Jehovah

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: Amdiggidy

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: azazyel

Originally posted by: Vic
It reminds me that there is no "J" in the Hebrew language.

But in the Latin alphabet, "Jehovah" begins with an "I

lol, exactly what i thought when reading the thread

Same

indiana Jones > *

D'oh! Beat me to it!
That is, Anubis, ShadowBlade, Nik, Brian23, and thehstrybean all beat me to it. Yep, I'm a little slow on the uptake this evening.

Anubis, ShadowBlade, Nik, Brian23, thehstrybean, and Amdiggidy all beat me to it!

 

[newnameman]

Jehovah!

 

[spiderrasmon]

Originally posted by: newnameman
Jehovah!

Latin-Schmatin...

for an objective view of the whole deal, check out the pronunciation paragraph in the following:

http://www.tetragrammaton.org/tetrastudy.htm

 

[UncleWai]

I have an old friend of mine in Hong Kong is a Jehovah Witness. I didn't know at the time and said happy birthyday to her. Ane she told me she doesn't celebrate birthday, and I was like wtf. So that's my 0.02 on "Jehovah".

 

[spiderrasmon]

Uncle Wai, your .02 is appreciated on the matter. Let me throw some fact on this fire and see if it will smolder some of your doubts...

The reason behind the aversion to celebrating birthdays is Jehovah's Witnessses view the Bible as the foremost authority on which to base their beliefs and lifestyle. There were only two recorded birthday celebrations in the scriptures, and both of them were for people who did not respect or believe in Jehovah God. At these celebrations, faithful worshippers of God were tortured and slain (you'll recall one of them as John the Baptizer, who was decapitated and had his head served on a platter for King Herod's niece as a 'gift' to her). So you can imagine why God's true worshippers would want to stay away from birthdays.

Aside from that, the actual birthday celebration itself, with the gift giving, the cakes with candles, and the whole making a birthday wish and singing that song (ugh...) has pagan roots, and as such, is viewed as unclean forms of worship in the eyes of Jehovah.

Mind you, JW's do celebrate the coming of newborns (baby showers), marriage (bridal showers, weddings), and every day of life, but holidays that are steeped in pagan or other spiritistic traditions (X-mas, Easter, Halloween) and man-made holidays that are widely accepted as tradition (Memorial Day, Earth Day, 'Arbor Day' (?)) are not observed by Jehovah's people, as it would again be viewed as a sign of unclean worship.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon
Uncle Wai, your .02 is appreciated on the matter. Let me throw some fact on this fire and see if it will smolder some of your doubts...

The reason behind the aversion to celebrating birthdays is Jehovah's Witnessses view the Bible as the foremost authority on which to base their beliefs and lifestyle. There were only two recorded birthday celebrations in the scriptures, and both of them were for people who did not respect or believe in Jehovah God. At these celebrations, faithful worshippers of God were tortured and slain (you'll recall one of them as John the Baptizer, who was decapitated and had his head served on a platter for King Herod's niece as a 'gift' to her). So you can imagine why God's true worshippers would want to stay away from birthdays.

Aside from that, the actual birthday celebration itself, with the gift giving, the cakes with candles, and the whole making a birthday wish and singing that song (ugh...) has pagan roots, and as such, is viewed as unclean forms of worship in the eyes of Jehovah.

Mind you, JW's do celebrate the coming of newborns (baby showers), marriage (bridal showers, weddings), and every day of life, but holidays that are steeped in pagan or other spiritistic traditions (X-mas, Easter, Halloween) and man-made holidays that are widely accepted as tradition (Memorial Day, Earth Day, 'Arbor Day' (?)) are not observed by Jehovah's people, as it would again be viewed as a sign of unclean worship.

welcome back . . . is there any reason you don't care to answer the other questions about JWs and their timeline?

 

[Patt]

It is part of the title of a great book ... "Towing Jehovah". Check it out ... James Morrow is the author.

 

[spiderrasmon]

Originally posted by: apoppin

welcome back . . . is there any reason you don't care to answer the other questions about JWs and their timeline?

Thanks. I think you have set enough traps, I'll just walk over on this side, thanks.

 

[Deeko]

I love when Jehova's Witnesses come to the door. I live in the city, they are at the door with pamphlet opened, and ask me what I'd think if where we lived looked like this...its a big field with some kids and stuff....riiight, we wouldn't have much of a city if it were just a big field, wouldn't we?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon

Originally posted by: apoppin

welcome back . . . is there any reason you don't care to answer the other questions about JWs and their timeline?

Thanks. I think you have set enough traps, I'll just walk over on this side, thanks.

So you are like the rest of the fundies . . . post some BS propaganda and then run away.

:thumbsdown:

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon
Uncle Wai, your .02 is appreciated on the matter. Let me throw some fact on this fire and see if it will smolder some of your doubts...

The reason behind the aversion to celebrating birthdays is Jehovah's Witnessses view the Bible as the foremost authority on which to base their beliefs and lifestyle. There were only two recorded birthday celebrations in the scriptures, and both of them were for people who did not respect or believe in Jehovah God. At these celebrations, faithful worshippers of God were tortured and slain (you'll recall one of them as John the Baptizer, who was decapitated and had his head served on a platter for King Herod's niece as a 'gift' to her). So you can imagine why God's true worshippers would want to stay away from birthdays.

Aside from that, the actual birthday celebration itself, with the gift giving, the cakes with candles, and the whole making a birthday wish and singing that song (ugh...) has pagan roots, and as such, is viewed as unclean forms of worship in the eyes of Jehovah.

Mind you, JW's do celebrate the coming of newborns (baby showers), marriage (bridal showers, weddings), and every day of life, but holidays that are steeped in pagan or other spiritistic traditions (X-mas, Easter, Halloween) and man-made holidays that are widely accepted as tradition (Memorial Day, Earth Day, 'Arbor Day' (?)) are not observed by Jehovah's people, as it would again be viewed as a sign of unclean worship.

Yet, they still claim Prince as a member, even when he has fairly publicized birthday parties.

 

[spiderrasmon]

where do you get that info from?

 

[Promethply]

YaHWeH

 

[Shaotai]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon

Originally posted by: apoppin

welcome back . . . is there any reason you don't care to answer the other questions about JWs and their timeline?

Thanks. I think you have set enough traps, I'll just walk over on this side, thanks.

So you are like the rest of the fundies . . . post some BS propaganda and then run away.

:thumbsdown:

I'm not going to get into this discussion of 1914, 607BCE or 5xxBCE...

But it's obvious some of you know a lot about Witnesses. All I can say is that if you are hung up on this one thing on this timeline, then you have no faith and are missing the whole point... Everthing else makes perfect sense, the teachings and explaination are logical.
You can't tell me that there is another religion out there that is more accurate and logical in their teachings and beliefs...

 

[HonkeyDonk]

nvm.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon
where do you get that info from?

Here
Here
Here
Here

A couple years ago I was on his website and there was stuff up about his birthday party.

Performer Prince, now officially a JW, to celebrate "birthday" (posted 6/12/01) (it's a bit near the end)

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Shaotai

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon

Originally posted by: apoppin

welcome back . . . is there any reason you don't care to answer the other questions about JWs and their timeline?

Thanks. I think you have set enough traps, I'll just walk over on this side, thanks.

So you are like the rest of the fundies . . . post some BS propaganda and then run away.

:thumbsdown:

I'm not going to get into this discussion of 1914, 607BCE or 5xxBCE...

But it's obvious some of you know a lot about Witnesses. All I can say is that if you are hung up on this one thing on this timeline, then you have no faith and are missing the whole point... Everthing else makes perfect sense, the teachings and explaination are logical.
You can't tell me that there is another religion out there that is more accurate and logical in their teachings and beliefs...

i don't know about Prince [the B-D link goes nowhere] . . . but Michael Jackson was one of JWs.
:shocked:


"if i am 'hung up'" ?
:roll:

". . . then i have no faith"
:roll:

"Everything else makes perfect sense"
:Q

AGAIN, you are IDENTICAL to the FUNDAMENTALISTS you try to distance yourself from.

NO, it does NOT make "perfect sense" the way you describe it . . . and why should i take your word for it?
:thumbsdown:

 

[Crappopotamus]

sha boy! jay-hova. : O

 

[dderidex]

Originally posted by: Shaotai

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon

Originally posted by: apoppin

welcome back . . . is there any reason you don't care to answer the other questions about JWs and their timeline?

Thanks. I think you have set enough traps, I'll just walk over on this side, thanks.

So you are like the rest of the fundies . . . post some BS propaganda and then run away.

:thumbsdown:

I'm not going to get into this discussion of 1914, 607BCE or 5xxBCE...

But it's obvious some of you know a lot about Witnesses. All I can say is that if you are hung up on this one thing on this timeline, then you have no faith and are missing the whole point... Everthing else makes perfect sense, the teachings and explaination are logical.
You can't tell me that there is another religion out there that is more accurate and logical in their teachings and beliefs...

Ummm....'everything else makes perfect sense'....except the ENTIRE TIMELINE YOUR RELIGION IS BASED UPON?

I'm sorry, but that's like saying a computer works perfectly fine except for the fried CPU. No, it DOESN'T work perfectly fine, then.

If you base your entire religion and prophecies on a timeline that is flawed....well, that makes you false prophets, doesn't it?

Why can't you answer that question?

IS your religion false prophets, or not?

Your post (that I highlighted for you) would seem to imply that you are acknowledging your religion IS a false prophet, but that it somehow doesn't matter.

 

[spiderrasmon]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon
where do you get that info from?

Here
Here
Here
Here

A couple years ago I was on his website and there was stuff up about his birthday party.

Performer Prince, now officially a JW, to celebrate "birthday" (posted 6/12/01) (it's a bit near the end)

None of those are official sites of the Watchtower Society. those are apostate sites.

 

[dugweb]

Originally posted by: Shaotai

I'm not going to get into this discussion of 1914, 607BCE or 5xxBCE...

But it's obvious some of you know a lot about Witnesses. All I can say is that if you are hung up on this one thing on this timeline, then you have no faith and are missing the whole point... Everthing else makes perfect sense, the teachings and explaination are logical.
You can't tell me that there is another religion out there that is more accurate and logical in their teachings and beliefs...

i think you are missing the point... it's your blind faith and ignorance that has convinced you their teachings are the most accurate and "logical"

 

[Shaotai]

Originally posted by: dderidex

Originally posted by: Shaotai

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon

Originally posted by: apoppin

welcome back . . . is there any reason you don't care to answer the other questions about JWs and their timeline?

Thanks. I think you have set enough traps, I'll just walk over on this side, thanks.

So you are like the rest of the fundies . . . post some BS propaganda and then run away.

:thumbsdown:

I'm not going to get into this discussion of 1914, 607BCE or 5xxBCE...

But it's obvious some of you know a lot about Witnesses. All I can say is that if you are hung up on this one thing on this timeline, then you have no faith and are missing the whole point... Everthing else makes perfect sense, the teachings and explaination are logical.
You can't tell me that there is another religion out there that is more accurate and logical in their teachings and beliefs...

Ummm....'everything else makes perfect sense'....except the ENTIRE TIMELINE YOUR RELIGION IS BASED UPON?

I'm sorry, but that's like saying a computer works perfectly fine except for the fried CPU. No, it DOESN'T work perfectly fine, then.

If you base your entire religion and prophecies on a timeline that is flawed....well, that makes you false prophets, doesn't it?

Why can't you answer that question?

IS your religion false prophets, or not?

Your post (that I highlighted for you) would seem to imply that you are acknowledging your religion IS a false prophet, but that it somehow doesn't matter.

Here's your answer to your question...

In 620 B.C.E., Jerusalem was made subject to Babylon. (2Ki 24:1) Three years later, in 617 B.C.E., the Babylonians deported many of Jerusalem?s inhabitants?its nobility, its mighty men, and its craftsmen?and looted the city?s treasures. (2Ch 36:5-10) Finally, the city, along with the temple, was destroyed and thousands of Jews were taken into exile.?2Ch 36:17-20.

Jerusalem?s destruction took place in 607 B.C.E., a very significant year from the standpoint of Bible prophecy. Although this date differs from the one used by many Bible commentators, it is used consistently in this publication. Why? Because we give greater weight to the testimony of the Bible than to the conclusions that scholars have drawn from the fragmentary record of history that is available on cuneiform tablets.

Plus, everywhere I look, 586/587 ends me up in apostate websites...

 

[Horus]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dderidex
And that YHWH was originally merely one of many pagan gods - in fact, a sky god (a god of thunder and lightning). He was called by enemies of Israel 'a god of the hills'. Once ancient Israel sufficiently conquered their neighboring tribes, they took to re-writing their history, and setting YHWH up as a single deity.

I'd like to see links to back up your "facts" here please. The word for "god" in ancient Hebrew was "El". "Elohim" is not the plural for "El", but means "the many that think/act as one." YHWH means a singular god -- the unchanging, eternal, self-existent God, the Exodus 3:14 "I am that I am" (but that "am", the "to be" verb, could be past, present, or future tense) -- similar to the Arabic word Allah. It cannot exist in plurality.

It is true that the word Jehovah has no Biblical basis whatsoever.

Originally posted by: azazyel

Originally posted by: Vic
It reminds me that there is no "J" in the Hebrew language.

But in the Latin alphabet, "Jehovah" begins with an "I

And in the Hebrew, it begins with a "Y". The word was never used though, and the ancient Hebrews called their God, Adonai ("Lord").

Originally posted by: exilera

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: exilera
Reminds me of Jehova's Witnesses, aka morons.

Don't you just love religious intolerance?

Religious intolerance? Hardly. I know quite a bit about their religion; I dated one for over a year. Judging by what I've learned about their hypocricy and BS, I stand by my assumption.

It doesn't matter what know about them, a sweeping derogatory generalization like that is religious intolerance no matter how you want to slice it. No matter what you think, it is fact that the most important right of all is the freedom of belief.

Wait, what? You dated a Jehovah's witness? I call shens, since they're NOT ALLOWED TO DATE OUTSIDE THEIR RELIGION. I know this, because a good friend of mine is a Jehovah's witness. He's not allowed to go to parties, or date. That doesn't mean he hasn't banged my gf's best friend.

He can't tell his friends though, because they're jehovah's and will rat him out.

I don't like jehovahs. I was walking home from the Army Reserves once, and got stopped by one. They handed me a panphlet titled "Imagine a World without war". Note, I was in uniform.

I smiled and said, "No thanks...I'd be out out a job."

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Shaotai

Originally posted by: dderidex

Originally posted by: Shaotai

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: spiderrasmon

Originally posted by: apoppin

welcome back . . . is there any reason you don't care to answer the other questions about JWs and their timeline?

Thanks. I think you have set enough traps, I'll just walk over on this side, thanks.

So you are like the rest of the fundies . . . post some BS propaganda and then run away.

:thumbsdown:

I'm not going to get into this discussion of 1914, 607BCE or 5xxBCE...

But it's obvious some of you know a lot about Witnesses. All I can say is that if you are hung up on this one thing on this timeline, then you have no faith and are missing the whole point... Everthing else makes perfect sense, the teachings and explaination are logical.
You can't tell me that there is another religion out there that is more accurate and logical in their teachings and beliefs...

Ummm....'everything else makes perfect sense'....except the ENTIRE TIMELINE YOUR RELIGION IS BASED UPON?

I'm sorry, but that's like saying a computer works perfectly fine except for the fried CPU. No, it DOESN'T work perfectly fine, then.

If you base your entire religion and prophecies on a timeline that is flawed....well, that makes you false prophets, doesn't it?

Why can't you answer that question?

IS your religion false prophets, or not?

Your post (that I highlighted for you) would seem to imply that you are acknowledging your religion IS a false prophet, but that it somehow doesn't matter.

Here's your answer to your question...

In 620 B.C.E., Jerusalem was made subject to Babylon. (2Ki 24:1) Three years later, in 617 B.C.E., the Babylonians deported many of Jerusalem?s inhabitants?its nobility, its mighty men, and its craftsmen?and looted the city?s treasures. (2Ch 36:5-10) Finally, the city, along with the temple, was destroyed and thousands of Jews were taken into exile.?2Ch 36:17-20.

Jerusalem?s destruction took place in 607 B.C.E., a very significant year from the standpoint of Bible prophecy. Although this date differs from the one used by many Bible commentators, it is used consistently in this publication. Why? Because we give greater weight to the testimony of the Bible than to the conclusions that scholars have drawn from the fragmentary record of history that is available on cuneiform tablets.

Plus, everywhere I look, 586/587 ends me up in apostate websites...

thanks for the reply . . . i missed it since 'search' didn't show the thread 'updated' - until today

ANYway, that is your [jw's] official version, i guess . . . what 'i' and i guess dderidex is looking for is evidence to support that date and your 1914 timeline.

and i am not sure what you mean about setting "traps" . . . how?

 

[Fullmetal Chocobo]

It makes me wonder why there isn't Religion isn't included in the Politics and News forum, because rarely does intelligent conversation come forth from a topic like this. Kind of like in politics.

//motions to move the forum or lock it before it gets too ugly.
Tas.