The truth about 'the truth about the Truth'

2007-03-04T12:38:00.000-08:00

The Whole Boering Truth--Boer Vs Watchtower

In Canada, Vicki Boer brought a civil lawsuit against the elders of her former congregation and the WTBTS asking for $700,000 dollars concerning her child abuse at the hands of her father who was one of Jehovah's Witnesses claiming they were negligent, breached their duty, advised her against contacting the authorities, and against seeking professional help. What did the court find?

Presiding Judge Anne Molloy ruled that the WTS and elders were not at fault and did not contribute to or promote in any way the child abuse that took place. The court said, "There is no foundation on the facts to support an award for punitive damages. Most of the allegations against the defendants have not been established on the facts. The defendants who interacted with the plaintiff did not bear ill will toward her. They accepted the veracity of her account, were sympathetic to her situation and meant her no harm. The claim for punitive damages is dismissed."

As respects her findings as to whether the elders advised Boer not to tell the authorities and not to seek professional help the judge stated very clearly her findings: "The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff not to get medical help. She chose not to seek professional help herself against the advice of the elders and Mr. Mott-Trille. The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff that her father’s abuse should not be reported. On the contrary, the defendants directed Mr. Palmer (the abuser) to report himself to the C.A.S. and then followed up directly to ensure he had done so."

Furthermore Judge Molloy clearly ruled that Vicki Boer's 'memory' of what occurred did not coincide with the facts when she later stated in her ruling: "I have already ruled that I do not accept Ms. Boer's evidence that the elders told her not to seek medical assistance and not to report the abuse to the authorities. These were important points about which she was certain in her own mind. Her memory on those was inaccurate."

Judge Molloy also examined similar cases from the United States and candidly stated in her ruling: "I conclude that had Ms. Boer’s action been brought in the United States, it would likely be subject to summary dismissal based on these cases."

However, even though Judge Molloy also stated in her ruling concerning the elders that "They were sympathetic to the plaintiff. She understood they believed her story..... It was reasonable, and indeed appropriate in the circumstances for them to ensure that the plaintiff's voice was heard and that they not rely solely on Mr. Palmer's version of the events..." she still awarded Boer $5,000 for the trauma caused her in confronting her father at an investigative meeting with the elders stating, "There was, however, psychological harm to the plaintiff as a result of the December 29, 1989 meeting. She was in a very vulnerable state at the time as she had just begun to deal with the effects of her father’s abuse. I accept the evidence of the various experts, including Dr. Awad, that this confrontation made things worse for the plaintiff."

But the flip side of the ruling is that the same court ordered Vicki Boer to pay the WTS $142,000 dollars in legal fees. Thus netting the WTS a sum total of $137,000 dollars as a result of the civil suit brought against them. It seems the Canadian courts do not take lightly cases based on "frivolous charges" and forcing someone to defend themselves "against false or unprovable charges."

How much do you suppose that the Boer's spiritual counselor, Bill Bowen and his Silent Lambs organization, was willing to contribute to help the Boer's pay their own legal fees of over $90,000 that were incurred as well as the $137,000 that they were ordered to pay to the WTS? Apparently whatever they contributed, if anything, was not nearly enough because Vicki's husband, Scott Boer commented, "We've pretty much exhausted our finances pursuing the case this far, and now we're to the point where we simply couldn't afford an appeal. We going to simply have to accept the judgment and if we have to declare bankruptcy for a victory, then we have to declare bankruptcy."

It seems that Silent Lambs by encouraging such lawsuits are contributing to further financial victimizing of the already abused victims. We have to wonder if it is concern for the abused victims that motivates Bowen's organization or their obvious agenda to discredit the WTS that motivates and consumes them.

The self proclaimed E-watchman, Robert King, in his attempt at painting the WTS as a greedy, money-loving corporation,commented: "They do not have to impose the court's ruling upon her. Apparently, though, the Watchtower has every intention of collecting, down to the last penny of the court ordered judgment."

However, it should be noted that in contrast to Robert King's premature judgment, showing no ill will or lust for revenge the WTS agreed to generously call it even and did not insist that Vicki Boer pay the $137,000 awarded to them by the court. It seems that in the end the WTS actually helped out the Boer's financially more than the Silent Lambs organization.

Why Awarded 5000 Dollars?

In view of the judge's ruling given above just why exactly would the judge award Boer the initial $5000.00 dollars. Here were her reasons given:

"I will deal first with the first meeting on December 29, 1989. (This was the confrontational meeting). The plaintiffs position is that she only attended this meeting because she was advised by Sheldon Longworth that she was required to do so as part of the application of Matthew 18. Although Mr. Longworth is not named as a defendant, the plaintiff argues that the defendants Watch Tower and/or John Didur (Bethel elder) are responsible for the conduct of Mr. Longworth. I have found as a fact that Mr. Longworth told the plaintiff she was required to apply Matthew 18 in this situation. I have also found that Mr. Longworth’s advice in this regard would appear to be contrary to the official position of the church which is that Matthew 18 has no appplication to this type of sin.

John Didur (Bethel elder) is a personal defendant. He testified at trial that Matthew 18: 15-18 has no application to this type of situatuion and that he would never have told this to Sheldon Longworth. Mr. Longworth’s notes of one of his conversations with Mr. Didur indicate that Mr. Didur told him that Matthew 18 applied. It is also apparent from his notes that Mr. Longworth spoke to other advisers at head office and that at least one other elder told him Matthew 18 applied. Mr. Longworth’s specific memory of which elders provided which advice is not reliable, as he candidly acknowledged in his testimony. It is possible Mr. Didur gave such advice without fully appreciating the background circumstances. It is also possible Mr. Longworth was confused about the advice he received from Mr. Didur or that he inaccurately recorded the discussion as having been with Mr. Didur when it was in fact with someone else. I found Mr. Didur to be a convincing witness. I am not able to say on a balance of probabilities that he was the one who told Mr. Longworth to apply Matthew 18: 15-18. Therefore he is not personally liable in damages to the plaintiff in respect of the December 29, 1989 meeting.

( 1 ) The Defendant Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Canada

[181] Sheldon Longworth is not named as a personal defendant. However, Ms Boer contacted Mr . Longworth in his capacity as an elder of the church. Mr. Longworth consulted throughout with more senior advisers at the Jehovah’s Witness head office and passed on their advice to the plaintiff. He acted at all times as an agent of the defendant Watch Tower. The defendant Watch Tower did not seek to distance itself from the conduct of Longworth and the other elders who provided advice to Ms. Boer in Toronto or to disclaim any responsibility for their actions. Although the statement of claim could be clearer on this point, I believe that on a fair reading of the pleading and subsesquently delivered particulars, there is an allegation that Watch Tower is responsible for the harm suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the direction given to her to apply Matthew 18:15-18. Accordingly I find the defendant Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada liable to the plaintiff for the harm she sustained as a result of attending the Decemer 29, 1989 meeting."

In short, if Sheldon Longworth had followed the correct WT policy, Vicki Boer would not have even received that $5000 dollars. It was his failure to follow the WT policy that caused the judge to rule the way she did. And even though it was not proven that anyone at the WTS gave Brother Longworth that bad advice she still determined that the WTS should pay $5000 dollars in that regard because the WTS did not distance themselves from Sheldon Longworth and his advice to Vicki Boer. So the $5000 dollars was awarded because of the emotional suffering caused to Vicki Boer in confronting her father at the advise of brother Longworth.

Now ask yourself: Does this sound like some evil scheme or evil policy by the WTS or just a mistake by an imperfect human being trying his best to honestly and sincerely perform his duties as an elder in the best interest of others?

The Judge's View of Boer's Treatment

In awarding Vicki Boer the initial $5000.00 dollars did the judge in the case feel that the elders had been harsh and unloving to Boer that they did not have Vicki Boer's best interest at heart? Please take note of these comments from the judge in her ruling:

"However Mr. Longworth (an elder) was sympathetic to the plaintiff and did not act out of any self interest.

...there is no evidence that the people at head office (WT) advising Mr Longworth with anything but the best of intentions.

They (the elders) were sympathetic to her during the meeting.

They believed they were doing the right thing and they did not simply ignore the plaintiffs (Boer's) intersts. For example, in the second meeting, although they did review the allegations of abuse with the plaintifff, they did not require her to go through that exercise with her father present. Likewise the head office personnal advising the local elders did nothing that could be characterized as disloyalty or bad faith.

There is no evidence that they shunned the plaintiff nor that they instructed others to do so. Therefore even if the perception of others within the congregation was as Ms. Boer describes (which also is not proven), there is no basis for placing any blame for that at the feet of these defendants.

I do find as a fact that none of the personal defendants was motivated by any ill will towards the plaintiff nor bias in favour of her father. They acted sincerely and honestly in carrying our their tasks as elders of the congregation. There was no element of bad faith."

The judge did not believe at all that the elders or the WTS had been unloving or harsh to Vicki Boer.

An Honest Mistake

One opposers of JWs child abuse policy who calls himself the E-Watchman had this to say on the case:

"However, when Vicki went to the elders, which is what every good JW is supposed to do to report gross sin, the elders told Vicki that she had to take along two elders to confront her father, again. Obviously, the elders had had it drummed into their head by the WT that that was the proceedure...Matthew 18

But, alas, the elders were evidently on the wrong page of the elders' manual, as it should be apparent to anyone with common sense that the only reason Jesus advised a brother to take along one or two others was if the offender refused to listen to the offended. That wasn't the case with Vicki's father. He admitted his guilt and apologized. There was absolutely no justification for the elders to insist that Vicki confront him, especially because she told the elders how terrifying the prospect of confronting him again would be. The elders sould have simply confronted him with the knowledge that he had already confessed.

But the truth is that it is not the policy of the WTS that a victim should confront the perpetrater face to face. This is not a page from the elders manual. Contradicting what is alledged by King, the November 1, 1995 WT even when discussing accusing one who has not admitted child abuse, clearly states: "If the accuser is not emotionally able to do this face-to-face, it can be done by telephone or perhaps by writing a letter. "

So while King slyly attempts to deceive his readers, in one regard he is correct and it is true that there was absolutely no reason for the elders to insist that Vicki confront her father and the WT publications agree with this assessment. However King deceitfully mischaracterizes and slyly twists the WT policy to suit his agenda of discrediting JWs. And it was not the elders that insisted that Vicki Boer should confront her father nor was it the policy of the WTS, it was one elder that advised her she should confront her father. In fact, notice this from the judge:

"The defendants Steve Brown and Brian Cairns (elders at the investigative meeting in question) were completely unaware of the subject matter of the December 29, 1989 meeting prior to actually hearing it from Mr. Palmer and the plaintiff. They heard from the family members present, made some inquiries to satisfy themselves that the younger children were not in danger, and told the Palmers they would get back to them about what needed to be done. Neither Mr. Brown nor Mr. Cairns was responsible for the structure of the meeting. They had no knowledge that Matthew 18 was being applied. The plaintiff did not tell them that she did not want to be there and she did not ask, nor attempt, to leave. Under these circumstances neither Mr. Brown nor Mr. Cairns is responsible for any harm suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the meeting. I have already determined that there is no liability arising from any of their conduct subsquent to the December 29 meeting."

So you see according to the judge it was the one elder, Sheldon Longworth, who told Vicki Boer that she should confront her father face to face in the presence of the two elders. The elder made an honest mistake. There was no ill intentions involved, nothing evil or sinister about it. Although that is not what apostates like Robert King will lead you to believe.

What About that Out of Court Settlement Offer?

Didn't the WTS offer Vicki Boer $50,000 to settle out of court prior to going to trial? And doesn't that in itself prove the WTS knew that the elders were wrong and that they were guilty of covering up the child molesting? And then they spent over $100,000 dollars in legal expenses on the case. Wouldn't the WTS have much better spent their money by compensating a victim of child abuse rather than trying to bribe Mrs Boer into silence with a gag order, attempting to pay to shove aside the legal claim of a lowly victim?

Lets consider this reasoning in light of the truth. The WTS knew that the elders had seen to it that the proper authorities had been informed because no doubt there was a record of it at the Children's Aid Society since it had been reported there. The WTS knew that the elders had not told her not to seek professional help because the father of her close friend, Jonathan Mott Trill, was an elder and told her to seek professional help even setting up an appointment for her. No doubt that appointment was on record. Notice that the judge agreed with this assessment. She stated in her ruling:

"[10] Ms. Boer also testified that she discussed her distress with the situation with a long-time childhood friend, Jonathan Mott-Trille. His family were members of the Shelburne Jehovah’s Witness congregation. She said she was crying and hysterical as she told her friend Jonathon about having to confront and accuse her father. Jonathan told her he thought the confronation was wrong and promised he would discuss the matter with his father Frank Mott-Trille, who was a lawyer and also an elder in the Shelbourne congregation.

[11] The next day, Ms. Boer met with Jonathan and Frank Mott-Trille at their home in Toronto. Frank Mott-Trille told her there was no requirement that she confront her father. He also advised her that she should report the abuse to the Children’s Aid Society (“ C. A. S.” ) and recommended that she see a psychiatrist. Frank Mott-Trille actually arranged an appointment for Ms. Boer with Dr. Kaplan, a psychiatrist recommended to him by his daughter ( who is herself a doctor).

[12] In the meantime, Ms. Boer received a telephone call from her father stating that a meeting had been arranged for December 29, 1989 at the Palmer family home in Shelburne and that two Shelburne elders , Steve Brown and Brian Cairns would be attending. Ms. Boer testified at trial that she went to the meeting because Mr. Longworth had directed that she must attend and she had no choice but to obey the elders....

[14] Ms. Boer did not contact the C.A.S. and did not keep the appointment with the psychiatrist which Frank Mott-Trille had arranged for her. She testified at trial that she knew she needed help but did not seek it out because she had been told not to by the elders."

The point is this assuming that it is true that the WTS offered a settlement of $50,000: Contrary to what opposers may assume, the WT's settlement offer of $50,000 dollars was not made because they knew they were in the wrong. The money was no doubt offered because they knew that it would cost more than that to go to trial. And why shouldn't they insist on a gag order since they knew that Vicki Boer was making false accusations? Should they have simply forked over money thus allowing Vicki Boer to make claims that the WTS knew they were wrong and that is why they paid her money? Of course not. They were simply trying to offer a settlement as a way of curtailing expenses for a long drawn out court case. Not only that but Vicki Boer as a child abuse victim could have benefitted from that $50,000 dollars. But alas the greedy apostates were out to simply discredit JWs at the expense of Vicki Boer, encouraging her to continue her lawsuit. They apparently could care less about her situation.

Rather than being lambasted for their offer, the WTS should be praised for their generosity in helping a child abuse victim, even though she was making false accusations against them. As Jesus said, 'if your enemy slaps you on the cheek, turn the other cheek'. That is what the WTS attempted to do. But the spiritual advisors of Vicki Boer would stop at nothing short in their attempt at discrediting JWs. Who cares about Vicki Boer's plight, lets bring down the WT!

But doesn't this show that some of the money donated by the brothers and sisters in their congregations for the world wide work is being used for paying legal expenses? If so, is this not a misuse of funds and perhaps even a breach of trust?

Well, lets take the example of Vicki Boer Vs. WT. It was shown in court and the judge agreed that Vicki Boer made false allegations against the WTS or as the judge put it her 'memory' was 'inaccurate'. In view of her false allegations, what was the WT supposed to do? Were they wrong to defend themselves? Should they have just given her the $700,000 that she wanted? To those who object to the WT using donated funds to defend themselves, what is the alternative? Open up the bank accounts to one and all who have a dispute or who claim abuse? Is that being responsible with donations?

JWs Child Abuse Policy Vindicated

Bill Bowen and his silentlambs organization, Robert King, and other opposers have tried to use the Vicki Boer case as an example to discredit JWs. But a closer examination of the case and what actually transpired shows that it is just the opposite. It has exploded in their face. It has backfired against them. And rather than the case discrediting JWs and the WTS, it has proven that JWs child abuse policy is excellent and that it does indeed work. The facts show that it clearly worked in the Vicki Boer case. We have to wonder, how many other cases against the WTS are mere fabrications just like the Vicki Boer case.

2006-12-13T15:17:00.001-08:00

Are Jehovah's Witnesses God's Spirit Directed Organization?

If Jesus inspected the Bible Students/JWs at the time in 1918/9, why would he pick them when they still had many teachings and practices that were wrong? This is often times brought up by opposers of JWs to discredit the claim that they are God's organization. But is this reasoning in accord with Bible prophecy? Indeed, why would Jesus pick them when they still had many things incorrect?

According to the prophecy in Malachi, when Jesus came to examine the temple he would find that the temple class needed to be refined and cleansed. Notice Malachi 3:2, "For he will be like the fire of a refiner and like the lye of laundrymen. 3 And he must sit as a refiner and cleanser of silver and must cleanse the sons of Le´vi; and he must clarify them like gold and like silver, and they will certainly become to Jehovah people presenting a gift offering in righteousness."

Question: Why would God's people need to be refined and cleansed? Surely God's organization would already be teaching all truths when Jesus arrived for inspection? While that is how some may reason that reasoning is not in harmony with the Bible prophecies. When Jesus arrived for inspection he found many flaws thus the need for refining. This is backed up by other scriptures as well. For example in Revelation, John is transferred into the 'Lord's day' (Rev 1:10) and it is during the Lord's day that he decribes the condition of the congregations in the seven letters. As the letters show, there was a need for changes in the congregation of Christ. Time and again he tells them that changes are needed and such changes need to be made before destruction comes. One example of this is Rev 3:3, "Certainly unless you wake up, I shall come as a thief, and you will not know at all at what hour I shall come upon you."

So you see, to believe that God's chosen ones would have all things right when he inspected the spiritual temple is incorrect. The Bible clearly shows that he would have a congregation of people and that congregation or organization of people would go thru a needed refining and cleansing during the Lord's day.
But which group would he choose to refine when he arrived at the beginning of the Lord's day?

Logically Jesus Christ would use the ones who were trying to do his will and who were trying to return to the ways of early Christianity. He found the Bible students, (later called Jehovah's Witnesses) to be the ones who had cast aside many God dishonoring Babylonish ideas and practices and he found them to be the ones teaching the basic doctrines of the Bible: no hellfire, no trinity, God's kingdom to restore paradise on earth, Christ's rule to be invisible from heaven, the importance of God's name, the importance of telling others these truths, etc. These are the people that he knew would humbly submit to a refining and cleansing process because they were already on the right path. And so the false teachings continued to be rooted out from the organization so that today JWs are clearly set apart from the other religions. That is why Malachi 3:18 says: "And YOU people will again certainly see [the distinction] between a righteous one and a wicked one, between one serving God and one who has not served him." The distinction is clear for those who are not blind.

But the claim is further made by opposers that Jehovah's Witnesses cannot be Jehovah's organization directed by His holy spirit and His son because they have in the past made interpretations, pointed to certain dates, and taught teachings that were proven to be wrong or were later corrected. Jehovah's spirit is never wrong. Jesus is never wrong. Then how can it be that Jehovah's Witnesses are directed by Jehovah and Jesus? 'Impossible!' opposers say.

But would anybody make the same argument about the seven congregations that John wrote letters to in the book of Revelation? Take a look at all their problems stated in the letters:

"you have left the love you had at first....

you have there those holding fast the teaching of Ba´laam, ... to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit fornication....

you, also, have those holding fast the teaching of the sect of Nic·o·la´us likewise...

you tolerate that woman Jez´e·bel, ... and she teaches and misleads my slaves to commit fornication and to eat things sacrificed to idols....

I know your deeds, that you have the name that you are alive, but you are dead....

I have not found your deeds fully performed before my God....

I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were cold or else hot. So, because you are lukewarm and neither hot nor cold, I am going to vomit you out of my mouth.

you say: "I am rich and have acquired riches and do not need anything at all," but you do not know you are miserable and pitiable and poor and blind and naked, I advise you to buy from me gold refined by fire that you may become rich, and white outer garments that you may become dressed and that the shame of your nakedness may not become manifested, and eyesalve to rub in your eyes that you may see."

Someone could very well say of those seven congregations: 'Can you believe that this is God's organization? They certainly can't be spirit directed. They certainly do not have Jesus as their leader. There is no way that these congregations make up God's organization.'

But they would be dead wrong. Why? Take note of these verses which show who is in the midst of the congregations directing them:

Revelation 1:12 "And I turned to see the voice that was speaking with me, and, having turned, I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and in the midst of the lampstands someone like a son of man, ...20 As for the sacred secret of the seven stars that you saw upon my right hand, and [of] the seven golden lampstands: The seven stars mean [the] angels of the seven congregations, and the seven lampstands mean seven congregations."

And take note that to each congregation it is said: "Let the one who has an ear hear what the spirit says to the congregations."

Obviously the seven congregations which were composed of God's people, yes, His organization, were directed by Jesus and God's holy spirit and yet they had many problems. How can this be? Jesus and the holy spirit can't make mistakes.

Just because a person or a group of persons are directed by God's spirit does not mean that they will always follow the leadings of God's spirit. Moses didn't. David didn't. The Israelites didn't. The apostles didn't. At times they failed to follow the guidance of God's spirit which led to incorrect thinking or actions. And so there is a difference in being spirit directed and spirit inspired. Persons who were inspired by holy spirit to write the Bible did not make mistakes in those writings. However, these same persons, who were spirit directed, did not always follow exactly the leadings of God's spirit and so they did make mistakes.
The Watchtower publications have not been written under inspiration of the holy spirit and so at times the things written may have to be corrected. By no means does this prove that Jehovah's Witnesses are not spirit directed. The very fact that they have made the changes and corrected wrong teachings or ideas is proof that they are directed by holy spirit. Other religions simply have not followed this example. They continue to teach the same old Babylonish falsehoods and follow the same old pagan practices. Not so Jehovah's Witnesses. Just look at the changes JWs have made! We can only conclude then that out of all the religious organizations on earth today, it is only Jehovah's Witnesses who are truly directed by Jehovah's holy spirit.

Please take note that the above is not based on my reasoning or the reasoning of Jehovah's Witnesses. It is firmly based on the Bible. As Malachi 3 shows, God's people or organization would need to be refined and cleansed. And as Revelation 1-3 shows, God's organization would have many problems when the Lord's Day began and would have to make many changes. And yet, those chapters show that Jesus was still in the midst of them, directing them and the holy spirit was still guiding them telling them what needed to be corrected. The fact that Jehovah's Witnesses have made corrections and discarded Babylonish teachings and practices is proof that they are indeed the only organization on earth that is directed by both God's son and spirit.

Now opposers or critics of Jehovah's Witnesses may feel inclined to make a long list of teachings that JWs have been wrong about or changed but what exactly have they really proven by doing this? They have proven that the Bible is being fulfilled and that JWs are being refined and cleansed just as prophesied. And they have proven that Jesus really must be walking in the midst of Jehovah's Witnesses because of the many changes made that have brought them more in harmony with the teachings of Jesus. And they have proven that God's holy spirit really is directing his organization of Jehovah's Witnesses because they have continuously discarded Babylonish teachings and practices as directed by God's spirit. This is what we should expect from God's organization since it was prophesied that God's congregation would indeed have problems and flaws that would need correcting and that his organization would humbly submit to the necessary refining and cleansing.

In essence all the reasonings by critics and opposers about JWs having things wrong in the past are made invalid since the Bible clearly prophesied that when Jesus arrived and inspected his temple he would then refine and cleanse them because they needed to be refined and cleansed due to mistakes and wrong teachings. The seven letters to God's congregations in the Lord's day show that there would be problems that would need correcting. So digging up wrong statements by the WT fifty or a hundred years ago in hopes of discrediting JWs is really just a waste of time since the Bible prophecies are what count, not any human reasoning. Such reasonings by enemies of JWs is unscriptural. There is therefore no need to respond to past inaccurate teachings of JWs that are pointed out that have been corrected as part of the refining work done by Jesus to his organization.

So everytime we see a list of the past inaccurate teachings of JWs, we can be happy that Jehovah has seen to it that those teachings and practices have been discarded and that Jehovah does indeed have an organization on earth that he is directing and refining and cleansing.

2006-07-27T14:28:00.000-07:00

Does the Policy of the Watchtower Create a Safe Haven for Child Molesters

Many have accused the WTS of promoting child molesting? When I first began to hear what the Silent Lambs organization and Robert King were saying I really did not know the truth of the matter. I thought perhaps it was true. Maybe the WT did coverup for the sake of not bringing reproach on the congregation? But further research into this matter of the WTS and their child abuse policy has revealed the truth about our policy and just how opposers of Jehovah's Witnesses try to hide the facts and mislead others?

Does the policy of the WTS hide child molesters from the law?

According to Silent Lambs and other critics of the WT's child abuse policy the WT publications are full of double speak when it comes to the information that has appeared in the publications. They say while the WTS says out of one corner of its mouth that protecting the children takes top priority and not to keep child abuse hush hush their policy is actually quite the opposite in order to try to put on the appearance of a spiritual paradise and avoid bringing reproach upon the organization. For example, as far back as 1985 the January 22, Awake contradicts what critics say about JWs not putting child protection first. Notice:

First, the child and other children too must be protected from any further abuse. This must be done, whatever the cost. In many cases the accused molester will have to be confronted. But whatever it takes, it is important that the child should feel confident that the molester will never be able to get at her (or him) again.

Second, the child must be given a lot of love and emotional support. Parents must make it very clear that the little victim is not to blame. The crime and anything that happens as a result of it even if a close relative goes to prison is not her (or his) fault. But that reassurance will have to be given many times, so that the victim comes to believe it and to believe that the parents believe it too!

Then the October 8, 1993 Awake again contradicts the critics who say that JWs insist on keeping information about child molesters in house and out of the public eye. It states:

Tragically, adult society often unwittingly collaborates with child abusers. How so? By refusing to be aware of this danger, by fostering a hush-hush attitude about it, by believing oft-repeated myths. Ignorance, misinformation, and silence give safe haven to abusers, not their victims.

However, Time noted that this conspiracy is crumbling at last. Why? In a word, education. It is as Asiaweek magazine put it: "All experts agree that the best defence against child abuse is public awareness." To defend their children, parents must understand the realities of the threat. Don't be left in the dark by misconceptions that protect child abusers and not children.

Some legal experts advise reporting the abuse to the authorities as soon as possible. In some lands the legal system may require this. But in other places the legal system may offer little hope of successful prosecution.

"Its all a bunch of double speak.' say opposers. "In these publications they are speaking of non-JWs but they try to hide child molesting in the congregation because they do not want it to become public and smear the reputation of the organization. They feel this is more important than protecting the children."

Those making such statements are no doubt unaware or are simply trying to cover over and hide the comments found in the January 1, 1997 Watchtower, pp. 26-29 :

Depending on the law of the land where he lives, the molester may well have to serve a prison term or face other sanctions from the State. (The congregation will not protect him from this. )

Instructions to the Elders

But you may have heard from those who criticize the policy of JWs that the elders receive different instructions from the WTS that regular publishers are not aware of. These instructions tell elders to instruct publishers not to go to the police and to keep it within the congregation. But is this really the case or another apostate lie meant to mislead others. Lets see.

A 1988 letter to elders in Canada says:
When to report? There is a duty to report when one has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that there is abuse or a substantial risk of abuse and parents have failed to protect the child. The report shall be mane forthwith to the local child welfare authorities. Sexual offenders are notorious repeaters. Therefore, careful investigation should be undertaken to ensure that no other children are at risk from the same person.

Elders must be aware, however, that once they have knowledge, they have an obligation. They cannot just hope that someone else will report. They must follow through quickly and be sure that it is done.

Here is a 1992 letter to the elders:
As members or the community in which Caesar still acts as God's minister and hence still has a certain authority, all in the Christian congregation would want to consider their personal and moral responsibility to alert the appropriate authorities in cases where there has been committed or there exists a risk that there might be committed a serious criminal offence of this type (see ks91, page 138) In child abuse cases such authorities might include the family doctor, the Social Services, the NSPCC, or the police.

If this is the case why doesn't the Society publically make known their child abuse policy? Why keep it a secret and send letters only to the elders?

Actually they have made it public for anyone who wishes to read it. It is found here for the general public to read:
http://www.jw-media.org/newsroom/index.htm?content=background.htm

The Two Witness Rule

The child abuse policy of JWs states:
When any one of Jehovah's Witnesses is accused of an act of child abuse, the local congregation elders are expected to investigate. Two elders meet separately with the accused and the accuser to see what each says on the matter. If the accused denies the charge, the two elders may arrange for him and the victim to restate their position in each other's presence, with elders also there. If during that meeting the accused still denies the charges and there are no others who can substantiate them, the elders cannot take action within the congregation at that time. Why not? As a Bible-based organization, we must adhere to what the Scriptures say, namely, "No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin . . . At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good." (Deuteronomy 19:15) Jesus reaffirmed this principle as recorded at Matthew 18:15-17.

Opposers say this is bad policy since child molesters usually do not molest with others around. This protects the molester and not the child.

To this we say, The rule book is the Bible. Do we just throw that out. The two witness rule is actually a very good rule. In many cases critics do not realize just what the two witness rule entails. Others may know but they don't want you to know and so they try to hide just who or what can serve as two witnesses.

Notice what the WT policy further states along these lines: However, if two persons are witnesses to separate incidents of the same kind of wrongdoing, their testimony may be deemed sufficient to take action.

"Its about time they changed that rule," some may exclaim. "No doubt credit can be given to Bill Bowen and his SilentLambs organization for this change." But the truth is that this was stated as far back as 1981 in the Pay Attention to the Flock Book. It instructs on page 119: If there is another witness to the same type of sin on the part of the accused, this would be basis for forming a judicial committee.

Making application of this directive, given long before Silent Lambs even existed, we know that two different children who are molested on separate occasions by the same person would qualify as the two witnesses. Other information from the WTS has revealed that the two witnesses do not have to both be children who were molested or persons who saw the molesting. It can be the court evidence and the child. It can be the DNA evidence and the child. But how would it be right if someone was DFed on the word of only one person. The bottom line is that it is unscriptural to disfellowship someone at the mouth of one witness. Surely God's word should take precedent over the thinking of imperfect men.

But doesn't the November 1, 1995 WT, pp. 28-29 contradict this aspect of the two witness rule? Doesn't it say that "even if more than one person remembers abuse by the same individual", this would not be enough evidence to "base judicial decisions on them without other supporting evidence."? Isn't this just more double-speak by the WTS?

No, it is not. A reading of the entire article and taking note of the context and what is being discussed in that particular WT, we see that the article is talking about repressed memories. That is why at the start of the article there is a footnote which says, " “Repressed memories” and similar expressions are enclosed in quotation marks to distinguish them from the more typical memories that all of us have."

Experts agree that repressed memories cannot always be trusted and false memories are sometimes implanted in a person's mind. And that is why the WT article states, "It is noteworthy, however, that a number of individuals have been unable to corroborate their “memories.” Some afflicted in this way have had vivid recollections of a certain individual committing abuse or of the abuse being committed in a specific place. Later, though, legitimate evidence to the contrary made it clear that these “remembered” details could not be true."

Then later in the article the statement in question is made that is often taken out of context by opposers of JWs: "Even if more than one person “remembers” abuse by the same individual, the nature of these recalls is just too uncertain to base judicial decisions on them without other supporting evidence." It is only in the case of repressed memories, and not the typical normal memories, that this applies. There is absolutely no contradiction here with JW's stated child abuse policy.

Reporting the information to the WTS

The policy continues: However, even if the elders cannot take congregational action, they are expected to report the allegation to the branch office of Jehovah's Witnesses in their country, if local privacy laws permit.

Opposers critisize the fact that the WTS stresses the importance of reporting the allegations to the headquarters. But there is a very good reason why. The WTS wants to make sure that each case is handled correctly. They want to make sure that the body of elders do not disregard their policy and thus cause problems for all involved. Can you imagine the criticism that would be heaped upon the Society if they said please do not call Bethel in cases of child molesting? Elders should handle it themselves.

I talked to an elder not long ago and asked him what to do in the case of child molesting and he said the first thing to do is call the WTS about it. I ask him what he would say to the victims family about going to the authorities and he said that he would strongly recommend that the person don't go to the authorities. So the fact is that if he did not call the WTS he would have handled the case contrary to the instructions from the Society. That is why it is vital that the elders call the WTS before proceeding.

Some critics argue that elders should not waste time calling the headquarters of the WTS. They should go straight to the police. They make it appear that both cannot be done or that calling the WTS will somehow prolong their reporting it to the police. But really both can be done in the same day. Calling the WTS does not take much time at all. Perhaps an hour or two at the most. This argument of course is really an absurd argument. One that is used in an attempt to discredit JWs and our policy but really it has no merit whatsover.

Is the victim told not to go to the police?

Continuing with the policy: In addition to making a report to the branch office, the elders may be required by law to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities. If so, we expect the elders to comply. Additionally, the victim may wish to report the matter to the authorities, and it is his or her absolute right to do so.

You have no doubt seen the apostates false claims that a person can be disfellowshipped for going to the authorities with child abuse allegations. Clearly, this is not the case at all. Some opposers claim that if there are not two witnesses to the molesting then the WT policy is that it should not be reported to the authorities. But did you notice the phrase above: 'even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations'. Yes, it is anyone's absolute right to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities, even if there are not two witnesses.

In fact, previously we showed a letter to the elders that said "all in the Christian congregation would want to consider their personal and moral responsibility to alert the appropriate authorities in cases where there has been committed or there exists a risk that there might be committed a serious criminal offence of this type..."

You Can't take a Brother to Court

But doesn't the WT publications say that we shouldn't take our brother to court because it might damage the reputation of the organization? Wouldn't this include pressing charges against an alleged child abuser who has not been disfellowshipped? "Its just more WT double speak,"opposers claim. They then may point to the November 15, 1973 WT attempting to show the contradiction: "And by dragging fellow believers before pagan judges, they would bring great reproach upon God’s name. As outsiders would be led to believe that Christians were no different from other people in being unable to settle differences, the interests of true worship would be injured. It would have been far better for individual Christians to take personal loss rather than to injure the entire congregation by bringing their disputes to public notice."

However, a reading of the context will show that this is just another way opposers try to twist the words of the publications to suit their own fancy. The fact is that this WT is applying the words of the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:7 where Paul counseled Christians, "Really, then, it means altogether a defeat for YOU that YOU are having lawsuits with one another. Why do YOU not rather let yourselves be wronged? Why do YOU not rather let yourselves be defrauded?" Both Paul and the WT publication are talking about civil lawsuits against one another not criminal cases.

There are civil courts and there are criminal courts. If, for example, a person were to sue another person for money this would be heard by the civil court. But if someone is accused of a crime it is the governmental authorities that decide whether or not to prosecute the accused. It would be the state versus the accused not the accuser versus the accused. Therefore anyone reporting abuse to the authorities would not be bringing a brother to court. Not at all. It would be the state government that would be bringing charges against the person in a criminal court.

However, even at that, this same 1973 WT does not say that a person would face a judicial hearing if he took his brother to court. It merely states,
"However, if any member of the Christian congregation, without regard for the effect of his action on the good name of the congregation, ignores the counsel from God’s Word on this matter, such one would not be "free from accusation" as a Christian. He would not be one who has "a fine testimony from people on the outside" of the congregation. (Titus 1:6; 1 Tim. 3:7) He surely would not be an example for others to imitate, so this would affect the privileges that he might have in the congregation." So not only are critics wrong in applying this WT to criminal cases, they are also wrong in saying that it could lead to disfellowshipping.

What About All Those Stories?

But you may say what about all the stories we hear where ones were disfellowshipped for reporting allegations to the police?

You will agree that there are many haters and opposers of Jehovah's Witnesses. They would stop at nothing to discredit us. No doubt, some of the stories are from those ones. Others may be based on truth but are exaggerated somewhat. Many times you will agree that there are two sides to the story. Sometimes a person will omit or forget some of the facts to make themselves look more believable.

Are we saying that all stories about elders mishandling cases are untrue? Of course not. As long as you are dealing with imperfect humans mistakes are bound to happen. Some elders may overstep the policy of the WTS and decide how to handle the case on their own resulting in serious mistakes and problems for those involved.

But by the same token there is no doubt that the numbers are greatly exaggerated by the Silent Lambs group because they apparently have a goal that is not readily seen by the ones who do not want to see it. Their statements and writings are misleading and twisted. They slant reality to fit their agenda. We will prove this later on. But for now ask yourself why should I believe every word they say? Am I willing to believe the words of ones trying to discredit the WTS but not believe factual documentation and the words of the ones who help me to see the truth of the Bible? Am I willing to believe their words but unwilling to believe the words of an organization that trys to stay clean by disfellowshipping fornicators, rapist, child molesters, and the like? What other organization disfellowships practicing child molesters and shuns them? If we want to boost our ranks all we have to do is allow the fornicators to remain or join. We could probably triple our membership in no time if that was simply the goal of the WTS.

There is no logical or reasonable explanation why the WTS would want molesters to be in the organization or be servants in the organization. They are simply trying to follow Bible principles in the policy they have in place. It is not sinister. It is not a cover up to try to show we have a spiritual paradise. If that was the case, why not cover up fornication as well. There are far more fornicators than child molesters. Why not keep fornication hush hush to give the appearance of an organization that lives in a perfect spiritual paradise with no wrongdoing whatsoever. It makes no sense. It is illogical. And it is nonfactual.

Can former molesters be servants?

Do JWs allow former child molesters to be servants in the congregation? Isn't this just like the Catholic church in transferring their priests to a different diocese? The reality is that this is a falacy promoted by apostates to discredit our policy. Notice how the WT policy makes this very clear.

If, when confronted, the accused confesses that he is guilty of child abuse, the elders take appropriate congregational action. If he is not repentant, he will not be permitted to remain a member of the congregation. Even if he is repentant—is cut to the heart and is thus resolutely determined to avoid such conduct in the future—what was stated in the January 1, 1997, issue of The Watchtower applies. The article said: "For the protection of our children, a man known to have been a child molester does not qualify for a responsible position in the congregation. Moreover, he cannot be a pioneer [full-time missionary of Jehovah's Witnesses] or serve in any other special, full-time service." He would not qualify Scripturally. (1 Timothy 3:2, 7-10) We take such action because we are concerned with maintaining Bible standards and protecting our children. Everyone in our organization is expected to meet the same requirements, namely, to be clean physically, mentally, morally, and spiritually.—2 Corinthians 7:1; Ephesians 4:17-19; 1 Thessalonians 2:4.

The WTS now keeps the names of anyone who was convicted (even if it was before they were a witness) or DFed or reproved for child molesting. When they relocate the elders of the new congregation are informed so that they can see to it that the person is not allowed to put children in the new congregation at risk. Just further proof that the WTS is way ahead of other religions.

But doesn't the Society make exceptions for some child molesters and appoint them as servants? Again notice the only exceptions mentioned in the policy set forth:
"In a few instances, individuals guilty of an act of child abuse have been appointed to positions within the congregation if their conduct has been otherwise exemplary for decades. All the factors are considered carefully. Suppose, for example, that a long time ago a 16-year-old boy had sexual relations with a consenting 15-year-old girl. Depending upon the U.S. jurisdiction where he lived when this happened, elders may have been required to report this as an incident of child abuse. Let us say that 20 years have passed. The child abuse reporting law may have changed; the man may have even married the girl! Both have been living exemplary lives and they are respected. In such a rare case, the man could possibly be appointed to a responsible position within the congregation."

As we see the exception to the rule is both reasonable and loving and in no way would endanger children.

Do the WT's lawyers follow a different policy?

Some opposers still argue that the WTS is ran by lawyers and as such the policy set forth is just a smokescreen to mislead others from knowing the real policy that the lawyers follow. But consider this:

If lawyers run the WT corporation as is many times said by opposers, do you think that they would counsel the WTS to tell victims not to go to the authorities and threaten DFing anyone who did? Would they tell the WTS to appoint former child molesters to positions of authority in the congregations? That would be inviting lawsuits. Are the WT lawyers so stupid and incompetent in child molestation cases yet such brilliant lawyers in other legal matters such as gaining freedom and liberties for Jehovah's Witnesses? That defies logic.

Why not just let the authorities handle child molestation cases since elders have no training in this field?

Has there ever been a perfect justice system? Isn't it true that people have been getting away with crimes since the human race began. The justice systems in the US and around the world are by far not perfect. People get away with murder and rape all the time. A lot of it depends on what kind of attorney you can afford or who happens to be the judge presiding that day. Some crimes are very difficult to prove. In the case of rape many times you have a he said she said scenario. Since the advent of DNA however these sorts of crimes are easier to prosecute. And some who were convicted have later been proven innocent with DNA evidence. There have even been some who have been wrongly executed. So the justice system makes many mistakes.

So while the child molester, because he has money to hire the best lawyers or some other reason, may be found not guilty in court of law he should still face discipline in the congregation regardless of the courts failure to convict him. The congregation has the responsibility to keep the organization clean regardless of what the law of the land may conclude about an individual. Should the congregation elders stand idly by waiting for the courts to handle the cases before ruling on the matter with the evidence available? It might take years before the case is settled in the govenmental courts. Meanwhile the child molester is still be considered one of Jehovah's Witnesses. Shouldn't a proven practicing child molester be removed from the congregation as soon as the evidence comes out rather than waiting years for the courts to decide? Of course they should. This is both scriptural, practical, and reasonable. And serves as a protection for all in the congregation. By no means would it be prudent to wait for the courts to handle the case and then the elders make a ruling based on what the court decides. And of course if the elders do not have enough evidence initially and the courts bring forth evidence that can serve as another witness against the molester then the elders can act at that time.

If the WTS told elders not to handle child abuse cases but just let the authorities take care of it can't you just hear what the critics would be saying? "I can't believe that the WTS shirks their responsibility? They are quick to DF others for lesser offenses but they do not want to touch child molesters just passing the buck on to the authorities. How hypocritical!" And so they are damed if they do and damned if they don't by some. But we are sure that honest ones can see the scriptural reasons why the elders should handle cases of all serious wrongdoing, including child molesting, as soon as possible.

But isn't it true that everyone in the congregation is instructed to keep silent including the elders and not let anyone else know that a person in the congregation is a former molester? Wouldn't a person be disfellowshipped or reproved for gossip or slander?

This is another common apostate falacy put forth to mislead others. A 1997 letter to body of elders states:

What can the elders do to help protect our children? The elders should be alert to the activity of any who are known to have molested children in the past. Individuals who have manifested a weakness in this regard should be sensitive to their need not to be alone with children. They should refrain from holding children or displaying other forms of affection for them. It would be appropriate for elders to give kindly cautions to any who are doing things that may be a temptation or a cause for concern to others in the congregation.

It is pretty clear for any who want to be honest and consider the statement carefully. If others in the congregation are concerned about something the former molester is doing what should elders do? Reprove them for gossip? Df them for slander? No, that is not in the instructions from the WTS at all. It is quite the opposite. Any individual in the congregation who has 'cause for concern' for what a former molester may be doing would not be considered slanderous for bringing up those concerns and elders should handle those concerns according to the directives from WTS. The elders are not to just sluff the concerns off and call it gossip or slander and reprove or DF the person. And yet, that is what apostates will tell you.

This directive certainly makes it clear that persons could indeed be warned if a person was unknowingly putting children in harms way of a former child molester. It also makes it clear that anyone who had 'cause for concern' about what a molester was doing would not be reproved but rather the former molester as well as those he is coming in contact with would be warned and cautioned because of this 'cause for concern'.

A 1992 letter to the elders further states:
Therefore, the elders should not make disparaging comments regarding a Christian' s decision to obtain professional help. It is also a personal decision if the alleged victim chooses to report such accusations to the secular authorities. Elders should encourage the sufferer to use discretion if that one chooses to confide in a mature friend.

What does this show us? Please note that it is mentioned that it might be discussed with a mature friend and that professional help could be obtained if one choses to do so. Certainly that would show that a person would not be dfed for warning a friend of the dangers should they be allowing their children to spend the night etc in the home of the child molester or for telling a professional what took place. The WTS would not condone dfing someone for reporting it since they here in the letters are saying that it should or could be reported and even talked about to others. Any elders saying otherwise is overstepping their bounds and disregarding the letters from the WTS.

But finally we have this evidence from the November 1, 1995 Watchtower. Here the WT addresses the victim of child molestation and states: If there is some valid reason to suspect that the alleged perpetrator is still abusing children, a warning may have to be given. The congregation elders can help in such a case.

Here, contrary to claims of apostates, straight from the WT, we see that the victim can provide a warning to others and the congregation elders can help them to do so.

Who has a better policy?

"Below is just a sampling of the steps numerous religious institutions have taken to protect children from being abused. By clicking on the links provided any observer can see that the churches have gone to great lengths to openly discuss abuse issues and establish policies to prevent abuses from taking place.

Interestingly, by Googling each church along with "child abuse policy," or any similar phrase, the results are readily forthcoming. However, try Googling the Watchtower's child abuse policy and see what your search results turn up. For example, here is a link to a well defined child abuse policy for a Methodist church that requires criminal background checks for day care workers etc.

http://www.ltumc.org/pages/safetypolicy2.html Here is a link to a Methodist conference that discusses their child protection policies. They seem to have gone to great lengths to ensure that children are not abused.

http://www.txcumc.org/SafeSanctuaries/SafeHome.htm The Baptist church also has a well-defined policy that is aimed at preventing abuse.

http://www.baptist-atlantic.ca/articles/abusepolicy.htm The American Baptist Church has a similar detailed screening policy that is aimed at preventing abuse.

http://www.nationalministries.org/children/policy.cfm The Lutheran Church has a similar child abuse policy

http://www.synodresourcecenter.org/admin/personnel/background_checks/0001/abuse.html Here are the minutes of a Presbyterian elders meeting that lays out a very comprehensive child abuse policy.

http://www.opmh.org/sessionminutes/session040823.htm The Anglican Church in Ontario has a clearly defined policy that informs parishioners to call the police.

http://www.ottawa.anglican.ca/abuse.shtml Please take note of the Anglican policy that states: WHAT DO I DO IF THE VICTIM IS A CHILD? The protection of children is a matter of fundamental concern. In Ontario all professionals are bound by law to report suspected child abuse to the Children's Aid Society. The professional's duty to report overrides the privilege of confidentiality."

Those comments above in italics are the words of one of the biggest critics of the child abuse policy of the WTS. When looking at each link he provides what do we reallly find? Here is the truth about each one of them.

Methodist Policy: This policy and its provisions shall apply to all persons including all paid and unpaid leaders, whether lay or clergy who have any direct or indirect contact with children and youth who participate in any activities or events sponsored by the Texas Conference.

Only protects children against ones in charge. Not against Joe Methodist the child molester.

Baptists policy: Policy for Child Abuse Prevention All persons desiring to work with children/youth through any ministry (current or future) of this church, must first meet the following qualifications.

Does not protect child against Joe Baptist the child molester.

American Baptist Policy: the Board of Educational Ministries adopted a recommended policy for churches and regions to consider as they recruit and screen volunteers and staff who work with children, youth, and/or other vulnerable populations.

Does not protect children against Joe American Baptist the child molester.

Lutheran policy: it is prompted by awareness of problems in other churches that have allowed for the abuse of children by paid and unpaid child and youth workers in the church,

Does not protect child against Joe Lutheran the child molester.

Presbyterian policy: Employees and volunteers who undertake the special responsibility of working with the children of OPMH shall not violate the trust of the responsibility by engaging in acts of sexual misconduct.

Does not protect children against Joe Presbyterian the child molester.

Anglican Church Policy: In the Church, where people entrust their lives and their spiritual wellbeing to clergy and other employees and volunteers, the issues of sexual exploitation and harassment are of great importance. Church leaders are invested with the confidence of those who come to them. Sexual contact is a gross misuse of that power and a massive breach of a sacred trust that takes advantage of another's vulnerability

Does not protect the children against Joe Anglican the child molester.

You will note that in every link provided the policy is concerning those in charge of youths, the clergy, employees, volunteers, youth leaders and counselors. There is no policy to protect children against members of the church or their own parents. Their only concern seems to be to make sure that no leaders are accused of child molesting so that lawsuits may be avoided. They have no concern for protecting children from child abusers who are simply members of the church. They seem to not even have a policy for this. How much finer the policy of JWs to DF practicing child molesters and shun them.

Some try to compare our policy and the fact that some elders or ministerial servants have been found to be engaging in child molesting to that of the Catholic church. There is a huge difference between the Catholic Church and JWs.

1.JWs do not transfer known child molesters to different parts of the country to continue to serve as elders.

2. Known child molesters are never allowed to be servants in the congregation for the rest of their life.

3. JWs disfellowship practicing child molesters whether they are elders, ministerial servants, Bethelites, COs, DOs, pioneers, publishers, or whatever their position in the congregation. It does not matter. Catholics and other religions have no such policy to remove individual members from their organization.

Jesus Cano is an example of this fact. If Cano would have been caught by JWs before the police caught him, he would have been immediately kicked out of Bethel and DFed just as he was after the police caught him. If he were a Catholic Minister he would have been transferred to another parish and continued as a Catholic Minister or possibly now that such publicity has come to the Catholic Church for thier mishandling of these matters and money awarded to victims he may have been temporarily removed as a Minister but by no means would he have been excommunicated as a member of the Catholic Church.

4. Child abuse victims of Catholic priests have been awarded over $1.5 billion dollars by the courts of the land. Money awarded to those bringing lawsuits against the WTS concerning child molesting: -$137,000 dollars. That's right. That figure is a minus $137,000 dollars. The WTS has actually been awarded a net total of $137,000 dollars in cases of child abuse lawsuits brought against them. We will explain next.

Boer Vs. WT

In Canada, Vicki Boer brought a civil lawsuit against the elders of her former congregation and the WTBTS asking for $700,000 dollars concerning her child abuse at the hands of her father who was one of Jehovah's Witnesses claiming they were negligent, breached their duty, advised her against contacting the authorities, and against seeking professional help. What did the court find?

Presiding Judge Anne Molloy ruled that the WTS and elders were not at fault and did not contribute to or promote in any way the child abuse that took place. The court said, "There is no foundation on the facts to support an award for punitive damages. Most of the allegations against the defendants have not been established on the facts. The defendants who interacted with the plaintiff did not bear ill will toward her. They accepted the veracity of her account, were sympathetic to her situation and meant her no harm. The claim for punitive damages is dismissed."

As respects her findings as to whether the elders advised Boer not to tell the authorities and not to seek professional help the judge stated very clearly her findings:

The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff not to get medical help. She chose not to seek professional help herself against the advice of the elders and Mr. Mott-Trille. The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff that her father’s abuse should not be reported. On the contrary, the defendants directed Mr. Palmer (the abuser) to report himself to the C.A.S. and then followed up directly to ensure he had done so.

Furthermore Judge Molloy clearly ruled that Vicki Boer's 'memory' of what occurred did not coincide with the facts when she later stated in her ruling: "I have already ruled that I do not accept Ms. Boer's evidence that the elders told her not to seek medical assistance and not to report the abuse to the authorities. These were important points about which she was certain in her own mind. Her memory on those was inaccurate.

Judge Molloy also examined similar cases from the United States and candidly stated in her ruling: I conclude that had Ms. Boer’s action been brought in the United States, it would likely be subject to summary dismissal based on these cases.

However, even though Judge Molloy also stated in her ruling concerning the elders that "They were sympathetic to the plaintiff. She understood they believed her story..... It was reasonable, and indeed appropriate in the circumstances for them to ensure that the plaintiff's voice was heard and that they not rely solely on Mr. Palmer's version of the events..." she still awarded Boer $5,000 for the trauma caused her in confronting her father at an investigative meeting with the elders stating, "There was, however, psychological harm to the plaintiff as a result of the December 29, 1989 meeting. She was in a very vulnerable state at the time as she had just begun to deal with the effects of her father’s abuse. I accept the evidence of the various experts, including Dr. Awad, that this confrontation made things worse for the plaintiff."

But the flip side of the ruling is that the same court ordered Vicki Boer to pay the WTS $142,000 dollars in legal fees. Thus netting the WTS a sum total of $137,000 dollars as a result of the civil suit brought against them. It seems the Canadian courts do not take lightly cases based on "frivolous charges" and forcing someone to defend themselves "against false or unprovable charges."

How much do you suppose that the Boer's spiritual counselor, Bill Bowen and his Silent Lambs organization, was willing to contribute to help the Boer's pay their own legal fees of over $90,000 that were incurred as well as the $137,000 that they were ordered to pay to the WTS? Apparently whatever they contributed, if anything, was not nearly enough because Vicki's husband, Scott Boer commmented, "We've pretty much exhausted our finances pursuing the case this far, and now we're to the point where we simply couldn't afford an appeal. We going to simply have to accept the judgment and if we have to declare bankruptcy for a victory, then we have to declare bankruptcy." It seems that Silent Lambs by encouraging such lawsuits are contributing to further financial victimizing of the already abused victims. We have to wonder if it is concern for the abused victims that motivates Bowen's organization or their obvious agenda to discredit the WTS that motivates and consumes them.

The self proclaimed E-watchman, Robert King, in his attempt at painting the WTS as a greedy, money-loving corporation,commented: "They do not have to impose the court's ruling upon her. Apparently, though, the Watchtower has every intention of collecting, down to the last penny of the court ordered judgment." However, it should be noted that in contrast to Robert King's premature judgement, showing no ill will or lust for revenge the WTS agreed to generously call it even and did not insist that Vicki Boer pay the $137,000 awarded to them by the court. It seems that in the end the WTS actually helped out the Boer's financially more than the Silent Lambs organization.

Poissonous Lies

One of the most famous cases brought against the WTS is the one brought by the children of Sara Poisson at the behest of the Silent Lambs organization. You are no doubt aware of the case and have heard how the elders were told by her that her husband was sexually molesting her 2 children and the elders stood by and did nothing about it. But did you know that these statements are untrue, lies that can be factually documented.

You have no doubt read articles such as this about the case: "November 16. 2004 8:06AM "At issue are the claims of sisters Heather and Holly Berry, who allege their Jehovah's Witness congregation in Wilton ignored their mother's complaints that their father was sexually abusing them. After the police inadvertently learned of the abuse, Paul Berry was convicted of assaulting Holly in 2000 and is serving 56 to 112 years in state prison. According to court records, Paul Berry, formerly of Greenville, abused the girls sexually and physically in the 1980s, when they were between the ages of 3 and 10. In one case, he was accused of hanging Holly by her wrists from hooks on a barn wall. When their mother, Sara Poisson, reported the abuse to church elders between six and 10 times, they told her to "be a better wife" and to pray more, the records said."

But are you aware that the truth is that the elders were never told of sexual abuse by Paul Berry at this time by the mother, Sara Poisson. How do we know this to be the truth?

Note the testimony of the mother herself in the sentencing phase of Paul Berry. Sara Poisson testified: "A social worker visited me and informed me that I needed to have Paul removed from the home by 5 o'clock that day, or that she would take my children away from me. Before me now was the decision--the very real decision--to choose God, as I perceived him to be at that time, or to choose my children. And I chose mychildren. This decision resulted in years of extreme poverty. The entire congregation turned their back on us."

Then notice what happened much later after her daughter had grown to maturity. Sara Poisson continues her testimony: "I did not hear from Holly for 18 months. She called one day from Indiana and sa1d she wanted to come home. I sent her a bus ticket and picked her up in (Ascutney), Vermont. She was thin, she was sick, and she had parasites. When she dismounted from that bus, she asked me, "Why did you let that happen?" And I said, "Why did I let what happen?" And this was the first time that I heard about the sexual abuse that had happened to her.""

According to Sara Poisson's on testimony at the sentencing of Paul Berry, she found out about the sexual abuse for the first time at a much later date than her conversation with the elders. No, she could not have possibly told the elders about any sexual abuse by Paul Berry. Silent lambs is attempting to discredit the WTS by spreading untruths. No wonder the WTS in the complaint against them denied it: "The church disputes the sisters' claims, however, and its lawyer, Donald Gardner of Manchester, has said church elders didn't know about the abuse until long after it had stopped and police were investigating."

Sara Poisson's testimony about her first suspecting sexual abuse at the sentencing phase of Paul Berry's trial is also contradictory: About this time, Heather, who was very young, began to act strangely. She refused to sleep in her bed, would only sleep in the bathtub. She threw things at her father and became very v1olent. Heather was the kind of little girl that brought wilted dandelions home for me. I suspected Paul was sexually abusing her, and began to ask questions of professionals and to take Heather to counseling. The situation went on for years. The abuse continued.

What does this reveal?

1. Lets assume that she is telling the truth when she says the elders told her not to report it to the authorities because we handle things in house. And so she listened to them and went against her better judgment. But then apparently she did not fully listen to the elders and ascribe to the notion that help from outside JWs organization should not be sought because here she acknowledges questioning professionals and taking her child to counseling. Yes, the fact is and we know it, that JWs do not condemn receiving outside help from professionals. Nor do they chastise or discipline members for reporting abuse to the authorities. This is a decision of each individual.

2. Heather received counseling and professionals were questioned. We have to wonder why didn't these counselors and professionals report the physical and sexual child abuse to the authorities? Why hasn't she brought a lawsuit against those counselors and professionals who surely learned of the abuse in questioning and counseling her child and Sara Poisson herself.

3. She admits the situation went on for years and she had no proof. It was not till much later that Holly told her. She did not and could not have told the elders that they were being sexually abused because according to her she did not know. If she did know about it then she allowed it to continue for years. I'm sorry. But these are the facts. I wonder if it bothers any of the opposers of JW's child abuse policy to realize that they have been duped into believing lies from silent lambs and Sara Poisson?

It is apparent from Sara Poisson's own testimony that she is the one who is the liar and not the WTS. At any rate the court dismissed the charges against the elders and the WTS and ruled the following: "We also disagree with the plaintiffs' assertion that special circumstances exist in this case such that an especial temptation and opportunity for Berry's criminal misconduct was created by Watchtower and Wilton Congregation. There is no allegation that the elders created any opportunity for Berry to abuse his daughters. As noted, there was no allegation that the alleged abuse took place on congregation property or at congregation-related activities. There is no allegation that the elders acted in any way other than by providing spiritual guidance and scriptural advice, at the request of the plaintiffs' mother."

You might take note of other lies by Sara Poisson: Concerning the teachings of JWs she said: "Women were not allowed to seek an education." We know that is a lie.

She said: "A social worker visited me and informed me that I needed to have Paul removed from the home by 5 o'clock that day, or that she would take my children away from me. Before me now was the decision--the very real decision--to choose God, as I perceived him to be at that time, or to choose my children. And I chose mychildren. This decision resulted in years of extreme poverty. The entire congregation turned their back on us."

Another lie. There is no judicial discipline against anyone separating from their husband. There was no decision to choose God or choose her children. She could easily choose both if she desired. Many have been duped by the lies of Sara Poisson and Silent Lambs.

Poissonous Interview

In 2002 BBC reporter Betsan Powys interviewed Sara Poisson and her daughter, Heather.

POWYS: Even after you had told them that her father was sexually abusing Heather, nothing changed?

POISSON: No, no. Well yeah, things changed, they got a lot worse, for me.

Notice the stammering. According to her own testimony that we showed above she did not know about the sexual abuse when she talked to the elders. How did she tell them about it? Either she lied under oath when she testified. Or she is lying in this interview. Notice how it continues.

POWYS: In the end the decision was taken out of her hands. In school bruises were noticed on her children. Social workers were told. They gave her a stark choice, leave your husband or we take your children. But if she left him, she knew the church would cut her dead.

POISSON: At that point I had to make decision between God and my kids. And I knew.. well at that time I knew that if I chose my kids, I don't have prayer, but I didn't care anymore. So we lost everything in one day.

POWYS: Sarah Poisson had no life outside the Kingdom Hall. When the congregation cast her out she had no choice but to move away. She didn't just lose every friend she had, overnight she was homeless, penniless, scraping a living to bring up her children. The friends they'd had openly shunned them.

Why was she DFed and removed from the congregation. Was it for separating from her husband? That is what we are led to believe. But any honest and reasonable person knows that she would not be Dfed for that reason. There is no dfing for separating from a mate or even divorcing them. The grounds for dfing would only come when remarrying without having scriptural grounds (fornication) for doing so.

POWYS: Heather Berry and her stepsister Holly Brewer have flown here from New Hampshire. The man who abused them has been gaoled for a minimum of 56 years. He was Heather's father. Now Heather and Holly are breaking new ground, they're taking the Jehovah's Witnesses to court.

HEATHER: I'm Heather from New Hampshire. I don't want to tell my story but I've heard the word 'victim' too many times today, and all of us are standing out here today and we're standing tall and proud and saying this happened and that it can't happen and we're survivors, and we're fighting and we're not victims.

POWYS: They're the first of those survivors to take their fight to court. They're claiming that not only did the church do nothing when they were abused, it ostracised and punished the family when they called the police.

HEATHER: I'm very glad I came, and like I said, I would do it again, and again, and again, and as many times as it takes to get a change in the policies and things that they hide constantly.

Can you believe that the church elders did this to them for simply going to the police? How terrible this WT organization must be to punish members for simply reporting crime? How courageous was Sara Poisson for finally ignoring the elders instructions at the risk of being ostracized and informing the police? Is that what really happened? Later on in the interview notice what is said about who really reported it.

POWYS: In the end the decision was taken out of her hands. In school bruises were noticed on her children. Social workers were told. They gave her a stark choice, leave your husband or we take your children. But if she left him, she knew the church would cut her dead.

POISSON: At that point I had to make decision between God and my kids. And I knew.. well at that time I knew that if I chose my kids, I don't have prayer, but I didn't care anymore. So we lost everything in one day.

Social workers were made aware of the situation by the school. The children were to be removed from the father's presence. The police would have had to be informed for this to take place and a criminal investigation would ensue. Sara Poisson would have absolutely no choice about talking to the police. How could she be ostrasized by the elders? She did not even initiate the contact with the police.

Questions:

1. Did she get ostracized by the elders for contacting the police or did the police get involved without any choice from her? Both cannot be true.

2. Was she ostracized and shunned for contacting the police or for separating from her husband? Since JWs do not judicially punish members for reporting crimes or for separating from their mate I submit that both accounts explaining how the elders ostracized her are lies.

Silent Lambs or Noisy Goats?

Would you like to see more outright lies by the Silent lambs people and their associates? Here are some of their statements. (Lies in italics)

In a letter from the Silentlambs dated August 8, 2001: The organization of Jehovah's Witnesses is a closed society that requires its members to turn inward to the organization with any problems, rather than seek outside help. This practice conflicts with laws requiring the reporting of suspected child abuse.

Outright lie. Anyone associated with JWs knows that help of outside professionals is up to each individual and is not condemned by the WTS and JWs. In fact, in Sara Poisson's own testimony at the trial she admits that she did obtain such outside help for her daughter from professional counselors while still one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

The letter continues: According to church policy, the proof can include two eyewitnesses to each act of abuse. Failure to present such proof can result in the victim being ostracized and shunned by elders and the congregation for false accusations against a member.

Outright lie. Two witnesses to 'each act of abuse' is not a requirement. Two witnesses to the same type of abuse is acceptable. Failure to present such proof does not result in ostracizing or shunning by the congregation for false accusations. Any victim is free to report child abuse to the authorities as they wish regardless of how many witnesses there are to the abuse.

The same letter states: The first lawsuit will be filed in Nashua, N. H., where Jehovah's Witness church member, Paul Berry is alleged to have repeatedly sexually molested his stepdaughter and his daughter, starting when they were three years old. When the girls' mother went to the church elders with her suspicions of abuse, the elders told her she should be a better wife, and to pray more about the situation, ignoring New Hampshire's mandatory child abuse reporting statute. The abuse continued and Berry was ultimately criminally convicted for the abuse of his stepdaughter and was sentenced to 56 years in prison.

Outright and misleading lie. Sara Poisson could not have told the elders about any sexual abuse because in her testimony before the court she tells that she was not aware of sexual abuse until years later.

Leader of Silent Lambs Bill Bowen states, "I felt compelled to resign as pastor of my local congregation in protest of internal policies that shield sex offenders and hurt children. When the church promotes child molesters to positions of leadership and requires them to call at the homes of the unknowing public that is bad policy."

Another outright lie. The policy of JWs is to not allow former child molesters to positions of leadership for the rest of their life. Furthermore former child molesters are not 'required' to call at homes of the unknowing public. But if they choose to do so they must do so in the company of another adult.

SilentLambs attorney Jeff Anderson states: "Child sexual abuse is not tolerated anywhere else. With the onset of the laws protecting children such as neighborhood notification laws and mandatory reporting statutes, the days when child molesters enjoyed a cloak of silence are past, except within the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses. This church seems to think they are above the law the rules do not apply to them. This case is simply about making Jehovah's Witnesses understand they have the same rules as everyone else when it comes to protecting our children."

Outright lie. The policy of JWs is that elders should report child abuse in accord with the laws of the land and that 'all' members of the congregation have a responsibility to report child abuse if they are aware of it or if they reasonably believe a child is in danger.

One of the most outspoken supporters of the Silentlambs organization, Robert King, said of the WTS: They have denied Jehovah by claiming before the courts that Christian elders have no responsibility before God to protect children from the crimes of a congregant.

That is not what the WT lawyers argued at all. The truth is this: They argued that the WTS and the elders do not have a 'legal' responsibility to protect the children. They were arguing that they should not be held responsible for children legally speaking. They were not the legal guardians of the children. They were not appointed as trustees over the children. They did not have a common law or fiduciary (trusteeship) responsibility toward the children. The parents have the legal responsibility over their own children, not the WTS or the elders.

And this is only logical and correct. It is common sense. They never argued that they had no responsibility to protect the children at all. In fact, that is not what the case was about. It was about their legal responsibility toward the children. The suit was dismissed by the court because the WTS was correct in their argument.

Can you imagine how apostates would respond if the WTS said that they had a legal trusteeship to the children of Jehovah's Witnesses? Can't you just here them saying, "Now they're trying to control our children. Is it not enough to control the adult members?"

The Very Best Child Abuse Policy

Notice how the WTS concludes their letter about their policy by humbly acknowledging that the organization is not perfect and that we are always looking for ways to make improvements.

Our procedures have been refined over time. Over the years, as we have noted areas where our policies could be strengthened, we have followed through. We are continuing to refine them. We do not believe that our system is perfect. No human organization is perfect. But we do believe that we have a strong, Bible-based policy on child abuse. Anyone in a responsible position who is guilty of child abuse would be removed from his responsibilities without hesitation. We certainly would not knowingly allow him to serve elsewhere, either because he moved or through a transfer. The Bible teaches that individuals can repent of their sins and "turn to God by doing works that befit repentance," and we accept what the Bible says. (Acts 26:20) Still, the safety of our children is of the utmost importance. We take it very seriously.

In light of the evidence, it is amazing that anyone would believe the lies coming out of the mouths of Bill Bowen and his noisy organization and other critics and opposers of JW's child abuse policy. To the chagrin of all apostates and enemies of JWs, JWs have the best child abuse policy of any religion, bar none. And after all, isn't that what you would expect from an organization directed by the God that is love and the Most High over all, Jehovah.

2006-07-04T15:17:00.000-07:00

Timothy Kline Exposed--Vomit, Lies, and Double Speak

Timothy Kline, humble servant of Jehovah whose only wish is that slaves of the Watchtower Society could be freed. Honest and straightforward, his only concern is to save you from Watchtower theology. His intelligence far surpasses that of all of the rest of Jehovah's Witnesses for whereas we needed help and guidance to find Bible truths, like the Ethiopian Eunuch, he needed no such help. Notice his own statements about this:

For one, the Watchtower Society taught me nothing that I didn't already know about the Bible long before I had ever even knew that the Watchtower existed. What drew me to Watchtower theology was that many of its basic teachings matched what I had already come to understand. To say that the Watchtower Society taught me "the truth" is false, and just goes to demonstrate how much thirdwitness tries to bring glory to mere men when it is Jehovah that reveals truth.

This statement alone belies his humility. He deems himself so knowledgable and so wise that no one needs to help him understand scriptures. His Bible understanding far exceeds that of any others. Lets examine some of his insights that he has brought forth thru no help from others and whether this savior of 'Watchtower slaves' is really as sincere and honest as he would have us believe. Kline's words will appear in italics.

The Lies

Mr. Kline once made this statment concerning the book, The Report by TWMC: "Of course, there's plenty more to be discussed when it comes to the true identity of this "ThirdWitness," staunch defender of The Report."

I challenged him to provide any evidence that I was a defender of The Report. He never even attempted to bring forth one bit of evidence for making this statement because he knew when he made the statement it was an outright lie. He was purposely deceiving others merely trying to take the heat off Robert King for plagiarizing The Report.

Mr. Kline further said concerning the book, "Coaxed by what "ThirdWitness" describes as "Holy Spirit," he purchased the book and then miraculously was led to certain passages much like a certain Joseph Smith was led by angelic guidance to writings that led Joseph Smith to truth."

I pointed out that I never made the claim that holy spirit directed me to find this book quoting exactly what I said. Here it is:
"watcher - Unless holy spirit gave him the information? I guess we will all have to decide that for ourselves and time will tell. I am reminded of Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormons. He was given golden tablets written in Egyptian. He translated it into English. Amazingly, some passages he translated were exactly word for word with the King James Version, even including spurious scriptures which were later found not to be in the original text. And even though he spoke modern English, he translated into the same archaic English of the King James Bible. How did he do this? Did he have Holy Spirit in translating the passages and that is why they are the same as the KJV[?]? That is what a Mormon will tell you. I can make the same claim. I was not even looking for THE REPORT. I was just looking thru ebay at books on ebay published by the WTBTS[?] and lo and behold, I saw THE REPORT. I noticed the similarites in the book and in watchmans essays so I bought it. Did I know just how similar it was going to be? NO! Was I directed by Holy Spirit to buy it and then directed to notice the similar passages so that watchman could be exposed? So do you believe watchman has holy spirit but I don't? Or do you believe I have holy spirit and watchman don't? I much prefer to just look at the facts rather than try to guess? (Just for the record I do not make such a claim at all. I think it was merely a coincidence.) " End of quote. Posted atformatTime('1127230843');10:40 - 20/09/2005

When someone else also pointed out to Kline this: If you had bothered reading a couple of lines further you would have seen 3W's disclaimer that he believes Holy Spirit had nothing to do with finding "The Report".

Kline replied: An obvious insertion on his part, added later to cover himself.

Fortunately I had saved the entire thread in which I had made the quote above. When I posted the entire thread and proved that I did not edit my statement and change it did Kline apologize? Admit he was wrong? No instead his anger, pride, and true colors came forth as he went on the offensive ranting among other things:
you are a hypocrite...I am SO glad that I'm not like you...Be satisfied in your self-righteousness. You truly are having your reward. In the end, the anonymity which affords you free reign in pedanticism will be stripped away by Jehovah, so go for it.

But his lying goes much deeper than untruths toward individuals. As is so often the case with apostates, Kline wants to misrepresent what WT publications and JWs really teach. For example Kline says:

There have been countless times when Watchtower members have heard the Watchtower Society derail, castigate, and denounce Roman Catholicism as about the furthest thing from true Christianity as one can get.
But the irony rests in the fact that the Watchtower Society has so plainly modeled itself after the Roman Catholic Church.
One of the ways that the Watchtower Society has done this is through the doctrine of infallibility.

Any JW reading this knows that we do not teach the doctrine of infallibility. Over the years the WT publications have made this plain. Here are a few:

It is not claimed that the explanations in this publication are infallible. (Revelation Climax--p. 9)

Those who make up the one true Christian organization today do not have angelic revelations or divine inspiration. (Kingdom Proclaimers--p.708)

Although the slave class is defined as "faithful and discreet," Jesus did not say that it would be infallible. This group of faithful anointed brothers still consists of imperfect Christians. Even with the best of intentions, they can be mistaken, as such men sometimes were in the first century. (WT December 1, 2002--p. 17)

Even more misleading is this outrageous claim by Kline against God's people: If we are going to argue that one must follow God's arrangement, then we here must acknowledge the arrangement that our Grand Creator has put into place: Our King is Jesus until such time as his kingdom reaches its fulfilled purpose. If we want for anything, we are to go through him in asking for it. Plain and simple. Watchtower theology would have us believe that we bypass Jesus entirely, that our king is Jehovah--not Jesus...

This of course is nothing more than a blatant lie from an enemy of God's organization. JWs believe that Jesus is King and that he is the only way to Jehovah and the only way to salvation. It makes a person wonder if Kline was ever really a JW or is he all a sham, pretending, trying to mislead others by claiming he was once a JW thus leading others to believe that he has more credibility in understanding our teachings since once he was one of us. He has certainly shown that he does not understand what JWs teach at all. Perhaps his words quoted at the start of this commentary really are true when he said: To say that the Watchtower Society taught me "the truth" is false.

The Double Speak

Kline says on his recently revised pathways site: However, it is the view of Pathways-Online that an "apostate" is a person who once had dedicated their life to serving and worshiping Jehovah God and has since turned to serving a triune god. Such ones cannot realistically obtain posting privileges on this forum, since they hold to a fundamental belief which is contrary to that of Pathways-Online. end of quote.

Afterwards Kline said on h2o: I will not go so far as to say that those who hold the Trinitarian view, yet are very much Christlike in the rest of their life and spirituality are condemned, because they view God in a Trinitarian light. If we declare the "Trinity" teaching a false teaching, are we willing to equally go so far as to declare that those who hold a false teaching will be destroyed (Watchtowerism/judgmentalism) because they are not true Christians, because that is the road that we start down, is it not?

Again at Kline's own site he states: In any case, while I am personally opposed to the Trinity doctrine being taught as somehow Biblically based and "truth," I do not prevent others from believing it, should they decide to. However, I will continue to refuse allowance of the discussion of the subject on Pathways-Online, specifically.

Afterward Flowerchild said on Klines site: But since I began to have a personal relationship with Christ I have started praying to Jesus....afterall in Isaiah....He is called our Eternal Father...and in the Lords prayer He tells His followers how to pray.....and He says to pray to our Father in Heavan......I worship my Lord....as Scripture so plainly tells us to.....and as for the trinity....I feel its a way to explain the nature of the Father and the Son...also when you think about it......the HolySpirit is part of both the Father and the Son ....as they both use the HolySpirit.......and this feels so right for me......I know that Christ has shown me these truths.....we are blessed to get out from under the yoke ofthe WTS.....and put on the Yoke of Christ.....

Kline's reply: Deafening silence. No warning. No correction. Flowerchild's words went unchallenged by Kline.

And this rule is put forth by Kline on his site as well: "Bashers" are not welcome at Pathways-Online for several reasons. First, it's like speaking to someone who has blinders on. If you look at the substance of their contributions to the forum, it is primarily negative, critical, and denigrating. We, as Christians, are to be balanced in all things. Unfortunately, some people have nothing to contribute except their "bashing." They love to talk about past faults, especially, and you can tell, because they devote so much of their time to it. Even in posts that they try to make "positive," they can't help but introduce a subtle snipe at their favorite target.

You might be laughing now if this wasn't so sinisterly deceiving. If you have ever examined his site do you find that bashers (of the WT) are not welcome there? The truth is that the owner of the board is one of the premier bashers of the WTS and not only is bashing allowed but it is encouraged by the owner himself. Where ever he posts on discussion boards you will find him bashing the WT. Most recent example of Kline's bashing:
"the Watchtower Society has so plainly modeled itself after the Roman Catholic Church..."

And who can forget the time that Kline tried to sabotage Al's site by taking over the domain that he and/or King had given him to use. If not for Al's good sense to register it under another name his entire site would have been lost. After Kline explained his position he then wrote how he would not speak of the controversy any longer, that he would take the high road. Read Kline's words for yourself:

Warm Christian greetings to everyone,I am writing to let everyone know that after much prayerful consideration and some very kind words that some have expressed privately through emails, I am not going to continue to be distracted by the likes of wolves who go by the name of "thirdwitness," "Al," ... and still others. If the "Future Judgment View" message board wants to continue to serve as sanctuary for these ones, then so be it. They can still cause their damage from afar, I'm sure, clawing and scratching with their endless barrages of empty speeches and contempt, ... I have posted my final, closing thoughts in response to the controversy they are trying to stir up against me. ...I wish I could say that this will finally put the matter to rest; however, I am fairly certain that the attacks, innuendo, and "theocratic warfare" will continue.

Shortly thereafter on the H2O site there appeared a parody of the 3 stooges where ones at Al's site were compared to the 3 stooges. Along with the parody there appeared a picture of the 3 stooges. Someone discovered that the picture was from Kline's site itself implicating Kline as the writer of the parody. Caught with his hand in the cookie jar in direct contrast to his humble 'I'll take the high road' rant he was forced to admit it although he gave the explanation that he had posted the picture on his site for someone else to use in writing the parody. You can read about the whole event here: http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=311102&amp;amp;amp;amp;CategoryID=2967&ThreadID=2268141&tolast=yes#bottom

The Vomit

Thirdwitness would probably say that Jehovah's name is Jehovah. This is, to put it bluntly, a nonsensical answer.

The disciples became apostles, yes. But they were never put in charge, they were never put into a position of authority.

It was not the "calling on the name of Jehovah" that salvation depended upon,
the early Christians were NOT a "people for his name" (that is, Jehovah),

He (thirdwitness) is also trying to argue that the name of Jehovah IS Jehovah. However, as I pointed out in a separate post from this topic, this is not necessarily the case.

Jesus clearly recognized that he was the name of Jehovah

Watchtower theology, and Thirdwitness of course, would have the reader believe that what Jesus is saying here is that Jesus went around saying "Jehovah!" all of the time, when this is not the case at all.

It isn't exactly clear to Bible scholars and historians today how Jesus, as a devout Jew, handled the Tetragrammaton,

And just as borne out by Acts 4:12, the name of Jehovah came to be Jesus.

You might be saying to yourself at this time, Why is he putting teachings of Christendom in this exposure of Timothy Kline? Surely Kline who supposedly was once one of Jehovah's Witnesses would not expound such unbiblical and unreasonable ideas. Yes, it is quite shocking and surprising but these are the actual words of Timothy Kline himself. Lets examine each claim and show how his words directly contradict God's word, something that any child of Jehovah's Witnesses could easily do.

In order to prove that the faithful and discreet slave found among Jehovah's Witnesses today has no authority in preaching and providing the spiritual food for Christ's household Kline stated:
The disciples became apostles, yes. But they were never put in charge, they were never put into a position of authority.

And thus with one swift stroke of his keyboard Timothy Kline has just negated all the writings of the Apostle Paul, Peter, Jude, James, and John since they were not in charge and had no authority to write anything further. Their writings are illegitimate. And here we all thought that the apostles and the first century Christian congregation was who Christ left in charge to carry out the preaching of the good news and feeding the sheep. But Timothy Kline has just informed us that this is wrong.

It was the apostle Paul who himself said, "Be obedient to those taking the lead among you and be submissive." (Hebrews 13:17) But Timothy Kline has overuled Paul by saying: But they were never put in charge, they were never put into a position of authority.

Notice other things that the Apostle Paul said about their authority:
1 Thess 4:1 Finally, brothers, we request YOU and exhort YOU by the Lord Jesus, just as YOU received [the instruction] from us on how YOU ought to walk and please God 2 For YOU know the orders we gave YOU through the Lord Jesus. But we exhort YOU, brothers, to go on doing it in fuller measure, 11 and to make it YOUR aim to live quietly and to mind YOUR own business and work with YOUR hands, just as we ordered YOU; 12 Now we request YOU, brothers, to have regard for those who are working hard among YOU and presiding over YOU in [the] Lord and admonishing YOU; 13 and to give them more than extraordinary consideration in love because of their work. 2 Thess 3:4 Moreover, we have confidence in [the] Lord regarding YOU, that YOU are doing and will go on doing the things we order. 6 Now we are giving YOU orders, brothers, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition YOU received from us. 7 For YOU yourselves know the way YOU ought to imitate us, 10 In fact, also, when we were with YOU, we used to give YOU this order: "If anyone does not want to work, neither let him eat." 14 But if anyone is not obedient to our word through this letter, keep this one marked, stop associating with him, that he may become ashamed."

For ones without authority they certainly did speak with much authority even to the point of giving what is described as 'orders'. There are of course many other scriptures that could be used to show that the apostles were indeed given authority by Jesus and most definitely were left in charge of feeding, disciplining, admonishing, giving orders, and caring for the sheep.

In saying that the apostles were not left in charge Timothy Kline has also contradicted many of Jesus' illustrations. For example this one found at Matthew 25:14 "For it is just as when a man, about to travel abroad, summoned slaves of his and committed to them his belongings. 28 "?Therefore TAKE away the talent from him and give it to him that has the ten talents. 29 For to everyone that has, more will be given and he will have abundance;

Jesus most definitely give his disciples a charge and authority to take care of his belongings. It is oh so very clear that Kline's reasoning and understanding of scriptures are based on nothing more than his own agenda to discredit JWs as God's people.

Furthermore, in direct contrast to what the Bible clearly states Kline said: It was not the "calling on the name of Jehovah" that salvation depended upon,

Paul said exactly the opposite at Roman 10:13 "For 'everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.'

And so Kline makes this case:
To put it in simple terms, the question that the reader should be asking at this point is "What is the name of Jehovah?" After all, according to the NWT rendering, everyone must call on the name of Jehovah to be saved. So, what is Jehovah's name?
Thirdwitness would probably say that Jehovah's name is Jehovah.
This is, to put it bluntly, a nonsensical answer.

Yes, its true. He really said that to say Jehovah's name is Jehovah is nonsensical. The King James translation of the Bible here has replaced Jehovah with Lord as we know. But just how do we know that Paul originally wrote Jehovah instead of Lord?

Because Paul was quoting from Joel 2:32 where it is said, "And it must occur that everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will get away safe;" Any Bible will show you that it was speaking about the name of Jehovah. Paul also quoted from Isaiah 52 showing further what he meant. This says, 6 "For that reason my people will know my name, even for that reason in that day, because I am the One that is speaking. Look! It is I."7 How comely upon the mountains are the feet of the one bringing good news, the one publishing peace,..."

Kline's reply: Thirdwitness once again makes reference to Joel 2:32, and tries to make the argument that when it says "everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will get away safe," that it is literally saying that only by calling "Jehovah!" will anyone get away safe. He is also trying to argue that the name of Jehovah IS Jehovah. However, as I pointed out in a separate post from this topic, this is not necessarily the case.

I know it is unbelievable. But that is what he wrote. But believe it or not it only gets more absurd and ridiculous.

More words used by Kline in his quest to prove JWs incorrect: Jesus clearly recognized that he was the name of Jehovah, for we find him saying in John: "I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world." -- John 17:6

And as I noted before, it is not an untenable position to argue that when Jesus said "I made made your name known," that he was acknowledging fulfillment of his role as the Logos made flesh. We have to remember that the referenced scripture in Isaiah 52:6 and Joel 2:32 make reference to a name that Jehovah would provide in due time. And just as borne out by Acts 4:12, the name of Jehovah came to be Jesus.

Jesus clearly recognized that he was the name of Jehovah.

Even a two year old knows that Jehovah's name is not Jesus. Never did the Bible say that the name of Jehovah is Jesus. Proverbs 30:4 makes a very clear distinction between Jehovah's name and the name of His son when it says, "4 Who has ascended to heaven that he may descend? Who has gathered the wind in the hollow of both hands? Who has wrapped up the waters in a mantle? Who has made all the ends of the earth to rise? What is his name and what the name of his son, in case you know?"

Putting Bible scholars above the Bible Kline quotes: It isn't exactly clear to Bible scholars and historians today how Jesus, as a devout Jew, handled the Tetragrammaton, ...

Perhaps it is not clear to some Bible scholars and Timothy Kline but it is clear to honest readers of the Bible because Jesus stated very plainly at John 17:26, "I have made your name known to them and will make it known..."

Kline further says in conjunction with his foolish argument: Watchtower theology, and Thirdwitness of course, would have the reader believe that what Jesus is saying here is that Jesus went around saying "Jehovah!" all of the time, when this is not the case at all...

A better statement would be: Watchtower theology, and Thirdwitness and the Bible of course, would have the reader believe that what Jesus is saying here is that Jesus went around saying "Jehovah!" all of the time.

Since Jesus said in prayer, " I have made your name known..." we can without a doubt scripturally make the exact opposite statement of Mr. Kline: Apostates and opposers of JWs and some Bible scholars and Timothy Kline of course would have the reader believe that Jesus seldom if ever used God's name, "Jehovah!" instead choosing to follow the superstitions and traditions of men while at the same time condemning their traditions of men, when this is not the case at all. But Kline wants us to believe that Jesus Christ did not wish to upset the apple cart and pronounce God's name in keeping with the Jewish superstition that then existed or was beginning to take root at the time.

As repects God taking out a people for his name Kline comments: Contrary to what Thirdwitness claims, the early Christians were NOT a "people for his name" (that is, Jehovah), but became identified as Christians ("a people for Jesus' name, that is, as Christians).

But again the Bible directly in no uncertain terms contradicts the first half of his statement. Acts 15:16, "Sym´e·on has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name. 17 in order that those who remain of the men may earnestly seek Jehovah, together with people of all the nations, people who are called by my name, says Jehovah, who is doing these things,..."

You may have realized already that Timothy Kline was disfellowshipped for apostasy but you may have thought that he was at least sincere about what he believed. It appears from his latest comments that he has lost lost all credibility as a sincere apostate. I am somewhat surprised that Robert King allows him to remain his moderator with such really blatant disregard for God's word and JWs since King does claim that he believes JWs are the true religion. But then again, I'm really not surprised on the other hand because he allows anyone at his site as long as they do not defend JWs.

The Dog Returns to Its Vomit

"For it would have been better for them not to have accurately known the path of righteousness than after knowing it accurately to turn away from the holy commandment delivered to them. The saying of the true proverb has happened to them: "The dog has returned to its own vomit, and the sow that was bathed to rolling in the mire."(2 Peter 2:21,22)

Like me, you may have wondered why anyone after knowing the truth would return to the vomituous falsehoods of Christendom. After reading Kline's latest comments I think I have finally come to understand why. They are so consumed with disproving and discrediting JWs that they can no longer look at things honestly, objectively, logically, reasonably, or scripturally.

For example, they are aware that it is only JWs who are preaching the good news and showing the importance of God's name and the sanctifying of it and the truth about the Trinity. Of this there is no doubt. Since that is the case, they must now prove that God's name is of no importance and that whether God is a trinity or not is a non-issue as respects truth and salvation. Thus they must return to the false teachings of Christendom in order to discredit JWs.

Kline's latest arguments have proven this. Kline and other apostates are so obsessed with discrediting JWs that they must out rightly deny overwhelming scriptural evidence in black and white. Honesty, objectivity, logic, reason, and yes even the scriptures must take a back seat to this obsession.

Kline proves that apostates must at all cost prove JWs wrong. Even if it means disregarding the Bible. Even if it means telling us that Jesus went along with the Jewish superstitions to some extent by not pronouncing God's name but condemed them on so many other traditions. Even if it means saying Jehovah's name is not Jehovah. Jehovah's name is Jesus. Even if it means contradicting Jesus when he said in prayer to his Father, "I have made your name known..." Even if it means putting forth the notion that believing the Trinity is ok and that God does not care as long as you live a good life. Even if it means returning to the vomit of Christendom. It is very sad that someone would be reduced to such illogical, unreasonable, dishonest, unscriptural thinking, blindly guided by his hatred for God's organization of people.

On Kline's pathways site he tells about his disfellowshipping for apostasy:
This site is provided by and maintained by Timothy Kline, a Christian who was excommunicated from the Watchtower Society for trying to find out why there are discrepancies and errors in what is taught to Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide.

Imagine this:
Kline sitting with 3 elders on his judcial committee as he explains to them the errors and discrepancies of Jehovah's Witnesses.

You would probably say that Jehovah's name is Jehovah. This is, to put it bluntly, a nonsensical answer.

The disciples became apostles, yes. But they were never put in charge, they were never put into a position of authority.

It was not the "calling on the name of Jehovah" that salvation depended upon,
the early Christians were NOT a "people for his name" (that is, Jehovah),

Are you trying to argue that the name of Jehovah IS Jehovah. as I pointed out ...this is not necessarily the case.

Jesus clearly recognized that he was the name of Jehovah

Watchtower theology would have the reader believe that what Jesus is saying here is that Jesus went around saying "Jehovah!" all of the time, when this is not the case at all.

It isn't exactly clear to Bible scholars and historians today how Jesus, as a devout Jew, handled the Tetragrammaton,

And just as borne out by Acts 4:12, the name of Jehovah came to be Jesus.

The elders were no doubt astounded at his way of teaching but not in the way that Jesus astounded his audience with clear truths from God's word.

Postscript:

After I had finished writing this blog and making it public an anonymous poster at H2O came forth with more information connecting Timothy Kline to the 3 Stooges Parody. The anonymous poster provided irrefutable proof that Kline had previously posted the 3 stooges parody at one of his blog sites. In light of this new evidence what would Kline do?

In a Jimmy Swaggart like manner (after being caught with prostitutes), Kline confesses that he sinned and did indeed write the 3 stooges parody. In his confession he compares himself to that of Abraham, Moses, David, and Peter who, of course, all made mistakes and sinned. But it must be pointed out that these persons did not make themselves enemies of God's people and thus enemies of God. They failed to live up to God's standards at times as we all do but this is far different from poking our finger in God's eye by attacking his people. (Zech 2:8 "for he that is touching YOU is touching my eyeball.")

As an opposer and enemy of God's organization and its representatives Kline has shown himself to be more like Korah and Balaam in both his words and attitude. It is not just his telling a lie or making some false step. Like Korah, he continues his downgrading and attacking of those that are taking the lead in God's organization and humbly submitting to the work that Jehovah has given them to do, that of preaching the good news and providing the spiritual food. Like Balaam he insists on cursing God's people with his lies, vomit, and double speak in order to lead persons away from the organization that Jehovah is using today to accomplish his will.

If he wants to really come clean he will realize this and turn from being an enemy of God and His organization. He will return to Jehovah and return to serving Jehovah along with and in support of his faithful anointed ones found only among Jehovah's Witnesses. I would be more than happy as would all of JWs to extend the hand of fellowship to him once again if he were to make such an about face.

Even Kline's close friend, Robert King, (Kline serves as a moderator and webmaster on his site) says concerning those who have followed a path like the path Kline has chosen: So, it is possible for some to become so deluded that they imagine that they are serving Jehovah by advertising the (Watchtower) Society's shortcomings, when in Jehovah's judgment such ones are merely scandal-mongers and fault-finders and working as partners with our many enemies to subvert our faith. In effect, those who are disfellowshipped for apostasy are guilty of calling down evil on Christ's brothers. So, at some point each will have to acknowledge their error or face the consequences.

Which will Kline do? Will he acknowledge his error in siding with enemies of God's people, trying to subvert our faith and calling down evil upon Christ's brothers or will he face the consequences like Korah and Balaam? Time will tell but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for an about face from Kline. Great humility would be needed and this is not likely coming from one who claims to have received Bible truths apart from the help of the appointed faithful and discreet slave and fancies himself an interpreter and expounder of scriptures far surpassing the abilities and wisdom of Jesus Christ's appointed servant class.

2006-05-14T10:55:00.000-07:00

Why Doesn't the Watchtower Society Build Kingdom Halls in Poor Countries?

If you have visited certain internet sites supposedly for Jehovah's Witnesses you may have read comments to the affect that the WTS does not build Kingdom Halls for poorer congregations because the poorer congregations cannot pay them back. They would much rather spend their millions of dollars on lavishly decorating the Bethel homes in New York so that the governing body can live in shameless luxury. For example, here are some recent comments at a certain supposed e-JW site on the internet that we shall call for now, Village no. 10. You will see why later in this discussion.

The Watchtower seems to be saying that they would rather not have donations earmarked for disasters so they can use that money for other things other than disaster reflief.

Like building lavish 'retirement' complexes out in Patterson, Walkill, that reportedly cost upwards of $50 million. (and don't even have one printing facility!)

Compare this with the August 15, 1992 Watchtower which said about JW's in Maputo City, Mozambique:

"Today, there are more than 50 congregations in and around Maputo City. However, there is not a single Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses to be found. Why is that so? Because of poor economic conditions, the congregations have not been able to build even though some have owned land for a number of years....If a man is fortunate enough to find a job here, the average wage is from $20 to $30 per month".

That is one thing that really upset me when I started reading more about the WT. They have a "worldwide work" fund that can't even build Kingdom Halls for people in poor countries? Is that loving? What would Jesus say about that??? They won't build for them because those folks can't afford to REPAY them. The AUDACITY!!!! There are several scriptures floating through my head now.

I'm sure some will object to my using this Scripture, but to me it fits Bethel,
Revelation 18:7,8

7 To the extent that she glorified herself and lived in shameless luxury, to that extent give her torment and mourning. For in her heart she keeps saying, ‘I sit a queen, and I am no widow, and I shall never see mourning.’ 8 That is why in one day her plagues will come, death and mourning and famine, and she will be completely burned with fire, because Jehovah God, who judged her, is strong.
End of the quotes.

What astute and wise people reside in this Village no. 10. They are expounding what they have come to call 'the truth about the truth'. And so they insightfully point out how the WT publication have inadvertantly demonstrated their greediness in failing to provide the poor brothers of Mozambique with places to worship.

But now, here is what you are not told. Here is the truth about the truth about the truth.

What they fail to point out is what the same Aug 15, 1992 WT tells us:
In 1991, Jehovah’s Witnesses were given legal recognition in Mozambique. Since then the preaching of the good news of God’s Kingdom has been making spectacular progress in this tropical country on the southeastern coast of Africa

Ah, now perhaps you understand why no KHs had been built in Mozambique at the time of the printing of that 1992 WT. The government of Mozambique would not allow KHs to be built in the country. When the restrictions upon JWs in Mozambique were lifted how did the WTS respond?

From the 1996 Yearbook of JWs:
Finally, in Maputo, as of September 1, 1992, in a large house acquired and refurbished by the Society, in an area with many embassies, the Mozambique branch began its work of overseeing this vast field. Starting with a small family of seven members, the recently appointed Branch Committee had a challenging job ahead of them. They would have to organize the work in the field, care for the spiritual—and even material—needs of the brothers, assist with the building of Kingdom Halls, and build the new branch facilities. A big job indeed.

The restrictions ended only in 1991. The WTS wasted no time and by Sept 1992 had branch facilities in place to oversee the work of, among other things.....building KHs.

The Aug 1996 Kingdom Ministry further reports:
Obviously, the increase of true worshipers in Jehovah’s organization calls for the construction of hundreds of new Kingdom Halls. It has also been necessary to plan for Assembly Halls and new or expanded branch facilities. Financing these projects as well as keeping the Kingdom work moving forward not only in Africa but also in other parts of the world has drawn heavily on the contributions to the Society’s worldwide work.

How are these KHs paid for. Does the WTS expect the poor Mozambique brothers to pay back every dime? No, it is paid for by monies from the worldwide work fund.

The December 15, 1996 WT:
“So Where Is Your Church?”

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES in Mozambique are often asked this question. Frankly, until recently it has been a difficult question to answer. This is because Jehovah’s Witnesses did not enjoy legal recognition in this country until 1991. Hence, it was not possible to have clearly identifiable and established places of worship.

However, that situation changed on February 19, 1994. On that hot, sunny day, the first two Kingdom Halls ever built in Mozambique were dedicated. A total of 602 came to the dedication of these fine meeting places in the port city of Beira, about halfway up the coast of Mozambique. They will serve the needs of the three congregations in that city.

The entire project, from laying the foundation to completing the buildings, took a year and two months of hard work.

A great deal of planning and organizing went into the work. Unlike many other projects in this part of the world, where materials and resources are scarce, work on the Kingdom Halls never came to a standstill for lack of supplies. On one occasion, 800 sacks of cement were needed, and the only place that could supply it did not have the necessary sacks for holding the cement. The brothers contacted the Watch Tower Society’s branch office in the capital, Maputo; sacks were sent by air, taken to the cement factory, and filled. The work went on uninterrupted.

The new Kingdom Halls have truly proved to be a great blessing for the local Witnesses. Most had previously met in primitive places with a grass roof or a few tin sheets overhead, in a backyard, or in a small room of a private home. They often got wet when it rained; still they attended the meetings faithfully. For decades these were the only “Kingdom Halls” that Witnesses in Mozambique knew. Brother Caetano Gabriel, an elder in the Massamba Congregation, declared: “We are grateful to our brothers around the world who contributed toward the realization of this project.” One young Witness recalled: “When we were in Carico (“reeducation camps” where Jehovah’s Witnesses were interned for approximately 12 years), we used to say, ‘We will persevere faithfully, and Jehovah will reward us.’ The new Kingdom Hall is a reward from Jehovah.” Their words express their profound gratitude and their determination to praise Jehovah.

2002 Yearbook:
Community leaders in Mozambique are also favorably impressed by the Kingdom Hall construction program. A traditional chief was asked for property on which to build a Kingdom Hall. In granting permission, he replied: “I heard about the construction of Kingdom Halls in other areas and became concerned, since there are none in my area. Thank you, Jehovah’s Witnesses, for planning to build our Kingdom Hall!”

How could the leaders of Mozambique be favorably impressed if no KHs were being built in Mozambique? And how is it that one chief in a certain area was concerned that there were KHs in many other areas but not his area? Yes many KHs have been built in Mozambique despite the fact that the brothers there could not possibly afford to pay for them.

1997 Yearbook
Although the new Assembly Hall in Maputo, Mozambique, was not yet completed, it was used for a district convention during July, attended by 1,938, and for another convention in August, attended by 10,040.

It seems that it is not just KHs that the brothers are building in Mozambique. The WTS has also been concerned with providing them a place for their larger assemblies and conventions.

In fact did you know that almost 12,000 kingdom halls have been built in Mozambique and similar countries around the world in the last 6 years. That's about 6 kingdom halls per day. In Africa alone, 1,074 new Kingdom Halls were built in the year of 2001! With 13,000 more planned worldwide. Why aren't these other 13,000 already built? Is it because the funds are not available because the governing body wasted the monies on lavishly decorating the properties where they reside?

No! It takes time. Land has to be found and purchased, permission and permits have to be obtained from the government, and so on. Sometimes it takes over two years just to get the needed permits in some of these countries. And once obtained the KH is usually built in about 2 or 3 months, sometimes less. Getting the permits takes much longer than building the KHs.

Does the WTS require that these poor congregations pay them back. Again the answer is no. They pay what they can. And whatever they pay of course goes into the governing body's pockets so they can decorate there 2 room apartment lavishly right? Ridiculous. It goes right back into the fund to build more KHs. The only requirement to have a KH built is to have 30 publishers and 1 elder. Just 30 publishers! That is amazing. And of course if there is not an elder in the congregation many times the WTS will send an elder into that congregation in order that it can qualify.

There are more than 30 congregations being formed every day by JWs. It is almost impossible to keep up with all the KHs that are needed. But the WTS is trying very hard to accomodate our brothers in the poorer lands. Our organization is like no other. You would have to be a blind apostate not to see it.
Any honest hearted ones should be moved to shame for writing and believing that the WTS would not build KHs for our brothers in Mozambique because they were too poor to repay the WTS. Interesting is this account that took place in one village in Mozambique.

Yearbook of JWs 1996
Apostasy and Village No. 10

A movement that stirred up much trouble was started by an apostate group that called themselves “the anointed.” Originating mainly from the Malawian villages, this group claimed that the “time of the elders” had ended in 1975 and that they, as “the anointed,” should be the ones taking the lead. The material in the Society’s book Life Everlasting—In Freedom of the Sons of God was a great aid in helping some who had doubts to understand what was involved in the genuine anointing. But the influence of the apostates spread, and many who listened to them were led astray. As part of their doctrine, they said that it was not necessary to send in reports to the Society. They would simply throw these into the air after saying a prayer.

It is estimated that about 500 were disfellowshipped as a result of this apostate influence. They decided of their own accord, and with the permission of the authorities, to build their own village. This became Village No. 10. Later on, the leader of the movement was attended to by a train of young women, many of whom bore him children.

Village No. 10 and its group continued in existence throughout the remaining period of life in the camps. They caused many difficulties for the faithful brothers. Some who were initially influenced to join the group later repented and returned to Jehovah’s organization. The apostate community was finally disbanded when life in the camps came to a close.

Does this remind you of a certain internet village, an internet village claiming to be for Jehovah's witnesses, with a chief watchman presiding over them, full of all sorts of complaining and lying against God's organization and deviation from the Bible teachings that you have learned only thru Jehovah's Witnesses? If you find yourself a part of this complaining and faultfinding internet village full of many disfellowshipped ones claiming to be enlightened and anointed since becoming part of the village you would be wise to separate yourself from them. Or if you happen to stumble upon this e-village no. 10 in looking for other JWs to talk to on the internet it would be to your benefit to flee that village as quickly as possible. They are subtle and their purpose is to mislead you away from Jehovah's true organization. When this e-village no. 10 is someday disbanded you will be glad that you deserted it.

2006-05-04T08:52:00.000-07:00

Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?

Matt 24:45 "Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?" The answer is given in the question. It is the ones who feed the domestics. Who was the faithful and discreet slave in the first century? It was the Christian Congregation of anointed followers who carried out and directed the assignment of preaching the good news thus feeding the sheep.

Remember Jesus told Peter to 'Feed my little sheep.' And remember Jesus said "Go therefore and make disciples." Who are doing those things today? Once you find the ones following these commandments of Jesus then you will be able to answer the question: "Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?"

Is the FDS a class?

At Luke 12:42-44 the parallel account of Jesus' illustration of the faithful slave or steward is recorded. But lets begin with the illustration given by Jesus in the verses just before that.

"35 Let YOUR loins be girded and YOUR lamps be burning, 36 and YOU yourselves be like men waiting for their master when he returns from the marriage, so that at his arriving and knocking they may at once open to him. Happy are those slaves whom the master on arriving finds watching! Truly I say to YOU, He will gird himself and make them recline at the table and will come alongside and minister to them. ... 39 But know this, that if the householder had known at what hour the thief would come, he would have kept watching and not have let his house be broken into. 40 YOU also, keep ready, because at an hour that YOU do not think likely the Son of man is coming." 41 Then Peter said: "Lord, are you saying this illustration to us or also to all?" 42 And the Lord said: "Who really is the faithful steward, the discreet one, whom his master will appoint over his body of attendants to keep giving them their measure of food supplies at the proper time?"

First you will note that Jesus is speaking of the entire household of God as slaves. He says, "Happy are those slaves whom the master on arriving finds watching!" Then Peter asks as recorded at Luke 12:41, "Lord, are you telling this parable to us, or to everyone?" (New International Version The Living Bible). Peter is therefore asking if the illustration applies to 'us', the 12 apostles, an 'us' class if you will. Jesus answers, "Who really is the faithful steward, the discreet one..." Thus Jesus illustrates that the slaves collectively are known as only one slave, THE Faithful and Discreet Slave or Steward which is appointed over all the slaves.

Why does Jesus answer Peter's question the way he does? It is clear that Jesus was saying the one faithful and discreet slave is made up of all those slaves of the master's house who keep on the watch and supply spiritual food. The kind of spiritual food that you and I have received when we learned the truth about God's name, his son, the kingdom, the paradise, hellfire, trinity, etc.

But most importantly just a few verses before Jesus gives the illustration of the faithful and discreet steward in Luke 12 notice who Jesus is addressing. At Luke 12:32 Jesus says, “Have no fear, little flock, because YOUR Father has approved of giving YOU the kingdom." This proves beyond a doubt that the faithful and discreet steward are those slaves who will be kings in the kingdom of God.

It is only logical that the slave could not be just one individual because he was to provide spiritual food from when the Christian congregation began at Pentecost until the Master, Jesus, returned. Of course that would be impossible for any one human to do. The facts indicate that this faithful and discreet slave class is made up of all anointed ones as a group on earth at any given time. It is most definitely a class of people and not just one individual.

To illustrate how all of the slaves of the master act as one collective slave look at 1 Corinthians 3. It is an example of the feeding work of the faithful and discreet slave in the first century. Notice verse 8, "Now he that plants and he that waters are one, but each [person] will receive his own reward according to his own labor. 9 For we are God's fellow workers. YOU people are God's field under cultivation, God's building."

The ones dispensing the food while made up of individuals like Paul and Apollos were just one in their labor of feeding sheep. That faithful and discreet slave was being used by Jehovah to direct the preaching of His kingdom and the gathering of more sheep to be fed. The FDS made up of individuals worked together in feeding the sheep and the result was that God made it grow. It is the same today.

Does the faithful and discreet slave make mistakes?

The slave is only faithful and discreet, not faithful and perfect. Take note that Job was noted as faithful and meek yet he proclaimed himself righteous more than God. "Against Job his anger blazed over his declaring his own soul righteous rather than God."--Job 32:2. If you expect perfection you will never find the faithful and discreet slave. It is just as the WT put it:

What will our Master look for when he returns to execute judgment? He will take note as to whether those professing to be his servants are such in reality. Have they been faithful in obeying the command to "make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded"? (Matt. 28:19, 20) Do they have a fine record of works displaying active concern for the "least" of Christ's brothers? When seeing these brothers of Christ in need, did they feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, extend hospitality to strangers, clothe the poorly clad, give help and comfort to the sick and visit those who were unjustly imprisoned? (Matt. 25:35-40) Have they remained spiritually awake, untarnished by the degrading works of the flesh?

Should anyone who is of the anointed remnant, be it man or woman, be able to consult and have dialogue with those of the governing body?

Anyone including those of the anointed may write to the governing body. But it is impossible that all of the anointed could be consulted before making decisions. How could they possibly consult with 1000s of people? Did the apostles and older men in Jerusalem when deciding the issue of circumcision consult with all of the anointed? That is absurd and unreasonable. Who decided the issue? It was that governing body in Jerusalem that decided after listening to the evidence.

The governing body at Bethel often gives assignments to persons to review or research certain subjects. They then listen to their findings and make decisions. They cannot possibly research everything for themselves without help. They are following the example in the first century. If an anointed brother has ideas let him write Bethel. They can consider what he says. Just because they did not accept Robert King's ideas does not mean that they listen to no one. As it turns out Mr. King has shown from his beating of his fellow slaves that he is not truly anointed after all.

What happens if the ideas from the remnant not on the governing body are for the most part ignored and no one asks for their contributions?

A person who is humble will continue to preach the good news of the kingdom. He will understand that his views are not always correct and if they are correct then Jesus will change things in due time since he is walking in the midst of the congregations holding the stars in his hand directing them.

A person who thinks more of himself than necessary, who lacks humility, and believes he knows more than the brothers at Bethel or anyone else might proclaim himself a watchman of Jehovah and go on a letter writing campaign against his brothers and encourage others to do so. He might write a book, denouncing the hard working brothers in responsible positions among Jehovah's people. And he might call them names like liars, adulterers, supporters of child molesters, Baal worshippers, inspired by demons, false prophets, and so on. He might even try to gain a following to pass out his book to as many brothers as possible. If anyone disagrees with him he might pronounce them as operandi of the demons. In other words, in short, he will beat the FDS.

Did the marriage of the master take place yet?

The marriage as seen in the book of Revelation of Jesus to the bride did not happen yet. It is future. But this is a different illustration all together. In this illustration Jesus is highlighting not the marriage but of the marriage feast.
In the illustration the master Jesus is also the bridegroom and because of wedding festivities he is returning at an uncertain hour of the night or morning. We need to understand that marriage festivities were not the same in Bible times as they are today. It was not simply the case of attending a wedding at a certain location and that’s it. Here is what the insight book says about wedding celebrations in Israelite times:

"The people along the route would take great interest in the procession. The voices of the bride and bridegroom would be heard in exultation. Some, particularly maidens bearing lamps, would join the procession. (Jer 7:34; 16:9; Isa 62:5; Mt 25:1) The bridegroom might spend considerable time at his home and, then again, some delay might take place before the procession would leave the home of the bride, so that it would thus be quite late, and some who were waiting along the way might get drowsy and fall asleep, as in Jesus’ illustration of the ten virgins. The singing and exultation might be heard quite a distance ahead, those hearing it making the cry: “Here is the bridegroom!” The attendants were ready to greet the bridegroom when he came, and those invited to the marriage supper would enter the house. After the bridegroom and his entourage had gone into the house and closed the door, it was too late for tardy guests to enter. (Mt 25:1-12; 22:1-3; Ge 29:22) It was looked upon as a gross insult to decline the invitation to the marriage feast. The guests might be provided with robes (Mt 22:11), and their respective places at the feast were often designated by the one extending the invitation.—Lu 14:8-10."

With this in mind we can alleviate some of the confusion about the illustration in Luke 12. The wedding procession is proceeding along at this time but the actual marriage feast is yet to take place in heaven.

Since Christ is returning from the wedding in Luke 12 and since his bride is the anointed how can the slaves who welcome his arrival home also be the anointed?

The problem is that many are trying to combine different illustrations all together into one illustration. The anointed are illustrated in many different ways: A bride, slaves, brothers of Christ, sons of God, guests of the marriage feast, virgins, etc.

Notice this illustration for example. Matt 22: 1 "In further reply Jesus again spoke to them with illustrations, saying: 2 “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man, a king, that made a marriage feast for his son. 3 And he sent forth his slaves to call those invited to the marriage feast, but they were unwilling to come. 4 Again he sent forth other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those invited: “Look! I have prepared my dinner, my bulls and fattened animals are slaughtered, and all things are ready. Come to the marriage feast.”’ 5 But unconcerned they went off, one to his own field, another to his commercial business; 6 but the rest, laying hold of his slaves, treated them insolently and killed them.
7 “But the king grew wrathful, and sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. 8 Then he said to his slaves, ‘The marriage feast indeed is ready, but those invited were not worthy. 9 Therefore go to the roads leading out of the city, and anyone YOU find invite to the marriage feast.’
10 Accordingly those slaves went out to the roads and gathered together all they found, both wicked and good; and the room for the wedding ceremonies was filled with those reclining at the table. 11 “When the king came in to inspect the guests he caught sight there of a man not clothed with a marriage garment. 12 So he said to him, ‘Fellow, how did you get in here not having on a marriage garment?’ He was rendered speechless. 13 Then the king said to his servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot and throw him out into the darkness outside. There is where [his] weeping and the gnashing of [his] teeth will be.’ "

This is more in line with the illustration in Luke 12. Obviously in this illustration the chosen anointed are likened to persons attending the wedding feast, not to the bride. And so in Luke 12 it is also talking about those who are dining with the bridegroom. Remember how a marriage worked in olden times. The wedding procession is returning to the master’s house for the wedding feast after he has picked up his bride. Many times this would be late at night. The slaves just didn't know when the master might show up so they had to be on the watch. When the master arrives the wedding feast commences. The faithful slave has kept on the watch and opened the door when the Master knocks. And so because of their watchfulness and because they opened the door for the Master when he arrived, the good slaves are invited to recline at the table with the master at the wedding feast. Meaning they are there for that wedding feast which really of course takes place in heaven. But they must be on the watch and open the door before the wedding feast takes place. This they have done since early in the 20th century.

Luke 12:37 Happy are those slaves whom the master on arriving finds watching! Truly I say to YOU, He will gird himself and make them recline at the table and will come alongside and minister to them.
41 Then Peter said: "Lord, are you saying this illustration to us or also to all?" 42 And the Lord said: "Who really is the faithful steward, the discreet one, whom his master will appoint over his body of attendants to keep giving them their measure of food supplies at the proper time? ”

And so in this illustration it is not the bride who pictures the anointed but rather those slaves that await the arrival of the master.

Has the faithful and discreet slave already been appointed over all the master's earthly belongings?

That is what we as Jehovah's Witnesses believe. But understand that we do not believe that the faithful slave has been appointed over all the master's belongings, both heavenly and earthly. Nor do we believe or teach that the slave has received the same authority as the anointed will receive once becoming kings in God's kingdom. Apostates have attempted to shroud the truth and complicate what Jehovah's Witnesses teach in this regard but it becomes very simple and uncomplicated when examining what the Watchtower publications really say. The March 1, 2004 WT study article states,

"What are the belongings over which the newly crowned Master appointed his faithful slave? All the spiritual things that belong to Him here on earth. For example, two decades after Christ’s enthronement in 1914, “a great crowd” of “other sheep” was identified. (Revelation 7:9; John 10:16) ... In effect, they said to “the faithful and discreet slave”: “We will go with you people, for we have heard that God is with you people.” (Zechariah 8:23) These newly baptized Christians partook of the same rich spiritual food as the anointed domestics, and the two classes have shared this spiritual table ever since. What a blessing this has been for members of the “great crowd”!

20 The members of the “great crowd” gladly joined the anointed slave class as preachers of the good news. As they preached, the Master’s earthly belongings increased, adding to the responsibilities of “the faithful and discreet slave.” ...From approximately five thousand anointed ones in 1914, the ranks of God’s praisers have increased to more than six million today, the majority of whom are of the “great crowd.” Yes, indeed, the King’s belongings have increased manyfold since his coronation in 1914!

21 All of this shows that the slave has been both “faithful and discreet."

So you see it is only logical. All the earthly belongings that the slave has been appointed over are those same belongings that the slave increased for the master by being faithful to his appointment to preach the good news and to feed the body of servants or domestics. The faithful slave is merely following the example of the early Christian congregation in faithfully carrying out the preaching of the good news. The result of which has been an increase in the master's belongings and more responsibility is thus given to the faithful and discreet slave because of this increase.

Yes, the slave is in charge of all those earthly belongings of the master because he has proven himself faithful in taking care of and increasing the master's belongings in the first place. It is not some sinister plot that the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses have hatched up to gain control over all our lives by claiming they have been given some mystical authority by Jesus that they never really received. If not for the faithful slave increasing the belongings which includes all of us who have learned the truth, we would not even know about the faithful and discreet slave at all and the truths that we have been shown from the Bible by that slave unless Jesus made the rocks cry out. But this was not necessary because unlike other religions of the world the appointed slave faithfully carried out his commission to preach the good news and thus increased the master's belonging thereby receiving more responsibility.

In other words, to make this more understandable, just for the sake of argument, lets assume that the appointment over all the belongings takes place at the time when Jesus arrives for his final judgment and that being put in charge of all those belongings means his finally receiving his heavenly reward and ruling as king with Jesus. Would this really change anything?

Consider. The Master Jesus appointed a faithful and discreet slave to provide the food at some point before his coming. That slave would be easy to recognize just before the second coming of Jesus because he would be on the watch for the master, be providing the spiritual food just as he was appointed to do, and increasing the master's belongings by preaching the good news that Jesus commanded him to preach. Therefore, the appointment of that slave has already taken place for sure. Why did the slave receive that appointment in the first place? In order to understand the appointment of a slave over an entire household lets consider the Bible example of Joseph as a slave in Potiphar's house.

"But Jehovah proved to be with Joseph, so that he turned out a successful man and came to be over the house of his master, the Egyptian. 3 And his master got to see that Jehovah was with him and that everything he was doing Jehovah was making turn out successful in his hand.
4 And Joseph kept finding favor in his eyes and waited upon him continually, so that he appointed him over his house, and all that was his he gave into his hand. 5 And it followed that from the time he appointed him over his house and in charge of all that was his Jehovah kept blessing the house of the Egyptian due to Joseph, and Jehovah’s blessing came to be upon all that he had in the house and in the field. 6 Finally he left everything that was his in Joseph’s hand; and he did not know what was with him at all except the bread he was eating." --Genesis 39:2-6.

What you will notice is that after Joseph became a slave in Potiphar's house he proved himself to be very trustworthy. Potiphar's house prospered greatly as a result. You might call Joseph a faithful and discreet slave. Because of this Potiphar appointed him over all his household. Since being in charge of the master's household as the household prospered he would bring on more slaves as needed and likewise provide for the new slaves added to the masters house.

What do we learn from this example of Joseph? That a slave receives an appointment over the entire household only after he has proven to his master that he is trustworthy and faithful and discreet. Jesus, the master, is certainly wiser than Potiphar and would not appoint an unfaithful and indiscreet slave, would he? Of course not. He appointed a slave that had already proven himself to be faithful and discreet. That faithful slave can definitely be found before Jesus arrives the final time.

The reality is that even if the faithful and discreet slave has not yet been appointed over all of the master's belongings (as interpreted by some) he has still been appointed to provide the food because he has proven himself to be faithful and discreet. It is really only a matter of quibbling over a word or phrase and its perceived interpretation. The interpretation of 'all the belongings' as given to us by the faithful and discreet slave clearly shows us that they believe that they have only been appointed over the earthly belongings of the master because of the increase that their faithfulness has brought. So whether or not the faithful slave has been appointed over all the belongings as of yet as interpreted by someone else really changes nothing from our standpoint. We still are under obligation to find that faithful and discreet slave that has increased the master's belongings and take in the food that is provided if we want to to be sustained. Certainly it would not be worth leaving Jehovah's organization over such a minor point. Especially when considering all the basic truths that we have learned from Jehovah by means of that faithful and discreet slave.

So who really is the faithful and discreet slave? Where can the slave class be found?

All one has to do is ask a few simple questions: Who has helped us to learn the marvelous truths of the Bible about God’s name, the trinity, hellfire, paradise earth, God’s kingdom, and so on? Who is currently preaching the good news of the Kingdom throughout the earth following the example of Jesus and the first century Christians? Who has been used by Jehovah in building a worldwide and united brotherhood? Who has Jehovah used in providing us with so much spiritual food that it is difficult to even keep up with it all? When you have a Bible question, what publications do you turn to in order to find the answer? (Have you ever noticed that even apostates turn to the Insight book when wanting to find out certain facts about the Bible? Why? Because they have no better Bible source.) It is quite apparent to all who are honest with themselves and others that the faithful and discreet slave is found only among the people known as Jehovah’s Witnesses.

2006-03-05T10:34:00.000-08:00

The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

We have shown previously how 607BCE not 587BCE is indeed the year that Jerusalem was desolated according to the irrefutable evidence presented in God's word the Bible. Even some of those who have previously tried to discredit Jehovah's Witnesses by saying 607BCE is the incorrect date of Jerusalem's desolation are now forced to admit that it may indeed be the correct date because they have no clear answer for the Biblical evidence presented in favor of 607 and against 587. In light of this, not wanting to admit that Jehovah's Witnesses indeed have the truth, they now have resorted to this view: 'So what. It doesn't matter if it was 607 or 587! This proves nothing about 1914. It is still an artfully contrived story with no basis in the Bible. There is no evidence that 607 began the Gentile Times and that 1914 was the end of those Gentile Times.'

So the question begs to be answered from a Biblical standpoint: did the 7 times begin in 607 and end in 1914? Did the 7 times begin when the ruler on Jehovah's throne in Jerusalem, Zedekiah, was cut down in 607 and end in 1914 with the rightful ruler, Jesus, the twig of Jesse, becoming the King in God's Kingdom in heaven?

How Long Are the Seven Times?

This has been discussed at length by the WT publications. Very briefly Revelation 12:6 tells us: "And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and sixty days." Later in verse 13 of the same chapter we read, "the woman, that she might fly into the wilderness to her place; there is where she is fed for a time and times and half a time away from the face of the serpent."

Clearly we can readily see that 3.5 times = 1260 days. By doubling both figures we can easily conclude that 7 times = 2520 days. Then by applying the day for a year rule we deduct that 7 times = 2520 years. Amazing as it may seem, it is 2520 years from 607BCE to 1914CE. Are the seven times of Daniel chapter 4 to be applied in connection with the Gentile Times and God's rulership?

Why Daniel Used the Word 'Times' not Years

The claim is made by many that the tree dream only applied to Neb and nothing more. That he would have his sickness for 7 years and then be restored after that 7 years. But it is most interesting that the word Daniel chose to use in Daniel 4 concerning the tree was not the same word used for the word 'year'. He used the word "iddan" which means epoch, age, seasons, or times . Iddan is not the word that would be used merely to describe one year if one year is what is meant. There is a different word used to describe the word 'year'. For example, the word for year in Hebrew is "shana". By using the word "iddan" it becomes evident that Daniel wanted to convey the thought that something was meant beyond a simple seven years otherwise why not just use the word for years?

What can we conclude concerning Daniel's use of the word 'iddan'? That Dalniel must have used that word for 'times' purposely or was at least directed by Jehovah to use the word. We have to wonder why? Why the use of the word 'times' instead of years? There must have been a reason. If the tree dream is only to be applied to Nebuchadnezzar then why didn't the prophecy simply say 7 years. Why 7 times? The only reasonable conclusion one can draw is so that it could later be connected to Revelation to show that 7 times does equal 2520. Apparently it was meant for 7 times to be deciphered as 2520 in order to show us that it has greater significance other than just the 7 years upon Neb? Otherwise, why the clues? Was it Jehovah's intention to mislead Bible readers?

There can be no doubt that the verses in Revelation were written to show us exactly the length of seven times so we can understand the tree dream in Daniel. Otherwise, John could have just been directed to write 1260 days and leave the cryptic 'time times and half of times' out all together since it is just repetition and does not help us in the interpretation of Revelation at all. In other words the seven times in Daniel do not help us to figure out what the 3.5 times are in Revelation. It is the other way around.

Think about this: If seven times mean only 7 years then Daniel could have simply said 7 years. Then Revelation could have simply said 3.5 years or 1260 days or 42 months. And nobody would ever even need to mention 'times' and everyone would be happy and understand it all. But because 7 times means 7 years with Neb but 2520 years in the great scheme of things then Daniel had to use a different term other than years. He had to use a word that could convey both the 7 years upon Neb and the hundreds of years spanning the Gentile times. That term he was directed by Jehovah to use was 'iddan' or 'times'. Since this needed to be understood, then John was directed to use the same terminology, 'times', to show the length of seven times and thus the book of Daniel could be understood by seekers of truth.

In view of the foregoing is it reasonable to think that Daniel 4 is only about Nebuchadnezzar? Why does Daniel specifically use the word 'times' rather than years? And why does Revelation then help us to see the length of 7 times? And why does Daniel tell of 7 times passing over until the lowliest one of mankind is set up. Dan 4:17, "to the intent that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that to the one whom he wants to, he gives it and he sets up over it even the lowliest one of mankind.” This cannot be mere coincidence, can it?

Could Seven Times Mean 70 Years?

Some make the claim that 7 times just meant 7 decades therefore concluding that it coincides with the 70 years of Babylonian domination. However, the question would need to be answered: In what way was a lowly one put on high in 537? No king of Judah was restored at that time.

We have a parallel in Neb. He was brought low only to be put on high after 7 times. God's rulership in the form of the Davidic Kings (the last one being Zedekiah) was brought low in 607. It would not be until someone sat on that throne again that the lowly one would be put on high. That lowly one of course is Jesus Christ. When would that lowly one be put on high? That is what the prophecy is answering. First it answers that question in regards to Nebuchadnezzar. Secondly, and most importantly, it answers that question as regards to God's rulership.

Others argue that a year is 365 days not 360 days. Therefore they conclude that 7 times should be 7 X 365. But the Bible interprets itself. The book of Revelation clearly shows that 3 and a half times equals 1260 days. Therefore 7 times equals 2520. We can't argue with that. We can't say, oh no , there are 365 days in a year. That doesn't matter. The Bible shows what 7 times equals. We can't change it. 7 times =2520 days. If it is a day for a year then 7 times is equal to 2520 years. You only have 2 choices. Either seven times = seven years. Or seven times = 2520 years. (based on a day for a year) It can't be 7 X 365 or 70 years or 7 months or 7 days unless we are going to totally disregard the Bible's explanation of times in Revelation.

What the Tree Pictures

Just why was the tree dream given to Nebuchadnezzar concerning the large tree that would be cut down and banded and that after seven times had passed over the bands would be removed and the tree once again would be able to grow? From the very outset of Daniel chapter 4 the theme is set. In verse 3 we read of Jehovah, "How grand his signs are, and how mighty his wonders are! His kingdom is a kingdom to time indefinite, and his rulership is for generation after generation." Continuing the theme the Bible explains the reason for the dream in simple terms at Dan 4:17, "to the intent that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that to the one whom he wants to, he gives it and he sets up over it even the lowliest one of mankind.” Yes, God's everlasting rulership toward the earth and his choosing of whomever he sees fit to place in the position of rulership is the centralized theme of Daniel 4.

As has been said before, the Bible interprets itself and so we do not have to guess about the meaning of Daniel chapter 4 at all. Incredibly, similar words of Daniel 4:17 are used concerning the kingship of Zedekiah. Ezekiel 21:25-27 reads concerning Zedekiah: "As for you, O deadly wounded, wicked chieftain of Israel, whose day has come in the time of the error of the end, this is what the Lord Jehovah has said, Remove the turban, and lift off the crown. This will not be the same. Put on high even what is low, and bring low even the high one. A ruin, a ruin, a ruin I shall make it. As for this also, it will certainly become no ones until he comes who has the legal right, and I must give it to him."

Most Bible scholars will readily agree that this prophecy does indeed apply to the last king of Judah, Zedekiah. Ezekiel 20:1 gives the time period that the prophecy was given, "Now it came about in the seventh year..." The seventh year being the 7th year of Ezekiel's exile. Ezekiel's 7th year of exile was during the rule of King Zedekiah. In fact a quick reading of the entire 21st chapter of of the book of Ezekiel will confirm that the prophecy is against Jerusalem and "against the soil of Israel," and verses 18 through 21 confirm that it is the "king of Babylon" who would come against Judah and Jerusalem. Ezekiel 21:25-27 must therefore apply to Zedekiah and only Zedekiah since he was the ruling king of Judah at the time when the prophecy was given, he was the last king of Judah, and he was in fact shortly thereafter conquered by the king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar.

But there is even more evidence in Ezekiel 21 for connecting the kings of Judah including the last king Zedekiah with the tree in Neb's dream. In reading the entire chapter of Ezekiel 21 did you notice that Jehovah has a sword that he will unsheath upon Judah because of their rebelliousness. It is concerning that sword that the question is asked in verse 10, “Is it (the executional sword) rejecting the scepter (rulership) of my own son (Israel), as [it does] every tree?"
12 “‘Cry out and howl, O son of man, for it itself has come to be against my people; it (Jehovah's sword) is against all the chieftains of Israel." Amazing! Exactly paralleling Neb's tree dream, Jehovah's sword will even cut down the tree or scepter or rulership of Israel.

The cutting down of the tree or rulership of Israel is of great significance because those kings of Israel represented Jehovah's rulership in the earth.
1 Chronicles 29:23 tells us, "And Sol´o·mon began to sit upon Jehovah’s throne as king in place of David his father" From this we can see that the kings of Israel did indeed represent Jehovah's rulership on earth.

It is in this regard that Lamentations 4:20 written after the desolation of Jerusalem and the end of Zedekiah tells us, "The very breath of our nostrils, the anointed one (king of Israel) of Jehovah, has been captured in their large pit, The one of whom we have said: “In his shade we shall live among the nations.” By using the word shade in connection with the king of Israel we are once again reminded of the large tree in Daniel 4 that would provide protective shade covering for all. This is the same protective tree-like shade that God's rulership provided as represented by the kings of Israel.

So ask yourself this: Out of 'every tree' or scepter or rulership that Jehovah's sword would cut down by means of Babylon which tree would be unbanded and restored in the future, receiving kingship from Jehovah himself as he saw fit? Which one would provide the 'lowliest' twig that would shoot forth and become a majestic cedar in Jehovah's Holy Mountain put on high like no other? It could only be the tree picturing Jehovah's rulership as represented by the kings of Judah who were said to 'sit upon Jehovah's throne'. It could only be that Judean tree which for 7 times would remain banded but thereafter would bring forth God's chosen ruler of all the earth.

Ezekiel 19 provides us with even more amazing similarities in comparing the rulership of Judah with the tree of Neb's dream in Daniel 4. After comparing the rulers of Judah to young cubs of a lioness notice the similarties of the tree in Daniel 4 with what is said of that mother lion comparing her to a vine in verses 10-14, “‘Your mother was like a vine in your blood, planted by waters. A bearer of fruit and full of branches she became because of abundant water. 11 And they came to be for her strong rods, meant for the scepters of rulers. And its height gradually became tall up among branches, and it got to be visible because of its tallness, because of the abundance of its foliage.

Compare that description to Daniel 4:11 "The tree grew up and became strong, and its very height finally reached the heavens, and it was visible to the extremity of the whole earth. 12 Its foliage was fair, and its fruit was abundant, and there was food for all on it. Under it the beast of the field would seek shade, and on its boughs the birds of the heavens would dwell, and from it all flesh would feed itself."

And just as the tree was chopped down notice the similar outcome of the vine/tree in Ezekiel 19:12 "But she was finally uprooted in fury. To the earth she was thrown, and there was an east wind that dried up her fruit. Her strong rod was torn off and became dry. Fire itself devoured it. 13 And now she is planted in the wilderness, in a waterless and thirsty land. 14 And fire proceeded to come forth from [her] rod. It devoured her very shoots, her very fruit, and there proved to be in her no strong rod, no scepter for ruling."

And so it was that finally the high one, Zedekiah, the last ruler of Israel, was 'devoured' by fire, brought low as it were, and the Pagan gentile ruler of the time was put on high even above the kings that had sat on 'Jehovah's throne' in Jerusalem. And the kingly representative of Jehovah on earth ceased for a time. The tree was banded until he who had the legal right would come and once again 'sit upon Jehovah's throne' as king. This lowly one with the legal right would be put on high when the tree was unbanded. How do we know this to be the case? Amazingly once again, we have the Bible explaining itself in no uncertain terms. Again the book of Ezekiel explains it.

The Riddle of Ezekiel 17

The whole 17th chapter of Ezekiel describes the end of Zedekiah by means of Nebuchadnezzar and thus the end of that tree. Notice it: 17:1 "And the word of Jehovah continued to occur to me, saying: 2 Son of man, propound a riddle and compose a proverbial saying toward the house of Israel. 3 And you must say, This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: The great eagle (nebuchadnezzer), having great wings, with long pinions, full of plumage, which had color variety, came to Leb´a·non (Jerusalem) and proceeded to take the treetop (Jehoiachin) of the cedar. 4 He plucked off the very top of its young shoots and came bringing it to the land of Ca´naan; in a city of traders (Babylon, Ezek 17:12) he placed it.

5 Furthermore, he took some of the seed of the land and put it in a field for seed. As a willow by vast waters, as a willow tree (Zedekiah) he placed it. 6 And it began to sprout and gradually became a luxuriantly growing vine low in height (Just a mere vassal king of Babylon, not lofty. Ezekial 17:13), inclined to turn its foliage inward; and as for its roots, they gradually came to be under it. And it finally became a vine and produced shoots and sent forth branches. 7 And there came to be another great eagle (Egypt's Pharoah. Ezekiel 17:15), having great wings, and having large pinions, and, look! this very vine stretched its roots hungrily toward him. And its foliage it thrust out to him in order [for him] to irrigate it, away from the garden beds where it was planted. 8 Into a good field, by vast waters, it was already transplanted, in order to produce boughs and to bear fruit, to become a majestic vine. 9 Say, This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: Will it have success? Will not someone tear out its very roots and make its very fruit scaly? And must [not] all its freshly plucked sprouts become dry? It will become dry. Neither by a great arm nor by a multitudinous people will it have to be lifted up from its roots. 10 And, look! although transplanted, will it have success? Will it not dry up completely, even as when the east wind touches it? In the garden beds of its sprout it will dry up."

11 And the word of Jehovah continued to occur to me, saying: 12 Say, please, to the rebellious house, Do YOU people actually not know what these things mean? Say, Look! The king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and proceeded to take its king and its princes and bring them to himself at Babylon. 13 Furthermore, he took one of the royal seed and concluded a covenant with him and brought him into an oath; and the foremost men of the land he took away, 14 in order that the kingdom might become low, unable to lift itself up, that by keeping his covenant it might stand. 15 But he finally rebelled against him in sending his messengers to Egypt, [for it] to give him horses and a multitudinous people. Will he have success? Will he escape, he who is doing these things, and who has broken a covenant? And will he actually escape? 16 As I am alive, is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, in the place of the king who put in as king the one that despised his oath and that broke his covenant, with him in the midst of Babylon he will die. 17 And by a great military force and by a multitudinous congregation Phar´aoh will not make him effective in the war, by throwing up a siege rampart and by building a siege wall, in order to cut off many souls. 18 And he has despised an oath in breaking a covenant, and, look! he had given his hand and has done even all these things. He will not make his escape."

19 Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: As I am alive, surely my oath that he has despised and my covenant that he has broken I will even bring it upon his head. 20 And I will spread over him my net, and he will certainly be caught in my hunting net; and I will bring him to Babylon and put myself on judgment with him there respecting his unfaithfulness with which he acted against me. 21 And as regards all the fugitives of his in all his bands, by the sword they will fall, and the ones left remaining will be spread abroad even to every wind. And YOU people will have to know that I myself, Jehovah, have spoken [it]."

The remaining verses describe the return of a twig as God's ruler. 22 "This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: I myself will also take and put some of the lofty treetop of the cedar; from the top of its twigs I shall pluck off a tender one (Jesus) and I will myself transplant [it] upon a high and lofty mountain. 23 On the mountain of the height of Israel I shall transplant it, and it will certainly bear boughs and produce fruit and become a majestic cedar. And under it there will actually reside all the birds of every wing; in the shadow of its foliage they will reside."

Especially notice the final verse. 24 "And all the trees of the field will have to know that I myself, Jehovah, have abased the high tree, have put on high the low tree, have dried up the still-moist tree and have made the dry tree blossom. I myself, Jehovah, have spoken and have done [it]."

Did you notice? The high tree is abased, dried up. The rulership ends. But at a later date a twig from the royal tree will return. For a twig will be planted in Jehovah's Holy Mountain and it will become a majestic tree.

Did you see the connection that the Bible makes between Daniel 4 and Ezekiel 21 and 17? Compare Daniel 4:17 "that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that to the one whom he wants to, he gives it and he sets up over it even the lowliest one of mankind"

And compare Ezek 21:26,27 about the end of Zedekiah's rule and the beginning of Jesus' rule, "Put on high even what is low, and bring low even the high one. 27 A ruin, a ruin, a ruin I shall make it. As for this also, it will certainly become no [one's] until he comes who has the legal right, and I must give [it] to him."

And Ezekiel 17:24 "And all the trees of the field will have to know that I myself, Jehovah, have abased the high tree, have put on high the low tree, have dried up the still-moist tree and have made the dry tree blossom. I myself, Jehovah, have spoken and have done [it]."

In all 3 Bible texts it is mentioned that the low will be put on high and that Jehovah is the one giving the rulership to whomever he chooses. There can be no doubt that the tree pictures God's rulership. The end of Zedekiah ends that rulership and is replaced by gentile rulership. The rulership continues once again when the one who has the legal right returns, the twig of Jesse if you will, and once again takes over that rulership.

Trees, Stumps, Roots,Twigs and the Kingship of Jesus

Notice the correlation between scriptures as regards to trees and stumps and twigs and roots and Christ's kingship:

Isa 10:33 "Look! The [true] Lord, Jehovah of armies, is lopping off boughs with a terrible crash; and those tall in growth are being cut down, and the high ones themselves become low. 34 And he has struck down the thickets of the forest with an iron tool, and by a powerful one Leb´a·non itself will fall. 11 And there must go forth a twig out of the stump of Jes´se; and out of his roots a sprout will be fruitful. 2 And upon him the spirit of Jehovah must settle down, the spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the spirit of counsel and of mightiness, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Jehovah; 3 and there will be enjoyment by him in the fear of Jehovah. 10 And it must occur in that day that there will be the root of Jes´se that will be standing up as a signal for the peoples. To him even the nations will turn inquiringly, and his resting-place must become glorious."

Jer 23:5 "Look! There are days coming,' is the utterance of Jehovah, 'and I will raise up to David a righteous sprout. And a king will certainly reign and act with discretion and execute justice and righteousness in the land."

Ezek 17:22 "This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: 'I myself will also take and put some of the lofty treetop of the cedar; from the top of its twigs I shall pluck off a tender one and I will myself transplant [it] upon a high and lofty mountain. 23 On the mountain of the height of Israel I shall transplant it, and it will certainly bear boughs and produce fruit and become a majestic cedar. And under it there will actually reside all the birds of every wing; in the shadow of its foliage they will reside. 24 And all the trees of the field will have to know that I myself, Jehovah, have abased the high tree, have put on high the low tree, have dried up the still-moist tree and have made the dry tree blossom. I myself, Jehovah, have spoken and have done [it]."

Zech 6:12 "And you must say to him, 'This is what Jehovah of armies has said: 'Here is the man whose name is Sprout. And from his own place he will sprout, and he will certainly build the temple of Jehovah. 13 And he himself will build the temple of Jehovah, and he, for his part, will carry [the] dignity; and he must sit down and rule on his throne, and he must become a priest upon his throne, and the very counsel of peace will prove to be between both of them"

Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to YOU people of these things for the congregations. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright morning star."

All of these Bible verses confirm that the twig that comes forth from the tree is the rulership of Jesus Christ as king of God's kingdom. However the defining scripture that tops it all off and leaves us no doubt is found at Isaiah 6. Here at Isa 6:11, notice what is said in conjunction with the desolation of Jerusalem and the restoration of the seed that will come forth: "At this I said: 'How long, O Jehovah?' Then he said: 'Until the cities actually crash in ruins, to be without an inhabitant, and the houses be without earthling man, and the ground itself is ruined into a desolation; 12 and Jehovah actually removes earthling men far away, and the deserted condition does become very extensive in the midst of the land. 13 And there will still be in it a tenth, and it must again become something for burning down, like a big tree and like a massive tree in which, when there is a cutting down [of them], there is a stump; a holy seed will be the stump of it."

While this scripture had fulfillment when Jerusalem was restored in 537BCE it would also certainly apply to the holy seed which is to rule God's Kingdom, the foremost of who is Jesus Christ himself. Yes the big, massive tree was chopped down when Jerusalem was destroyed in 607BCE but there was a stump left and that stump is comprised of the holy seed, those who rule in God's Kingdom. Again further proof that the tree dream does indeed have direct bearing on God's Kingdom and His rulership.

The Prophecies of Daniel Point to Jesus as Ruler

Another thing to consider: Have you noted that every prophecy of Daniel concludes with Jesus arriving in God's Kingdom. Except the one in chapter 9 which concludes with the arrival of the Messiah who is the King of God's Kingdom.

Dan 2:44, "And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;"

Dan 7:27 "And the kingdom and the rulership and the grandeur of the kingdoms under all the heavens were given to the people who are the holy ones of the Supreme One. Their kingdom is an indefinitely lasting kingdom, and all the rulerships will serve and obey even them."

Dan 8:25: "And against the Prince of princes he will stand up, but it will be without hand that he will be broken."

Dan 12:1 "And during that time Mi´cha·el will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of your people."

How about Daniel 4. Does it also conclude with God's Kingdom? Dan 4:17 "By the decree of watchers the thing is, and [by] the saying of holy ones the request is, to the intent that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that to the one whom he wants to, he gives it and he sets up over it even the lowliest one of mankind."

Here is something else to consider. Since one of Daniel's prophecies foretold the arrival of Jesus Christ on earth, wouldn't it be expected (or at least not surprising) that it would also tell about his heavenly arrival as king. Daniel 4 accomplishes that very purpose. Does it make sense that all the prophecies of Daniel point to the Messiah/King either coming on earth (once) or ruling in heaven (the rest), but that this one prophecy in Daniel 4 does not have anything to do with the Messiah/King but only Nebuchadnezzar?

The WT put it well when it said: "examination of the entire book of Daniel reveals that the element of time is everywhere prominent in the visions and prophecies it presents; and the world powers and events described in each such vision are shown, not as isolated or as occurring at random with the time element left ambiguous, but, rather, as fitting into a historical setting or time sequence. Additionally, the book repeatedly points toward the conclusion that forms the theme of its prophecies: the establishment of a universal and eternal Kingdom of God exercised through the rulership of the 'son of man.'

In view of the above, it does not seem logical to evaluate the vision of the symbolic 'tree' and its reference to 'seven times' as having no other application than to the seven years of madness and subsequent recovery and return to power experienced by one Babylonian ruler...The time at which the vision was given: at the critical point in history when God, the Universal Sovereign, had allowed the very kingdom that he had established among his covenant people to be overthrown; the person to whom the vision was revealed: the very ruler who served as the divine instrument in such overthrow and who thereby became the recipient of world domination by divine permission, that is, without interference by any representative kingdom of Jehovah God; and the whole theme of the vision, namely: 'that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that to the one whom he wants to, he gives it and he sets up over it even the lowliest one of mankind' (Da 4:17) all of this gives strong reason for believing that the lengthy vision and its interpretation were included in the book of Daniel because of their revealing the duration of 'the appointed times of the nations' and the time for the establishment of God's Kingdom by his Christ. The fact is evident that the key point of the vision is Jehovah God's exercise of irresistible sovereignty in 'the kingdom of mankind,' and this provides the guide to the full meaning of the vision.

The tree is shown to have an application to Nebuchadnezzar, who at that point in history was the head of the dominant World Power, Babylon. Yet, prior to Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of Jerusalem, the typical kingdom of God ruling out of that city was the agency by which Jehovah expressed his rightful sovereignty toward the earth. It thus constituted a divine block or impediment for Nebuchadnezzar in attaining his goal of world domination. By allowing that typical kingdom at Jerusalem to be overthrown, Jehovah permitted his own visible expression of sovereignty through the Davidic dynasty of kings to be cut down. The expression and exercise of world domination in the 'kingdom of mankind,' unhindered by any representative kingdom of God, now passed into the hands of the Gentile nations. (La 1:5; 2:2, 16, 17)

In the light of these facts the tree is seen to represent, beyond and above its application to Nebuchadnezzar, world sovereignty or domination by God's arrangement.

Should We Apply the Day for a Year Rule?

If a day for a year is not applied then that means that the 7 times lasted from 607 to 600. Did a ruler of God's Kingdom come forth then? Logical reasoning will lead a person to believe that the day for a year rule must apply otherwise the prophecy is meaningless. We have as an example the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel chapter 9. The day for a year rule must apply in Daniel chapter 9 or the prophecy is meaningless and is of no value.

As we have already shown Daniel used the word for 7 times instead of 7 years. Therefore it must mean more than 7 years. Otherwise he would have said 7 years not 7 times. Do you think that Jehovah was trying to trick us by using the terminology of 7 times and then explaining the length of 3.5 times in Revelation only to merely mean that the 7 times that pass over are 7 years and that is all? AT the same time he supplied the rule ' a day for a year ' when Ezekiel laid on his side for so many days (which by the way pointed to the destruction of Jerusalem in 607). He also supplied the prophecy of the 70 weeks which also needs the rule of 'a day for a year' for it to have value. The 70 weeks from 455 brings us to 453.5. Nothing happened. So surely it must be a day for a year.

With that said, is there any other reason to apply the day for a year rule to the dream? For a moment lets reason why God wanted us to know exactly how long 3 1/2 times are. In one place he calls it 42 months, in another place he calls it 1260 days. If it only meant 42 regular months then why be so specific about it. What difference does a few days here or there make? Why not just 3½ years or 42 lunar or solar months? The only time a few days does make a big difference is when you are dealing with a prophecy that has a day for a year rule applied. In this case every day makes a big difference. When you combine this with the fact that every prophecy of Daniel either concludes with Jesus arriving in God's Kingdom or with the arrival of the Messiah who is the King of God's Kingdom, then you have a pretty strong reason to apply the day for a year rule.

Jerusalem Will Be Trampled On by the Nations

Here are the words at Luke 21. 20 "Furthermore, when YOU see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then know that the desolating of her has drawn near. 21 Then let those in Ju·de´a begin fleeing to the mountains, and let those in the midst of her withdraw, and let those in the country places not enter into her; 22 because these are days for meting out justice, that all the things written may be fulfilled. 23 Woe to the pregnant women and the ones suckling a baby in those days! For there will be great necessity upon the land and wrath on this people; 24 and they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled."

Please take note that these words are different from the words of Matthew and Mark. In Matthew and Mark he does not specifically mention the Roman armies. He refers to the disgusting thing that causes desolation. But here he is without a doubt talking about the Roman armies and what they will do to the literal city of Jerusalem. And he is showing in verse 24 how those Jews in Jerusalem will die by the sword and be led into captivity. Then the statement is made that "Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled."

Remember that Jesus is talking to his disciples who believe that in the very near future Jesus will restore the nation of Israel and reside as king over it. In Acts 1:6 we read, "When, now, they had assembled, they went asking him: 'Lord, are you restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time?'" From this question it is clear that they are expecting Jesus to save Jerusalem and become the king. And so when Jesus is telling them exactly what will happen to the literal city of Jerusalem he then makes it clear to them that Jerusalem and its rulership, contrary to what they expect, will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed (seven) times of the nations are fulfilled. Only then will it truly be restored and he become king. Although they could not grasp that at the time, we can. Of course it was not to be the literal Jerusalem that was restored but the heavenly one.

We must not forget that Jesus is answering the question: "what will be the sign of your presence and conclusion of system of things." Then in Luke 21 he is telling what the near future holds for the literal city of Jerusalem and its people. But Jesus has not forgotten the big question: When is his presence? So after telling of the literal outcome of Jerusalem, he no doubt knows that his disciples are logically thinking, 'then Jerusalem will be restored and Christ's presence as king will begin,' just as they had previously ask in Acts 1:6. So he is letting them know that their thinking is Wrong. Jerusalem will not then be immediately restored.

Thus he reminds them that the Daniel prophecy said that 'Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times (or seven times) of the nations are fulfilled.' And only then will his presence and kingship commence. Only then after the appointed seven times of the nations have been fulfilled will Jerusalem be restored. While they did not understand at the time we do understand. And so his words were not just for his disciples living then but also for people living in the last days of this system of things.

Matthew and Mark said the 'disgusting thing' so that definitely had two fulfillments: 1. The roman army and 2. the UN. But Luke 21:20-23 is specifically and directly speaking about the literal events that would happen in the first century. Those events do not have a specific fulfillment in the last days although the parallel is similar. So after Jesus tells us literally what would happen to Jerusalem and the Jews he then explains to them that Jerusalem will be trampled until appointed times have ended. The Kingdom will not be restored until then. So they would come to recognize after holy spirit was poured out at Pentecost that God's Kingdom would not be established literally in Jerusalem as they had thought but it would be a heavenly kingdom that would come but not until the appointed times of the nations had ended.

To use an illustration: You go to an Elvis concert. He is older and has gained weight and is popping pills. He is not the King he use to be. A fire breaks out at the concert hall. Everybody begins scrambling for the doors. Elvis gets caught up in the crowd and falls down. He is being trampled on. After about 30 seconds a prophet appears to him and says to Elvis. "7 minutes will pass over you until you know who the real King is" Well after another 2 minutes passes another prophet appears and says, "Elvis' neck will be broken and the King will be trampled until the appointed minutes of the crowd are fulfilled." Finally after the 7 minutes have passed the King stands up. He is young, thin, good looking, and rejuvenated just like at the beginning of his career. Notice that the phrase used is 'the King will be trampled'. It works.

Elvis = Jerusalem

Crowd=nations

7 minutes=7 times.

Beginning of trampling=607BCE

fat druggy King=Israelite rulers until 607

Elvis' broken neck = Jerusalems destruction in 70CE

end of trampling=1914, true King restored

607 to 1914--The Gentile Times

What does all this lead us to? That the Gentile Times began in 607 BCE with the end of the king of Judah who sat on Jehovah's throne and ended in 1914CE when Jesus, the twig, who had the legal right to rule took over kingship of God's throne in the heavens. The events that took place on earth in 1914 and since then also confirm this. I submit that the artfully contrived story is not 1914 but rather those with the artfully contrived false story are those that contend that 607 is not the date of Jerusalem's destruction and 1914 is not the end of the Gentile Times. Those promoting this artfully contrived story that Jesus did not began his rule in 1914 are the same ones who fulfill the prophecy by saying, "Where is this promised presence of his?"

2006-02-15T09:03:00.000-08:00

Does Vat 4956 Prove 587?

Many point to Vat 4956 as proof that Jerusalem was desolated in 587BCE. After all Vat 4956 is an eyewitness account of celestial phenomena that occured in the 37th year of Neb. It is so detailed that the astronomical events that are recorded in this tablet could have only occured in the year 568BCE. And since it was written in the 37th year of Neb.....Wait! What's that you say? It was not written in the 37th year of Neb by an eyewitness to the celestial events?

Well, maybe not. But it was observed in the 37th year of Neb and written a little while later while Neb was still king or shortly thereafter during the rule of other Babylonian kings by a very reliable and trustworthy person. No? It was written then either?

You might be very surprised to learn that the tablet known as Vat 4956 is admittedly a copy dated during the Seleucid period and the time of Berosus some 300 years after the supposed events that it records. The fact is we do not know how many times it was copied and handed down. We do not know if there really was an original tablet. We do not even know if 'in the 37th year of Neb' was originally in it or if the copyist added those words perhaps to reflect what they thought or what Beorosis thought at the time because amazingly it does reflect the beliefs of Berosus whose beliefs may have well been popular at the time. Who can really say? And remember this, it is not an inspired record from God.

It is much like this conclusion reached by one who thoroughly studied Vat 4956:

"VAT 4956 is one more document often cited to support the popular chronology. It is alleged to be a copy made during the Seleucid period, which lists many astronomical events from 568 BCE that are assigned to the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzer. There is, however, no evidence to support the claim that Nebuchadnezzer's 37th year occurred in 568 BCE from any contemporaneous documents. Thus, no one can exclude the possibility that this document was nothing more than a fabrication, compiled during the Seleucid period, possibly from a badly damaged tablet that lacked the name and the year of the king."

So then what really does Vat 4956 prove? It proves that there surely were people living almost 300 years after Neb that believed that his 37th year occured in the year that we now consider to be 568BCE only about 30 years before the conquering of Babylon by Cyrus. It proves that Vat 4956 may reflect well what was believed by Berosus and probably others at the time. But the simple fact is that any astronomer could research and describe events that occured in a certain year and then date it to any date they wanted such as in the 37th year of Neb.

Are you aware of another tablet that has been discovered which says something different. This tablet shows many celestial events that could have only happened in the year 588BCE. This tablet says these events occured in the 37th year of Neb also. If this tablet was written about 300 years after Neb then we have conflicting stories. Perhaps this person believed that Neb's 37th year was about 50 years before the conquering of Babylon by Cyrus in the year 588BCE as we know it. Can it really be so? Where is this tablet?

You will find it sitting on my dining room table as it is on a Big Chief tablet belonging to my preschooler and written by someone of modern times. But it well illustrates the nature and reliability of Vat 4956. An astronomer who lived in the time of Berosus could have very well written a document describing the celestial events of 588BCE and dated it to the 37th year of Neb and who would have known? Who could have argued with it?

Why would such a document as Vat 4956 be written if it is not true. Was it a conspiracy against the Watchtower which they knew would rise up in the future to proclaim 607 as the year of Jerusalem's destruction? That is the argument used in an attempt to discredit and show the foolishness of JWs. But consider.

Perhaps Vat 4956 was written for one of the following reasons. It could have been written to support those beliefs popular during the time. Or perhaps it was written to show that the sacred Jewish writings at the time concerning the 70 years of desolation and restoration were inaccurate. Or even consider that perhaps it was an attempt by Satan the Devil to obscure the date of Jerusalem's destruction in order to make Jehovah's prophets appear to be wrong about the 70 years of desolation and it has worked for the most part. Or even looking at the bigger picture, to confuse the starting and ending point of the seven Gentile times, to put forth the lie that 1914 is not the date of Christ's presence at all, in order to bring forth the notion: 'Where is this promised presence of his?'

As the Watchtower accurately put it way back in 1972:

"It should not be overlooked that the source of corroborative evidence should bear the earmarks of dependability. Can this be said about “VAT 4956”? Not really. The text is not an original and it contains numerous gaps. Certain terms found therein cannot even be understood now. Twice in the text the notation hi-bi (meaning “broken off, obliterated”) appears. Thereby the scribe acknowledged that he was working from a defective copy.

Even if, despite these problems, the astronomical information presents a true picture of the original, this would not establish the correctness of the historical data. As Ptolemy used the reigns of ancient kings (as he understood them) simply as a framework in which to place astronomical data, so the copyist of “VAT 4956” may, in line with the chronology accepted in his time, have inserted the ‘thirty-seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar.’ As admitted by the German scholars Neugebauer and Weidner (the translators of this text), the scribe evidently changed words to conform with the abbreviated terminology common in his day. But he was both inconsistent and inaccurate. So he could just as easily have inserted other information to suit his purposes. Hence both Ptolemy’s Canon and “VAT 4956” might even have been derived from the same basic source. They could share mutual errors."

But if Vat 4956 is inaccurate then doesn't this also undermine the evidence that Babylon was conquered in 539BCE? No it does not. For the 37th year of Neb can still be 588BCE and it does not effect 539 in any way. 539 as the date of Babylon's conquest is proven historically with the backing of Biblical evidence in many different ways.

In conclusion we might ask a few simple questions:

Who was the copyist of the VAT 4956? Was he an astrologist? Was he inspired by God? Did he have an agenda? Did he have any qualms about adding his own thoughts? Did he mind adding words to prove what he believed? Did he know Nebuchadnezzar? Was he there during the 37th year of Neb? Did he really copy it from anything or just make it up using known astronomical happenings from the year 568BCE? Was he a Godly man?

On the other hand:
Who wrote Ezekiel? Who was Isaiah? Who was Daniel? Who was Jeremiah? Who was Ezra? Who did they worship? Were they inspired of God? Did they add their own words?

Who should we believe? These Bible writers approved by Jehovah and inspired by him? Or some unknown copyist?

2005-12-27T16:14:00.000-08:00

A Closer Look at E-Watchman's Patchwork of Prophecy

"What we have is a contradictory and confusing patchwork of prophecy..." Those are the words about the WTS from a man who considers himself a prophetic watchman of God. He presents what he and his supporters consider to be a clear and undeniable interpretation of prophecy. But a closer examination of his interpretation of scriptures will reveal that his words above fit better in describing his own patchwork of prophecy.

The Holy Place

In the essay, Let the Reader Use Discernment, E-Watchman states: "More reasonably, if Jehovah's Witnesses are really God's people, as we believe, then, the holy place that is due to become desolate must represent the spiritual temple of Jehovah as represented by the holy ones and the organization associated with it. In other words, what is commonly called: Jehovah's visible organization.
Apparently, then, the disgusting thing standing in a holy place will serve as a signal for Jehovah's people to abandon the Watchtower Society;"

There are many problems with this interpretation. For example, if the holy place, Jerusalem, that was desolated in 70 CE pictures what is known as Jehovah's visible organization then who is represented by the true Christians that preached the good news from 33CE until that destruction in 70CE? Is there another group currently preaching this good news that we are unaware of that are pictured by the true Christians of the first century? When Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 CE there was no other organization of God that came forth to represent him. His organization had been established in 33CE and obediently left Jerusalem before its destruction. They existed at the same time as apostate Jerusalem and continued to exist afterward. No new organization of God was born from an apostate organization at that time in 70CE.

E-Watchman also contends that the man of lawlessness actually will rise up from among the WT organization today. In his essay, Mystery of the Anti-Christ he reasons, "Reasoning on the matter, it is evident that the man of lawlessness is to emerge from among Jehovah's anointed ones in the future; that being the case, then, he must come from within the highest levels of the Watchtower Society."

But the problem with his reasoning here is that the man of lawlessness did not rise up from apostate Jerusalem in the first century did he? He came forth from the first century Christian organization. Therefore the question begs to be asked, how is it that the WTS is pictured by apostate unfaithful Jerusalem from which no man of lawlessness originates and at the same time is plagued by the man of lawlessness?

Finally another question comes to mind when considering his interpretation: Since unfaithful Judaism pictures JWs then who is Christendom pictured by in all of this? The pagan religions of the first century? If that is the case then are we to believe that Judaism came out of those pagan religions as JWs came out of Christendom in modern times?

E-Watchman's interpretation: Apostate Jerusalem = Jehovah's visible organization currently housing the man of lawlessness.

Problems:

1. True Christians from 33CE to 70CE = ?????

2. Who in the first century = Christendom?

3. Man of lawlessness did not originate from apostate Jerusalem.

Let the Patchwork Begin

Any thinking person can clearly see the problem that E-Watchman has encountered in his interpretations. So in his latest mailbag he attempts to stitch the new patches to the old interpretation. He spins:

"Nevertheless, in spite of the apostles' ignorance, Jesus told them that they would not complete the circuit of Israel until the son of man arrived. So, in that respect they fully accomplished their ministry and then the resurrected son of man arrived. But before that, when Jesus was arrested and executed, all of the apostles and disciples were stumbled. But when Jesus appeared to them after his resurrection, he first rebuked them for being slow of heart to believe, but then he fully opened up their minds to understand the prophecies as they related to Christ. The transformation of the apostles was astounding.

Jesus’ numerous supernatural appearances before his disciples immediately following his resurrection, including his last manifestation before Paul as the glorified king of God’s kingdom, establishes a pattern to be fulfilled during Christ’s parousia. Just as those apostles were originally entrusted with a preaching work, even though they were in a state of ignorance that was not remedied until after Jesus appeared to them from the spirit realm, so too, Jehovah’s Witnesses have been preaching about God’s kingdom in a similar state of ignorance and disbelief that will not be dispelled until the actual revelation of Christ.

But just as the resurrected Jesus only appeared to those within the Jewish system who had already proven themselves to be his disciples, in the same way the presence of Christ will only become manifest to his approved chosen ones within the Watchtower Society. At that point the Watchtower Society will have served its purpose, just as Jerusalem and the Jewish system had in the first century."

What does E-Watchman here establish as his patchwork interpretation?

1. The disciples preaching before Jesus' resurrection = JWs and their preaching work now before Jesus' presence.
2. The arrival of the son of man in Matthew 10:23 = Jesus arrival and appearing to his disciples after his resurrection.
3. The disciples after Jesus' resurrection and the pouring out of holy spirit = the future new organization of God's people (no doubt made up of E-watchman and his followers) after Christ's future presence.
4. Rejecting of Jewish people in 33CE = rejection of the WTS at Christ's future presence.

Now do you see any problems with this? First of all notice all the contradictions. First he says Judaism up until its destruction pictures JWs. Now he says that the disciples still in Judaism before Jesus resurrection pictures JWs. First he says the rejection takes place when the disgusting thing stands in the holy place paralleling 66CE, followed by the destruction of the WTS which is paralleled by the destruction of Jerusalem in 70CE. Now he says that rejection is symbolized by the scattering and the rebuking of the disciples followed by the rejecting of Judaism in 33CE. Is the rejection of the organization of JWs paralleled by 33CE or 70CE? Are JWs rejected twice? Are we to flee the WTS twice?

How Many Times Does the Son of Man Arrive?

At Matthew 10:23 Jesus states to his disciples, "When they persecute YOU in one city, flee to another; for truly I say to YOU, YOU will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of Israel until the Son of man arrives." When did this arrival of the son of man take place? Is it at the same time as Matthew 25:31 when he arrives to separate the sheep and the goats? Is it when he arrives to bring destruction upon the wicked as recorded at Luke 21:27? Is it when the bridegroom arrived and brings the discreet virgins into the wedding feast as recorded at Matthew 25:10? No says E-Watchman in his latest mailbag. The son of man arrived in this case in 33CE at the time of his appearing to the apostles after his resurrection. Although all these other scriptures concerning the son of man's arrival apply to the time of the Great Tribulation, not so this scripture about his arrival according to the prophet/watchman.

And this despite the fact that just one verse earlier Jesus said, "22 And YOU will be objects of hatred by all people on account of my name; but he that has endured to the end is the one that will be saved." Apparently according to E-Watchman that end came when Jesus was resurrected. That is when the son of man arrived. They merely had to endure until his resurrection, until the rejection of Judaism, and then they would be saved.

Not only that but in verses 10-22 Jesus gives the exact same prophecy in almost the exact same words that he used when answering the question about the sign of his presence. And yet verse 23 does not apply to the last days when the son of man arrives but rather to his arrival and appearances before his followers immediately after his resurrection. The prophecy in fact does not even apply to the last days of the Jewish system of things since the son of man arrived at his resurrection in 33CE when he appeared to his disciples. Or does it perhaps mean that the son of man arrived in 33CE at his resurrection before the initial preaching work was completed. Again he arrived at the end of the Jewish system in 70CE so that the disciples were once again unable to complete the circuit of cities with the real preaching work before the destruction of Jerusalem. And finally he will arrive just before he appoints E-Watchman and his clan as his new refined organization and they commence to preach the real true good news of the kingdom. And of course we left out the arrival that didn't happen in 1914 when he organized his people to preach the untrue good news of the kingdom which we will discuss next. We have to ask: Just how many times does the son of man arrive?

Modern Day Preaching Work and the Man of Lawlessness

Since Jesus came in 29CE and organized the disciples to do their preaching work we must ask: When did Jesus arrive in modern times to organize the preaching work of JWs today. Certainly it could not have been 1914 for according to E-Watchman that is an artfully contrived story. So what is the parallel to his arrival in 29CE? Is the preaching work of JWs unauthorized by Jesus? That is not E-Watchman's contention. If Jesus' presence is yet future then how has he organized his people today so that they can engage in this preaching work that parallels what the disciples did up until 33CE? I guess he will need another patch to fix that problem in his interpretation.

And what of the man of lawlessness and the operation of error? Paul prophesied about the man of lawlessness and the operation of error long after 33CE? It was long after Jesus resurrection and after holy spirit was poured out on the disciples at Pentecost. It was long after the true preaching work had begun in 33CE that parallels the preaching work by God's new and refined organization after the destruction of the WTS according to E-watchman. So are we to expect the man of lawlessness to rise up again after the destruction of the WTS among the newly organized people of God who are in a 'real' spiritual paradise at this future time? According to Paul that would have to be the case if we are to logically follow the flow of E-Watchman's interpretation. We have to ask: Just how many men of lawlessness are there anyway? Just how many operations of errors are there? We have to wonder will the men of lawlessness ever cease? Is the operation of error the constant feature?

The only thing that becomes clear in the interpretations of E-Watchman is just how confusing they are. His prophetic interpretations are in the words of E-Watchman "saddled with numerous contradictions and absurdities, such as discussed here... What we have is a contradictory and confusing patchwork of prophecy..." But how simple the truth is.

The Simple True Parallel

Jesus arrived in 29CE and established his Christian organization of kingdom preachers in the first century. They came forth from God's former people who had apostatized and left Jehovah. They preached the good news right up until the destruction of the apostate Jerusalem and that Jewish system of things. They survived that destruction because of their obedience to Christ. It is the same today.

Jesus arrived in 1914CE and established his Christian organization of kingdom preachers in modern times. They came forth from God's former people who had apostasized and left Jehovah. They will preach the good news right up until the destruction of the apostate Christendom and this system of things. They will survive that destruction because of their obedience to Christ. No patchwork needed at all.

See following chart courtesy of Al:

http://jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/research/media/basis.png

2005-11-24T10:41:00.000-08:00

Jerusalem's Destruction--587 or 607? The Bible's View

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the destruction of Jerusalem took place in 607BCE. Most secular historians point to 587/586BCE as the date for that destruction. Of course those who want to discredit Jehovah's Witnesses are quick to point this out in an attempt to disprove their application of the seven times prophecy. If the seven times began in 587BCE and not 607BCE then Jehovah's Witnesses must be wrong about 1914. But the real question for Bible believers is what does the Bible say concerning the destruction of Jerusalem? Can the Bible prove or disprove either date? Let us take a closer look using Bible prophecies and events.

When Did Nebuchadnezzar Begin His Reign

Jehovah's Witnesses agree with secular historians that 539BCE is the year in which Babylon was conquered by Medo-Persia. There is so much evidence that it is called an absolute date and there is no Biblical evidence that would contradict this date. But here is where the discrepancy comes in. Secular historians believe Neb (Nebuchadnezzar) began his reign in 605BCE. Jehovah's Witnesses believe his reign began in 625BCE. What accounts for the 20 year discrepancy?

Jehovah's Witnesses reason that the Jews returned to their homeland after Cyrus made his decree in his first year and Jerusalem at last became inhabited once again in 537BCE. Ezra 1:1 "And in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia, that Jehovah’s word from the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, Jehovah roused the spirit of Cyrus the king of Persia so that he caused a cry to pass through all his realm, and also in writing, saying:
2 “This is what Cyrus the king of Persia has said, ‘All the kingdoms of the earth Jehovah the God of the heavens has given me, and he himself has commissioned me to build him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. 3 Whoever there is among YOU of all his people, may his God prove to be with him. So let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and rebuild the house of Jehovah the God of Israel—he is the [true] God—which was in Jerusalem." 607BCE is then arrived at by counting 70 years back from 537BCE in conjunction with prophecy of the 70 years of desolation.

Jeremiah 52:12 tells us exactly when Neb sacked Jerusalem, "And in the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month, that is, [in] the nineteenth year of King Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, the king of Babylon, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard, who was standing before the king of Babylon, came into Jerusalem. 13 And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the house of the king and all the houses of Jerusalem; and every great house he burned with fire. 14 And all the walls of Jerusalem, round about, all the military forces of the Chal·de´ans that were with the chief of the bodyguard pulled down." Since the destruction occurred in Neb's 19th year then we count 18 years back from 607BCE and we have the date that Neb began his rule, 625BCE.

On the other hand secular historians rely upon Babylonian inscriptions and tablets. They count back from 539BCE, piecing together the archaeological evidence, then adding together the years that they believe each king ruled. In this way they determine the year of 605BCE to be the first year of Neb's reign. Then they count forward 18 years and arrive at 587BCE as the year that Jerusalem was desolated.

The following evidence will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that 607BCE is the actual date of the desolation of Jerusalem. It will also prove that 587BCE cannot possibly be the date for that desolation. Let us now show you why that is the case.

Jerusalem Uninhabited for Seventy Years

The simple and basic reason for concluding that 607BCE is the correct date is found at Daniel 9 and 2 Chronicles 36. Daniel 9:2 tells us, "In the first year of his reigning I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years."

In Hebrew the word here used for 'devastations' is horvot. It merely means ruins. Here are some other Bible translations confirming this meaning.

"Jerusalem will lie in ruins for seventy years."--Contemporary English translation.

"the seventy years that Jerusalem would be in ruins"--Good News Bible.

"Jerusalem would remain in ruins for 70 years."--God's Word translation.

"fulfilling of the wastes of Jerusalem -- seventy years;"--Young's Literal Translation.

"the number of years that Jerusalem had to lie in ruins, namely, seventy." --The Message (MSG) translation

2 chron 36:20: "Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; 21 to fulfill Jehovah's word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years."

The Hebrew words used here are SHAMA which means desolation, desert, wilderness, or a place where no one lives, and SHAVTA which usually means REST as in the case of no work being performed.

Here again are other translations.

"While it lay in ruins, the land had its 70 years of rest."--God's Word Translation.

"Judah was an empty desert, and it stayed that way for seventy years, to make up for all the years it was not allowed to rest."--Contenmporary English translation.

"For the seventy years that the land was not being used, the Day of Rest was kept. So the Days of Rest were enjoyed that had not been kept before."--New Life Version (NLV).

"It rested. That deserted land wasn't farmed for a full 70 years."--New International Reader's Version (NIRV).

"The land enjoyed its sabbath rests; all the time of its desolation it rested, until the seventy years were completed."--New International Version - UK (NIVUK).

These verses leave us no doubt that Jerusalem would be devastated, desolated, uninhabited, in ruins, a wilderness, a wasteland, with no work being performed in the land for 70 years. Could 70 years have run from 587BCE to 517BCE? No! Impossible. By the year 517BCE as a reading of both Zechariah (written in 518BCE) and Haggai (written in 520BCE) will show the Jews had built houses, planted crops, and were working on the temple. Jerusalem had definitely been inhabited for some time before 517BCE. The 70 years of desolation thus occurred between 607BCE and 537BCE. This is actually the only period in time that the 70 year desolation period could have taken place.

But as further proof lets again return to 2 Chron 36. And read verses 20 onward: "Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; 21 to fulfill Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years. 22 And in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia, that Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, Jehovah roused the spirit of Cyrus the king of Persia, so that he caused a cry to pass through all his kingdom, and also in writing, saying: 23 “This is what Cyrus the king of Persia has said, ‘All the kingdoms of the earth Jehovah the God of the heavens has given me, and he himself has commissioned me to build him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever there is among YOU of all his people, Jehovah his God be with him. So let him go up.’”

You will please take note of the smooth logical flow of the verses, telling both the beginning and the ending of the 70 years of desolation. After telling of those last remaining ones, who survived the destruction by the sword, being carried off to Babylon in fulfillment of the 70 years of desolation the account proceeds to tell how and when the 70 years of desolation came to an end when Cyrus made his decree. This decree was given in Cyrus' first year in 538/537BCE. The Jews had reached there homeland by 537BCE and the 70 years of desolation was over.

Therefore 587BCE to 537BCE can not fit the prophecy because simple math tells us this is only 50 years. 587BCE to 517BCE does not fit the prophecy since Jerusalem was inhabited from 537BCE onward, even growing crops and building houses. A person must purposely twist the prophecy of the 70 years of desolation to try to make it fit between 587BCE and 517BCE.

However, there is much more proof that 607BCE is the only possible date for the desolating of Jerusalem. Before we get to that proof lets examine if the Bible dates associated with Kings Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah harmonize with this date of 607BCE.

The Rules of Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah

Does the 607 date fit with Bible history and chronology concerning the dates that Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah ruled? Contrary to what promoters of the 587 date say, 607 fits perfectly. Let me demonstrate.

628--Jehoiakim begins to rule. He reigns 11 years. 2 chron 36:5 tells us, "Twenty-five years old was Je·hoi´a·kim when he began to reign, and for eleven years he reigned in Jerusalem;"

625--Neb begins to rule. The first year of Neb = the fourth year of Jehoiakim. Jer. 25:1 confirms this: "The word that occurred to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Je·hoi´a·kim the son of Jo·si´ah, the king of Judah, that is, the first year of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon;"

620--Jehoiakim is set up as a vassal king by Neb. 2 kings 24:1 "In his days Neb·u·chad·nez´zar the king of Babylon came up, and so Je·hoi´a·kim became his servant for three years. However, he turned back and rebelled against him."

617--Neb conquers and kills Jehoiakim. As the seige continues Jehoiachin, who reigns for only 3 months, is taken into exile. Zedekiah, the last king, begins his 11 year rule. Many Jews are taken into captivity, including Ezekiel, Daniel, and Jehoiachin, as are the utensils of Jehovah's house. There are 3 separate scriptures describing this event. Lets examine each of them.

Dan 1:1 "In the THIRD year of the kingship of Je·hoi´a·kim the king of Judah, Neb·u·chad·nez´zar the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and proceeded to lay siege to it. 2 In time Jehovah gave into his hand Je·hoi´a·kim the king of Judah and a part of the utensils of the house of the [true] God, so that he brought them to the land of Shi´nar to the house of his god; and the utensils he brought to the treasure-house of his god. 3 Then the king said to Ash´pe·naz his chief court official to bring some of the sons of Israel and of the royal offspring and of the nobles, 4 children in whom there was no defect at all,"

2 Kings 24:12 "At length Je·hoi´a·chin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he with his mother and his servants and his princes and his court officials; and the king of Babylon got to take him in the EIGHTH year of his being king. 13 Then he brought out from there all the treasures of the house of Jehovah and the treasures of the king's house, and went on to cut to pieces all the gold utensils that Sol´o·mon the king of Israel had made in the temple of Jehovah, just as Jehovah had spoken. 14 And he took into exile all Jerusalem and all the PRINCES and all the valiant, mighty men, ten thousand he was taking into exile, and also every craftsman and builder of bulwarks. NO ONE HAD BEEN LEFT BEHIND EXCEPT THE LOWLY CLASS of the people of the land. 15 Thus he took Je·hoi´a·chin into exile to Babylon; and the king's mother and the king's wives and his COURT OFFICIALS and the FOREMOST MEN of the land he led away as exiled people from Jerusalem to Babylon."

2Chron 36:5 "Twenty-five years old was Je·hoi´a·kim when he began to reign, and for ELEVEN years he reigned in Jerusalem; and he continued to do what was bad in the eyes of Jehovah his God. 6 Against him Neb·u·chad·nez´zar the king of Babylon came up that he might bind him with two fetters of copper to carry him off to Babylon. 7 And some of the utensils of the house of Jehovah Neb·u·chad·nez´zar brought to Babylon and then put them in his palace in Babylon. 8 As for the rest of the affairs of Je·hoi´a·kim and his detestable things that he did and what was to be found against him, there they are written in the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah; and Je·hoi´a·chin his son began to reign in place of him. 9 Eighteen years old was Je·hoi´a·chin when he began to reign, and for three months and ten days he reigned in Jerusalem; and he continued to do what was bad in Jehovah's eyes. 10 And at the return of the year King Neb·u·chad·nez´zar sent and proceeded to bring him to Babylon with DESIRABLE ARTICLES of the house of Jehovah. Further, he made Zed·e·ki´ah his [father's] brother king over Judah and Jerusalem."

The dates and the events described in all 3 accounts above compliment one another. Daniel often spoke from the perspective of Babylon because of his being exiled there at the time of his writing the book named after himself. (More on this later). And so he describes it as being in Jehoiakim's 3rd year that he is conquered because Daniel speaks from the time that Jehoiakim was made a vassal king of Neb. It clearly shows he was conquered in this 3rd year and yet the Bible says he reigned for 11 years. This leaves no doubt what Daniel meant when he said 'In the THIRD year of the kingship of Je·hoi´a·kim'.

Jeremiah also confirms this in chapter 27. Verses 19-21: "For this is what Jehovah of armies has said concerning the pillars and concerning the sea and concerning the carriages and concerning the remainder of the utensils that are remaining over in this city, 20 that Neb·u·chad·nez´zar the king of Babylon had not taken when he carried Jec·o·ni´ah the son of Je·hoi´a·kim, the king of Judah, into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon, together with all the nobles of Judah and Jerusalem; 21 for this is what Jehovah of armies, the God of Israel, has said concerning the utensils that are remaining over at the house of Jehovah and the house of the king of Judah and Jerusalem,

So you see from the Bible ALL the nobles (this would include Daniel) were taken when Jeconiah who is Jehoiachin were taken into exile in Neb's 8th year and Jehoiakim's 3rd year of vassalage to Neb or 11th and final year of rule. There is no record in the Bible or in secular history that says otherwise.

In summary the dates all harmonize and took place in 617BCE. Jehoiakim's 11th and final year = his 3rd year as vassal king under Neb = Neb's 8th year = Jehoiachins 3 month rule = Zedekiah's 1st year.

Jer. 52:28 also confirms this, "These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·rez´zar took into exile: in the seventh year, three thousand and twenty-three Jews. 29 In the eighteenth year of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, from Jerusalem there were eight hundred and thirty-two souls. 30 In the twenty-third year of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard took Jews into exile, seven hundred and forty-five souls."

Notice that he took exiles the 7th year (7th full year. During 8th year as described in 2 Kings 24), and in his 18th year (Again described as 19th year in Jer. 52).

607--Zedekiah's 11th and final year of ruling. 2 Chronicles 36:11, "Twenty-one years old was Zed·e·ki´ah when he began to reign, and for eleven years he reigned in Jerusalem." Jeremiah 52:5, "So the city came under siege until the eleventh year of King Zed·e·ki´ah.

607--Neb's 19th year is when Jerusalem is destroyed. Jer 52:12, 13, "And in the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month, that is, [in] the nineteenth year of King Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, the king of Babylon, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard, who was standing before the king of Babylon, came into Jerusalem. 13 And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the house of the king and all the houses of Jerusalem; and every great house he burned with fire."

Yes the Bible's dates concerning Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah, and Neb all harmonize in every way when assigning the date of 607BCE as the year of Jerusalem's desolation.

See chart @ http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/research/media/kings_with_data.png

Daniel's Exile in Jehoiakim's 3rd Year

There are some that make the claim that Daniel was in Babylon during Neb's 2nd year as sole ruler of the Babylonian empire because he went into exile in Jehoiakim's third year of ruling over Judah, some 8 years before Jehoiakim's rulership ended. They reason that if Neb began to rule in 625BCE and Jehoiakim in 628BCE as Jehovah's Witnesses believe, then Daniel was there in exile by 625/24BCE. That would make him well over 100 years of age when he died since he lived under the rule of Cyrus and Darius after Babylon was conquered. His life span would have ran from about 640BCE to 535BCE. Impossible! So Jehovah's Witnesses chronology would have to be wrong since Daniel could not have lived that long and served in the court of Darius. But lets examine what the Bible really says about Daniel's exile and time in Babylon.

One of the controversial scriptures is Daniel 1:1: "In the third year of the kingship of Je·hoi´a·kim the king of Judah, Neb·u·chad·nez´zar the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and proceeded to lay siege to it." Note that it is Neb the king who does the conquering and takes the exiles.

Among these exiles is Daniel because Daniel 1:6 says, "Now there happened to be among them some of the sons of Judah, Daniel, Han·a·ni´ah, Mish´a·el and Az·a·ri´ah." But look at verse 5, "Furthermore, to them the king appointed a daily allowance from the delicacies of the king and from his drinking wine, even to nourish them for three years, that at the end of these they might stand before the king." That would make at least 3 years that Daniel has been in captivity, right?

But now notice Daniel 1:18: "And at the end of the days that the king had said (the end of 3 years) to bring them in, the principal court official also proceeded to bring them in before Neb·u·chad·nez´zar. 19 And the king began to speak with them, and out of them all no one was found like Daniel, "

And now the other controversial scripture, Daniel 2:1, "And in the second year of the kingship of Neb·u·chad·nez´zar, Neb·u·chad·nez´zar dreamed dreams;" This is one of the dreams that Daniel interpreted. Ah, convincing proof that Daniel was there in the 2nd year of King Neb. But wait, Daniel has already been there at least 3 years under Neb's rule, how can it be that he is interpreting the king's dream in only his 2nd year of ruling? It would at least be his 3rd year. Then why does Daniel write that it was in the 'second year of the kingship' of Neb?

It is because as mentioned earlier Daniel is speaking from the perspective of the Jews coming under Neb's rule and no longer having a King to rule over Israel just as he had previously spoken of Jehoiakim's 11th year as his 3rd year. Do we have any further reason to believe that Daniel would date the rulership of kings from this same perspective?

Yes we do. Here is the further proof: At Daniel 10:1, Daniel dates the rule of Cyrus in the same way. Notice he says, "In the third year of Cyrus the king of Persia there was a matter revealed to Daniel,..." Cyrus actually began to rule Persia around 560 BCE. Does this mean that Daniel was in exile in 557 BCE at Persia under Cyrus in his 'third year'? It can't be. Daniel was in exile at Babylon from before Jerusalem was desolated until Babylon was conquered in 539BCE. How could he be in exile in Persia in 557BCE and at the same time be in exile in Babylon? This clearly shows us that Daniel is without a doubt speaking from his perspective as an exile under Babylon's rule. This was the 3rd year of Cyrus' rule since his conquering of Babylon. Not the third year since Cyrus began to rule Persia. This would be the year 536/535BCE. Daniel uses that same perspective when alluding to the 2nd year of Neb. It is the 2nd year of Neb since he conquered Jerusalem. That '2nd year' would be from the time that Neb became king over Jerusalem in 607BCE, therefore the year would be 605BCE not 624BCE.

Do other events in the Bible concerning Jehoiakim prove that Daniel was speaking of Jehoiakim's third year since becoming a vassal king of Neb rather than his actual third year of ruling over Judah? Yes they do. Consider the following as further proof.

The Bible tells us that Jehoiakim was under Egypt's rule and a vassal king of Pharaoh Necho until Necho was defeated by Neb. 2 Kings 23:34, "Furthermore, Phar´aoh Ne´choh made E·li´a·kim the son of Jo·si´ah king in place of Jo·si´ah his father and changed his name to Je·hoi´a·kim; and Je·ho´a·haz he took and then brought to Egypt, where he eventually died. 35 And the silver and the gold Je·hoi´a·kim gave to Phar´aoh. Only he taxed the land, to give the silver at the order of Phar´aoh."

When did Neb defeat Necho? Jeremiah 46:2 provides the answer, "For Egypt, concerning the military force of Phar´aoh Ne´cho the king of Egypt, who happened to be by the river Eu·phra´tes at Car´che·mish, whom Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon defeated in the fourth year of Je·hoi´a·kim the son of Jo·si´ah, the king of Judah" Since it wasnt until Jehoiakim's 4th year that Neb defeated Necho then how is it that Neb placed Jehoiakim as his vassal king and took exiles in his Jehoiakim's third year even before he defeated Necho? Jehoiakim was still under Necho until after Neb defeated Necho.

But you may be surprised that there is even more proof. Jer 36 gives us further indication that during Jehoiakim's fifth year he was still not under Neb's vassalage. Notice verse 1, "Now it came about in the fourth year of Je·hoi´a·kim the son of Jo·si´ah, the king of Judah, that this word occurred to Jeremiah from Jehovah, saying: 2 “Take for yourself a roll of a book, and you must write in it all the words that I have spoken to you against Israel and against Judah and against all the nations, since the day that I spoke to you, since the days of Jo·si´ah, clear down to this day. 3 Perhaps those of the house of Judah will listen to all the calamity that I am thinking of doing to them, to the end that they may return, each one from his bad way, and that I may actually forgive their error and their sin.”

You will take note that apparently no punishment has come upon Judah as of yet. There is still time to repent and be forgiven. No exiles have been taken. No calamity has arrived as of yet. And this is in the 4th year of Jehoiakim's reign.

But the story continues. Jeremiah 36:9 "Now it came about in the fifth year of Je·hoi´a·kim the son of Jo·si´ah, the king of Judah, in the ninth month, that all the people in Jerusalem and all the people that were coming in from the cities of Judah into Jerusalem proclaimed a fast before Jehovah." Notice it is now the 5th year of Jehoiakim.

14 Then all the princes sent out to Bar´uch Je·hu´di the son of Neth·a·ni´ah the son of Shel·e·mi´ah the son of Cush´i, saying: “The roll from which you read aloud in the ears of the people—take it in your hand and come.” Accordingly Bar´uch the son of Ne·ri´ah took the roll in his hand and came in to them. 15 Then they said to him: “Sit down, please, and read it aloud in our ears.” So Bar´uch read aloud in their ears." What? How can this be? 'All the princes' sent out to Baruch? Didn't some of the princes already go into exile in Jehoiakim's third year?

When the words are read to Jehoiakim notice which part he especially takes exception to. 29 "And against Je·hoi´a·kim the king of Judah you should say,‘This is what Jehovah has said: “You yourself have burned up this roll, saying, ‘Why is it that you have written on it, saying: “The king of Babylon will come without fail and will certainly bring this land to ruin and cause man and beast to cease from it”?’ If in his third year Jehoiakim had already bowed to Neb and become a vassal king of his then why does he become so angry about it and burn the roll in the fire?

Jeremiah concludes with this pronouncement. 30 "Therefore this is what Jehovah has said against Je·hoi´a·kim the king of Judah, ‘He will come to have no one sitting upon the throne of David, and his own dead body will become something thrown out to the heat by day and to the frost by night. 31 And I will call to account against him and against his offspring and against his servants their error, and I will bring upon them and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem and upon the men of Judah all the calamity that I have spoken against them, and they did not listen.’”’”

The further prophecying by Jeremiah about Neb shows that Neb had not yet taken action at all against Jerusalem. He had taken no exiles and that is why there is no record of Neb taking exiles before or shortly after he defeated Pharaoh Necho. The fact that Jehoiakim is so bold and brazen shows that Neb had not assaulted Jerusalem yet. There is absolutely no mention of what Neb had already done to Judah. No mention of him already taking exiles. The calamity is yet future. The assault on Jerusalem is yet future. It was not until Neb's 8th year which was Jehoiakim's 11th and final year and his third year as Neb's vassal king that captives were taken. That is what the Bible clearly shows us.

Here is the Bible record stating exactly when Neb took Jewish exiles as we have previously noted. Again look at Jer. 52:28. "These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·rez´zar took into exile: in the seventh year, three thousand and twenty-three Jews. 29 In the eighteenth year of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, from Jerusalem there were eight hundred and thirty-two souls. 30 In the twenty-third year of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard took Jews into exile, seven hundred and forty-five souls." Notice there is no mention of Jewish exiles being taken to Babylon before the 7th year of Neb. There is no record at all of exiles being taken in Neb's first year. So reasoning on the matter, if exiles were first taken by Neb in his 7th year of his rule, as the Bible shows, then how could Daniel possibly be there in Babylon to interpret Neb's dream in the 2nd year of his actual rule?

The fact is that Daniel was taken into exile at the same time as both Ezekiel and Jehoiachin around the year 617BCE when the first exiles were taken. Thus he would have still been under 100 years of age when he served under both Cyrus and Darius. He would have lived from about 630BCE to 535BCE. This would easily have been possible for a man of that day and age, especially a man full of God's spirit, having Jehovah's support. The argument that Daniel would have been too old has no merit whatsoever.

Hoshea's Reign Counted from His Vassalship to Assyria

Jeremiah's account of the rule of Hoshea provides an example and sets a precedent to show that Bible writers did indeed sometimes start the rule of kings from the time of their becoming a vassal king to another nation. It shows that it is not unreasonable nor is it twisting the scriptures to say that Jehoiakim's 3rd year in Daniel was his 3rd year as vassal king. This exact Bible example is found in 2 kings.

2 kings 15:27 "In the fifty-second year of Az·a·ri´ah the king of Judah, Pe´kah the son of Rem·a·li´ah became king over Israel in Sa·mar´i·a for twenty years. 30 Finally Ho·she´a the son of E´lah formed a conspiracy against Pe´kah the son of Rem·a·li´ah and struck him and put him to death; and he began to reign in place of him

2 kings 16:1 In the seventeenth year of Pe´kah the son of Rem·a·li´ah, A´haz the son of Jo´tham the king of Judah became king."

We here learn that Hoshea began reigning after Pekah ruled for 20 years. Ahaz began ruling in Pekah's 17th year. We can conclude that Hoshea therefore began ruling in Ahaz's 3rd or 4th year. Of this there can be no doubt. But wait! Look!

2 Kings 17:1 "In the twelfth year of A´haz the king of Judah, Ho·she´a the son of E´lah became king in Sa·mar´i·a over Israel for nine years."

Uh oh. We have a problem. Ahaz's 12th year should be Hoshea's 9th year, but no it is his first year. Hoshea should have ruled 18 years not 9 years. What is going on? Is Jeremiah so stupid that he can not add? Does he not know how to count the reigns of Kings? Has he become like Daniel in his 'ignorance' with how to count the reigns of kings? That is the same accusations made against JWs concerning 'the third year of Jehoiakim'.

Does the Bible provide an answer? Why, yes it does. Continue reading in chapter 17 of 2 Kings: "3 It was against him that Shal·man·e´ser the king of As·syr´i·a came up, and Ho·she´a came to be his servant and began to pay tribute to him." Surely this must be wrong. Hoshea's reign is being counted by Jeremiah from the time that he became a vassal king of Assyria. How can this be?

Jeremiah was inspired just like Daniel. If Jeremiah started counting a king's rule from the time he became a vassal king then Daniel could surely and apparently when examining the whole of the Bible did do the same. I wonder: if its ok for Jeremiah to do that would it be ok for Daniel to do the same?

And make no mistake all the years fit perfectly. Jeremiah just left out the first 9 years of Hoshea and began counting when he became a vassal king thus saying that he ruled 9 years. Perhaps Jehovah's Witnesses may not be so ridiculous and wicked after all for believing that Jehoiakim's third year in Daniel 1:1 is his third year as a vassal king to Babylon.

778 ISRAEL: Pekah rules 20 years--2 kings 15:27

777 JUDAH: Jotham rules 16 years--2 king 15:32-33

762 JUDAH: Ahaz becomes king in the 17th year of Pekah, rules 16 years--2 kings 16:1,2

758 ISRAEL: Hoshea assassinated Pekah. Hoshea rules 18 years. This is also 4th year of Ahaz and the 20th year since Jotham first became king--2 kings 15:30

749 ISRAEL: Hoshea in the 12th year of Ahaz becomes vassal king to Assyria and rules 9 more years as such-- 2 kings 17:1.

746 JUDAH: Hezekiah becomes king in the third year of Hoshea (12th year from beginning of his rule) and rules 29 years--2 kings 18:1,2

740 ISRAEL: Hoshea's rule ends in his 9th year as vassal king (18th overall year as king) and in Hezekiah's 6th year--2 kings 18:10

Dates are appoximations and may be off a year due to accession/regnal years.

Ezekiel's Exile

Since Ezekiel gives many prophecies in connection with the destruction of Jerusalem it is vital that we establish exactly when Ezekiel was taken into exile. At Ezekiel 40:1 we read, "In the twenty-fifth year of our exile, in the start of the year, on the tenth [day] of the month, in the fourteenth year after the city had been struck down, on this very same day the hand of Jehovah proved to be upon me." So here we can definitely establish that Ezekiel was in exile some 11 years before the destruction of Jerusalem. Using secular chronology this would be 597/598BCE. Using Jehovah's Witnesses' chronology this would be 617/618 BCE which incidentally would coincide with Daniel's exile as well. Keep these dates in mind because they are vital for the rest of our discussion.

Egypt's Forty Year Desolation

Ezekiel prophecied that Nebuchadnezzar would plunder and desolate Egypt and he even showed how long that desolation would last. This prophecy is key in establishing when the desolation of Jerusalem took place. Part of that prophecy was made in the 27th year of Ezekiel's exile.

Ezekiel 29:17: "Now it came about in the twenty-seventh year, in the first [month], on the first [day] of the month, that the word of Jehovah occurred to me, saying: 18 “Son of man, Neb·u·chad·rez´zar himself, the king of Babylon, made his military force perform a great service against Tyre. Every head was one made bald, and every shoulder was one rubbed bare. But as for wages, there proved to be none for him and his military force from Tyre for the service that he had performed against her. 19 “Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said, ‘Here I am giving to Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon the land of Egypt, and he must carry off its wealth and make a big spoil of it and do a great deal of plundering of it; and it must become wages for his military force.’ 20 “‘As his compensation for service that he did against her I have given him the land of Egypt, because they acted for me,’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah."

Lets count 27 years from 597/598 BCE (the date of Ezekiel's exile according to secular chronology). This would bring us to 570BCE. Counting 27 years from 617/618BCE would bring us to 590BCE according to Jehovah's Witnesses' chronology. These dates are very important when considering the prophecy that Ezekiel made about the land of Egypt and how long it would be desolated.

According to the prophecy of Ezekiel, Egypt was to be desolated for 40 years. Notice Ezekiel 29:12: " And I will make the land of Egypt a desolate waste in the midst of desolated lands; and its own cities will become a desolate waste in the very midst of devastated cities for FORTY years; and I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations and disperse them among the lands.”

Make no mistake. These are not two separate and distinct prophecies. It is indeed King Neb who would cause the 40 years of desolation upon Egypt. Ezekiel 30 ties it all together in verse 10: “This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said, ‘I will also cause the crowd of Egypt to cease by the hand of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon. 11 He and his people with him, the tyrants of [the] nations, are being brought in to reduce the land to ruin. And they must draw their swords against Egypt and fill the land with the slain. 12 And I will make the Nile canals dry ground and will sell the land into the hand of bad men, and I will cause the land and its fullness to be desolated by the hand of strangers. I myself, Jehovah, have spoken.’"

So now lets take the dates using secular chronology. Ezekiel made the prophecy in 570BCE so the desolation had to take place sometime after that date. Vat 4956, the one that establishes the 37th year of Neb which secular history believes to be 568BCE also talks about Neb's campaign against Egypt. So using secular chronology Neb desolated Egypt in 568, his 37th year. That is when the 40 year desolation would have begun and it would have ended in 528 BCE. But wait, Cyrus let all the exiles go in 537BCE. Did he decree that all exiles could leave, except Egyptians? Also historical records show that Egypt actually had an alliance with the last Babylon King, Nabonidus, before the destruction of Babylon in 539BCE. Therefore, Egypt had been repatriated even before 539BCE. From 568BCE until 539BCE is less than 30 years. How is it that Egypt could have been desolated for 40 years? It is absolutely and positively impossible. Therefore 587BCE as the date for the destruction of Jerusalem simply cannot be if the Bible is to be believed.

Now lets take it using the date of 607BCE. Ezekiel would have made the prophecy in 590BCE. The 37th year of Neb's reign would be the year 588BCE. That would also be the year that Egypt was desolated. Now lets allow for the 40 years of desolation and we arrive at the year 548BCE. There is plenty of time for the 40 year desolation of Egypt to take place before their restoration sometime before 539BCE.

It is not surprising that Egyptian records do not contain any references to a 40 year desolation at that time just as they do not record the Hebrew's exodus from Egypt almost one thousand years earlier. But what is amazing is that secular history does record an alliance between King Nabonidus of Babylon and King Amasis of Egypt in the year 547BCE, one year after the 40 year desolation would have ended. It harmoniously fits in perfectly with true Bible prophecies and chronology.

See chart @ http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/research/media/egypt.png

The Seventy Year Prophecy for Tyre

Ezekiel 26:1 tells us about a prophecy that was to be fulfilled upon Tyre, "And it came about in the eleventh year, on the first [day] of the month, that the word of Jehovah occurred to me, saying: 2 “Son of man, for the reason that Tyre has said against Jerusalem, ‘Aha! She has been broken, the doors of the peoples! The trend will certainly be to me. I shall be filled—she has been devastated,’ 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said, ‘Here I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring up against you many nations, just as the sea brings up its waves. 4 And they will certainly bring the walls of Tyre to ruin and tear down her towers, and I will scrape her dust away from her and make her a shining, bare surface of a crag."

Here we can establish that Ezekiel made this prophecy in 587/586BCE according to secular chronology or 607/606BCE according to Jehovah's Witnesses. This is again an important date for the prophet Isaiah expands on this prophecy and gives us further details about a 70 year prophecy to be fulfilled upon Tyre.

Isa 23:13 "Look! The land of the Chal·de´ans. This is the people—As·syr´i·a did not prove to be [the one]—they founded her for the desert haunters. They have erected their siege towers; they have stripped bare her dwelling towers; one has set her as a crumbling ruin. 14 Howl, YOU ships of Tar´shish, for YOUR stronghold has been despoiled. 15 "And it must occur in that day that Tyre must be forgotten seventy years, the same as the days of one king. At the end of seventy years it will happen to Tyre as in the song of a prostitute: 16 “Take a harp, go around the city, O forgotten prostitute. Do your best at playing on the strings; make your songs many, in order that you may be remembered.17 And it must occur at the end of seventy years that Jehovah will turn his attention to Tyre, and she must return to her hire and commit prostitution with all the kingdoms of the earth upon the surface of the ground.18 And her profit and her hire must become something holy to Jehovah. It will not be stored up, nor be laid up, because her hire will come to be for those dwelling before Jehovah, for eating to satisfaction and for elegant covering. "

Now lets return again to Ezekiel 26 and see how it coincides with the prophecy of Isaiah: 7 “For this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said, ‘Here I am bringing against Tyre Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon from the north, a king of kings, with horses and war chariots and cavalrymen and a congregation, even a multitudinous people. 8 Your dependent towns in the field he will kill even with the sword, and he must make against you a siege wall and throw up against you a siege rampart and raise up against you a large shield;"

Looking at both prohecies we see that Tyre will be sieged by Babylon, by Nebuchadnezzar, and for 70 years Tyre will be forgotten and not hired commercially speaking. This does not mean Tyre would be desolated for 70 years but would merely be forgotten in a business sense. Secular historians will try to tell us that the seige of Tyre began shortly after the desolation of Jerusalem around 587/586BCE. The 70 years would therefore end in 517/516BCE. But wait again, notice Ezra 3:1 actually tells us when the 70 years on Tyre were fulfilled, "When the seventh month arrived the sons of Israel were in [their] cities. And the people began to gather themselves as one man to Jerusalem. 7 And they proceeded to give money to the cutters and to the craftsmen, and eatables and drink and oil to the Si·do´ni·ans and the Tyr´i·ans, to bring cedar timbers from Leb´a·non to the sea at Jop´pa, according to the permission granted by Cyrus the king of Persia to them."

This event happened in 537BCE or 536BCE only 50 or so years after the seige of Tyre if 587BCE is to be accepted. The scripture in Isaiah was fulfilled at this time concerning the hiring of Tyre for Jehovah. Remember Isaiah 23:18 said, "And her profit and her hire must become something holy to Jehovah." Because Tyre was suppying cedar timbers for Jerusalem it was a holy work performed by Tyre.

Therefore the 587BCE date cannot be correct. Tyre could not have been sieged in 586BCE because that does not allow for 70 years to pass before Tyre is hired to provide timbers in the building work at Jerusalem. No, the siege of Tyre could have only taken place in 607/606BCE shortly after the true date of the destruction of Jersusalem in 607BCE. Counting 70 years from 607/606BCE we arrive just in the right year, 537/536BCE when the timbers were supplied for Jehovah's rebuilding work after the Jews had returned to Jerusalem.

Chart for 70 year prophecy on Tyre: http://jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/research/media/tyre.png

The 70 Year Servitude of the Nations to Babylon Beginning with Neb

Jer 25:1: The word that occurred to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Je·hoi´a·kim the son of Jo·si´ah, the king of Judah, that is, the first year of Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon; 2 which Jeremiah the prophet spoke concerning all the people of Judah and concerning all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying:
8 "Therefore this is what Jehovah of armies has said, ?"For the reason that YOU did not obey my words, 9 here I am sending and I will take all the families of the north," is the utterance of Jehovah, "even [sending] to Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these nations round about; and I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of astonishment and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite. 10 And I will destroy out of them the sound of exultation and the sound of rejoicing, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the hand mill and the light of the lamp. 11 And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years."'

You will note that the prophecy is made after Neb has become king in his first year and in the 4th year of Jehoiakim. Popular chronology would say this was 605BCE. 605BCE to 539BCE is only 66 years. It would therefore be impossible for the nations to serve Babylon beginning with Neb for 70 years.

Some will try to point to 609BCE as the year that this 70 year servitude began with Neb's father. But the Bible verses quoted above say otherwise. Jeremiah chapter 27 also confirms that it would be Neb, his son, and his grandson that the nations would serve, not his father.

Jer. 27:1: In the beginning of the kingdom of Je·hoi´a·kim the son of Jo·si´ah, the king of Judah, this word occurred to Jeremiah from Jehovah, saying: 2 "This is what Jehovah has said to me, ?Make for yourself bands and yoke bars, and you must put them upon your neck. 3 And you must send them to the king of E´dom and to the king of Mo´ab and to the king of the sons of Am´mon and to the king of Tyre and to the king of Si´don by the hand of the messengers who are coming to Jerusalem to Zed·e·ki´ah the king of Judah. 4 And you must give them a command for their masters, saying:
"?"This is what Jehovah of armies, the God of Israel, has said; this is what YOU should say to YOUR masters, 5 ?I myself have made the earth, mankind and the beasts that are upon the surface of the earth by my great power and by my stretched-out arm; and I have given it to whom it has proved right in my eyes. 6 And now I myself have given all these lands into the hand of Neb·u·chad·nez´zar the king of Babylon, my servant; and even the wild beasts of the field I have given him to serve him. 7 And all the nations must serve even him and his son and his grandson until the time even of his own land comes, and many nations and great kings must exploit him as a servant.'

The Bible makes it very clear that the 70 years of serving Babylon by the nations would begin during the rule of Nebuchadnezzar. Interestingly JWs and the Bible have no problem with this since according to both the evidence shows that he began his rule around 625BCE not 605BCE. Further proof that 587 is incorrect.

Zechariah's References to Seventy Years

Zechariah 1:12 says, "So the angel of Jehovah answered and said: “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you yourself not show mercy to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah, whom you have denounced these seventy years?”

Zechariah 7:5 says, “Say to all the people of the land and to the priests, ‘When YOU fasted and there was a wailing in the fifth [month] and in the seventh [month], and this for seventy years, did YOU really fast to me, even me?"

Since Zechariah covers the time period between 520BCE and 518BCE proponents of the 587 date point to these two references in Zechariah in an attempt to prove that the 70 years had not yet ended at this time and would not end until 517BCE. But a closer look at the context will help us see why this argument is incorrect.

In the first few verses chapter one Jehovah warns the people not to become like their fathers who did not listen and received punishment. The repatriated Jews needed to show zeal in the building work that lay ahead.

Next Zechariah's vision shows horses walking about in the earth. Notice the report that they bring back in verse 11, “We have walked about in the earth, and, look! the whole earth is sitting still and having no disturbance.”

The report shows that the nations are unconcerned about the building project taking place in Jerusalem. They feel they have nothing to fear from the Jews. Jehovah has not yet executed vengence upon all of those nations who laughed and scoffed at Judah. The temple has not even been finished and the work has been neglected.

Thus the angel ask in verse 12, “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you yourself not show mercy to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah, whom you have denounced these seventy years?”

Reason on the matter, why would the angel ask 'how long' when the exact length of time was already known to be 70 years? The only reason for asking was because the 70 years had ended and yet by all appearances the 70 years of denunciation was continuing. In other words, were the 70 years of desolation not enough? Will Jehovah continue to not show favor just like he did during the 70 years of desolation?

The answer comes as recorded in verse 13-17. "And Jehovah proceeded to answer the angel who was speaking with me, with good words, comforting words; 14 ...“I have been jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with great jealousy. 15 With great indignation I am feeling indignant against the nations that are at ease; ...16 My own house will be built in her, ...My cities will yet overflow with goodness;” Yes, Jehovah will show favor. Jerusalem and the temple will be rebuilt and blessings will flow to God's people.

Now lets look at Zechariah chapter 7. Throughout the 70 years of desolation and beyond the Jews had kept festivals of fasting commemorating their sorrow over the destruction of Jerusalem. So men from Bethel are sent to ask Zechariah, “Shall I (we the people of Bethel) weep in the fifth month, practicing an abstinence, the way I have done these O how many years?” Notice that they do not specify that it was 70 years only. For the commemoration had continued on now for an additional 17 years.

The answer then comes from Jehovah in verses 5-7, “Say to all the people of the land and to the priests, ‘When YOU fasted and there was a wailing in the fifth [month] and in the seventh [month], and this for seventy years, did YOU really fast to me, even me? 6 And when YOU would eat and when YOU would drink, were not YOU the ones doing the eating, and were not YOU the ones doing the drinking? 7 [Should YOU] not [obey] the words that Jehovah called out by means of the former prophets, while Jerusalem happened to be inhabited, and at ease, with her cities all around her,"

Jehovah's words are merely pointing out how much better obedience in the first place would have been than the later fasting over the calamity. Notice that God's words actually takes them back in time and reminds them that if they would have been obedient when the land was still inhabited before that calamity, then the 70 years of desolation would not have occurred. If the the fastings and commemorations were really for Jehovah rather than their own sorrow they would be obedient. And so the rest of the chapter reminds them of just why the desolation came upon them.

When we look at the context, coupled with the previous information that the land was to be desolated, uninhabited, ruined, and a wilderness for 70 years, we can see that Zechariah is not contradicting the other Bible prophecies at all.

539 or 587

Some have suggested that perhaps it is the date of 539BCE as the year of Babylon's overthrow that is incorrect rather than 587BCE as the date of Jerusalem's destruction. Perhaps Babylon was really conquered in 519BCE and the Jews returned to their homeland in 517BCE. Aside from the archaeological evidence why 539BCE is correct (and their is much evidence of that fact) lets consider why this is not in accord with logical reasoning.

If Babylon was conquered in 519BCE and the 70 years desolation then ended in 517BCE this would mean that every event after Babylon's overthrow would have to be pushed forward 20 years since most dates thereafter are based on 539BCE as the correct year for Babylon's overthrow.

For example, the word to go forth the rebuild Jerusalem would have been given in 435BCE not 455BCE. Thus the 70 weeks of years prophecy of Daniel which identified the arrival of the Messiah would have ended in 56CE, not 36CE. Jesus birth would have been around 19CE, his baptism 49CE, and his death 53CE. The destruction of Jerusalem would have thus occurred in 90CE. Anyone considering Roman history will concede that these dates are impossible. Therefore, logical reasoning, secular evidence, and Biblical evidence all point to 539BCE as the only acceptable date for the overthrow of Babylon and thus making 607BCE as the only acceptable date for the destruction of Jerusalem.

The Conclusion--607 Vs. 587

Here are the timelines which are impossible if 587BCE is the correct date of Jerusalem's desolation.

1. 70 years on Tyre began after destruction of Jerusalem. That would mean 587BCE at earliest bringing us to 517BCE some 20 years after exiles returned and Tyre provided cedars to Jews in rebuilding work in fulfillment of prophecy. Impossible!

2. Egypt devastated 40 years. Ezekiel gave prophecy in 570BCE and devastation began in 568BCE if 587BCE date is the correct date for Jerusalem's desolation. 40 years ends in 528BCE. And yet exiles released 537BCE. Impossible!

3. Jerusalem to be uninhabited and desolate for 70 years. If 587BCE is correct. desolation would end 517BCE. By this time houses had been built and crops grown for some 20 years. Impossible!

The Bible just will not work with the 587BCE date supplied by secular historians. But notice how well 607BCE coincides with the Bible's timelines.

628--Jehoiakim begins 11 year rule.

625--Neb begins rule.

620--Jehoiakim placed as Babylonian vassal king by Neb. Lasts 3 years.

617--Jehoiakim killed. Daniel, Ezekiel, and Jehoiachin exiled. Zedekiah begins 11 year rule.

614--Daniel's 3 year training ends.

607--Jerusalem destroyed, 70 years begins, 19th yr of Neb, Zedekiah's rule ends

607--Ezekiels prophecies against Tyre after their celebrating Jerusalem's destruction.

607/606--Seige of Tyre and 70 year prophecy on Tyre begins.

605--Daniel interprets Neb's dream in his 2nd year since desolating Jerusalem.

590--Ezekiel gives prophecy of Egypts desolation in 27th yr of exile. Also tells of the siege of Tyre now completed, which lasted 13 years (according to Josephus). It began 16 years earlier.

588--Egypts desolation of 40 years begins, 37th year of Neb.

548--Egypt's 40 year desolation ends.

539--Babylon conquered.

538--Cyrus' decree for Jews to return to Jerusalem.

537--Jews restored to homeland, 70 years of desolation end.

537/536--70 years on Tyre end. Provides timber for Jerusalem.

536/535--Cyrus' 3rd year, Daniel gets vision.

455--Word goes forth to rebuild Jerusalem. 70 weeks of years (490 years) begin.

29CE--Jesus baptized and anointed.

33CE--Jesus' death.

36CE--End of 70 weeks of years.

Yes the year of 607BCE as the date of Jerusalem's desolation fits perfectly with the Bible history and chronology. It is in fact the only date that does fit perfectly. No other date will work. The only conclusion that can possibly be reached is that 607BCE is indeed the date that Jerusalem was desolated according to God's Word the Bible.

On the other hand the Bible does not agree with the 587BCE date. Jehovah's Witnesses prefer to go with the Bible and what it says rather than unproven writings of historians which may or may not have an axe to grind and a reason to slant the history to suit their own beliefs. But clearly 587BCE was not the year that Jerusalem was desolated.

So you must decide, will you accept the chronology as recorded in the Holy Bible, God's view, or will you accept the chronology of secular historians and the view of imperfect man?

For further information proving 607 see http://geocities.com/jimspace3000/JWstrs/607BCE.htm

2005-11-17T18:29:00.000-08:00

Is It Proper and Loving to Judge Others as Being Apostate?

On the matter of judging others: It is somewhat dismaying that apparently even some of Jehovah's Witnesses suppose that the Bible's injunction against judging our brothers somehow applies in the case of those who would mislead us. That is a wrong application of a biblical principle. For example, in the very same sermon where Jesus told us not to judge our brother or presume to extract the splinter of fault in our brother's eye, Jesus also warned us to be on guard against those who would defraud us of our faith, saying at Matthew 7:15: "Be on the watch for the false prophets that come to you in sheep's covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will recognize them."

Jesus' graphic illustration ought to help us appreciate the fact that spiritual predators may be very hard to recognize as such. They may appear to be genuine Christians—but appearances can be very deceiving. But, how is it possible to ever "recognize them" without using our faculty of judgment? It is not possible. The very act of identifying a wolf in sheepskin is to judge that one. Not only is it our right to make judgments in these matters, it is also the moral obligation of good watchmen and shepherds to sound the alarm when there is clear evidence that proves a wolf has donned a sheep's cloak and is on the prowl among the flock. Why should any clear-thinking Christian even question the appropriateness of that?

Secondly, some readers have expressed indignation that myself and others have cited Robert King by name. But, there is no impropriety in that. Robert King is a well-known public figure—at least among Jehovah's Witnesses.

Besides, in the 1st Century the apostle Paul named the names of those who were notorious in wrecking the faith of fellow believers. For instance, in his 2nd letter to Timothy, Paul mentioned Hymenaeus and Philetus by name, saying of them: "These very men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some." Was Paul judging them? Yes, of course he was. But, he rightly judged them on the basis of the criteria Christ laid down for us—by their fruits. The fruitage that allowed Paul to recognize those men for what they were was that they were "subverting the faith of some."

Jesus also named names. In the 2nd chapter of Revelation, Jesus actually commended the brothers in Ephesus because they hated the deeds of the sect of Nicolaus. Jesus said to them: "Still, you do have this, that you hate the deeds of the sect of Nicolaus, which I also hate. Let the one who has an ear hear what the spirit says to the congregations." Conversely, Jesus rebuked those in the Pergamum congregation who were "holding fast the teaching of the sect of Nicolaus."

We are not told anything about the man Nicolaus. Perhaps he was not even personally a member of either congregation. Neither are we told anything about the teaching of Nicolaus and why Jesus hated the deeds of his followers. But, evidently the sect of Nicolaus was not a stand-alone sect as we might think of a sect today as being; but rather, the sect of Nicolaus evidently operated as a sub-sect, submerged within the congregations back then. Likely the sect of Nicolaus accepted much of the teachings of the apostles but differed only in a few key doctrines—or perhaps just one. At any rate, the sect posed a very real spiritual danger to Christ's congregation. But, the point is: How would it be possible for the Ephesians to "hate the deeds of the sect of Nicolaus" without also judging Nicolaus as an enemy of the truth?

Paul similarly instructed Christians to reject any man who promotes a sect, saying: "As for a man that promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition; knowing that such a man has been turned out of the way and is sinning, he being self-condemned." (Titus 3:10-11)

Does the act of rejecting a man involve judging him? Yes, of course it does. But in the case of a promoter of a sect, Paul said that such an individual is self-condemned. So, rather than making our own judgments in such matters, it is merely a matter of accepting the judgment that is self-evident.

Now, the question: Is Robert King a promoter of a sect? Yes, absolutely! Why can we say that? Because Robert King promotes teachings that run counter to the truth that is held in common by Christ's anointed congregation. Just as Jesus condemned those who were "holding fast the teaching of the sect of Nicolaus," so too, the followers of Robert King holds fast to unbiblical teachings.

Those who embrace such teachings may be said to hold fast to the teachings of the sect of Robert King.

Paul said in reference to Hymenaeus and Philetus: "Their word will spread like gangrene." How true that has been of Robert King's words as well. Like the 1st Century Cretins, King's teachings have also subverted the faith of entire households of Jehovah's Witnesses. For a certainty, the teachings of King are truly comparable to a rapidly spreading, gangrenous, faith-destroying cancer.

Judging by the end results of Robert King's writings, namely the stumbling of many of Jehovah's Witnesses and interested persons; we may rightly judge Robert King as a promoter of a sect and an enemy of the truth. As Jesus said, "by their fruits"—and the fruits of King's teaching is demonstrably rotten!

No doubt, the Devil would prefer that Jehovah's Witnesses today would suspend their God-given powers of judgment under the rubric of not judging our brother. However, it is our right and obligation to judge such a man. Moreover, we may also expect to hear Christ's eventual commendation for hating the deeds of the sect of Robert King.

If someone were to purposefully dump a vat of cyanide into a city's drinking water, would it be unfair to judge that person as to their motive? By the same measure, when a man of King's stature in the organization writes books directed to Jehovah's Witnesses and a large percentage of those who read his writings are stumbled, many ceasing to continue as Jehovah's Witnesses, we are left with only two conclusions: One, the writer knows full well the result his writings will have on others. Or two: He is stupid and does not realize the effect of his influence. Personally, I do not think Robert King is stupid.

I am not saying that Robert King ever advised Jehovah's Witnesses to leave the Watchtower. He is much too clever for that. But, if you look at the end result of his teaching, and the faith-destroying effect his writings have upon the reader, then it is obvious what he is all about. II Peter the 2nd chapter warns us, the same as Jesus warned us, that there will be false teachers in our midst. The 3rd verse says that "they will exploit you with counterfeit words."

A person may unknowingly accept counterfeit currency because they are unable to detect the fraud, but that does not mean that they are genuinely enriched and can use the currency themselves. They are stuck with it—to their loss. By the same token, those who accept "counterfeit words" from the smooth-talkers may imagine them to be genuine words of faith. However, we can no more benefit from false words than we can pass counterfeit currency with impunity. The end result is spiritual ruination. Obviously, many believe that Robert King is the genuine article, but, like Jesus said: "By the fruits you will recognize those men."

The letter of Jude is very similar to the 2nd chapter of II Peter and it relates that the false teachers are "the ones that make separations, animalistic men, not having spirituality." Now, ask yourself: Have the writings of Robert King caused "separations"? Without a doubt, yes they have.

Just like unreasoning animals, animalistic men also instinctively know the weaknesses and fears of others. They know that if they can subtly create enough doubt within a person's mind, then their faith will give way and they will have their intended prey. The victim may not even know he has been devoured.

Why would you defend anyone who knowingly stumbles others out of the truth?

Ultimately, who we choose now for our guide will determine whether we reach our goal of salvation or not. The Bible advises that we keep focused on God's prophetic word until the daystar arises in our hearts. During the darkest hours of the end of the world we may expect the sealed sons of the kingdom to shine as brightly as the stars of heaven and lead God's people to life. Contrasted with that, Jude describes the animalistic misleaders of God's people as lost stars hurtling into eternal blackness.

You would do well to seriously reflect upon the course Robert King has provided by his pattern and decide if you really want to follow his wandering star into oblivion.

I must admit I am a plagiarist. The above words are not mine (except for the title). They were written by Robert King before he was disfellowshipped about Ray Franz. I merely substituted Robert King's name for Ray Franz.

2005-11-17T10:13:00.000-08:00

Robert King Exposes the WT's Interpretation--Or Does He?

Have you seen this blog by Robert King? http://yhwhwatchman.blogspot.com/2005/10/day-of-tyranny.html
Did you notice his most logical and excellent reasoning on the WT's interpretation? And how he positively showed the WT's interpretation as being incorrect? Please note how he soundly exposes the WT's faulty interpretation:

But it is during the reign of the tyrant, or the "despot of the nations," as recorded in the 31st chapter of Ezekiel, that Jehovah offers the lowly ones of his people refuge from the storm of tyranny.
The 25th chapter of Isaiah foretells:"That is why those who are a strong people will glorify you; the town of the tyrannical nations, they will fear you. For you have become a stronghold to the lowly one, a stronghold to the poor one in the distress that he has, a refuge from the rainstorm, a shade from the heat, when the blast of the tyrannical ones is like a rainstorm against a wall. Like the heat in a waterless country, the noise of strangers you subdue, the heat with the shadow of a cloud. The melody itself of the tyrannical ones becomes suppressed."
-Has the tyrant begun his reign of terror yet? Jehovah's Witnesses say yes. And stranger still, according to the Watchtower's interpretation, the despot and tyrants of the nations is none other than Jesus Christ himself and the holy angels. Here is an excerpt from the May 15th, 1977 Watchtower.-"Who is the modern "despot of the nations," and who are the "strangers, the tyrants of the nations"? They are the fear-inspiring Communist bloc of nations, are they not? To this we flatly answer, No!. . .So, then. . .who will be Jehovah’s instrument that will do a work like that of the "despot of the nations," or the "strangers, the tyrants of the nations," back in the prophet Ezekiel's day? It will not be Jehovah’s Christian witnesses, who today number just some two million scattered among 210 lands around the globe. They are not despotic, not tyrannical, and strike no terror in people's hearts, for which reason they are openly persecuted as a helpless, defenseless religious minority. Not a puny earthly instrument, but a mighty heavenly instrument is what Jehovah will use. Jehovah's instrument is the glorified Jesus Christ and his armies of heavenly angels. Hardheaded politicians of today may laugh at such a thought."
Hopefully it is obvious to thinking persons that Nebuchadnezzar's nation-crushing tyranny did not foreshadow the activities of God's kingdom. Jehovah will not need to intervene to protect the lowly ones from being tyrannized by Jesus Christ and the holy angels.”

Wow, I am utterly astounded. You have to hand it to Mr. King this time. He has really exposed the ridiculous interpretation of the WT in this case. Can you believe the WT would make such a, as Robert King put it, 'bizarre and blasphemous' interpretation of scripture? Neither can I. Because they really didn't.

If you actually look up the May 15, 1977 WT that Mr. King quotes in his blog you will find that it is not an interpretation of the WT for Isaiah 25 at all as he would lead you to believe. No, it is instead an interpretation of Ezekiel chapter 31. Here from the Isaiah Prophecy book is the WT's real interpretation of Isaiah 25:

2 The counsels of Jehovah include his judgment declarations against Israel’s enemies. Isaiah now pronounces one of these: “You have made a city a pile of stones, a fortified town a crumbling ruin, a dwelling tower of strangers to be no city, which will not be rebuilt even to time indefinite.” (Isaiah 25:2) What is this unnamed city? Isaiah may be referring to Ar of Moab—Moab has long been at enmity with God’s people. Or he may be referring to another, stronger city—Babylon.—Isaiah 15:1; Zephaniah 2:8, 9
3 How will Jehovah’s enemies react when his counsel against their strong city comes true? “Those who are a strong people will glorify you; the town of the tyrannical nations, they will fear you.” (Isaiah 25:3) It is understandable that the enemies of the almighty God will fear him. How, though, do they glorify him? Will they abandon their false gods and adopt pure worship? Hardly! Rather, like Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar, they glorify Jehovah when they are compelled to recognize his overwhelming superiority.—Exodus 10:16, 17; 12:30-33; Daniel 4:37.
4 Today “the town of the tyrannical nations” is “the great city that has a kingdom over the kings of the earth,” namely, “Babylon the Great,” the world empire of false religion"

It seems Mr. King is now resorting to using the straw man routine to discredit the WTS. He is attempting to mislead people by ascribing an interpretation to the WT on a certain scripture that they have really not put forth in order for him to then discredit them for that 'bizarre and blasphemous' interpretation. But in using such sly trickery and deceit he is really only calling his own credibility into question. We may be reminded of a certain scripture at 2 Corinthians 11:13:

"For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel of light. 15 It is therefore nothing great if his ministers also keep transforming themselves into ministers of righteousness. But their end shall be according to their works."

And these sly words of a certain someone: "Is it really so that God has said....?"

2005-11-11T07:15:00.000-08:00

Has Babylon the Great Fallen?

Has Babylon the Great really already fallen? And have Jehovah's Witnesses and the WTS really ceased to be a part of Babylon the Great? Some of our fellow brothers have been duped by apostate reasonings into thinking that Babylon has not fallen and that Jehovah's Witnesses have not been called to come out of Babylon.

As one disbeliever of such a fall commented, "if Babylon has already fallen, why does Christendom's trinity god still presumptuously parade as if he were the real God of the Bible? Or why does the Muslim god, Allah, still oppress and kill Jehovah's Witnesses, and anyone else who carries a Bible in the lands where his worshippers dominate? Is Jehovah, the God of Jehovah's Witnesses, and the same God who parted the Red Sea and overthrew the mighty kingdom of Babylon in one fateful night, merely an also-ran to the modern pantheon of gods of the nations?"

In his use of the above questions he is trying to put forth the notion that Babylon the Great must not have fallen yet. But is his reasoning valid? Or does his reasoning belie the fact that he simply does not understand what the Bible really teaches on the subject? While he poses these questions in an attempt to merely discredit the WTS, we will admit that those are certainly reasonable questions that ones might sincerely ask and that deserve an answer. Does the Bible offer that answer? Let us see.

Does Babylon's Fall Mean Immediate Destruction?

The 18th chapter of Revelation provides the answer. It shows us that her fall occurs sometime before her destruction: "After these things I saw another angel descending from heaven, with great authority; and the earth was lighted up from his glory. 2 And he cried out with a strong voice, saying: “She has fallen! Babylon the Great has fallen, and she has become a dwelling place of demons and a lurking place of every unclean exhalation and a lurking place of every unclean and hated bird! 3 For because of the wine of the anger of her fornication all the nations have fallen [victim], and the kings of the earth committed fornication with her, and the traveling merchants of the earth became rich due to the power of her shameless luxury.”

Please note that after her fall she still continues to be a lurking place for demons and uncleaness. We find this to be true in false religion today where pagan demonic teachings are promoted and where immorality runs rampant among its members. She has fallen but no she is not yet destroyed.

"4 And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if YOU do not want to share with her in her sins, and if YOU do not want to receive part of her plagues."

The call to get out of her comes after her fall but of course before her destruction. Anyone failing to get out of Babylon the Great could not be called 'my people' by Jehovah God. That call to get out is now taking place before her detruction and will probably continue right up until her destruction.

"5 For her sins have massed together clear up to heaven, and God has called her acts of injustice to mind. 6 Render to her even as she herself rendered, and do to her twice as much, yes, twice the number of the things she did; in the cup in which she put a mixture put twice as much of the mixture for her. 7 To the extent that she glorified herself and lived in shameless luxury, to that extent give her torment and mourning. For in her heart she keeps saying, ‘I sit a queen, and I am no widow, and I shall never see mourning.’ "

Even after she has fallen she still displays the attitude that she is a queen and nothing can happen to her. And even after her fall she appears to be well grounded in this system, ruling over the nations as a queen sitting pretty.

"8 That is why in one day her plagues will come, death and mourning and famine, and she will be completely burned with fire, because Jehovah God, who judged her, is strong."

Additionally we see here that even after her fall it is declared that her destruction is still yet future when she will be completely burned with fire. Why will this burning take place? It is 'because Jehovah God, who judged her, is strong.' She is judged (past tense) as already fallen before she is destroyed.

The Fall of Ancient Babylon--A Parallel

The parallel is ancient Babylon. It fell in 539BCE. But it was not destroyed. God's people were released from it in 537BCE but it was still not destroyed. The Babylonian religion and philosophy still held sway over the earth. It wasn't until some time later that it was destroyed.

Concerning Babylon becoming a literal desolate wasteland one brother named Al said, "Remember that when the ancient Babylon fell it continued to be a capital city and a major trading post for centuries. It was still inhabited in the 1st century and the early Christians preached there. All of this happend despite that the prophecies said Babylon would fall and become a desolate waste. But the prophecies weren't wrong. Babylon did fall, it just didn't become a desolate waste immediately, but it did later. So too with prophetic Babylon the Great. It fell and no longer prevented the truth from being spoken as it had done for centuries during the dark ages. It's not a desolate waste yet as Revelation predicts, but that too will change, hopefully soon."

What the Fall of Babylon Means

It is not that Babylon the Great, false religion, has lost position and authority in the world today. She has much influence over this world and the nations. In fact, as we showed earlier, even after Babylon the Great has fallen according to Revelation she still says, 'I sit a queen and I am no widow and I shall never see mourning.' She does not acknowledge or recognize a fall. Nor do her lovers.

The fall is only apparent to Jehovah and to Jehovah's people for He has pronounced that she has fallen and that her sure destruction will come. Jehovah's Witnesses proclaim that judgment by Jehovah and her coming destruction worldwide in their preaching of the good news of the Kingdom. JWs are no longer in bondage to Babylon's pagan falsehoods. She has no spiritual control over God's people any longer. God's people have been released from that bondage. She has fallen in that sense and in the sense that God has pronounced her destruction. But she still is viewed as a queen by herself and her lovers.

The Fall of Judaism

The fall of Babylon the Great also has a parallel in the fall of Judaism in the first century as well. Jesus said at Matthew 23:37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent forth to her,—how often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks together under her wings! But YOU people did not want it. 38 Look! YOUR house is abandoned to YOU."

The Jewish religious system had become filled with falsehoods and traditions of men. It had rejected God's son. It was therefore abandoned or rejected by God, fallen from his favor. God's people were released from that rejected religion and gathered into the newly formed Christian organization of God. The barren fallen Jewish religious system had no spiritual hold on God's people any longer. It had fallen. But it still existed. It still persecuted God's people. Even Rome apparently considered it a force to be reckoned with because in 70CE the Roman armies, the disgusting thing, attacked Jerusalem and destroyed the city and its temple thereby leaving no doubt that God had rejected them.

It is the same today. God has rejected Babylon the Great and she has no spiritual hold on God's people any longer. God's people have gotten out of her and have left her Babylonish teachings and falsehoods. She has fallen. But she still persecutes God's people. She is still a force to be reckoned with and the disgusting thing, the scarlet wild beast, will do so when he turns on her and eats her up. (Revelation 17)

Paul Makes the Connection

The Apostle Paul clears the matter up so that we are left with no doubt. At 2 Corinthians 6:16,17 notice what he says, "For we are a temple of a living God; just as God said: “I shall reside among them and walk among [them], and I shall be their God, and they will be my people.” 17 “‘Therefore get out from among them, and separate yourselves,’ says Jehovah, ‘and quit touching the unclean thing’”; “‘and I will take YOU in.’” 18 “‘And I shall be a father to YOU, and YOU will be sons and daughters to me,’ says Jehovah the Almighty.”

Here Paul makes the connection that those anointed ones, who are 'a temple of a living God', are the same ones who God calls 'my people' and have gotten out of symbolic Babylon. How do we know this? Because he is here quoting from the prophecy of Isaiah about the Israelites leaving ancient Babylon.

Isaiah 52: 9 "Become cheerful, cry out joyfully in unison, YOU devastated places of Jerusalem, for Jehovah has comforted his people; he has repurchased Jerusalem. 10 Jehovah has bared his holy arm before the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth must see the salvation of our God.
11 Turn away, turn away, get out of there, touch nothing unclean; get out from the midst of her, keep yourselves clean, YOU who are carrying the utensils of Jehovah."

Does this not prove from God's word that the call to get out of Babylon the Great is not at some designated time during or immediately prior to the Great Tribulation but rather the call to get out of Babylon is at the time of the initial ingathering of God's people. That is what Paul was saying. That was the requirement for true Christians in the first century if they wanted to be part of God's temple class.

Babylon Has Fallen--Get Out Now

Trying to use faulty reasoning to discredit and belittle Jehovah's people one such twister of God's word said, "Has Jehovah's name become renowned world-wide merely because the Bible Students denounced Christendom back in the 1920's? Not really." However, we know that to be a dishonest and misleading statement, purposely put in such a way as to again attempt to belittle Jehovah's Witnesses. But we know, contrary to the reasoning of this opposer of God's people, that thanks to the preaching of the good news of Jehovah's Kingdom, the divine name has indeed become renowned throughout the entire globe like never before. For a fact, millions of people worldwide have been contacted by the promoters and bearers of God's name Jehovah?

He further reasons, "If Babylon the Great has already fallen and God's people have relived the mighty deliverance from the hand of tyranny, foreshadowed and foretold in prophecy, then, we must say "Yes, Jehovah is no more powerful than any other god." To this we can say, perhaps his god is no more powerful than any other god but our God Jehovah has pronounced that Babylon the Great has fallen and has collected together millions of people who are no longer under bondage to Babylon the Great or her false teachings. Perhaps he considers that a small unimportant feat that Jehovah has performed but Jesus said that it could only be performed by the power of the holy spirit.

Acts 1:8 "but YOU will receive power when the holy spirit arrives upon YOU, and YOU will be witnesses of me both in Jerusalem and in all Ju·de´a and Sa·mar´i·a and to the most distant part of the earth.”

Yes Babylon has indeed fallen according to the scriptures and now is the time for God's people to get out of her. Do not let the twisted reasonings of apostates convince you otherwise.

2005-11-09T09:01:00.001-08:00

Spiritual Paradise--Present or Future?

"...just knowing certain truths, and even living by them, doesn't make for a spiritual paradise. Having organizational unity and order is not what makes for a spiritual paradise either. What makes for a spiritual paradise is the absolute absence of any corrupting influence or stumbling block of any kind. Such a condition did not exist in the first-century congregation, and neither does it exist today. The only time a spiritual paradise has ever existed on earth was that brief moment in the Garden of Eden before the Devil misled humans into rebellion. Since that time, no such paradise has existed" These are the words of a modern day self proclaimed 'prophet' who has been 'enlightened' with 'the truth about The Truth'. But are his words based on the Biblical evidence? Or just empty twisted words used to support his views that the restoration of God's people has not yet occurred and is yet future. A careful examination of the Bible prophecies and the words of the Apostle Paul will help us recognize the truth about this cleverly concocted 'truth about The Truth'.

Devastated Land Becomes a Paradise

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that we do currently live in a spiritual paradise. This belief is based on the prophecies of the restoration of God's people. We have previously shown, in accord with the WT publications and the Bible, that the restoration of God's people occurred according to the fulfillment of Isaiah 61 in the first century and that the prophetic parallel took place after the arrival of the King, Jesus Christ, in 1914. http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2005/11/restoration-of-gods-people-when.html

From Isaiah 61:4 comes this prophecy fulfilled upon God's restored people: "And they must rebuild the long-standing devastated places; they will raise up even the desolated places of former times, and they will certainly make anew the devastated cities, the places desolate for generation after generation." Do we find similar worded prophecies in the God's word?

Indeed we do. Please take note of Ezekiel 36:33 “This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said, ‘In the day of my cleansing YOU from all YOUR errors I will also cause the cities to be inhabited, and the devastated places must be rebuilt. 34 And the desolated land itself will be cultivated, whereas it had become a desolate waste before the eyes of every passerby. 35 And people will certainly say: “That land yonder which was laid desolate has become like the garden of E´den, and the cities that were a waste and that were laid desolate and that were torn down are fortified; they have become inhabited.” 36 And the nations that will be left remaining round about YOU will have to know that I myself, Jehovah, have built the things torn down, I have planted what has been laid desolate. I myself, Jehovah, have spoken and I have done [it].’

Ah, 'long-standing devastated places', 'the desolated places of former times', 'the devastated cities', 'the places desolate for generation after generation' have 'become like the garden of Eden'. Just as the garden of Eden could be called a paradise literally speaking, in like manner the devastated land of God's people, now spiritually restored, is like a paradise, that is a spiritual paradise. This is what the scriptures say. Any cleverly twisted words and reasonings cannot altar God's word. Is this description of a spiritual garden of Eden or paradise in agreement with the writings of the first century Christians? Let us see.

Spiritual Paradise of the Early Christians

The aforementioned self proclaimed prophet made this bold statement as if it were truth beyond any doubt: "Did such a spiritual paradise exist in the first century among those spirit-anointed apostles and disciples? No" He goes on to reason, "it is evident by reason of the fact that first-century Christians were plagued with all sorts of moral and spiritual problems, the same as we are. They had problems with sexual immorality, sectarianism, and apostasy; there was dissension and disputes about what was correct teaching, and so forth. Some congregations were troubled with petty jealousies, hatreds, and backbiting. There were treacherous, animalistic men who sought to prey upon the innocent vulnerable ones. Paul spoke about the spiritual dangers he faced from false brothers who sneaked into the congregations to spy upon the brothers, and from the satanic charlatans in Corinth whom Paul sarcastically dubbed the super-fine apostles. Those are hardly the conditions of a spiritual paradise." Is this reasoning in accord with the scriptures or is it misleading faulty twisted reasoning meant to undermine the faith of those having doubts? Is his dogmatic statement that there was and is no spiritual paradise among the anointed followers of Christ really in accord with the Bible writers of the first century? And is perfection a requisite for the existence of a spiritual paradise?

Paul makes the connection between the Christian congregation in his day and the restoration prophecy of Isaiah 49. At 2 Cor 6:2 he quotes from the Isaiah prophecy and applies it to the restoration and salvation of God's people in his day. For detailed explanation see: http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2005/11/restoration-of-gods-people-when.html

But of great interest concerning the spiritual paradise is Isaiah 49:10, 11: "They will not go hungry, neither will they go thirsty, nor will parching heat or sun strike them. For the One who is having pity upon them will lead them, and by the springs of water he will conduct them. 11 And I will make all my mountains a way, and my highways themselves will be on an elevation."

No hungering, no thirsting, no scorching heat: Life in paradise is well described here and ties in with Revelation 7:15-17 in describing the blessings brought upon the great crowd, "That is why they are before the throne of God; and they are rendering him sacred service day and night in his temple; and the One seated on the throne will spread his tent over them. 16 They will hunger no more nor thirst anymore, neither will the sun beat down upon them nor any scorching heat, 17 because the Lamb, who is in the midst of the throne, will shepherd them, and will guide them to fountains of waters of life. And God will wipe out every tear from their eyes.”

But please take note too of the elevated highways mentioned in verse 11 of Isaiah 49. You are no doubt reminded of the description of paradise and the spiritually elevated Highway of Holiness mentioned in Isaiah 35. Notice specifically Isaiah 35:8,9, "And there will certainly come to be a highway there, even a way; and the Way of Holiness it will be called. The unclean one will not pass over it. And it will be for the one walking on the way, and no foolish ones will wander about [on it]. 9 No lion will prove to be there, and the rapacious sort of wild beasts will not come up on it. None will be found there; and the repurchased ones must walk [there]." By connecting his day to the restoration prophecy of Isaiah 49 where the elevated highways were foretold, it is clear then that the Apostle Paul connected Christians in his day to walking on that spiritually elevated Highway in the spiritual paradise of God's people. No it was not necessary for the Christians in the first century to reach perfection before the prophecy could be fulfilled upon them, anymore than it was necessary for the Jews to reach perfection in 537BCE in order for the restoration prophecies to be fulfilled upon them.

Additionally, please look at what the Apostle Paul said at Ephesians chapter two as regards the spiritual condition of the anointed: "Furthermore, [it is] YOU [God made alive] though YOU were dead in YOUR trespasses and sins, 2 in which YOU at one time walked according to the system of things of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that now operates in the sons of disobedience. 3 Yes, among them we all at one time conducted ourselves in harmony with the desires of our flesh, doing the things willed by the flesh and the thoughts, and we were naturally children of wrath even as the rest. 4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love with which he loved us, 5 made us alive together with the Christ, even when we were dead in trespasses—by undeserved kindness YOU have been saved— 6 and he raised us up together and seated us together in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus,..."

Paul is speaking about the spiritual condition of the anointed ones even before they receive their heavenly reward. God raised them 'together in the heavenly places' even while they are still on earth. Certainly their being raised up to heavenly places while still on earth, even in the imperfect flesh, constitutes a spiritual paradise indeed!

Did Paul believe that perfection must be obtained before a spiritual paradise can exist? No, the Apostle Paul does not agree with the reasoning of the 'prophet/watchman'. How about you? Who do you believe? The Apostle Paul, specifically chosen by Jesus Christ and used by Jehovah God as a writer of much of the Holy Bible? Or the reasoning and baseless statements of a self proclaimed watchman/prophet who has shown himself guilty of double speak and copying the works of others while proclaiming it his own? Please see http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2005/09/e-watchman-enlightened-by-holy-spirit.html and http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2005/11/e-watchman-speaks-out-against-robert.html

The Spiritual Paradise Described by Isaiah 11

You are probably very familiar with Isaiah 11:6-9. There it says, "And the wolf will actually reside for a while with the male lamb, and with the kid the leopard itself will lie down, and the calf and the maned young lion and the well-fed animal all together; and a mere little boy will be leader over them. 7 And the cow and the bear themselves will feed; together their young ones will lie down. And even the lion will eat straw just like the bull. 8 And the sucking child will certainly play upon the hole of the cobra; and upon the light aperture of a poisonous snake will a weaned child actually put his own hand. 9 They will not do any harm or cause any ruin in all my holy mountain; because the earth will certainly be filled with the knowledge of Jehovah as the waters are covering the very sea."

The very fact that it here mentions that the 'earth will be filled with the knowledge of Jehovah' forces even denouncers of the existence of a spiritual paradise today to acknowledge that this is indeed talking about a spiritual paradise. Only humans on earth can have actual knowledge of Jehovah. But they are not willing to go down quietly. Notice the argument made by one such denouncer:

"Consider the context of the verses in question. The preceding verses reveal how Edenic conditions will come about. Isaiah 11:3-5 reads: “And he will not judge by any mere appearance to his eyes, nor reprove simply according to the thing heard by his ears. And with righteousness he must judge the lowly ones, and with uprightness he must give reproof in behalf of the meek ones of the earth. And he must strike the earth with the rod of his mouth; and with the spirit of his lips he will put the wicked one to death. And righteousness must prove to be the belt of his hips, and faithfulness the belt of his loins.” Please notice that spiritual paradise comes about as a result of the Messiah judging mankind in righteousness. The effect of his judgment will be that he will put the wicked to death and save the righteous. Spiritual paradise follows Christ’s judgment."

But is this in harmony with what the Apostle Paul and the other prophecies have said about restoration and spiritual paradise? Furthermore, is this actually what the prophecy is saying? An examination of the entire chapter shows otherwise. Lets look at verses 10-12:

"And it must occur in that day that there will be the root of Jes´se that will be standing up as a signal for the peoples. To him even the nations will turn inquiringly, and his resting-place must become glorious.
11 And it must occur in that day that Jehovah will again offer his hand, a second time, to acquire the remnant of his people who will remain over from As·syr´i·a and from Egypt and from Path´ros and from Cush and from E´lam and from Shi´nar and from Ha´math and from the islands of the sea. 12 And he will certainly raise up a signal for the nations and gather the dispersed ones of Israel; and the scattered ones of Judah he will collect together from the four extremities of the earth."

Please note what happens 'in that day' when the spiritual paradise comes about: 1. 'the nations will turn inquiringly' 2. 'Jehovah will again..acquire the remnant of his people' 3. and gather the dispersed ones of Israel' 4. 'the scattered ones of Judah he will collect together'

From this we see that it is not the death of the wicked ones that brings about the spiritual paradise but rather the collecting of God's people together which is now taking place. Of course, ultimately, the death of the wicked ones will take place when Jesus does 'strike the earth with the rod of his mouth' and the spiritual paradise will then be perfect in every way. But until that time he must fill the earth with knowledge of Jehovah by collecting his people together into a spiritual paradise.

It should not be surprising that in harmony with his other writings Paul once again bears this out at Romans 15:9-12 by actually quoting from Isaiah 11:10: "9 and that the nations might glorify God for his mercy. Just as it is written: “That is why I will openly acknowledge you among the nations and to your name I will make melody.” 10 And again he says: “Be glad, YOU nations, with his people.” 11 And again: “Praise Jehovah, all YOU nations, and let all the peoples praise him.” 12 And again Isaiah says: “There will be the root of Jes´se, and there will be one arising to rule nations; on him nations will rest their hope.”

Yes here once again Paul shows us that the gathering of people of the nations into his organization is in fulfillment of the prophecy about restoration and paradise as found in Isaiah 11. According to Paul it by no means must wait to be fulfilled after the destruction of the wicked for it had a fulfillment in his day. Again we asked, will you believe the Bible writer Paul or some self proclaimed 'prophet' who has proven himself unable to properly interpret the scriptures?

Spiritual Paradise Today

Does Isaiah 11 and 49 have fulfillment for our day? Yes indeed it does. As we have seen above, Revelation describes those exact paradise-like spiritual conditions as being poured out upon the great crowd in the Lord's Day. In particular verse 16, "They will hunger no more nor thirst anymore, neither will the sun beat down upon them nor any scorching heat," provides ample proof that the same spiritual paradise prophecies that were applied to God's people in the first century should also be applied to God's people in these last days. Of course ultimately in the New World the paradise will reach perfection both literally and spiritually.

Yes, prophecy, history, and the facts all show that Jehovah's Witnesses are indeed today living in a spiritual paradise like no others. While imperfect, they nonetheless are a worldwide brotherhood of Kingdom truth proclaimers, united by love regardless of race, color, nationality, and social status. Unlike the false religious spiritually desolate wastelands of this world, anyone found trying to wickedly sully the spiritual paradise of God's people, whether by works of the flesh or apostasy, are promptly removed so as to maintain the spiritual paradise-like condition.

The would be 'watchman/prophet' himself is a testimony to that fact because currently he finds himself outside the spiritual paradise of God's people. Verbally beating and trying to mislead Christ's brothers and supporters is simply not tolerated in God's spiritual paradise.

2005-11-06T15:48:00.000-08:00

Restoration of God's People--When? Examining Isaiah 61

Jehovah's Witnesses teach that the restoration of God's people in modern times occured shortly after Jesus began his ride as King in 1914. But there are some would be prophets and their followers, who have risen up from among Jehovah's Witnesses, claiming that the restoration is yet future and will occur after God punishes His people just prior to Armageddon by the King of the North. And so they proclaim their 'truth about the Truth' as if it were truth beyond any doubt whatsoever. But a closer examination of the prophecy in Isaiah 61 will help us to arrive at the correct conclusion as to when the restoration of God's people began in modern times.

Isaiah 61 beginning in verse 1 reads: "The spirit of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah is upon me, for the reason that Jehovah has anointed me to tell good news to the meek ones. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to those taken captive and the wide opening [of the eyes] even to the prisoners; 2 to proclaim the year of goodwill on the part of Jehovah and the day of vengeance on the part of our God; to comfort all the mourning ones; 3 to assign to those mourning over Zion, to give them a headdress instead of ashes, the oil of exultation instead of mourning, the mantle of praise instead of the downhearted spirit; and they must be called big trees of righteousness, the planting of Jehovah, for [him] to be beautified. 4 And they must rebuild the long-standing devastated places; they will raise up even the desolated places of former times, and they will certainly make anew the devastated cities, the places desolate for generation after generation.

Jesus Application of the Prophecy in the First Century

A reading of Luke 4 tells us exactly how it was fulfilled in the first century. 17 "So the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed him, and he opened the scroll and found the place where it was written: 18 “Jehovah’s spirit is upon me, because he anointed me to declare good news to the poor, he sent me forth to preach a release to the captives and a recovery of sight to the blind, to send the crushed ones away with a release, 19 to preach Jehovah’s acceptable year.” 20 With that he rolled up the scroll, handed it back to the attendant and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were intently fixed upon him. 21 Then he started to say to them: “Today this scripture that YOU just heard is fulfilled.”

From this it is clear that Jesus had come to preach a release for captives. But captives of what? In 607BCE the nation of Israel had went into captivity in Babylon. But they had long ago been released from that captivity in 537BCE. The captivity that Jesus now was preaching a release from was the captivity to the Jewish religion that had left the teachings of Jehovah with there manmade traditions.

Did you notice what the results of his preaching would be? Isaiah 61:3 continues, "to assign to those mourning over Zion, to give them a headdress instead of ashes, the oil of exultation instead of mourning, the mantle of praise instead of the downhearted spirit; and they must be called big trees of righteousness, the planting of Jehovah, for [him] to be beautified."

As a result of Jesus' preaching work 'big trees of righteousness' were brought forth. These big trees as anointed followers of Jesus would follow his example in preaching a release for captives. But most interesting is what the next verse alludes to.

4 And they must rebuild the long-standing devastated places; they will raise up even the desolated places of former times, and they will certainly make anew the devastated cities, the places desolate for generation after generation."

The question here must be asked: Is this a literal rebuilding of devastated places? It certainly was in 537BCE. But Jerusalem was in no way destroyed and rebuilt just prior to 33CE. Since this is not a literal rebuilding of devastated places and cities in 33CE then we must ask: Were the Jews as a religious people literally devastated at this time by a national beast-like army so that there was need of regathering them and rebuilding the devastated people in a symbolic sense? No, there had been no such attack by the Roman armies or any other armies so that they needed to be regathered and rebuilt symbolically speaking for this reason.

So the question that logically follows is: In what sense was the Jewish religion devastated since it was not at the hands of any outside force such as the Roman armies? Notice the comments by the WT, July 1, 1978:
13 It was because of the spiritual state into which the nation of Israel had come. True, Jehovah had executed a "day of vengeance" on the Babylonian Empire, whose rulers had refused to ‘open the way homeward to the prisoners.’ (Isa. 14:17; Jer. 50:15, 28; 51:6, 11, 36) When restored thereafter to their homeland those Jewish "prisoners" did not come into bondage to idolatry with literal graven images. Yet they came into a greater bondage, that to the religious system of Judaism. This was a system dominated by precepts and traditions of men, things that made invalid the Law and the commandments of Jehovah God. The official scribes and Pharisees became prominent in this religious system. They blinded the people to the truth by taking away "the key of knowledge," hindering them from entering into the kingdom of God, and binding heavy loads on the common people that they themselves would not touch.—Luke 11:52.
14 Moreover, those leaders in Judaism, like blind guides, led the blinded Jews in the way that ends up in the ditch of national destruction. They maneuvered Zion, or Jerusalem, into rejecting the real Messiah, Jesus, and having him put to death on a stake as if he were a false Christ. Those religious leaders kept Jerusalem on the path of being a killer of prophets and a stoner of those whom her God sent. (Matt. 23:1-37) So, did the "meek" ones of such a nation need to have "good news" told to them? Were those "taken captive" needing to have liberty proclaimed to them? Were there "prisoners" that needed to have a "wide opening of the eyes" by being brought out of the dungeon of religious darkness? Was Zion, or Jerusalem, as the center of Jehovah’s worship in such a religiously devastated state that there was real cause for mourning over her? Yes, indeed! And the anointed Jesus saw that there was then a remnant of such "mourning ones" among the Jews.

How were the captives released and the devastated places restored? Again the same WT comments:
23 From all of this, what do we today observe? This fact, that, in keeping with his own anointing, Jesus Christ pioneered a restoration work toward those who became his disciples. Jehovah used him to pour out holy spirit on his baptized disciples, so that these recipients of holy spirit themselves became persons anointed with the spirit of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. (2 Cor. 1:21; 1 John 2:20, 27) Now they also were commissioned to tell "good news" to the "meek" ones in the nation of Israel, to proclaim liberty to the captives and a release for the prisoners, and to comfort all those mourning over Zion. In this way they could help others whom they were used to comfort and liberate into exulting over "the year of goodwill on the part of Jehovah" and into praising him for restoring them to his favor and service by means of his anointed ones.
24 That outpouring of the spirit made all the difference in the world for those anointed with it. Instead of being like frail plants drooping for lack of nourishment, they became like "big trees of righteousness" that only Jehovah could plant and make grow up through Christ. Man’s original "Paradise of Pleasure" had been adorned by trees of various kinds. (Gen. 2:7-9) But from Pentecost onward Jehovah planted "big trees" in the spiritual estate of his dedicated people that their enemies had devastated and desolated. Such figurative "big trees" were the stalwart, steadfast, immovable Christians that reared themselves up loftily for the righteousness of Jehovah God. He, as their Planter, was "beautified" by their presence in the newly established Christian congregation.

And so it is in connection with the restoration of the devastated places that Joel 2 is fulfilled. Please see the following link for explanation of Joel 2 in this regard. http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2005/10/unfaithful-jerusalem-christendom-or.html

Paul Confirms the Restoration in His Day

The apostle Paul at 2 Cor 6:2 makes the connection between the Christian congregation and the restoration of God's people. Paul said quoting Isaiah 49:8, "For he says: “In an acceptable time I heard you, and in a day of salvation I helped you.” Look! Now is the especially acceptable time. Look! Now is the day of salvation."

And what do you suppose was the topic of Isaiah 49. Yes, the restoration of God's people. Notice Isaiah 49:8-11 concerning that restoration: "8 This is what Jehovah has said: “In a time of goodwill I have answered you, and in a day of salvation I have helped you; and I kept safeguarding you that I might give you as a covenant for the people, to rehabilitate the land, to bring about the repossessing of the desolated hereditary possessions, 9 to say to the prisoners, ‘Come out!’ to those who are in the darkness, ‘Reveal yourselves!’ By the ways they will pasture, and on all beaten paths their pasturing will be. 10 They will not go hungry, neither will they go thirsty, nor will parching heat or sun strike them. For the One who is having pity upon them will lead them, and by the springs of water he will conduct them. 11 And I will make all my mountains a way, and my highways themselves will be on an elevation."

And here in 2 Cor 6 we find that Paul after quoting that prophecy of Isaiah about the restoration pointedly says, "Now is the especially acceptable time. Look! Now is the day of salvation." Can their be any doubt that there was a fulfillment of the restoration prophecies on God's people in the first century?

Applying the Prophecy in the Last Days

The parallel is evident to any who are willing to reason on the matter. The true Christian Congregation of the first century was contaminated thru the centuries by false Babylonian teachings. Christianity had come into the same condition as the Jewish religious system of the first century. There was a need for a release of the captives of false religion and the restoration of devastated places so to speak. God's people had not been literally overcome by some military force so that they needed to be regathered and restored. Just as they had not been devastated by a military force in the first century so that they needed restoration. But they were spiritually devastated. And so a spiritual restoration began at the arrival of the King Jesus Christ.

Making the parallel application the WT comments:
4 The province of Judea and Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ and his apostles did much preaching of God’s kingdom, had long before been rehabilitated by the remnant of faithful Jews after their release from Babylonian captivity and their return to their homeland in 537 B.C.E. But did the anointed Jesus apply the prophecy of Isaiah 61:4 to that past accomplishment on the literal land of Judah? No! When he quoted the first two verses of Isaiah, chapter 61, in the synagogue of Nazareth, he pointed to the fulfillment of that chapter as beginning with him, in his day. He showed that it had a spiritual significance and did not apply to a restoration of the natural, physical, environmental conditions of the people. So the fulfillment of the prophecy extends down to our 20th century, to our day.

From this prophetic parallel it becomes clear that the restoration of God's people does not begin after their devastation by some military force such as the King of the North as proponents of the future judgment view of JWs would have you believe. No the prophecy clearly shows that the devastation of God's people was a spiritual devastation not a literal devastation. And just as God's people were restored in the first century and began to preach the good news to captive ones so likewise God's people in these last days have been restored and preach the good news of the Kingdom to the captive ones of false religion.

How can we know for sure when this restoration began? All we need do is look at the history of God's people to see when the anointed 'big trees of righteousness' began this preaching of the good news thereby releasing captives from the false Babylonian teachings that had corrupted God's people thru the past centuries. The facts prove beyond a doubt that this was shortly after the enthronement of Jesus Christ in 1914. That is when the restoration of God's people commenced and long standing devastated places began to be rebuilt. Today there are over 6 million who have been released from Babylonish captivity as a result of the preaching work of the 'big trees of righteousness.'

The Devastation--How Long?

But there is even more evidence than what has already been presented. Lets take even a closer look at Isaiah 61:4 examining the phrases that I have highlighted in red, "And they must rebuild the long-standing devastated places; they will raise up even the desolated places of former times, and they will certainly make anew the devastated cities, the places desolate for generation after generation." Why are these phrases so important to the prophecy?

Consider this. The future judgment view involves the devastation of God's people at most for 3 and 1/2 years before their restoration. Could a time period of 3.5 years or less be considered as a 'long-standing' devastation? Or a devastation that is of 'former times' that has lasted 'for generation after generation'? But on the other hand, that lenghthy time period could certainly apply to the hundreds of years before 33CE that the Jewish religion found themselves spiritually devastated. And it was for over 1500 years that the Christian congregation established in the first century was in a spiritually devastated condition of apostasy. Therefore, this leaves no doubt that the prophecy cannot apply to merely a few short years of devastation as the modern day future judgment 'prophets' would have us believe.

And so once again, by examining Bible prophecy and how it was fulfilled in the first century upon God's people, it is easy to see that the future judgment view that the restoration is yet future is not in accord with the scriptures.

2005-11-02T22:43:00.000-08:00

E-Watchman Speaks Out Against Robert King

The E-Watchman once said, "Since most of Jehovah's Witnesses are not spiritually ill, why should you want to force down their throats a dose of medicine that they do not need? Shall we first cause our brother to have doubts just so we can save him from his doubts? Do you imagine that you know what is best for the millions of Jehovah's Witnesses who are serving God the only way they know how? My observation is that those who insist on telling Jehovah's Witnesses "the truth about the truth" don't know the truth themselves and are not really capable of imparting to Jehovah's Witnesses anything having to do with faith."

Robert King said, "For those who are inclined to do more to make this information available to others, I would suggest that you buy several copies of the book. I suggest that you give a copy to family or friends, send a copy to Bethel, give one to your circuit or district overseer. For those who would like to do more but simply can't afford to buy a book, why not email a friend or an acquaintance this web address and let them look at the information for themselves?"

Fact: Robert King is now insisting 'on telling Jehovah's Witnesses the truth about the truth.'

E-Watchman's observation: Robert King "don't know the truth himself and is not really capable of imparting to Jehovah's Witnesses anything having to do with faith."

Just imagine going to the doctor for a check-up. And although the doctor can find nothing wrong with you he still wants to give you an antibiotic. You decline to take it, but he insist. A struggle ensues as he tries to hold you down and force the medicine down your throat. E-Watchman views Robert King as that crazy persistent doctor. And E-Watchman poses this question for Robert King: 'Do you imagine that you know what is best for the millions of Jehovah's Witnesses?' Thereby insinuating that he doesn't.

But he did not stop there. Watchman continues in one of his previous mailbags by identifying Robert King as a scandal-monger, fault-finder, and even a partner with the enemies of God's people, even deluded to the point of imagining that he is serving God by publicizing the faults of the WTS. Notice what he says: "In the 50th Psalm Jehovah issues a scathing rebuke to those of his people who presume to teach others his regulations, but who, among other things, give away the faults of their brothers and are partners with thieves and adulterers. Verse 21 says: "You imagined that I would positively become like you. I am going to reprove you, and I will set things in order before your eyes."Jesus also spoke of those who would imagine that they were performing a sacred service by murdering his children. So, it is possible for some to become so deluded that they imagine that they are serving Jehovah by advertising the Society's shortcomings, when in Jehovah's judgment such ones are merely scandal-mongers and fault-finders and working as partners with our many enemies to subvert our faith."

And finally he condemns him as one who calls down evil upon Christ's brothers with dire results if he does not repent for his actions taken in this case. E-Watchman comments: "In effect, those who are disfellowshipped for apostasy are guilty of calling down evil on Christ's brothers. So, at some point each will have to acknowledge their error or face the consequences."

I have to wonder if any of the watchmanites or people on his site realize that even E-watchman himself has condemned the actions of Robert King to the point of saying that Robert King doesn't know the truth, is not capable of imparting any faith to JWs, is a partner of the enemies of JWs, is guilty of calling down evil upon the anointed ones of Christ, and is even delusional in imagining he is serving Jehovah in the actions he is taking.

It appears that the harshest words of all toward Robert King come from E-watchman himself. So next time someone complains that I am unloving and slanderous and always negative toward Robert King I am just going to say 'Watchman did it first! Go jump on Watchman.'

2005-10-30T10:14:00.000-08:00

Unfaithful Jerusalem: Christendom or Jehovah's Witnesses?--Examining Joel 2

You have no doubt read the essays of many on the internet who denounce the interpretations of prophecies by Jehovah's Witnesses. They proclaim that unfaithful Jerusalem is actually God's modern day people, the corrupted and unfaithful Watchtower Society not Christendom. They determine that the prophecies foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem in 607BCE or 70CE are prophecies foretelling the destruction of the WTS at the start or immediately before the Great Tribulation and that a remnant of faithful ones will then be regathered and survive through Armageddon into the New World. One such prophecy used is found in the book of Joel chapter 2.

One would be interpreter of the future judgment to come upon Jehovah's Witnesses known as the E-Watchman had this to say: "Even a casual reading of Joel should impress the reader that God is foretelling a visitation of a unique and horrific catastrophe upon the world, and in particular how that calamity will impact those who are God's people."

He goes on to interpret the prophecy to show that the destruction of unfaithful Jerusalem, which corresponds to the unfaithful WTS, and the regathering of God's people will happen immediately before Armageddon and is definitely not being fulfilled now. And so it is determined that Joel 2:27-29 is fulfilled at the time of the regathering just before Armageddon during the Great Tribulation. Joel says: "And YOU people will have to know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am Jehovah YOUR God and there is no other. And my people will not be ashamed to time indefinite. 28 “And after that it must occur that I shall pour out my spirit on every sort of flesh, and YOUR sons and YOUR daughters will certainly prophesy. As for YOUR old men, dreams they will dream. As for YOUR young men, visions they will see. 29 And even on the menservants and on the maidservants in those days I shall pour out my spirit."

But is his timeline correct? Is this scripture fulfilled immediately prior to Armageddon, by the trampling of God's people by the nations, followed by their being regathered and Jehovah pouring out his spirit upon them so that they prophesy? Does this interpretation hold up to scrutiny when examining how the prophecy was fulfilled in the first century?

The First Century Fulfillment Upon God's People

Exactly how was the prophecy fulfilled in the first century upon God's people in the last days of the Jewish system of things? By determining this we will then be able to understand its fulfillment upon God's people in the last days of this system of things.

The Bible shows it was fulfilled at Pentecost when holy spirit was poured out upon those Christians gathered together in Jerusalem. As a result they preached and prophesied to unbelieving Jews about Jesus. Notice how Peter and the Apostles applied the fulfillment of the scripture in Acts 2:14-18, "But Peter stood up with the eleven and raised his voice and made this utterance to them: “Men and all YOU inhabitants of Jerusalem, let this be known to YOU and give ear to my sayings. 15 These [people] are, in fact, not drunk, as YOU suppose, for it is the third hour of the day. 16 On the contrary, this is what was said through the prophet Joel, 17 “And in the last days,” God says, “I shall pour out some of my spirit upon every sort of flesh, and YOUR sons and YOUR daughters will prophesy and YOUR young men will see visions and YOUR old men will dream dreams; 18 and even upon my men slaves and upon my women slaves I will pour out some of my spirit in those days, and they will prophesy."

The fulfillment of the prophecy does not wait to take place after the destruction of unfaithful Jerusalem at all. It takes place before the destruction. Peter showed the fulfillment began to take place in 33CE, many years before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70CE. It is not fulfilled at the very end of that Jewish system of things. Rather it has fulfillment with the establishment of the Christian congregation and the beginning of the gathering of God's people. It's fulfillment is upon that remnant of faithful follows of Jesus taken from among the Jews and later Gentiles in the first century. In view of this, it now becomes apparent when the scripture has fulfillment in the last days of this system of things.

Applying the Scripture Upon God's People in Modern Times

When did holy spirit began to be poured out in fulfillment of the prophecy for our day? Using the first century as a parallel, it becomes clear that it is not at the time of destruction of symbolic unfaithful Jerusalem. It is not at the end of this system of things, during the Great Tribulation immediately before Armageddon. No, just as it was applied in the first century when God's people began to be gathered as Christ's followers to preach the good news so likewise in modern times. The scripture could only find fulfillment when God began to gather his modern day worshippers into a congregation of faithful proclaimers of the good news of God's Kingdom early in the 20th century. And just as many years passed after Joel 2 began to have fulfillment before the destruction of the Jewish system, so likewise in modern times, many years would pass after the fulfillment of Joel 2 began to take place until the destruction of the entire system of things at Armageddon.

Additionally, it should be noted that the early Christians came out from the religions of that time (primarily the Jewish faith) to form the Christian congregation. God's modern day people also come out from the false religions of this world that have failed to bring praise to Jehovah in these last days (primarily being Christendom, which corresponds to unfaithful Jerusalem). And although God's people will no doubt have hard times during the Great Tribulation, as they did during the tribulation upon Jerusalem in 70 CE, the destruction of unfaithful Jerusalem (Christendom in our times) did not mean the destruction of Christ's followers because they obeyed him when they left Jerusalem.

As one brother correctly stated, "Jerusalem had already been rejected by Jehovah by 70 CE. They no longer had a claim to be God's chosen people. So their destruction at that time is meaningless, compared to the newly formed christian congregation." By the same token, symbolic unfaithful Jerusalem (Christendom) has failed to gain God's blessings today. They have rejected Jehovah, rarely if ever using his name and worshipping him as an unscriptural Trinity God. They no longer have a claim to be God's chosen people. Symbolic unfaithful Jerusalem is slated for destruction just like unfaithful Jerusalem in 70 CE. So their destruction has no direct bearing on God's people.

Really all that is necessary to expose the silly absurdity of E-Watchman's interpretation is a few simple questions. If unfaithful Jerusalem pictures Jehovah's modern day unfaithful organization then who do the true Christians who preached the good news of the kingdom from 33CE to 70CE picture? Since the true Christian congregation was established in 33CE then we must ask, when apostate Jerusalem was destroyed in 70CE what newly formed true organization of God came out of the desolated unfaithful Jerusalem at this time?

Future Judgment View Needs to be Readjusted

The same well known promoter of the future judgment view mentioned earlier reasons like this: "Since the apostle Peter quoted from the prophecy of Joel on the day of Pentecost, applying it to the Christian congregation, it is apparent that the "holy place" and "Jerusalem" have significance for Christ's congregation too, but during a latter time of judgment. And, as stated previously, since there has been no such devastation of the anointed congregation to date, the prophecy of Joel, as well as all the other prophets, await a future realization."

But all we need do is once again ask a few simple questions: What was the devastation that came upon God's people in 33 CE before the outpouring of holy spirit took place? Since there was no such literal physical devastation upon God's people at that time at the hands of outside forces, why was the prophecy fulfilled then according to Peter? Indeed why didn't the prophecy of Joel have to 'await a future realization' upon the first century Christian congregation at a 'latter time of judgment'? (For further evidence about what the devastation was that came in 33CE see: http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2005/11/restoration-of-gods-people-when.html )

If proponents of the future judgment view that Jehovah's Witnesses represent unfaithful Jerusalem are correct, here is what should have happened in the first century in order for there to be a parallel application:

1. In 33CE Jehovah sends the northeners, the Roman armies, to punish God's people for their unfaithfulness, to devastate Jerusalem and God's people.

2. His people repent and come back to him.

3. He makes compensation for them by bringing faithful ones back to the fold.

4. He pours out his holy spirit at Pentecost and they prophesy thus fulfilling the scripture at Joel.

But the fact is, that is not what happened at all. Shouldn't the prophecy be applied today in the same way that Peter applied it? If we lived back then we could have argued with Peter that he is wrong in the way he applies the prophecy. 'Peter, first the calamity upon God's people must come for the blessings and holy spirit to be poured out. You are misapplying the prophecy.' But Peter was inspired. He can't be wrong. And we can only follow the pattern of understanding the prophecy that Peter set for us. In other words, the future judgment way of interpreting the scripture does not agree with Peter's way of interpreting the scripture. In order to prove that the WTS misapplies the prophecy you must at the same time prove that Peter misapplies the prophecy.

Paul's View of Unfaithful Jerusalem

Did the Apostle Paul have any problem in comparing faithful Jerusalem to God's people and unfaithful Jerusalem to those not God's people? Notice what Paul said at Galations chapter 4. Beginning in verse 25, "Now this Ha´gar means Si´nai, a mountain in Arabia, and she corresponds with the Jerusalem today, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. 29 But just as then the one born in the manner of flesh began persecuting the one born in the manner of spirit, so also now."

Paul's conclusion:

1. Faithful Jerusalem = God's people.

2. Unfaithful Jerusalem = not God's people.

I am inclined to accept Paul's understanding over that of a self appointed modern day 'watchman prophet'. How about you?

The True Parallel

In 537BCE God's people were restored. But by the time 29CE rolled around they had again become apostate to a large extent. And that is when Jesus arrived. And so the new Christian congregation was established and holy spirit was poured out as prophecied by Joel 2 and the good news of the Kingdom was preached. The last days of the Jewish system began. The false religion of unfaithful Jerusalem was then destroyed in 70CE not to cleanse the true Christian congregation but to show God's disfavor on the false apostate religion that had once been true.

Did this mean hard times for God's people who left Jerusalem? Of course it did. It was 3.5 years of wilderness living. Did some apostasize and fall away from the truth and fail to listen to Jesus during that time? No doubt. Were JWs destroyed? By no means.

Many Christians were probably then expecting the destruction of the nations shortly thereafter. But it didn't happen.

In the last days we have a repeat of the events. So once again, by the time the 1900s rolled around apostate teachings had become firmly entrenched among God's people. And that is when Jesus arrived and the last days began. And once again, holy spirit was poured out upon God's people and the good news of the Kingdom was preached. And thats where we are now.

How did the story end in the first century? It must be the same today except this time Armageddon is really coming and the nations will really meet their destruction. So by examining the happenings of the first century what should we expect from here on out?

First, the destruction of unfaithful Jerusalem to clearly show who God has favored in these last days. Obedient ones will not meet their destruction when Babylon the Great is destroyed. Will we meet persecution before that destruction? Of course we will. And maybe again it will be 3.5 years. Will some apostasize and fall away from the truth during that time? No doubt. Will JWs be destroyed? By no means.

And then we will be expecting the destruction of the nations as foretold. And this time it will happen. This is the real parallel.

From this it is clear that Joel 2 began to have modern day fulfillment early in the 20th century with the gathering of Jehovah's modern day witnesses. In view of the foregoing, perhaps it is time for proponents of the future judgment view (that all the prophecies about unfaithful Jerusalem apply to the unfaithful and corrupt WTS) to go back to the drawing board.

For further proof that future adverse judgment upon God's people is unscriptural visit:
http://thetheocracyvindicated.blogspot.com/2005/10/inactive-and-unfruitful-future.html

2005-09-29T17:30:00.000-07:00

Robert King Really Is Donald Burney

It’s official. Lowly kingdom publish, Robert King, that ‘slightly disheveled-looking brother sitting at the back of the kingdom hall—you know, the one who makes the occasional, not-in-the-paragraph-comment during the meetings’ is a ‘true watchman of Jehovah’, even a prophet. Within his latest mailblog (http://e-jehovahs-witnesses-mail.blogspot.com/) you will find along with many other claims these quotes by Mr. King:

“My work is all about speaking out; declaring Jehovah's future judgments--as contained in Scripture. By definition that makes me a prophet.”

“…the prophecy confirms that even though his message is not received well because of animosity in the house of God--Jehovah's watchman is true.”

In so making such claims, it has become apparent that Robert King really is Donald Burney.

No, not literally. Not to my knowledge. It has been reported that Mr. Burney claims to be the prophet Elijah, one of the two witnesses, and the Messiah, sent to declare the wrongdoings of God’s wayward people, Jehovah’s Witnesses. And so Robert King, aka E-Watchman, has become just another Donald Burney in this regard, a self-appointed, self-proclaimed ‘prophet’ of Jehovah.

Remember what Mr. King previously said about all the blogs written to expose him for who he really is, “Interestingly, like blossoming mushrooms in manure, numerous blogs have popped up in Blogdom this week, all denouncing e-watchman as a plagiarist and apostate.” And so one more ‘mushroom in manure’ blossoms forth. None are so damaging as this latest blog written by Robert King himself. It now becomes apparent that only the most disgruntled and gullible witnesses of Jehovah, who are looking for a reason to leave the organization will even consider what he has to say. And once again it has proven true that Jehovah does not need our help. He can and will expose those trying to damage the faith of his people, even using the person himself to do so.

And in proclaiming himself a prophet he at the same time proclaims the non-prophet status of the Faithful and Discreet Slave. Notice his words:

“Ascribing to the Watchtower prophet-class status is like saying that Jehovah used the kings and priests of ancient Israel to denounce themselves. It is an absurdity.”

Since Robert King has become Jehovah’s 'prophet' and the Faithful and Discreet Slave do not have this same 'prophet-class status', will it be long before Jehovah appoints Mr. King as that Faithful and Discreet Slave? Or Donald Burney? Certainly that would not be too absurd to consider, would it?

2 Peter 2:1, “However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among YOU. These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. 2 Furthermore, many will follow their acts of loose conduct, and on account of these the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively. 3 Also, with covetousness they will exploit YOU with counterfeit words. But as for them, the judgment from of old is not moving slowly, and the destruction of them is not slumbering.”

2005-09-23T13:21:00.000-07:00

Robert King and Timothy Kline--Humble Truth Tellers or Masters of Deception?

You probably know by now that Robert King now admits that he is E-Watchman. Timothy Kline is his administrator of his 'e-Jehovah's Witness' site. They have both offered a defense to my blog that E-W did not receive his 'new light' from Holy Spirit* but rather from a book by TWMC called The Report. Here are the links to their defense.
http://e-jehovahs-witnesses-mail.blogspot.com/
http://jw-theocratic-warfare.blogspot.com/
Lets take a closer look.

Does Eloquent Words Prove You Speak the Truth?

After reading their blogs defending E-W what do we find? They do not offer one iota of evidence proving that I have lied or slandered. Instead they give scathing denunciations of myself and others claiming that we are liars, slanderers, principalities of the demons, machinations of the Devil. Notice a few of these comments:

Mr. King says: "While claiming to support the truth, all of these men follow the Devil's modus operandi, he being the original Slanderer."

While Mr. Kline says: "Those who have sworn fealty to the Society have, in times past, always engaged in a similar campaign of smear tactics, discreditation, and false accusations to that in practice by the Society."

Most excellent words indeed. Perhaps if I could now create a reply with longer sentences and more eloquent words of denunciations, it would prove that I am the one really telling the truth. Maybe if I write my words bigger than theirs then it will show that I am the ultimate truth teller.

Notice that Mr. Kline has brought forth the old defense that we 'attack the messenger not the message'. He says: "In recent days, the Society's online foot soldiers of "theocratic warfare" have started anew in their efforts to attack the person rather than the truth. Through the use of mock "Press Releases," carefully-crafted Blogs designed to warn fellow Witnesses about "apostates", and what appears to be a successful infiltration and undermining of message boards, these zealots of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society are taking the rules of "theocratic warfare" to all-new levels. This blog will attempt to address those accusations and slanderous remarks." And yet we see no attempt whatsoever by Mr. Kline to address the 'accusations and slanderous remarks.' What do we see instead? Who is it that is attacking the messengers rather than the message?

Instead we see how they address these so called slanderers in oh so many different ways:
1.those who utilize it to distract the public from the more important issues,
2.constantly harass lovers of Jehovah,
3.banned for their disruptive behavior from Mr. King’s board,
4.persevering in their Slander-and-Smear campaigns,
5.petty yet endless barrages of false accusations and belligerent slander,
6.these so-called “Jehovah’s Witnesses”,
7.boasts of his disregard for the Watchtower Society’s direction in areas such as acquiring apostate literature and posting from it so others can have a “peek” inside,
8.use the board as a launching pad for “theocratic warfare” to try to discourage people from examining the truth for themselves when it comes to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society,
9.this prideful and self-proclaimed “Witness”,
10.the artfully-contrived work of this underminer of Witness faith,
11.Hardly sounds like a real Witness, engaged in a similar campaign of smear tactics, discreditation, and false accusations to that in practice by the Society,
12."theocratic warfare" strtegy meant to try to detract from the validity of the truths being dispensed across the internet,
13.Two of them don’t even use their screen names because they are apparently ashamed of their underhanded attacks and their own glaring hypocrisy,
14.the three bloggers greedily gulped down the lie that Third Witness is peddling and they regurgitated their own slanders in the hope that others will eagerly swallow their slanders,
15.all of these men follow the Devil's modus operandi. "

Congratulations to you Mr. King and Mr. Kline. I don't think there are many more ways the messengers could be attacked. You have made it impossible for anyone to attack you without repeating words that you have already said about others. Who really are the slanderers?

But what about the issues? What about the copied phrases by Mr. King from The Report? What about the way Mr. King told his readers when he was merely known as E-Watchman that they should not tell out 'the truth about the truth' in the congregations. That it would only be stirring up contentions. Why do these words of E-W no longer apply: "Since most of Jehovah's Witnesses are not spiritually ill, why should you want to force down their throats a dose of medicine that they do not need? Shall we first cause our brother to have doubts just so we can save him from his doubts? Do you imagine that you know what is best for the millions of Jehovah's Witnesses who are serving God the only way they know how? My observation is that those who insist on telling Jehovah's Witnesses "the truth about the truth" don't know the truth themselves and are not really capable of imparting to Jehovah's Witnesses anything having to do with faith." Why does Mr. King disagree with E-Watchman? How about addressing the issues rather than seeing how many ways you can attack someone. How about addressing why persons who defend JWs are banned from your site Mr. King, a site supposedly primarily for Jehovah's Witnesses, whereas those who insult JWs as an organization and who insult defenders of JWs remain in good standing and are praised for their challenging the authority of the elders and WTS and getting themselves disfellowshipped?

Offering Proof not Attacks

Mr. Kline has said: "Case in point: the site host, an individual named Al—who recently broke all ties with Robert King after Mr. King’s message board became inundated with those who wanted to constantly harass lovers of Jehovah—has now found his own board populated with the same individuals who afterwards got banned for their disruptive behavior from Mr. King’s board."

Is this really what happened? Did Thirdwitness 'harass lovers of Jehovah'? Or was it the other way around? All anyone has to do is read the past threads and they will see for themselves. But it might be good here to quote some of the insults that was heaped upon thirdwitness while at the Paradise Cafe:

watchman: "The Watchtower is lying and so are you When the occasion called for it, Christ pointed out the lying hypocrisy of his opposers"

Others: "You, sir, are a liar."

"3W, you ... spew the mindless drivel that you do!You have shown me just how heartless and petty the WT and their BLIND followers can be"

"What's the point in trying to reason with someone that seems to have the credulity of a 5 year old when it comes to the WT?"

3W , You know........ I just deleted half my message because my respone to you likley would have gotten me banned.You want to know why I didn't ? Because you're not worth it !! This dear sister shares a terribly tragic story in the hope that lunkheads like you finally wake up and some of the first words out of your mouth are: "But can you blame the WTBTS for this ?" Are you nuts or just stupid beyond belief !!?? Your big man "outrage" doesn't change your blindness !

I'm sickened by the parrot above that agrees that it's ok to disagree elders if they advise contrary to the WT publications.

Yes provide the proof Mr. Kline and Mr. King. I challenge Mr. King or Mr. Kline to post one quote from me where I was so insulting. I was banned simply for disagreeing with E-W. He knows and many others know that to be the truth. I also challenge these self-proclaimed truth tellers to submit one line of slander that I have brought forth against them. Words are cheap. The proof is in the pudding.

Mr. Kline has also made this statment: "Of course, there’s plenty more to be discussed when it comes to the true identity of this “ThirdWitness,” staunch defender of The Report." Am I a 'staunch defender of The Report'? Or is this just another statement of deceit designed to make persons believe that my goals are to promote a different apostasy rather than promoting Mr. King's apostasy? I challenge Mr. Kline again to prove his accusation and bring forth even one sentence of my so called 'staunch' defense of The Report. That being said, if I were Mr. Burney, Robert King would be receiving a letter from my attorney forthwith.

Let us take note of further deceptions in their blogs of defense, http://jw-theocratic-warfare.blogspot.com/2005/09/carefully-laid-plans.html. Mr. Kline says: "Here is a recent example of just one such would-be Witness who goes by the name of “ThirdWitness”:“I was not even looking for THE REPORT. I was just looking thru ebay at books on ebay published by the WTBTS[?] and lo and behold, I saw THE REPORT. I noticed the similarites in the book and in watchmans essays so I bought it. Did I know just how similar it was going to be? NO! Was I directed by Holy Spirit to buy it and then directed to notice the similar passages so that watchman could be exposed?”

"The book titled The Report is well-known around the internet as an apostate work of literature. Interestingly enough, this “Witness” makes no qualms about having purchased this apostate book and owning it, and even goes so far as to point out that “holy spirit” directed him to buy the book—absolutely contrary to the direction of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society."

He further says, http://jw-theocratic-warfare.blogspot.com/2005/09/who-is-thirdwitness-jehovahs-witness.html: "Coaxed by what “ThirdWitness” describes as “Holy Spirit,” he purchased the book and then miraculously was led to certain passages—much like a certain Joseph Smith was led by angelic guidance to writings that led Joseph Smith to truth."

Here we have an attempt to actually raise me up to the level of Robert King. He being the Watchman with new light by means of the Holy Spirit and me being Holy Spirit directed to find The Report and certain passages in the book. Unwittingly he actually provides an argument against Robert King. In other words, I am just another crazy glory seeker with thoughts of grandeur that I have direction from the Holy Spirit 'much like a certain Joseph Smith', yes much like a certain Robert King. But is this really what I claimed? Or is Mr. Kline deceivingly leaving something out. Here is my real quote:

watcher - Unless holy spirit gave him the information? I guess we will all have to decide that for ourselves and time will tell. I am reminded of Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormons. He was given golden tablets written in Egyptian. He translated it into English. Amazingly, some passages he translated were exactly word for word with the King James Version, even including spurious scriptures which were later found not to be in the original text. And even though he spoke modern English, he translated into the same archaic English of the King James Bible. How did he do this? Did he have Holy Spirit in translating the passages and that is why they are the same as the KJV[?]? That is what a Mormon will tell you.

I can make the same claim. I was not even looking for THE REPORT. I was just looking thru ebay at books on ebay published by the WTBTS[?] and lo and behold, I saw THE REPORT. I noticed the similarites in the book and in watchmans essays so I bought it. Did I know just how similar it was going to be? NO! Was I directed by Holy Spirit to buy it and then directed to notice the similar passages so that watchman could be exposed? So do you believe watchman has holy spirit but I don't? Or do you believe I have holy spirit and watchman don't? I much prefer to just look at the facts rather than try to guess? (Just for the record I do not make such a claim at all. I think it was merely a coincidence.) " End of quote. Posted at
formatTime('1127230843');
10:40 - 20/09/2005

It is exactly the opposite of what Mr. Kline said. I pointedly said that I did not make such a claim at all that holy spirit directed me. And I would here for the record like to reiterate that I do not make such a claim. But Mr. Kline has written a whole entire piece about my alleged claim that never was.
http://jw-theocratic-warfare.blogspot.com/2005/09/who-is-thirdwitness-jehovahs-witness.html
Proof that Mr. Kline is indeed a master of deception. Now I suspect that he will have to remove his words from his blog to hide his clear deception here exposed.

Since these two have no qualms about twisting the truth to deceive others as has clearly been shown how can they be taken seriously about other matters such as the child abuse policy of the WTS and the UN matter? Do they also twist the the truth when it comes to these subjects? The evidence shows the answer to be yes. http://thetruthaboutthetruthaboutthetruth.blogspot.com/2005/08/is-watchtower-guilty-of-prostitution.html

E-W's Defense of Plagiarism

Mr. Kline himself has unknowingly provided proof that Mr. King was aware of the book by TWMC. Did you notice Mr. Kline's comment: "The book titled The Report is well-known around the internet as an apostate work of literature." As someone from Al's site facetiously asked, Did Mr. Kline forget to add the words, 'except by E-Watchman, aka Mr. King?'

King: This is not the first time I have been falsely accused as a word thief.

Perhaps not. But perhaps it is the first time it has been proven.

King: I only recall reading one essay of his having to do with the king of the north. Frankly, my impression was that he had very little insight into these matters. One example: He asserts that Osama bin Laden is the king of the north, which is, of course, absurd. Bin Laden a king? Who are his subjects?

That is great. But that is not what The Report says. It agrees with Mr. King. Or should I say Mr. King agrees with it. Even pointing to that same 1991 Awake Magazine about the UN.

King: Did the Report cover Joel or Habakkuk, Amos, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Zechariah, Micah, Hosea? I can’t say for certain since I have never read it, but, somehow, I seriously doubt it. Furthermore, the recently released book Jehovah Himself Has Become King offered a unique interpretation of Revelation from chapter seven to chapter eleven. Does The Report delve into that portion of Revelation? Again, I doubt it.

So what? Just because a person can add to or take away from the writings of another does not prove that he did not copy parts of it. No one is arguing that Mr. King is not intelligent enough to write his own essays. Joseph Smith wrote the whole entire Book of Mormon while copying parts of the King James translation. Since he was able to think up some things on his own did that mean he did not copy some of the words from the King James translation of the Bible? But again, he does not defend himself by addressing the parts of the book that he obviously did consult and yes copy. He merely sidesteps the issue.

King: As a former member of the Paradise Café forum, Third Witness had plenty of opportunities to bring up his concerns about certain similarities between the Report and e-watchman. I would have been more then happy to discuss it in the forum. But he didn’t chose to have an open and honest discussion.

First of all, I did not get the book until after I was banned. Secondly, I'm sure he would have been 'happy to discuss it in the forum'. Just as he was happy to discuss the child abuse policy of the WTS and the NGO matter. Subjects that I was banned for discussing. Not for my insulting behavior, but because I disagreed and offered proof contray to the beliefs of Mr. King on these subjects. Subjects that thereafter became taboo to discuss with the threat of immediate banning for anyone who did discuss it unless of course you agreed with Mr. King. I suspect that if I had discussed The Report at his Paradise Cafe we would have soon seen something like this written by the administrator: "I have decided from this point on that anyone discussing the book entitled, The Report, will be banned from this site immediately. Furthermore this is not open for discussion."

King: Interestingly, like blossoming mushrooms in manure, numerous blogs have popped up in Blogdom this week, all denouncing e-watchman as a plagiarist and apostate.

Another excellent and well written example of clever words that say nothing at all about the issues.

Why anonymity?

Mr. Kline further charges: "They can engage in their attacks, slander and smear campaigns at-will, in the freedom of anonymity.This provides the public with a powerful and convincing reason to question the validity of anything these ones claim or write--after all, if a person really believes that what they are saying is true and incontrovertible, why the anonymity?"

And Mr King likewise asserts: "While two of the bloggers hide in complete anonymity it is apparent that they all are former members of the Paradise Café, who were either banned of left in a huff. Two of them don’t even use their screen names because they are apparently ashamed of their underhanded attacks and their own glaring hypocrisy..."

To which I have a very simple answer that is not very original at all: "Again, my personal matters are of no consequence. I choose to remain anonymous for a number of reasons. Perhaps in the future that may change."

"Without compromising my identity, I have been as honest and forthright as I know how to be."

Oh, by the way, I would not want to plagiarize. Did I mention that those are E-watchman's words? Are You Saying You are a Prophet?

Displaying Humility

Mr. King accuses us of being sent by the Devil to attack him, while at the same time he is attacking our brothers who work hard in Bethel calling them slimy adultering liars, harbingers of child molesters, greedy, having demon-inspired doctrines. But the question here is what do we have to gain by pointing out the kind of person he has proven himself to be. We are not selling books. We are not claiming to be Watchmans of Jehovah. Who is Mr. King now? Is he still the man who answered this question: "Are you not just following the traditions of men and trying to draw Jesus' disciples off after yourself with crafty words?" with these words:

"Where would I draw them off to? I am merely a lowly kingdom publisher the same as you. In fact, I might be that slightly disheveled-looking brother sitting at the back of your kingdom hall—you know, the one who makes the occasional, not-in-the-paragraph-comment during the meetings? I want nothing more than that my brothers should trust Jehovah to set things straight. "Are You Saying You are a Prophet?

So much for being that 'lowly kingdom publisher ' the same as the rest of us. And so much for trusting 'Jehovah to set things straight.'

Here is an excellent scripture that I actually learned from Mr. King himself, a scripure that he has apparently forgotten as shown by his actions thus far:

1 Cor 4:5 "Hence do not judge anything before the due time, until the Lord comes, who will both bring the secret things of darkness to light and make the counsels of the hearts manifest, and then each one will have his praise come to him from God."

Perhaps it has now come the 'due time' for Mr. King, the 'Watchman', to do that judging. And has it now also become the due time for him to rule as a king? Interestingly Paul asked a similar question about puffed up individuals who had forgotten that they had received the truth from the same source as the rest of us.

That scripture continues: 4:6 “Do not go beyond the things that are written,” in order that YOU may not be puffed up individually in favor of the one against the other. 7 For who makes you to differ from another? Indeed, what do you have that you did not receive? If, now, you did indeed receive [it], why do you boast as though you did not receive [it]? 8 YOU men already have YOUR fill, do YOU? YOU are rich already, are YOU? YOU have begun ruling as kings without us, have YOU? And I wish indeed that YOU had begun ruling as kings, that we also might rule with YOU as kings."

Their actions are well described in 2 Cor 11:13: "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel of light. 15 It is therefore nothing great if his ministers also keep transforming themselves into ministers of righteousness. But their end shall be according to their works."

Displaying Real Love for Our Brothers

There is a lot of talk about showing love for one another on certain sites. And how exposing Robert King is because of our hatred and lack of love. Actually it is the exact opposite. Our love for our brothers as well as Robert King has moved us to bring forth these truths for the sake of our brothers. Is it really showing love just because we may say 'much love and peace to you' out of one corner of our mouth while at the same time bashing Jehovah's people and encouraging our brothers to leave Jehovah and his arrangement of things out of the other corner? And encouraging loyalty to who? Jehovah? His people who are working hard to do Jehovah's will in preaching the good news worldwide? Or a talented, charismatic, self-proclaimed watchman who spews out denunciations upon JWs and the WTS proclaiming them outright liars, adulterers, full of demon-inspired doctrines, directed by lawyers who only concern is pocketing more money, practicers of modern day Baal worship and so on? What unmatchless love indeed!

Jude 11,12,16 very well decribes some of these so called JW sites: "Too bad for them, because they have gone in the path of Cain, and have rushed into the erroneous course of Ba´laam for reward, and have perished in the rebellious talk of Ko´rah! 12 These are the rocks hidden below water in YOUR love feasts while they feast with YOU, shepherds that feed themselves without fear; 16 These men are murmurers, complainers about their lot in life, proceeding according to their own desires, and their mouths speak swelling things, while they are admiring personalities for the sake of [their own] benefit."

And so I am writing these blogs because Mr. King has decided to make an all out assault upon our brothers by distributing his new book. I am concerned that this will damage the faith of some of our weaker brothers who have not moved on to the solid food of the Bible, or perhaps even some of the chosen ones. I am hoping that others can read this information and know the truth about who they are dealing with. But at the same time, I would hope that Mr. King would see the error of his ways, show humility, and once again become a 'lowly kingdom publisher' like the rest of us rather than having grandeur thoughts that he is a modern day watchman for Jehovah. He could no doubt be a great asset to Jehovah's Witnesses if he would only return to Jehovah and his arrangement of things. The same I hope for Mr. Kline. I would like nothing more than to be internet friends with them serving Jehovah shoulder to shoulder.

*Mr. Kline has pointed out that holy spirit should not be capitalized. He is correct. I did capitalize it above in some instances. My mistake. I in no way believe that holy spirit is a separate person from Jehovah. I will not edit it so that my mistake as pointed out by Mr. Kline can clearly be seen.