P
pacloc
Guest
Great post my friend. My feelings are the same.
- Status
P
Pronger1
Guest
I wouldn’t necessarily agree that the JW preaching work “dwarfs anything any other religion attempts”. If you solely define it as the number of hours knocking on doors, then yeah, JWs likely put a lot more in than other religions. But that doesn’t mean it is the most effective method at reaching people, nor the only way to preach. I note that in recent years there have been some smart changes with the street carts and the greater internet presence.Hi Pronger1.
But the JW’s have never been afraid to change their beliefs if they realise they are not correct.
(the rediculous alternative would be to keep believing something you now realise is wrong)
That is acknowledged here in a recent article on JW.org.
jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/changed-bible-beliefs/
And of course their preaching work still dwarfs anything any other religion attempts. I’m not trying to show off here, but what does this mean?
Jesus prophesied (not the WT, though they try to understand what he was talking about) at Matt 24:14 “that the good news of the kingdom would be preached in all the earth before the end.”
Is that happening now?
I’m afraid I find that hard to explain away. (Maybe another religion will start doing an even greater teaching work soon? Maybe baptising a billion at birth is the preaching work Jesus was talking about? )
Actually another change in doctrine the JW’s made: in Russels day they thought the fact the Bible was available in most languages was the preaching work. Partly because they could not have imagined 8 million active in the work 100 years later.
I have no problem with a religion making doctrinal changes. But how many of the changes have been to core beliefs? Most changes have been related to beliefs that should have just been left up to the individual. Is it really essential to salvation to hold the correct belief of whether or not the people of Sodom will be resurrected? They have changed that teaching about a half dozen times.Anyway. What about yourself? You seem to have lost faith in the JW religion for various reasons.
May I ask: Have you found the real true religion?
Is it really a matter of salvation regarding who the Faithful & Discreet Slave class is? It used to be the 144,000 but now it just the Governing Body, not individually, but acting as one to direct the faith.
There are so many of these minor doctrinal changes. Take when the separating of the sheep from the goats is to occur. The original belief was this would happen after the tribulation, then it changed to it is taking place now, before the tribulation. What if in my heart I knew they were wrong with this change and refused to preach it either door to door or from the platform. I would risk being disfellowshipped for apostasy. But then later, the belief changed back to after the tribulation.
This is where I have a big issue. I have an issue that complete acceptance of every teaching is required. Sure, I understand how teachings on Jesus’ ransom sacrifice, the promise of the resurrection, the rejection of the Trinity are core beliefs. And to be a JW you have to adhere to those. But how much it matters to follow to the letter of even minor beliefs is what troubles me.
My personal troubles revolve around 607-1914. It would take pages and pages of writings to go through it all and explain my position. But it is required to accept 607 as the fall of Jerusalem. JWs accept some of the historical documents in this time period, but then reject parts of these documents. They say the 70 years must be from 607 to the rebuilding of the temple in 537. So it that conflicts with 587/586 as the fall of Jerusalem as the math doesn’t work.
But it does. The 70 years can just as easily be explained as between 609 when Babylon became the world power defeating Assyria to 539 when Babylon fell to Cyrus the Great. Jeremiah 29:10 says This is what the Lord says: “When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my good promise to bring you back to this place."
The Watchtower Society is trapped though. They have to fit their interpretation around 1914 as it such a critical date to them. That in itself has resulted in them having to constantly redefine “this generation” of Matthew 24:34. It went through multiple revisions from people who were alive and old enough to understand the events of 1914 to overlapping lifetimes of people who old enough to see the events of 1914 and some of those born later while the original group was still alive. This completely changings every definition of the word “generation”. And there is no Biblical evidence that supports this interpretation of the word.
Have I found the “true religion”? No. But now I can explore other faiths in ways that were not permitted to me being born as a Jehovah’s Witness. I can buy literature of other faiths to find out what they truly believe and why. I can attend their services, talk to their clergy in an attempt to learn. That is a freedom I was denied growing up. Had I talked to the clergy of other faiths or went to their services as an unbaptized youth, I would have been marked by the congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
What will the end result be? God only knows.
D
DelsonJacobs
Guest
I believe I quoted what’s on the link which DOES NOT SAY what you said, namely that it was translated into more languages than any other. That comment appears nowhere on that link, am I right?Oh relax.
Here is the link. Sorry to disturb you.
jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/activities/publishing/jw-org-over-300-languages/#?insight
I see the Holy See website has 8. (one is Latin)
vatican.va/
Also, why are you here since, as the Watchtower says “true Christians…are not curious about apostate ideas” and “it would be a mistake to think that you need to listen to apostates or to read their writings to refute their arguments” as I brought up in my earlier post (#218)? You state you like to do so because you like to refute what gets written here, but the Watchtower says that “true Christians” don’t do that.
“I look for threads discussing JW’s for obvious reasons. - because I love talking about what the Bible says, and to try to answer misconceptions about us or defend false or half-true accusations”–Logically.
How can you even begin to question our beliefs and actions when you, who claim to be a true Christian, don’t even follow your own religion’s teaching?
Is it that you are a good example of a JW, and thus it is okay to ignore direction or think it doesn’t apply to us? Or are you acting independently of the Governing Body’s counsel in being here?
How can your argument of having the true religion be considered serious if you do not follow it?
C
churchatheist
Guest
This is a strange, ad hominem attack. It requires enormous self-confidence (read: blind, egotistical, closed-mindedness) to call other people “pretend” Christians. You are aware that there are many different kinds of people out there who believe differently from you, right? But I suppose you KNOW that you are right.
I might be able to understand, since I was a believing Christian for 30 years. I think you SHOULD care about the non-theological aspects of their religion, like how they participate in civic affairs and what kind of health-care decisions they make, because those are the aspects of their religion that affect other people, that affect the wider society we live in. I say that it is silly and small to criticize their theology because (again, to a non-believer) the matters of theology that you are so concerned about are based in faith and are not subject to traditional kinds of fact-checking, proof, or argumentation. It’s fine for you to believe that the trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost comprise the godhead, but you believe that for all kinds of reasons that are not necessarily provable to the wider world. You don’t have to prove it, if it is real to you, but surely you are capable of understanding that their beliefs are equally real to them. And to a nonbeliever, the theological discrepancies are akin to arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. You believe–no, you KNOW–that the answer is 35. (or whatever.) They believe–no, they KNOW–that the answer is 37. (or whatever.)
“Heresy” is a scary word to the non-believer, because it is the crime of believing something contrary to the accepted dogma of an institution, accepted dogma which is faith-based (or, as you claim/admit, “revelation” based). And that term heresy has been used to shun, alienate, control, torture, and murder for many centuries, even to this day in many parts of the world. Be careful tossing around that word “heresy” because in a different country or a different century it is that kind of talk that gets people murdered, over little more than arguments about how many angels fit on the head of a pin.
S
Sailor_Kenshin
Guest
Like I keep saying: no such thing as a non-believer.
C
churchatheist
Guest
Other responders have addressed this statement, but since you are so insistent, allow me. You’re right, all people believe things, and atheists do have sets of beliefs that guide them. But I use the term non-believer in the specific sense that I don’t believe in a deity.
Presumably you don’t believe in unicorns or leprechauns. Would you say that your lack of belief in them is merely a belief? Would you say it is equally likely that a believer in unicorns and a non-believer in unicorns are equally right? To say that an atheist’s worldview is “also a belief” or “just a belief” or whatever is a way of trying to equate it with belief in god, to relativize it, or to suggest that it is based in nothing but a kind of faith. Would you say that your lack of belief in unicorns is a kind of faith? Do you require a set of beliefs to come to the conclusion that unicorns are nonexistent?
It is simply that I am not persuaded as to the existence of a deity. You could say that lack of belief in something is the same as belief in something’s nonexistence. I suppose that’s fair. But if we’re going to say that, I’d also add that belief in the nonexistence of something is the reasonable position until evidence of that something has been shown. In other words, the burden of proof would be on the person who says, “x, y, or z exists.” Atheists think it is a fallacy to say that belief in x and nonbelief in x are equally valid positions. Theists, or believers, have been persuaded that God exists, or at least they find enough good in that premise to take it on faith; nonbelievers simply haven’t been persuaded of that premise.
So I don’t disagree with you; everyone believes things. But I hope you would take the time to think about my explanation of why I use that term rather than being so condescendingly dismissive.
B
Brendan_64
Guest
So do you spend much time on forums where people discuss their belief in unicorns and leprechauns?
If your belief simply represented a passive disregard for something that didn’t exist you wouldn’t be investing your time arguing your case on forums such as these.
Atheists do not simply dismiss the concept of God, they actively campaign to convince others that God does not exist. That is a belief system, and one that is being propagated with evangelical zeal.
B
boomerang
Guest
This is a strange, ad hominem attack. It requires enormous self-confidence (read: blind, egotistical, closed-mindedness) to call other people “pretend” Christians. You are aware that there are many different kinds of people out there who believe differently from you, right? But I suppose you KNOW that you are right.
**Thank you! Yes, as a matter of fact, I am right! So kind of you to notice! **
I might be able to understand, since I was a believing Christian for 30 years. I think you SHOULD care about the non-theological aspects of their religion, like how they participate in civic affairs and what kind of health-care decisions they make, because those are the aspects of their religion that affect other people, that affect the wider society we live in. I say that it is silly and small to criticize their theology because (again, to a non-believer) the matters of theology that you are so concerned about are based in faith and are not subject to traditional kinds of fact-checking, proof, or argumentation. It’s fine for you to believe that the trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost comprise the godhead, but you believe that for all kinds of reasons that are not necessarily provable to the wider world. You don’t have to prove it, if it is real to you, but surely you are capable of understanding that their beliefs are equally real to them. And to a nonbeliever, the theological discrepancies are akin to arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. You believe–no, you KNOW–that the answer is 35. (or whatever.) They believe–no, they KNOW–that the answer is 37. (or whatever.)
**As I said before, no one debates JW’s because of their peculiar culture. We debate them because of their deceptive theology. I don’t think you fully understand what is going on here. Orthodox Christianity has certain set beliefs common to all people who consider themselves “Christian”. JW’s put on a façade of “Christianity”, using familiar Christian terms: “Jesus”, “resurrection”, “bible”, “Archangel Michael”, “afterlife”, etc, etc, etc., but these terms mean something totally different to them, which is something they don’t initially disclose. They are misrepresenting Christian theology to unwary people. **
“Heresy” is a scary word to the non-believer, because it is the crime of believing something contrary to the accepted dogma of an institution, accepted dogma which is faith-based (or, as you claim/admit, “revelation” based). And that term heresy has been used to shun, alienate, control, torture, and murder for many centuries, even to this day in many parts of the world. Be careful tossing around that word “heresy” because in a different country or a different century it is that kind of talk that gets people murdered, over little more than arguments about how many angels fit on the head of a pin.
I’m sorry if you don’t like the word “heresy” but there is no other way to describe their beliefs. It is not a matter of not believing an accepted dogma. Buddhists don’t believe Christian dogma. Neither do Hindus, animists, Muslims, Jews, Zoroastrians, or pagans. They are not considered heretics. We are talking about deliberately distorting orthodox Christian theology all the while still claiming they are Christian. That is a heresy.
S
Sailor_Kenshin
Guest
That is more or less what I meant.
D
DelsonJacobs
Guest
If I might, the subject is getting off the track.
While I may have a lot to say about how misleading the Jehovah’s Witnesses are, they are not false to their own doctrine. While their belief in Christ is not the same as that of other Christians, I have to agree with Churchatheist that it is unfair to claim that they are pretending to be Christians. They are not. They try to be very good Christians, according to their own doctrines–which unfortunately includes applauding arguments like these between Christians and atheists.
Be aware that each time this happens, you strengthen the resolve of the Jehovah’s Witness to remain in their organization.
I wish such an approach could be taken, but the Witnesses make this impossible.
Jehovah’s Witnesses do not participate in civil affairs and will excommunicate members who do so. Their healthcare decisions include refusing blood transfusions at all times, even to their non-believing children who may need blood in an emergency to save their life. Members who take blood transfusions have been excommunicated, even when it was a matter of life and death. They also believe they have no responsibility toward building a better more tolerant society whatsoever.
These matters stem from their theological beliefs. Since Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in a dichotomy approach to their lives (i.e., a non-theological or secular part and a religious part), one cannot approach the JWs as if they believe in such a dichotomy. Therefore it is not possible to deal with them on purely a secular basis as they do not have any aspect of their lives that they view as non-theologically based.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses have NO TOLERANCE for people who are not like them. If anyone on this thread wishes to act like them in some theists-vs-atheist war, go right ahead. But please do it on another thread.
D
DelsonJacobs
Guest
This is a stereotype.
I have several close atheist friends. None of them actively campaign to convince others that God does not exist. They do not engage in propagating their views, never have, and in the years we have known each other have never once had a debate on the subject.
They have shown interest in what I believe but not to the point of wanting to become a Catholic or Jew, have come to my home for holidays, even attended a family baptism, but they have never, ever acted in the way you mention.
Some do act as you describe, true, But this is NOT true of them all.
E
Eric_Hilbert
Guest
At next stop sign, make a U-turn back to the subject of the OP please.
D
DelsonJacobs
Guest
To get back on point…
Jehovah’s Witnesses are not evil. They may call us children of the devil, fit for destruction at Armageddon, but we who are Catholic do not believe the same about them.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses can be very mannerly, strive to live morally, but at the same time do not engage in charitable works beyond the scope of those in their organization, and then only toward those among them that they judge to be in good standing.
While among them I did NOT share in their condemnatory manner, it was hard to not give in from time to time. But it appears to me that this is not an exclusive trait of what it means to be a Jehovah’s Witness. Instead I see that the Witnesses have an organizational knack for playing on all of our weaknesses like this one. We can all be just a judgmental even if we are not a member of their organization.
While I am not suggesting that we do not hold fast to our convictions, whatever these may be, I am warning that we are not above from patting our egos for our “wisdom” in “choosing the right path” as they do. It is one of the most disgusting and disquieting of failures of being human that we are all subject to, religious and non-religious.
Having the truth in Catholicism is not limited to doctrinal teachings. The truth of our religion is what is lived out, not what is kept within. We might know all the correct teachings of the Church, but as Scripture teaches us:
Knowledge inflates with pride, but love builds up.–1 Corinthians 8:1.
As St. Paul also brought out:
If I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing.–1 Corinthians 13:2, 3.
“Love is the fulfillment of the law,” not doctrinal knowledge. (Romans 13:8) While it is important to know what you believe and the reason for your convictions, “if someone says he has faith but does not have works, can that faith save him? If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well,’ but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it?”–James 2:14-16.
Knowledge will not save me, you, the Jehovah’s Witness, the atheist, the agnostic—neither now or tomorrow or forever. Even charity alone without love does nothing. Love is what saves. There is no faith with it, and it is what brings grace and fills grace.
Love feeds the hungry now and tomorrow. Knowledge doesn’t. Love was what happened on the Cross. It defied all doctrines known up till then, did it not? If knowledge saved, then the Cross is useless to save you. But, as it is, love saves.
Again I say, one cannot love without a mind that knows what God commands, but one cannot merely know what God commands and not love as a result.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are not without love, and neither can we be without love towards them. It does not serve love to ignore the dangers of following the path they place before us. But neither does it serve love to judge them as mercilessly as they do us.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are not evil. They may call us children of the devil, fit for destruction at Armageddon, but we who are Catholic do not believe the same about them.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses can be very mannerly, strive to live morally, but at the same time do not engage in charitable works beyond the scope of those in their organization, and then only toward those among them that they judge to be in good standing.
While among them I did NOT share in their condemnatory manner, it was hard to not give in from time to time. But it appears to me that this is not an exclusive trait of what it means to be a Jehovah’s Witness. Instead I see that the Witnesses have an organizational knack for playing on all of our weaknesses like this one. We can all be just a judgmental even if we are not a member of their organization.
While I am not suggesting that we do not hold fast to our convictions, whatever these may be, I am warning that we are not above from patting our egos for our “wisdom” in “choosing the right path” as they do. It is one of the most disgusting and disquieting of failures of being human that we are all subject to, religious and non-religious.
Having the truth in Catholicism is not limited to doctrinal teachings. The truth of our religion is what is lived out, not what is kept within. We might know all the correct teachings of the Church, but as Scripture teaches us:
Knowledge inflates with pride, but love builds up.–1 Corinthians 8:1.
As St. Paul also brought out:
If I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing.–1 Corinthians 13:2, 3.
“Love is the fulfillment of the law,” not doctrinal knowledge. (Romans 13:8) While it is important to know what you believe and the reason for your convictions, “if someone says he has faith but does not have works, can that faith save him? If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well,’ but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it?”–James 2:14-16.
Knowledge will not save me, you, the Jehovah’s Witness, the atheist, the agnostic—neither now or tomorrow or forever. Even charity alone without love does nothing. Love is what saves. There is no faith with it, and it is what brings grace and fills grace.
Love feeds the hungry now and tomorrow. Knowledge doesn’t. Love was what happened on the Cross. It defied all doctrines known up till then, did it not? If knowledge saved, then the Cross is useless to save you. But, as it is, love saves.
Again I say, one cannot love without a mind that knows what God commands, but one cannot merely know what God commands and not love as a result.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are not without love, and neither can we be without love towards them. It does not serve love to ignore the dangers of following the path they place before us. But neither does it serve love to judge them as mercilessly as they do us.
H
HojaVerde
Guest
Great post DelsonJacobs!!
Indeed God is Love! He wants us to partake in His Love and love each other as He loves us!
I totally agree with you!
As I’ve read in this thread it seems to me that many JWs (I hope not all of them) have fear towards God. Maybe they’re moved by fear.
Everybody should move by love to God and love to our all our brothers and sisters! No matter how religion they belong to, we have to love all of them. That’s what God does. He loves us. He loved us although we were sinners and gave us his son.
I have some relatives who are JWs. Two cousins of my mother and some of their children (now adults). I would like to help them, but I don’t know how. They live in another country.
Many years ago,when I attended high school, there was a girl in my class who was JW. I had some debates with her. I came across her some months ago, and now she is not a JW and for some details I’ve seen she is less reluctant towards catholics. For example, she liked a movie about catholic Spanish martyrs. I didn’t dare to ask her about her current faith.
But some years ago I knew another JW girl when attending a special school to learn English (I’m Spanish BTW). She invited me to go to their “Last Supper”. But I told her that I’m catholic and that I had to attend my church these days. Since then, she was quite reluctant to relate with me. For example I wrote her emails. She answered them but she stopped doing so when I recommended her a beautiful movie about Saint John Bosco. Now our contact is very limited.
I feel sad about these things. I see the way they understand God is quite different from ours.
Indeed God is Love! He wants us to partake in His Love and love each other as He loves us!
I totally agree with you!
As I’ve read in this thread it seems to me that many JWs (I hope not all of them) have fear towards God. Maybe they’re moved by fear.
Everybody should move by love to God and love to our all our brothers and sisters! No matter how religion they belong to, we have to love all of them. That’s what God does. He loves us. He loved us although we were sinners and gave us his son.
I have some relatives who are JWs. Two cousins of my mother and some of their children (now adults). I would like to help them, but I don’t know how. They live in another country.
Many years ago,when I attended high school, there was a girl in my class who was JW. I had some debates with her. I came across her some months ago, and now she is not a JW and for some details I’ve seen she is less reluctant towards catholics. For example, she liked a movie about catholic Spanish martyrs. I didn’t dare to ask her about her current faith.
But some years ago I knew another JW girl when attending a special school to learn English (I’m Spanish BTW). She invited me to go to their “Last Supper”. But I told her that I’m catholic and that I had to attend my church these days. Since then, she was quite reluctant to relate with me. For example I wrote her emails. She answered them but she stopped doing so when I recommended her a beautiful movie about Saint John Bosco. Now our contact is very limited.
I feel sad about these things. I see the way they understand God is quite different from ours.
C
churchatheist
Guest
I invest my time in forums such as this out of curiosity and a desire for greater exchange of ideas. The forum rules make clear that evangelism is not appropriate, so I’m not out to change Catholic minds. But if I can offer an occasional outside perspective, as I did about the JWs, perhaps that can lead to fruitful dialogue. I believe that growth comes from engaging with people who think differently, and so conversations like this are good for me, and I hope for some open-minded Catholics as well. But the moderator has pointed out that this conversation has deviated from the original post about JWs, so I’ll respectfully end it with that.
E
Eruvande
Guest
I have a good friend who is a JW and has been visiting me for about 10 years. Lord knows what she 's going to make of it when I tell her I’m thinking of becoming Catholic - I can imagine we won’t be such good friends any more. She told me today that her congregation has been reorganized because of falling numbers.
P
PaulDupre1
Guest
I. for one, am glad you are in the mix. You’re right, it is helpful to have an outside perspective.
Paul
L
Logically
Guest
hey thanks pronger1.…
I have no problem with a religion making doctrinal changes. But how many of the changes have been to core beliefs? Most changes have been related to beliefs that should have just been left up to the individual. …
Have I found the “true religion”? No. But now I can explore other faiths in ways that were not permitted to me being born as a Jehovah’s Witness. I can buy literature of other faiths to find out what they truly believe and why. I can attend their services, talk to their clergy in an attempt to learn. That is a freedom I was denied growing up. Had I talked to the clergy of other faiths or went to their services as an unbaptized youth, I would have been marked by the congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
What will the end result be? God only knows.
I would like to reply in more datail. Do you mind? or should I private message you?
Some of your thoughts and doubts are ones I have had to address myself.
The “607 BC” one I spotted back in highschool (my history book said 587
) and that concern had lingered in my head for decades.I have recently found a few bits of information that has settled my doubts on that one.
Will write again soon.
Logically
L
Logically
Guest
Excellent. Please continue.
D
DelsonJacobs
Guest
Logically here is demonstrating another tactic of the Jehovah’s Witnesses that supports my take on that sect:hey thanks pronger1.
I would like to reply in more datail. Do you mind? or should I private message you?
Some of your thoughts and doubts are ones I have had to address myself.
The “607 BC” one I spotted back in highschool (my history book said 587
I have recently found a few bits of information that has settled my doubts on that one.
Will write again soon.
Logically
- Claiming that Jewish and secular history are incorrect.
- Ignoring direction from the Governing Body.
Bringing Reproach Upon Jehovah by Ignoring Direction
When I served in the past in oversight of my congregation, some of the other elders and ministerial servants and I would often sigh over how many problematic members there were that lived according to a double-standard.
The Governing Body would be clear about what SHOULD NOT be done in their private lives, such as the current information regarding refuting views contrary to the Witnesses, building websites to defend Watchtower teachings, and joining and participating in Internet forums.
While these certain brothers and sisters had no problem with telling others where they needed correction, they refused to apply the direction from the “faithful and discreet slave” class to themselves. These ones were often the JWs who made a bad name for the others, publicly demonstrating a brazen attitude and therefore bringing reproach upon Jehovah’s name and his organization through their actions.
“What is written in the Watchtower doesn’t apply to me,” was the anthem of these problematic Witnesses who were making it hard for the rest of those who were being faithful.
The fact is that there wouldn’t be so many complaints to make about the Witnesses if there weren’t so many among them who set a bad example of not following direction.
History Hijinks
As to claiming that secular and Jewish history are incorrect, the Witnesses expect us to accept their use of two logical fallacies: namely an “argument from authority” (i.e., offering blurbs and quotes from “experts” as “proof”) and “special pleading” (otherwise known as “moving the goalposts”).
The Witnesses have done much in this area regarding Jewish history. For example, in their book “Worldwide Security Under the Prince of Peace” published in 1986 they claimed that Jews kept their genealogical records at the Second Temple, and since it was destroyed by the Romans in the year 70, Jews don’t know their lineage or tribe any longer.
This is false, of course, as many Jews know their ancestry, and family histories were kept with each family itself. On page 103, par. 11 they claim that Jews don’t know who is of the tribe of Levi today, yet that is one of the best known family lines today, often connected to the well-known name “Cohen” or similar spellings.
Their arguments for 607 BCE are just as unfounded in the face of examination, but noteworthy is the “special pleading” approach employed.
Sorry, We’ve Moved
Little know fact is that the 607 date is a “goalpost” that’s been admittedly moved by the Witnesses themselves. Originally the 1914 date was calculated using 606 BCE as the starting date for their countdown to 1914:
It seems to be well settled now in the minds of the anointed that the Gentile Times, which began in 606 B.C., ended in 1914.–The Watchtower, March 1, 1925, p.67.
The Witnesses admit moving the “goalpost” themselves, claiming that they:
…had not realized that there is no zero year between “B.C.” and “A.D.” Later, when research made it necessary to adjust B.C. 606 to 607 B.C.E., the zero year was also eliminated, so that the prediction held good at "A.D. 1914.–Revelation - Its Grand Climax at Hand!, p.105
It makes it hard to accept people who don’t follow the direction of their own leadership and will “move the goalpost” to suit their own needs.
- Status