happened." In the prologue of his book he says his book "is about how we know evolution happened, in the context of the challenges to evolution mounted by twenty-first century creationists and Intelligent Design theorists."

38

Watchtower Change On Origins from 42,000 Years to the "Day Age" Theory

by Sea Breeze in

does anyone know when and how the change took place?

is the "day age" theory still the current position of watchtower?.

Disillusioned JW

Though some WT publications have said something to the effect that "the Earth might be as old as scientists say" and/or that "the universe might be as old as scientists say', at least one WT publication specifically said some undisturbed rock formations on Earth are billions of years old and at least another WT publication said the sun is billions of years old. Note the following examples.

Paragraph numbered 13 on page 10 of "Life Does Have a Purpose" (copyright 1977) says "Yet for billions of years, with apparently little or no change, the sun has steadily produced light and heat.' Paragraph number 7 on page 8 of the same book says "The heavenly bodies have revolved in their vast orbits at tremendous speeds, with astounding precision, for untold millions of years." [The italics are that of the book, not mine.]

"Was all physical creation accomplished in just six days sometime within the past 6,000 to 10,000 years?

The facts disagree with such a conclusion: (1) Light from the Andromeda nebula can be seen on a clear night in the northern hemisphere. It takes about 2,000,000 years for that light to reach the earth, indicating that the universe must be at least millions of years old. (2) End products of radioactive decay in rocks in the earth testify that some rock formations have been undisturbed for billions of years." Regarding the word "day" used in Genesis chapter 1, the next paragraph says 'The term used allows for the thought that each "day" could have been thousands of years in length.'

"The Bible's narrative allows for the possibility that some major events during each day, or creative period, occurred gradually rather than instantly, perhaps some of them even lasting into the following days.*

ACCORDING to their kinds

Does this progressive appearance of plants and animals imply that God used evolution to produce the vast diversity of living things? No."

BluesBrother, that you quote you gave from the Watchtower 2015 1st June is fascinating. I am surprised that the WT said such. It seems that in the print edition the quote appears somewhere within pages 3 - 5. It can be read online at https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2015402 . Besides saying the words you quoted the article also says:

"Scientists estimate that the earth is about 4 billion years old and that the universe was born some 13 to 14 billion years ago. The Bible sets no date for the creation of the universe. In no place does it affirm that the earth is only a few thousand years old. The very first verse in the Bible reads: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) That general statement allows scientists to determine the age of the physical world according to sound scientific principles." [Note: Instead of about 4 billion years, the scientific estimate is more accurately stated as about 4.5 billion years old for the age of the Earth.]

Sea Breeze, though Genesis 1:14 in the NKJV says "... for signs and seasons, and for days and years" and thus expresses the wording you stated of 'so that there could be "seasons, days, and years', some other Bibles (though ones less literal) express the idea of signs marking the time frames. Note that the REB (copyright 1989) says "... serve as signs both for festivals and for seasons and years." The HCSB (copyright 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003) says "serve as signs for festivals and for days and for years." The NIV (1984) says "... let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years" and the TNIV of 2005 says the same The NLLT (1996) says "... will be signs to mark off the seasons, the days, and the years." The NAB (copyright 1970 for the Genesis), a Catholic Bible not to be confused with the Protestant NASB, says "... Let them mark the fixed times, the days and the years".

Whether the passage means 'for signs, season, days, and years' or whether it means 'for signs of seasons, days, and years' I don't know for sure, especially since since I can't read/translate ancient biblical Hebrew and ancient biblical Septuagint Koine Greek. It would be helpful to know what the specific wording is in the corresponding Babylonian and Assyrian creation accounts since the ancient Jews/Israelites were in captivity in Babylonia for a time and later many lived in Persia for a time, and it appears that the the Jews/Israelites adopted the cosmology of those ancient civilizations.

72

How many TRUE BELIEVERS do you think are left in the Organization?

by pistolpete in

i have a few jw relatives who are true believers.

by this i mean, they believe with all their heart that 1914 was the beginning of the last days, that this is the last generation, that we are in the very last of the last hour of this system of things, and that you should obey the governing body even if it does not make sense.

all of them are in their 60s and up into their 90s there is nothing you can say or show them to convince them or even cause a small doubt that the wt is not god organization.

Disillusioned JW

In this post I provide an update to my words of a prior post in which I said "Br. Russell in at least one of his old books said Jehovah might have used evolution to create nonhuman life (but not for human life since Genesis chapter two says Jehovah fashioned Adam from dirt)." Though in a number of places in some of his writings Russell says that evolution is wrong, in chapter 2 in at least one edition of The Divine Plan of the Ages book, he does say that nonhuman species could have been made by God through some sort of theistic evolutionary creationism that ultimately results in the kinds of life becoming fixed. For example see http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/plan/chapter2.html (its website seem to have been created by a devout one of Jehovah's Witnesses). There the book (as transcribed on the website) says:

"Surely if unintelligent nature were the creator or evolver she would continue the process, and there would be no such thing as fixed species, since without intelligence nothing would arrive at fixed conditions. Evolution would be a fact to-day, and we would see about us fish becoming birds, and monkeys becoming men. This theory we conclude to be as contrary to human reason as to the Bible, when it claims that intelligent beings were created by a power lacking intelligence. One theory regarding the creation (excepting man) by a process of evolution, to which we see no serious objection, we briefly state as follows: It assumes that the various species of the present are fixed and unchangeable so far as nature or kind is concerned, and though present natures may be developed to a much higher standard, even to perfection, these species or natures will forever be the same. This theory further assumes that none of these fixed species were originally created so, but that in the remote past they were developed from the earth, and by gradual processes of evolution from one form to another. These evolutions, under divinely established laws, in which changes of food and climate played an important part, may have continued until the fixed species, as at present seen, were established, beyond which change is impossible, the ultimate purpose of the Creator in this respect, to all appearance, having been reached. Though each of the various families of plants and animals is capable of improvement or of degradation, none of them is susceptible of change into, nor can they be produced from, other families or kinds. Though each of these may attain to the perfection of its own fixed nature, the Creator's design as to nature having been attained, further change in this respect is impossible. It is claimed that the original plants and animals, from which present fixed varieties came, became extinct before

32

the creation of man. Skeletons and fossils of animals and plants which do not now exist, found deep below the earth's surface, favor this theory. This view neither ignores nor rejects the Bible teaching that man was a direct and perfect creation, made in the mental and moral image of his Maker, and not a development by a process of evolution, probably common to the remainder of creation. This view would in no sense invalidate, but would support, the Bible's claim, that nature as it is to-day teaches that an Intelligent Being ordered it, and was its first cause. Let human reason do her best to trace known facts to reasonable and competent causes, giving due credit to nature's laws in every case; but back of all the intricate machinery of nature is the hand of its great Author, the intelligent, omnipotent God. We claim, then, that the existence of an Intelligent Creator is a clearly demonstrated truth, the proof of which lies all around us: yea, and within us; for we are his workmanship, whose every power of mind and body speaks of a marvelous skill beyond our comprehension. And he is also the Designer and Creator of what we term nature. We claim that he ordered and established the laws of nature, the beauty and harmony of whose operation we see and admire. This one whose wisdom planned and whose power upholds and guides the universe, whose wisdom and power so immeasurably transcend our own, we instinctively worship and adore. To realize the existence of this mighty God is but to dread his omnipotent strength, unless we can see him possessed of benevolence and goodness corresponding to his power. Of this fact we are also fully assured by the same evidence which proves his existence, power and wisdom. Not only are we forced to the conclusion that there is a God, and that his power and wisdom are immeasurably beyond our own, but we are forced by reason to the conclusion that

33

the grandest thing created is not superior to its Creator; hence we must conclude that the greatest manifestation of benevolence and justice among men is inferior in scope to that of the Creator, even as man's wisdom and power are inferior to his. And thus we have before our mental vision the character and attributes of the great Creator. He is wise, just, loving and powerful; and the scope of his attributes is, of necessity, immeasurably wider than that of his grandest creation. But further: having reached this reasonable conclusion relative to the existence and character of our Creator, let us inquire, What should we expect of such a being? The answer comes, that the possession of such attributes reasonably argues their exercise, their use. God's power must be used, and that in harmony with his own nature - wisely, justly and benevolently."

137

Masks Are Coming Off

by minimus in

jw
friends

a number of states are allowing people to not wear a mask.

some think this is disastrous!

what’s your view?.

Disillusioned JW

I think that until Covid-19 case numbers (and Covid-19 related deaths) drop to less than 5% of their peak level and also until at least 50% of the population is vaccinated from Covid-19, people still should be required to a wear a mask. I think that dropping at this time the requirement to wear a mask would be disastrous.

17

"Modern Bibles" New World Translation - Part II

by Perry in

behold, the days come, saith the lord god, that i will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the lord .

amos 8: 11. .

most of us who have been raised as jehovahs witnesses since at least the 1960s were occasionally reminded of the scholarship of fred franz and his command of eight or more languages, including the biblical languages of hebrew and greek.

Disillusioned JW

The WT booklet called ' "The Word" - Who Is He? According to John' (copyright 1962) specifies the edition of Greber's NT quoted by the WT. It is the one listing (in the Explanation) which verses Greber alleged were translated by assistance of spirits. That is because a footnote on page 5 says "The New Testament--A New Translation and Explanation Based on the Oldest Manuscripts, by Johannes Greber (a translation from German into English), edition of 1937, the front cover of this bound translation being stamped with a golden cross."

40

Are Jehovah’s Witnesses Wrong Regarding Staying Out of Politics?

by minimus in

jw
friends

we were told we were part of the world if we got involved in politics.

if we had employment that had political involvement we were instructed to get another job.

we were told we might be considered disassociated if we voted and then it became questionable.

Disillusioned JW

Rocketman123, actually according to some verses in the Bible, Jesus did say his disciples (at the least ones who were his faithful apostles) are no part of the world (though physically in the world). John 17:6 first part, 9, 11 first part, and 14 - 16 (NKJV) say: "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. ... I pray for them. I do not pray for the world, but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. ... Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. ... I have given them, Your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world."

Verses 14 and 16 (NWT of 1984) says "... no part of the world ..." instead of "... not of the world ...".

23

The Emphatic Diaglott, still being published by the WTB&TS for the benefit of ... NOT JWs but for Christadelphians, Church of God Holiness and Abrahamic Faith folks.

by illoowy in

jw
friends

there are english speaking denominations that actively use the emphatic diaglott.

the wtb&ts is the only publisher providing new printings of this nt interlinear.

the r&f jehovah's witness doesn't use the diaglott (not even the jw version of it "kingdom interlinear translation" that supplanted it).

Disillusioned JW

Where I said "... about have the various ..." I should have said "... about how the various ...".

23

The Emphatic Diaglott, still being published by the WTB&TS for the benefit of ... NOT JWs but for Christadelphians, Church of God Holiness and Abrahamic Faith folks.

by illoowy in

jw
friends

there are english speaking denominations that actively use the emphatic diaglott.

the wtb&ts is the only publisher providing new printings of this nt interlinear.

the r&f jehovah's witness doesn't use the diaglott (not even the jw version of it "kingdom interlinear translation" that supplanted it).

Disillusioned JW

I "bought" my first KJV (a WT edition) and ASV (a WT edition) I think in the early 1990s. I had to wait years before the WT announced in a KM that they were available again for ordering. It was easy for me to order them (when they were available) since I was the literature dept. servant at the time. [The booklet which listed the items that could be ordered classified them, the leather/deluxe Bibles, and the KIT as controlled stock items, meaning the KH was not to stock up on many of them (if any) as inventory at any given time, but could order them if people in the congregation requested a copy to be ordered for them.]

When I started looking up WT "proof texts" in the KJV for a number of WT doctrines I noticed that many of the verses in the KJV were incompatible (or more difficult to use) for proving some of the WT doctrines. That made me concerned for awhile. As a result, after learning that, from that point on when I witnessed door-to-door I only used in my reasoning those verses which also worked in the KJV, since I knew people at the door respect the KJV and don't use the NWT. I didn't manage to place much WT literature or start many studies.

dropoffyourkeylee and slimboyfat that is very interesting what you both say about the controlled stock items are no longer available for being ordered from the WT. It is also interesting regarding what was said about the WT having a severe money shortage. Br. Russell (I still use "Br." when referring to him) said something to the effect of 'if the time ever comes when the Lord doesn't support the work financially and that thus the WT Society can't pay its bills without pleading for money, then it would cease operations.'

http://jwdivorces.bravehost.com/russell2.html is very interesting. I wonder how much of it is true. So far I have only read the very first part of it since the page is very long. It is about have the various legal entities of the JW religion (or 'business") are set up legally and suggests how they are controlled, perhaps even in a way for personal profit.

Last time I checked the Diaglott (other than old editions prior to the 1940s) typically receive about $10 plus shipping cost in eBay auctions. I plan to keep my Diaglott and 1985 KIT, for now, for personal study of the Bible and to see how the NWT and other Bibles compare to the Greek text and Diaglott's and KIT' interlinear renderings of the Greek text. If I write a book with the aim to convincing JWs to leave the JW religion I would probably quote from WT editions of those books, thus I should keep them for that purpose.

The Byington Bible I have is one I bought at a local Goodwill Outlet thrift store. I don't like the translation of that Bible, since to me it is considerably harder to understand. As a result, I don't plan to keep that Bible.

23

The Emphatic Diaglott, still being published by the WTB&TS for the benefit of ... NOT JWs but for Christadelphians, Church of God Holiness and Abrahamic Faith folks.

by illoowy in

jw
friends

there are english speaking denominations that actively use the emphatic diaglott.

the wtb&ts is the only publisher providing new printings of this nt interlinear.

the r&f jehovah's witness doesn't use the diaglott (not even the jw version of it "kingdom interlinear translation" that supplanted it).

Disillusioned JW

The WT book Theocratic Aid to Kingdom Publishers (copyright 1945 and thus before the first volume of the NWT was published) on page 266 says "The majority of those the Lord commissions us to disciple are not acquainted with the Scriptures, and religion has made them suspicious of any Bible translation that differs from their own." Isn't it ironic that now the JW religion makes JWs suspicious of any Bible translation that differs from their own?

I currently plan to keep my copies of the WT edition of the Emphatic Diaglott, the KJV, and the ASV. I also currently plan to keep my copy of the KIT (1985 Edition) and my copies of numerous editions of the NWT.

12

NWT informative Pamphlet FYI

by Adonai438 in

their kingdom interlinear translation of the greek scriptures declares:

11. john 1 :1 [''god" as "a god" in order to.

gruss comments:

Disillusioned JW

The first post in this thread (apparently quoting a pamphlet of a Christian ministry) says "Unfortunately, in utilizing this translation, the Witnesses never informed their members that the translation was flawed or that Wilson was a Christadelphian ..." The fact is, in at least one WT publication the WT did tell JWs that Wilson was a Christadelphian. The WT book called Theocratic Aid to Kingdom Publishers (copyright 1945) includes some study lessons pertaining to various translations of the Bible. In one of those lessons, on page 261 of the book, the WT says "Benjamin Wilson, a Christadelphian, published a translation of the Greek Scriptures in 1864, in New York, and designated his work The Emphatic Diaglott. It has so many features of great value, such as a Greek text with an interlinear word-for-word translation in one column and an emphatic English translation in another, that a detailed consideration of its uses in analytical study is undertaken in Lessons 68 and 69."

However though the WT and others have said that Benjamin Wilson was a Christadelphian, a number of websites (including ones written by Christadelphians) say he was never a Christadelphian, and some of those sites say he started a church that had some doctrines different from the Christadelphians. From what I have read I think Wilson's church was the Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith (COGAF) and not the Christadelphians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Wilson_(biblical_scholar) says "Benjamin Wilson (1817–1900) was an autodidact Biblical scholar and writer of the Emphatic Diaglott translation of the Bible (which he translated between 1856 and 1864). He was also a co-founder of the Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith.[1]"