Until a several days I was convinced that technically that the WT was a not a false prophet despite making numerous failed predictions. But now I see by the definition of prophecy given in one of the WT's own books, they are a false prophet. The book is called Life and was written by Rutherford (and copyrighted in 1929 by him). On page 51, in Chapter II, the book (written by someone who claimed to be one of the anointed of Jehovah God), as transcribed at http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/life/life2.html , says: "Prophecy means the foretelling of events that are to transpire, before
they do take place. Prophecy can be understood and properly interpreted
after its fulfilment, or when in course of fulfilment." The book and numerous other ones written by Rutherford of the WT, and other publications of the WT, made numerous false predictions. As such, according the above quote the WT has made and stated its own prophecies and since many of such have failed, then the WT is a false prophet (by one of their own former definitions of a prophet).
Disillusioned JW
JoinedPosts by Disillusioned JW
-
179
The Watchtower is NOT a false prophet
by The Quiet One inregarding what some have said here about the wt being a false prophet.. i would like to make my point regarding the wt not being a false prophet... so please, if you can be patient enough to read this, at least try to understand what i am getting at.. a false prophet is one who, according to deuteronomy, makes a false prediction of the future and claims that the prediction came from god, or in other words claiming that 'god has said he will do a certain thing at a certain time' etc.. for example, hypothetically speaking, if someone had claimed: "god will bring about the end of the world in 2010", they would have been proven to be a false prophet, obviously.
but, as an example, imagine a man who claimed the position of a prophet of god, (as moses did, because although he was not the type of prophet that predicted the future.. he was still a prophet or spokesman for god) and that he had publicised worldwide, according to his interpretation of a (for example) prophecy found in the book of isaiah, that the world would end in 2010.. and he had also stated that he was not saying that god will end the world in that year.. but only that there was biblical evidence that god might do so.
that would clearly have been a mistake.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
-
28
Which English Translations of the Bible are you Favorites, and Why?
by Disillusioned JW inwhich english translations of the bible are you favorites, and why?
my favorites include the (english) revised version bible (of 1881-1885) and its apocrypha (of 1898), the american revised version bible (of 1898, it close to the american standard version), the american standard version bible (of 1901), the new american standard bible - updated edition, the new revised standard version bible with the apocrypha, the complete bible: an american translation (it includes the apocrypha), and the twentieth century new testament.
i also use others beside those.. they are my favorites because i consider them to be highly accurate, and also they are either very literal (but not so literal as to be hard to understand) or they use functional equivalence.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
The edition I have of the American Revised Version Bible (ARV) and one of my editions of the (English) Revised Version Bible (RV) are both rare editions which I bought on eBay. They were each published in 1898, "Printed for the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge" and published (or distributed) by their respective New York, U.S.A. branch. They both have copious scriptural marginal references. The RV edition has a genuine leather cover. Both Bibles include alternate readings and alternate renderings.
The other RV Bible I have is part of the "The Parallel Bible" published in 1890. It is a rare edition (and has a genuine leather cover) which has the Authorized Version (AV/KJV) and RV in parallel columns. It is "Printed for the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge" and distributed from the Oxford Warehouse in London and the Cambridge Warehouse in London. It includes alternate readings and alternate renderings for both the AV/KJV and the RV. It includes "Helps to The Study of the Bible, comprising summaries of the several books with copious explanatory notes and tables illustrative of scripture history ...", a "Subject-Index to the Holy Scriptures", a "Concordance to the Holy Scriptures", and color maps. I bought it on eBay.
One edition I have of the ASV is a very hard to find wide-margin edition (with copious scripture cross-references) published by Thomas Nelson which includes the Apocrypha of the RV. Another edition I have of the ASV is "Nelson's Teachers' Edition". It has a bonded leather cover (and is thumb notch indexed). It includes copious scripture cross-references and "The Concise BIBLE DICTIONARY with numerous illustrations based upon The Illustrated Bible Treasury written by leading scholars in America and Great Britain together with a new concordance to the American Revised Version (Standard Edition), with over ten thousand references to the Authorized Version of 1611, combined with a subject-index and pronouncing dictionary of scripture proper names and A New Indexed Bible Atlas". That Bible Dictionary section is copyright 1900 by Thomas Nelson & Sons and its illustrations include photographs. I also have a newer printing of the "Teachers' Edition" by Nelson.
Though I am now an atheist I consider the above mentioned Bibles to be treasures of mine. I love the craftsmanship of four of the above mentioned Bibles.
The editions I have of the NRSV with the Apocrypha are of "The New Oxford Annotated Bible" - with Apocrypha (and I also have one for the RSV with the Apocrypha: Expanded Edition). I also have "The Oxford Study Bible - Revised English Bible with the Apocrypha: A Complete Guide to the World of the Bible". The NASB-Updated edition I have is the "Life Application Study Bible". I also have the "Today's Parallel Bible" consisting of the NIV, NASB-Updated, KJV (the latter of which is based upon the Cambridge Paragraph Bible of 1873), and NLT.
I have the "Saint Joseph Edition of the New American Bible" (a Catholic Bible with annotations) and it includes full color illustrations.
I have "The Open Bible - New King James Version" and a Holman UltraThin Reference Edition of the NKJV.
I also have the "Zondervan NIV Study Bible - 2008 Update", the Student Bible - NIV, the "Couples' Devotional Bible" - TNIV, "The New Testament In Modern Speech: An idiomatic translation into everyday English from the text of the Resultant Greek Testament" - "Fifth Edition", "The S. S. Teacher's Edition: THE HOLY BIBLE ... Authorized King James Version (which includes "The Oxford Cyclopedia Concordance ..") published by Oxford At The University Press and it has a leather cover, several editions of the NWT (ones published prior to 2013), and several other Bibles (including two Jewish translations of the Hebrew Scriptures).
I also have various Concordances, some of which include Study Helps.
-
39
What Do You Think About The Government Going Door to Door To Get You Vaccinated?
by minimus ini hate anyone bothering me going door to door and house to house.
maybe it’s my jw background?
i dunno..
-
-
Disillusioned JW
I agree with titch on this matter. It is very much like if people from the fire department come to your door to urge you to evacuate due to an approaching wildfire or of an impending eruption of a volcano (such as back in 1980 about Mount St. Helens), or if other government people came to your door to warn you of some other approaching impending natural disaster (such as a flood or of an approaching meteor).
The ABC News articles says in part "... Biden called for a stepped-up vaccination strategy that would rely on volunteers like faith leaders, local medical professionals and community organizations to canvas neighborhoods." Since the JWs believe their (former) door to door work of preaching to people is a warning work, comparable to government officials going door to door to warn people of an impending natural disaster, maybe the JWs should participate in the door to door vaccination strategy.
-
28
Which English Translations of the Bible are you Favorites, and Why?
by Disillusioned JW inwhich english translations of the bible are you favorites, and why?
my favorites include the (english) revised version bible (of 1881-1885) and its apocrypha (of 1898), the american revised version bible (of 1898, it close to the american standard version), the american standard version bible (of 1901), the new american standard bible - updated edition, the new revised standard version bible with the apocrypha, the complete bible: an american translation (it includes the apocrypha), and the twentieth century new testament.
i also use others beside those.. they are my favorites because i consider them to be highly accurate, and also they are either very literal (but not so literal as to be hard to understand) or they use functional equivalence.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
LV101 the JW.org website of the WT contains an online version of the 1984 NWT as well as other Bibles, besides the latest version of the NWT. However, I haven't been to a Kingdom Hall in years (except for memorial services of 2 JW elderly family members of mine who died), thus I don't know the official policy but I suspect the newest version is the primary NWT used in JW current meetings.
-
37
What are your personal reasons for hating the Jehovah's Witnesses religion ?
by Rocketman123 infirst thing comes to mind is that this organization through its leaders are not witnessing the true and honest version of the gospel teachings of jesus christ .. they are subjectively teaching/preaching a tainted version made up by the top controlling men of the organization, which i'm sure is connected to the proliferation and distribution of literature which these men publish themselves.
.
when jesus said that no one knows of the time not even he, he didn't say a select few will know .. the other thing that bothers me is this organization promotes human ignorance on many levels, admonishing education or knowledge that mankind needs for its very survival... there are many other religious organizations that do this as well but the jws is just one of these organizations.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
During the past few years I purchased used college textbooks in each of the subjects mentioned above which I avoided taking a college course in. I'm glad I now own such books and I have learned much from them.
-
37
What are your personal reasons for hating the Jehovah's Witnesses religion ?
by Rocketman123 infirst thing comes to mind is that this organization through its leaders are not witnessing the true and honest version of the gospel teachings of jesus christ .. they are subjectively teaching/preaching a tainted version made up by the top controlling men of the organization, which i'm sure is connected to the proliferation and distribution of literature which these men publish themselves.
.
when jesus said that no one knows of the time not even he, he didn't say a select few will know .. the other thing that bothers me is this organization promotes human ignorance on many levels, admonishing education or knowledge that mankind needs for its very survival... there are many other religious organizations that do this as well but the jws is just one of these organizations.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
JESUSnameALONE, since you say that Jehovah is not the name of the father, who do you say YHWH/Yahweh/Jehovah Elohim/God is?
Folks, regarding the claim that the JW religion does not allow JWs to go to college is it really true? I know that the religion highly discourages JWs to attend college but I don't recall their literature forbidding attending college. My mom has been a baptized JW ever since a number of years prior to her marriage to my father (who was a JW when he got married and he was still one when he died). My mother attended college (but as far as I know my JW father never attended college) and didn't stop attending college until my sister was born. My sister and I became baptized while we were in high school and we both went to college upon graduating from high school (I even took two college courses before graduating from high school and one of those two courses was at my high school). We both got a full 4-year college/university degree (though neither or us managed to obtain much financial benefit from our degree). At age 19 and while in college full-time I was appointed a ministerial servant and I served as one for several years. If the WT now actually forbids JWs to get a college degree or to even attend college then I am shocked. If the WT actually now forbids it that is very bad and very sad.
My mom and others in the congregation we attended even used me as an example to other JWs in our congregation to show that going to college won't necessarily cause a JW to loose his faith and/or go bad. My mom highly values college education. She even sent college enrollment applications in my name (and for some time without my knowledge) to big name colleges across the nation, because she wanted me to go to the best college possible. Many years later I did loose my belief in the religion and later even in the god and the supernatural (but I didn't go bad morally or ethically, though JWs might think I went bad in regards to ceasing to be a JW), but it was not due to anything I learned or experienced as a college student (except maybe a tiny bit of what was taught to me in college). While in college I lived my in mom's home, rather than in a college dorm and I still participated in the congregation which I attended since around age 2 or so. While in college I avoided taking classes of the type which I thought would likely challenge my confidence in the Bible, but I now regret not taking those classes (physical anthropology, physical geology [since it would present evidence in favor of radiometric dating], historical geology [since it would present evidence for radiometric dating, including carbon dating, and fossil evidence for evolution], introduction to philosophy [where arguments against the existence of a god would likely be discussed], philosophy of religion, introductory biology [since it would present evidence and arguments for evolution], and an English course in the Bible as literature [since it might suggest that much of what is in the Bible never actually happened]).
-
28
Which English Translations of the Bible are you Favorites, and Why?
by Disillusioned JW inwhich english translations of the bible are you favorites, and why?
my favorites include the (english) revised version bible (of 1881-1885) and its apocrypha (of 1898), the american revised version bible (of 1898, it close to the american standard version), the american standard version bible (of 1901), the new american standard bible - updated edition, the new revised standard version bible with the apocrypha, the complete bible: an american translation (it includes the apocrypha), and the twentieth century new testament.
i also use others beside those.. they are my favorites because i consider them to be highly accurate, and also they are either very literal (but not so literal as to be hard to understand) or they use functional equivalence.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Correction: The Apocrypha of the Revised Version first came out in 1895 (or maybe in 1894) instead of in 1898.
-
28
Which English Translations of the Bible are you Favorites, and Why?
by Disillusioned JW inwhich english translations of the bible are you favorites, and why?
my favorites include the (english) revised version bible (of 1881-1885) and its apocrypha (of 1898), the american revised version bible (of 1898, it close to the american standard version), the american standard version bible (of 1901), the new american standard bible - updated edition, the new revised standard version bible with the apocrypha, the complete bible: an american translation (it includes the apocrypha), and the twentieth century new testament.
i also use others beside those.. they are my favorites because i consider them to be highly accurate, and also they are either very literal (but not so literal as to be hard to understand) or they use functional equivalence.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Which English Translations of the Bible are you Favorites, and Why? My favorites include the (English) Revised Version Bible (of 1881-1885) and its Apocrypha (of 1898), the American Revised Version Bible (of 1898, it close to the American Standard Version), the American Standard Version Bible (of 1901), the New American Standard Bible - Updated Edition, the New Revised Standard Version Bible with the Apocrypha, The Complete Bible: An American Translation (it includes the Apocrypha), and The Twentieth Century New Testament. I also use others beside those.
They are my favorites because I consider them to be highly accurate, and also they are either very literal (but not so literal as to be hard to understand) or they use functional equivalence. In the case of the latter four their language is much more modern than that used in the KJV and thus easier for me to understand. When I compare the text of the RV, ARV, and ASV with the KJV, to me the RV, ARV, and ASV are an improvement to the KJV. I also see significance to the Apocrypha and consider it scripture, thus I have Bible editions which include the Apocrypha. Another Bible I like is the Holman Christian Standard Bible. That Bible included the name "Yahweh multiple times" (about 70 times or so in later revisions) in the Old Testament, but when that Bible translation became revised and had the new name of Christian Standard Bible, the name "Yahweh" was unfortunately removed from the scripture text (except maybe it is there as a footnote). Naturally I also use the NWT, but during the past 15 years I mostly only use it in combination with the other books of the WT (or to look up a verse whose wording I most familiar with from the NWT since that is the Bible translation I used for most of my life).
-
47
The Evidence of Human Evolution keeps getting stronger and stronger
by Disillusioned JW indespite the wt's and young earth creationists' teachings against human evolution (namely macroevolution from non-humans) being a reality, the evidence of human evolution keeps getting stronger and stronger.. consider for example two science news articles and one other science article, each pertaining to the fossil that is nicknamed "little foot".
below are links to three science articles, listed in order of the articles from oldest to newest (except i don't see a date for one of the articles).
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2187639-exclusive-controversial-skeleton-may-be-a-new-species-of-early-human/.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
While abiogenesis is not the same as biological evolution it is what scientists (especially ones which have a big history picture of the universe) call chemical evolution (or which is considered a part of what is called chemical evolution). Likewise there is what is called cosmological evolution. One astrophysicist, Eric Chaisson, has a book from 1981 called Cosmic Dawn: The Origins of Matter and Life and his revision (and enlargement) of it is called the Epic of Evolution: Seven Ages of the Cosmos. I wish I had read the first book before making the decision to get baptized since it probably would have made a difference in my life. I am very impressed by the latter book. The books are about the evolution (in the the broad sense of gradual change and even transmutation, such as transmutation of one atomic element into a another by nuclear fusion) of the universe. It includes cosmological evolution, chemical evolution, and biological evolution. His book also talks about cultural evolution.
Eric Chaisson also has a book, from 2001, called Cosmic Evolution: The Rise of Complexity in Nature. A brief description of the book from Wikipedia is the following. "It examines cosmic evolution which includes the history of natural evolution from the Big Bang to the present from the perspective of the emerging multi-scientific discipline of Big History.[2] It offers an explanation of why simple structures billions of years ago gave way to more complex structures, such as stars, planets, life, and human beings in complex civilizations.[2] It is written for a general audience interested in science." [See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Evolution_(book) .]
-
17
"My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?"
by Diogenesister incan anyone remember the reasoning the watchtower gave for jesus speaking these words?
if you have a reference that would be even better!.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Why do many evangelical apologists care about whether the physical body of Jesus was resurrected anyway, since they and other Christians believe they have an immortal soul which will go to heaven upon the death of their physical body and that it could be hundreds of years (or even countless thousands of years) before their physical body gets reunited with their spirit being?
The vast majority of Christians seem to give no thought to the idea of a future resurrection of their human body, since they imagine themselves as going to heaven as a spirit (without a fleshy body, though somehow looking like such a body in some way) and being in bliss in that state. It seems to me that Christians (and their denominations/sects) who believe/teach they will ascend to heaven as a spirit (and be in bliss as a spirit being in the company of the Lord Christ and the Lord God the Father [who is thought of as a spirit being without any fleshly or physical body]) should ditch the doctrine of a bodily resurrection (including of Jesus), as being a superfluous doctrine. They might as well embrace the Gnostic doctrine of the escape of the immortal spirit from the fleshly body (and without any resurrection of their fleshly body). [Or they might as well embrace the WT/JW doctrine pertaining to the 144,000 which says that such ones enter heaven as spirit beings and will never obtain a fleshy body (an idea which might explain why the Bible says Christ says that in the resurrection their is no marriage/marrying).] If they believe they will be extremely happy in heaven prior to their fleshy body becoming resurrected, then what benefit would they have in their fleshly body eventually becoming resurrected? According to virtually all of the churches (those which don't believe in 'soul sleep', the first Christians to enter heaven did so nearly 2,000 years ago and haven't yet had a bodily resurrection, so my question is: If that idea is true, hypothetically speaking, what benefit would such Christians get by later having their physical body resurrected? I see none.