Posts by leaving

8

Book study next week... was the Mosaic Law perfect?

by StarTrekAngel in

before i get the "no it was not, because god does not exist and this is a writing of man", i am directing this discussion to those that either still believe, or need as many tools as possible to talk to a family member still in.. the purpose of my posting is to discuss what i believe to be a mistake on this book or, in the other hand, be corrected if i am not getting the entire picture.. in the book, chapter 19 "god's wisdon in a sacred secret", paragraph 10, it reads.... 10 second, the law thoroughly demonstrated mankinds need for a ransom.

a perfect law, it exposed the inability of sinful humans to adhere to it fully.

compare this with hebrews 7:11-12. jesus a priest like melchizedek11now if perfection was through the levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of aaron?

leaving_quietly

There is a MASSIVE mis-treatement of the word "perfect" by WT. The word used in the Biblical sense does not mean what WT implies it means. The Greek word eteleiōsen at Heb 7:19 literally means "I complete, accomplish, make perfect". Thus, "perfect" means "complete". This makes sense. The Law could not make ANYTHING complete. That's why they had to sacrifice over and over and over again. But the one sacrifice of Christ could make things complete.

You may also note Hebrews 5:9. Speaking of the Christ, it says: "And after he had been made perfect, he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him," I can almost hear you gasping. WHAT? Christ was NOT PERFECT?????!?!??!?! In the definition of the Greek word for perfect, no. While he was in the flesh, he was NOT complete. This does not mean he sinned, for we are told at Hebrews 4:15 that he was "without sin".

As an interesting aside, the old NWT Reference Bible has a footnote on Hebrews 5:9 on the word "perfect". It reads:

Or, “after he had been inaugurated (installed; empowered; consecrated to office).” Gr., te·lei·o·theisʹ. See Le 21:10 ftn. Compare Le 8:33 ftn.

This is one of the proofs that Christ became King long, long, long before 1914, and in their own Bible.

17

Rev 17:9 - Thoughts?

by leaving_quietly in

rev 17:9 describes something about the "woman", the harlot, babylon the great:.

here is where the intelligence that has wisdom comes in: the seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top.

and there are seven kings: five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet arrived, but when he does arrive he must remain a short while.. i was dreaming about this verse last night, so i thought i'd look it up.

leaving_quietly

@Gladiator, wish I could. Working on it. Slowly, slowly, slowly. But, first, I'm busting out of the WT indoctrination. That means asking lots of questions, gathering input from a variety of sources, and forming a conclusion. It's often not the same conclusion as WTBTS (well, duh!)

@Bobcat, once again, thanks. I'm always appreciative of your research.

@Londo111, true, but since Revelation was given to John in signs, what's the saying... things may not be as they appear...

@myelaine, when I get some time and privacy, I'll watch that. Thanks.

@Jonathan Drake, yes, that's a fairly common view. I'm aware of it, but I don't currently share it. I say "currently". Revelation is such a difficult book and with a lifetime of one-sided WT teachings, it's a challenge when considering anything else. I'm trying, though.

@cappytan, you're statement is spot on. I know I don't believe WT anymore. But, just what DO I believe? That is the question I'm working on answering.

@OrphanCrow, I am still a believer. Hard to shake that. You may be completely correct. And it's a conclusion I may eventually come to agree with you on at some future point. For now, though, the journey is interesting, myth or not.

18

Watchtower doctrine: Judges 1:19 (God couldn't defeat the Iron Chariots)

by southwest in

this weeks assigned bible reading is judges 1-4. i have never noticed judges 1:19 before which reads in the nwt as:.

jehovah was with judah, and they took possession of the mountainous region, but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain,* because they had war chariots with iron scythes.

but in the kj as:.

leaving_quietly

Thanks, Bloody Hotdogs!

This highlights something very tricky, in my opinion, with the WT Library CD. I usually just click on the verse number and it brings up the list of references. Well, clicking on this verse brings up no references. I usually don't proceed past there. But, this time, I went to both the scripture indexes (1930-1985 and 1986-2014) and again, no references. But, searching for the verse DOES bring up references, but only when searching for Judges 1:19 without quotes. With quotes, no references. And even with quotes around "Jg 1:19", no references, even though there are references to this specific verse, as you found.

17

Rev 17:9 - Thoughts?

by leaving_quietly in

rev 17:9 describes something about the "woman", the harlot, babylon the great:.

here is where the intelligence that has wisdom comes in: the seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top.

and there are seven kings: five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet arrived, but when he does arrive he must remain a short while.. i was dreaming about this verse last night, so i thought i'd look it up.

leaving_quietly

Rev 17:9 describes something about the "woman", the harlot, Babylon the great:

Here is where the intelligence that has wisdom comes in: The seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top. And there are seven kings: five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet arrived, but when he does arrive he must remain a short while.

I was dreaming about this verse last night, so I thought I'd look it up. I have long thought, ever since I was a child, that the seven mountains might not mean what WTBTS says it means, but that it may mean seven continents or seven seas instead. This is because Rev 17:1 says the harlot sits on "many waters". I don't recall much about my dream, only the words "seven continents" in relation to this verse. So, I thought I'd look into it further this morning. But, this post is not about the seven mountains. Bear with me.

I came across a blog posting about the verse that asked an interesting question:

On what basis can anyone claim that the present tense John wrote is anything other than a reference to a state of affairs existing in his time?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2012/03/is-revelation-179-10-the-decisive-evidence-against-the-end-times-view-of-revelation.html

WTBTS explanation is this:

The seven heads of that ferocious beast stand for seven “mountains,” or seven “kings.” Both terms are used Scripturally to refer to governmental powers. (Jeremiah 51:24, 25; Daniel 2:34, 35, 44, 45) In the Bible, six world powers are mentioned as having an impact on the affairs of God’s people: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Of these, five had already come and gone by the time John received Revelation, whereas Rome was still very much a world power. This corresponds well with the words, “five have fallen, one is.”
Revelation Climax p. 251 par. 2

Here's my question: Regarding the seven kings, would they be describing kings as seen from John's point of view in his time? Or, would they be describing kings as seen from the point of view in the day of the Lord? At the beginning of the book, at Revelation 1:10, John says that by the spirit, he came to be in the day of the Lord. Does this change the view of who these seven kings are?

12

Books/texts/scriptures mentioned in the bible , though not incorporated in the bible cannon .

by smiddy in

if a bible writer / scribe refers to a particular book text or scripture by name , for one reason or another, shouldn`t that be a legitimate reason for including it in the bible cannon as a part of the bible ?.

just how many texts , books, scriptures are left out of the old testament bible that are mentioned there in and how many, if any are their in the new testament..

leaving_quietly

There's also the letter to the Laodicean congregation.

And when this letter has been read among you, arrange for it also to be read in the congregation of the La·o·di·ceʹans and for you also to read the one from La·o·di·ceʹa. (Col 4:16)

18

Watchtower doctrine: Judges 1:19 (God couldn't defeat the Iron Chariots)

by southwest in

this weeks assigned bible reading is judges 1-4. i have never noticed judges 1:19 before which reads in the nwt as:.

jehovah was with judah, and they took possession of the mountainous region, but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain,* because they had war chariots with iron scythes.

but in the kj as:.

leaving_quietly

Yet another verse WTBTS never comments on. However, typing in "Judges 1:19" into Google search yields many interesting results.

18

Why do Jehovah's Witnesses do this?

by runForever in

jw
friends

why do jehovah's witnesses as individual members readily think that apostates are having a sweeping mass delusion?

if some jw's have known you for a long time do they really think you based everything on some random delusion you randomly had instead of confirming the information?.

it's quite retarded even the bible itself is contradicting them in jeremiah about the 70 years.. i know some know, and some choose not to know but what about the rest?.

leaving_quietly

ARS, you seem to have a fascination with SEX. It's not the first post you've accused us as having that as the reason for leaving. I am a married person, so SEX is not the reason for me. Nor is it for quite a number of people here, so quit making these sweeping accusations.

NEVR ONCE have I known a SINGLE PERSON that was "due to doctrines that I disagreed with..." because you cant even be disfellowshipped for that AND THE MAIN thing is, WHAT DOCTRINE is SOOOOOOOOOO bad that you give up the baby with the bathwater?

And you know everyone here? Just because you don't know someone who left for this reason doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It is my PRIMARY reason for wanting to leave. Yes, you can get disfellowshipped for not believing. There's plenty of documented accounts of that. What doctrine is so bad? Does it matter? If we still believe in God (and I still do) then what is it God wants? John 4:23,24 says worshippers must worship with spirit and truth. Doctrines surrounding salvation must be truthful. If they are not, then we are not worshipping with truth.

If there is no paradise earth, then that's a false hope. If there was a paradise earth, don't you think Paul, Peter, James and John would have spoken or written about it BEFORE Revelation? Revelation came around AFTER the rest of them died, so none of them died believing in any paradise earth. Even Revelation doesn't say anything about a paradise earth. For that matter, that phrase isn't in the Bible at all. Paul said that even an angel should be accursed if anything different than the good news he taught was preached (Gal. 1:6-8). If an angel should be accursed, then so should anyone else preaching any other good news, INCLUDING JWs.

2

List Of Watchtower Misquotes

by Bangalore in

here are some links showing various misquotes from wt publications.. http://home.comcast.net/~docbob1/misquotes.htm.

http://www.paradisecafediscussions.net/showthread.php?tid=2357.

http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/how-watchtower-distorts-writings-of_15.html.

leaving_quietly

Thanks for putting that together.

LQMARKED

How about a Bible API?

by leaving_quietly in

since we post quite a few scriptures on this site, it would be useful if they could pop-up the verse(s) when the link is clicked.. a couple of possibilities i found:.

http://reftagger.com/.

http://labs.bible.org/netbibletagger.

leaving_quietly

Since we post quite a few scriptures on this site, it would be useful if they could pop-up the verse(s) when the link is clicked.

A couple of possibilities I found:

http://reftagger.com/

http://labs.bible.org/NETBibleTagger

23

Feeling low

by campaign of hate in

jw
friends

christ, my mind feels f***ed.

there is so many layers of indoctrination and rules and regulations in this, whatever this is (religion?

cult?

leaving_quietly

I hear you. I'm at the same place you are. The number of "what ifs" is less that it used to be, but there are a couple of really big ones.

Just yesterday, I was trying to re-prove to myself that the anointed are not just the 144,000. But, as I was going through the verses, this gnawing thought kept coming to me: what if they're actually right? I even drew a chart about how they prove this concept. And, as much as I hate to say it, while I have seen a ton of argumentation against the number 144,000 being literal, I have seen almost no argumentation against the fact that the 144,000 are sealed (Rev 7:3) and the anointed are sealed (2 Cor 1:21,22) or the 144,000 are firstfruits (Rev 14:4) and the anointed are firstfruits (James 1:18). Even jwfacts.com doesn't address these particular parts of the reasoning. In my opinion, nearly ever other JW doctrine depends on "anointed = 144,000", so this is an important one to me.

So, what if they're right about this, based on these reasonings? And if they're right about this, then paradise earth isn't so much of a stretch, even though it's not explicitly stated anywhere.

Anyway, hang in there. It's going to take a while to get past all this. Even if you stop suddenly, there's no way to stop the "what ifs" from hanging around.

leaving_quietly

Posts by leaving_quietly