Posts by Disillusioned JW

13

Shunning from different perspectives

by jonahstourguide in

hi folks,.

this interesting article on abc australia covers views of people ex-communicated or shunned by a couple of institutions.

it also includes paul grundy's experience.. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-25/the-australians-who-were-cast-out-of-their-religions/100306930.

Disillusioned JW

Sea Breeze, I notice that the ABC article quotes Grundy as saying that he is "ignostic" not "agnostic". Ignostic is an actual word and it is different (though similar) in meaning than agnostic. An online dictionary defines ignostic as the following. "One who professes ignorance on the knowledge of whether or not any gods exist, or even what the term means. It is a play on the words "ignorant" (to lack knowledge) and "gnostic," (knowledge pertaining to gods)." The word ignostic thus goes beyond the meaning of the word agnostic.

Folks, the article at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-25/the-australians-who-were-cast-out-of-their-religions/100306930 is very interesting.

Note that the dismissed Catholic priest, Peter Kennedy, has created a new church. Terry Fitzpatrick was an associate priest at the Catholic church congregation which Kennedy was formerly at. Terry Fitzpatrick says he follows "mysticism and the gnostic Christians, the non-literalist Christians that were persecuted by the literalist Christians in the early church system". That which Fitzpatrick said about gnostic Christians is very important. Some posts on jehovahs-witness.com have said that Gnostic Christianity was probably the original Christianity, or very close to it.

On a different matter, have a look at the people attending the Kennedy's new church and notice how old they are. That age profile is the way many other congregations of Christianity are today. I see it as evidence that Christianity is dying out, at least in western civilization of developed countries (including the USA and Europe). People posting on this site have wrote that today people in the JW congregations are also primarily the elderly and that virtually no one under age 18 in the USA congregations of JWs still believes in the JW religion.

13

Shunning from different perspectives

by jonahstourguide in

hi folks,.

this interesting article on abc australia covers views of people ex-communicated or shunned by a couple of institutions.

it also includes paul grundy's experience.. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-25/the-australians-who-were-cast-out-of-their-religions/100306930.

Disillusioned JW

Even if a god revealed himself or herself nearly 2000 years in one small part of the Roman empire (in Galilee, Samaria, and/or Judea), no god has revealed himself or herself to people living in our modern times, or even since the time of the Enlightenment (the Age of Reason). Certainly neither Jesus nor Jehovah nor a god that unknown to me revealed himself to me - even when I was an agnostic when I asked them to provide to me convincing evidence of their existence if they exist. That lack of complete lack evidence, despite my sincere searching for such, was one of the factors which contributed to me becoming an outright positive/strong atheist (meaning someone who is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that no god exists) and a philosophical naturalist. That which which philosophers call divine hiddenness is one of the two strongest arguments which they cite for disbelief in the existence of all loving personal gods/Gods, even the biblical god (or gods) - the other being the argument from evil.

I agree with the idea of if (hypothetically) a god exists, then no human knows anything about that god since that god has not revealed himself/herself/itself to any human in the past 300 years. Furthermore many people living today are convinced that no god (even Christ) has ever revealed himself/herself/itself to a human.

For information about the concept of divine hiddenness see https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/divine-hiddenness/ . It says "However, “divine hiddenness” refers to something else in recent philosophical literature, especially since the publication of J.L. Schellenberg’s landmark book, Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason (1993). In this context, it refers to alleged facts about the absence of belief of God, on the basis of which one might think there is no God. For example, Schellenberg argues that, since there are nonbelievers who are capable of a personal relationship with God and who do not resist it, there is no perfectly loving God, while Stephen Maitzen argues that naturalism better explains the “demographics” of nonbelief than theism and Jason Marsh argues that naturalism better explains “natural nonbelief” than theism. Understood in this way, divine hiddenness constitutes putative evidence for atheism."

See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_nonbelief , it says "The argument from reasonable nonbelief (or the argument from divine hiddenness) was first elaborated in J. L. Schellenberg's 1993 book Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason. This argument says that if God existed (and was perfectly good and loving) every reasonable person would have been brought to believe in God; however, there are reasonable nonbelievers; therefore, this God does not exist."

Schellenber promotes something he calls Skeptical Religion and Evolutionary Religion. Regarding them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._L._Schellenberg says "Schellenberg's Evolutionary Religion (Oxford University Press, 2013) aims to be a more widely accessible account of his arguments in the trilogy.[17] It seeks to place these arguments into an evolutionary framework and maintains that skeptical religion provides a new way of responding to the science and religion debate.[18] "

47

The Evidence of Human Evolution keeps getting stronger and stronger

by Disillusioned JW in

despite 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

Regarding the evidence for biological evolution there is a useful article by the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) at https://ncse.ngo/review-evolution-what-fossils-say-and-why-it-matters .

At https://ncse.ngo/genesis-knows-nothing-scientific-creationism the NCSE in an online issue of their "Creation/Evolution Journal" (Issue 12) makes an argument based upon the Bible and the archaeological discoveries of ancient writings that claims young earth creationism is incompatible with the Bible's account of creation. It makes the argument that Genesis 1:1 - 2:4 was not meant to be interpreted literally. The article is very interesting and it makes me now seriously question the idea of interpreting Genesis chapter one from a literal (fundamentalist style) point of view.

This article is by far the best presentation I have read that represents something similar to the theological liberal interpretation of theologians and biblical scholars, but in a way which also integrates a lot of scientific facts. I am surprised to learn that it is written by a science education organization - one which I highly respect. If its views are correct then I need to abandon most (maybe all) of my specific criticisms of the creation account of Genesis 1:1 - 2:4.

https://ncse.ngo/about-issue-0 says in part the following.

'Issue XI was devoted entirely to exposing the difficulties in creationist attempts to render scientifically plausible the story of Noah's Ark. ... But debunking the efforts of pseudoscientific biblical literalists by pitting their claims against the facts of nature is only one way to reveal the bankruptcy of their case. Another, and perhaps more basic, approach is to challenge their biblical literalism itself. Do "scientific creationists" read the Bible correctly? Is their biblical scholarship credible, or is it as outdated and superficial as their science?

In this issue, Conrad Hyers demonstrates how the matters dealt with in Genesis have nothing to do with the current creation-evolution controversy. The great religious issue that the biblical writers sought to resolve was one of a very different sort-one that proved to be more basic to modem Western religious belief than creationists suspect.

In future issues of Creation/Evolution, we will feature articles discussing Genesis from further angles. Although we remain a journal that focuses upon the scientific errors creationists make, it is important that we not miss the fact that they make errors in biblical scholarship as well-lest some accept the creationist claim that one must choose between evolution and the Bible.'

179

The Watchtower is NOT a false prophet

by The Quiet One in

regarding 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

waton, you made great points in your post about those who existed in 1914 and 1918 and of how many of them are alive today. I also agree with your words of "By supporting, joining wt, you make yourself part of a false prophet entity."

20

"Resurrection" or "Re-Creation of The Soul"? What do really JW's teach?

by EdenOne in

interesting find through a book "inside story of jehovah's witnesses" (1967) by w.c. stevenson, supposedly a former jw circuit overseer.

it's an interesting "apostate" perspective written prior to the wts 1975 debacle.. anyway, at a certain point, there's a quote from a book called "the four cults", by professor anthony a. hoekema (1963, william b. eerdmans publishing company), a calvinist, which makes some sharp remarks about the way jehovah's witnesses teach the dead coming back to life:.

1) in the case of those "resurrecting" for everlasting life on earth, one asks: if the soul is extinct at death, and the body disintegrates and its components are integrated into other forms of life, what is there to "resurrect"?

Disillusioned JW

Yes Phizzy the JW Org's view of being " Spirit Directed" is very muddled. I agree with you about that and about the evidence showing they are not directed by Jehovah's spirit. I remember reading in one article by the WT Society that the WT Society while saying the holy spirit is not a person also says specifically that it has intelligence. When I read that I was thinking "Huh? If it has intelligence doesn't that mean it must be a person, or does the WT mean intelligence in some way like an AI (artificial intelligence) computer program?"

I never thought of using non-WT literature to prepare talks to be given at the Kingdom Halls, and while an active JW I never even owned non-WT books about the Bible or theology. I did notice though that my JW mother and her JW parents both had a non-WT Bible Dictionary (the same Bible Dictionary edition). I suspect that particular Bible Dictionary (and a RSV Bible) was once made available to the JWs through the literature counter (prior to the WT producing the Aid book). It was the one called The New Bible Dictionary, edited by Douglas. I now own a used copy of that book. It is copyright 1962.

After I became inactive and obtained old WT books (most of which I found from a thrift store, though some I bought on eBay) I later noticed in a WT book from the 1940s (the decade that the Theocratic Ministry School was created) that the WT invited JWs to make use of conservative Bible dictionaries and commentaries (though with caution) in preparing talks for JW congregations. The WT also encouraged them to use Bible concordances, including ones which stated the underlying Hebrew or Greek word for the English translation, and to see how the word was used throughout the Bible, in order to see what the Bible teaches on that topic. I recall that it is an approach which the WT says that Russell used in his study groups (before he created Zion's Watch Tower) to learn what the Bible said about the soul and hell and other words used in the KJV Bible.

While Bible commentaries are useful I notice that what they say often conflict with each other. That makes it disconcerting, to me, and challenging when using those commentaries.

Like you, I also am displeased by the WT's "Quote Mining" and by their dishonesty. Their frequent dishonesty it makes me wonder if the people in charge of the WT's writings really think of themselves as faithful true Christians.

179

The Watchtower is NOT a false prophet

by The Quiet One in

regarding 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

Rocketman123, you are right in saying the following.

OK how about apostate liars, who the bible says to not listen to.
They announced that they are modern day prophets and continued to say things that were false and unscriptural ie, 1914

The more I read the WT's literature the more false statements I see in their literature and the less reliable their literature appears to me. Matters are now at the point where I must fact check every statement I read in their literature before I consider it true (if I ever consider it true), unless I already discovered certain ideas stated by them to be true. Regarding their literature I must act in the way that Paul wrote that the ancient Boreans did - but not just in regards to Bible quotes and alleged Bible teachings, but in regards to all of the quotes by the WT and in regards to all of the definitions the WT gives (such as I did regarding the definitions of "cult", "apostate", "creationism", and "prophet"). At some point I will likely sell virtually all of the remaining books I have of the WT (but probably not for some editions of their NWT Bible, for comparison purposes).

179

The Watchtower is NOT a false prophet

by The Quiet One in

regarding 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

Rattigan350, regarding Paul claiming to be a prophet, at Galatians 1:12, besides the NIV, both the Holman Christian Standard Bible and the New Living Translation also say ".. from Jesus Christ."

179

The Watchtower is NOT a false prophet

by The Quiet One in

regarding 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

Rattigan350, though the WT claims the word 'prophet' can merely mean someone who speaks for God by explaining the Bible, they are incorrect. At the very minimum the word 'prophet' (in the biblical sense) means someone who claims that God (or some other supernatural being) gave them the message they are speaking. All of the ones in the Bible which are called prophets are ones who claim that God gave them the message to them directly (or through an angel [such as in the book of Daniel] and/or through Christ [such as in the book of Revelation] - they are not merely explaining the words attributed to God in the scriptures.

The apostle Paul claimed to foretell the future. For example, he says that at the presence (or coming) of Christ those Christians who are dead will rise first and then those who are living, and that together they will meet the Lord in the air. Those specifics are not in the Hebrew Scriptures nor in the gospels.

He also clamed that his gospel (he wrote the words "my gospel") was given to him by the Lord and by so doing he claimed to be acting as a prophet for the Lord (whether Yahweh and/or Jesus). See Romans 2:16; 16:25; II Timothy 2:8. He clams to have received a revelation from the Lord Jesus Christ himself - see Galatians 1:12 (KJV) where he says "by the revelation of Jesus Christ". Note that the NIV says ".. from Jesus Christ." That verse in the NASB (Updated) says "For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ." By saying I neither received it from man, that includes not receiving it from scriptures penned by a man (or by men). If he received it from the scriptures or even from a living human prophet, at best he would be receiving it secondhand. But insists he received it firsthand from a being in heaven (whether God or Christ)!

The following are excerpts from Galatians chapter 1 [NASB (Updated)].

. 8But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

...
11For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

...

15But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, was pleased 16to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles ...

20(Now in what I am writing to you, I assure you before God that I am not lying.) "

179

The Watchtower is NOT a false prophet

by The Quiet One in

regarding 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

waton, Yes in the 1920s - 1950s or so they did teach that the Great Tribulation went into a hiatus. But by the 1970s they had abandoned that teaching. Right? Even if they didn't abandon it the book of Revelation when speaking of those having come out of the Great Tribulation are talking about coming out something which has not happened (and from my atheistic view never will happen). The WT is incorrect in their interpretation of much of the book of Revelation.

Regarding the comment of "50 people that were living in 1909 are still alive today btw", it does not contradict my comment of "Everyone who was age 30 or older on January 1, 1930 are now dead and thus no one of them was ever part of a great crowd which came out of the great tribulation (nor who have any chance of coming out of the great tribulation) of the type mentioned in the book of Revelation!". I chose my words very carefully, for I know that some people who were alive in 1914 are still alive today - though all of them are under the age of 120 years. Another way of saying "Everyone who was age 30 or older on January 1, 1930 are now dead" is "Everyone who was born before January 1, 1900 is now dead".

The WT is still wrong for saying in the 1920s and on January 1, 1930 that millions alive then will never die and when they spoke of the millions they referring to the great crowd (and perhaps including the anointed ones). Their teaching of "millions now living will never" die was first proclaimed in the 1920s! 50 people is far less than millions, thus their prediction failed!

179

The Watchtower is NOT a false prophet

by The Quiet One in

regarding 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

Like the WT did in a WT article in the 1970s where they said JW are in some sense of a "prophet" to my shock I noticed yesterday that they are saying that again, though with more careful wording! I noticed such in the 2006 WT publication (the most recently copyrighted WT book I have obtained) called Live With Jehovah's Day In Mind. Notice what it says on pages 165-167. [By the way I obtained that book in the year 2006, I think, but I didn't start reading it (other than to browse it) until a few days ago. Back in 2006 I was not attending any JW meetings other than the memorial and perhaps some assemblies and conventions.] Page 166 says 'As we noted in Chapter 1 of this book, the words "prophet' and "prophetic" have a variety of meanings. Although you may not be a prophet in the sense that Amos or the other ancient prophets were, you can still speak out about the future.' [Notice the wishy washy language of "Although you may not be ..." when they could have correctly simply said (at least in regards to JWs) "Although you not ...".] The caption at the top of the page says 'From the early part of the 20th century down to our day, God's people have been "prophesying" '. Note that in the 1970s article they have the word 'prophet' in double quote marks while saying that JWs were a "prophet" and in the 2006 book they have the word 'prophesying' in double quote marks while saying that JWs (whom they refer to as God's people) have been "prophesying"! If JWs are prophesying then they are false prophets for much of what they are proclaiming is false. The WT is putting their JW followers into the category of being labeled as false prophets. Shame on the WT and its governing body for doing such.

On page 167 in reference to a prophecy in the book of Joel which says there would be a time when Jehovah's people (ancient Jews and/or Israelites) of every sort would prophecy, the WT dishonestly diminishes the meaning by saying "so to speak". The verses in Joel literally mean, in the full sense of the word "prophet", that the people would become prophets - with each of them literally receiving prophetic messages directly from Jehovah God by way of dreams and visions! The book of Joel did not simply mean in the sense of proclaiming messages found in the scriptures (as the WT implies on pages 166-167) but rather in the full sense of proclaiming messages that the people personally as individuals received directly from God (and thus literally as prophets)! Using the incorrect interpretation ("spin") on what the Bible says the WT on page 167 deceptively says the following.

'Now consider our time, Joel's prophecy has been undergoing its major fulfillment since early in the 20th century. Spirit-anointed Christians--male and female, old and young--began to "prophesy," that is, to declare "the magnificent things of God," including the good news of the kingdom, now established in the heavens.

Though not begotten by holy spirit to be sons of God, "a great crowd" of 'other sheep" are telling the anointed followers of Jesus Christ: "We will go with people, for we have heard that God is with you people." '

How can the WT's writers have a clean conscience when saying such deceptive and outright false things while also claiming to faithful Christians? This is evidence that the WT leadership and/or its writers are charalatans and playing JWs (and other readers of WT literature) as fools!

Notice also they have backtracked on who the "great crowd" are. In the late 1990s they correctly identified the great crowd (according to the Bible) as being a future group, specifically defined as those who have come out of the great tribulation. But in the 2006 publication they are saying that group already exists. They are repeating the mistake they made in the 1920s (or 1930s) up through the mid-1990s about the great crowd already existing. Everyone who was age 30 or older on January 1, 1930 are now dead and thus no one of them was ever part of a great crowd which came out of the great tribulation (nor who have any chance of coming out of the great tribulation) of the type mentioned in the book of Revelation!

Reading pages 165-167 of the above mentioned book irritates me and make even more want to officially resign from the JW religion (in writing) so I can repudiate the WT leadership and be on record for doing such and be on record for leaving their religion, except I refrain from doing so because I still wish to have social contact with my two surviving immediate JW family members.