You are here:

Jehovah`s Witness/Bad Move, Rando...You Just Shouldn't Have Gone There

Advertisement


Question
You should have just told the truth.  I know that you hate to do that, but you just should’ve.  Now, I have to expose your lies again.

Answer
It is very disappointing, though not at all surprising, that Rando still refuses to tell the truth.  This is his pride, and overall disdain for honesty, getting the best of him.  No matter, because several facts still remain….

1.  Rando lied about my original statement
2.  Rando lied about the 1874 teaching, as it was taught by the Watchtower
3.  Rando is still lying about it
4.  Rando's own friends have admitted it was taught, as well as his own religion's literature has admitted it.  Rando himself is the lone hold-out.


RANDO:  “My answer to 1874 was accurate and true and the facts bare this out.”

No actually, ALL the facts are against you.  They BEAR (not bare) out my answer, and completely obliterate yours..  So much so, that even your own friends here, had to admit (with clenched teeth, no doubt), that the WT did indeed teach that 1874 was the time of Christ’s invisible “coming”/presence, until the teaching was changed to 1914.  

I know that must be tough to swallow, especially when you keep trying to pretend that my friends and I are contradicting each other, and now Eddie and Ms. T have no option but to admit that the WT did teach this, while you‘re still throwing your tantrum and screaming “NO, THEY DIDN‘T!!!” .  

But they really had no choice but to admit it….It was either tell the truth, or prove to everyone that the non-Witnesses here knew more about the religion’s history than they did.  It was either that, or have us continue to post fact, after fact, after fact, proving that we were correct after all.  They couldn’t very well afford to have that, right in the midst of ranting and raving about how we non-Witnesses should not be here.  

How would THAT look?

Just tell the truth, Rando.  Try it for a change.  Your life will go better.  Your answer to 1874 was not accurate, because it was built on a completely false statement.  Such as….

RANDO:  “Don't believe the Apostate that claims the Watchtower taught Christ would Return in "1874", when the Watchtower never existed until "1881".”

Now, something did occur to me.  You didn’t actually use my name here…You just said “the Apostate”.  So, perhaps you weren’t even talking about me in the first place?  Maybe you were referring to somebody who actually DID claim that the WT was predicting that Jesus WOULD return in 1874, as if they existed prior to 1874?

Is that possible?  Since I never once stated such a thing, maybe you were talking about someone else?

But then, the more I thought about it, I realized that nobody else here said that, either.  And then I remembered your bad habit of lying and twisting things around, and I realized that this was simply another example of that.  You lied about what my statement said, and twisted it, so you could go on the attack.  

So yes, you were talking about me.  But one problem…I didn’t say the WT PREDICTED it would happen in 1874.  I said they taught that 1874 WAS the year of Christ’s return/presence.  

Here is the original comment again….“The way we know that Jesus did not come "invisibly" in 1874 (the original year that the WT taught for His return), or 1914 (the current year taught),”

So, stop lying.  Unless you’re prepared to show WHERE I said what you claim above, and we both know you’re not, then just admit you were wrong.

Like I said, you should’ve just kept your mouth shut.  Then, none of this embarrassment would have had to happen to you.  But as it stands now, you have shown that you know absolutely nothing about your own religion’s history, and that you are not man enough to admit when you are wrong.  

But you are wrong, nonetheless.


RANDO:  Derrick was forced into a corner and had to re-arrange his {make believe question} then tape my answer to a different question. Not only is this unethical and immoral but explains his demonic demeanor. Even Satan didn't re-arrange his questions to Christ then added his answers to try to prove Christ wrong at a latter time. This is why I call Derrick Holland "Legion".”

Now, I have no idea what Rando is babbling about here, but I would certainly love to challenge him to explain it further.  Especially since I quoted ALL of your lies on this subject, in this one posting….

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Jehovah-s-Witness-1617/2014/11/rando-truly-gift-keeps

Not sure what lie you are trying to tell about my supposedly “rearranging a question”.  I assure you my statements have not been altered in any way, and still are visible just as they were originally written.  Care to elaborate?

Or, do you just want to try being honest for a change?

Fact is, your religion did teach up until the 1930s, that Jesus had “returned invisibly” in 1874.  I was correct, you were incorrect.  I told the truth, you lied.  

The facts BEAR this out.  I have already given you 16 quotes from your own literature.  Do you want about 50 more?


RANDO:  When "Richard" even admitted with the facts that 1874 was a Second Adventist teaching. DH was turning red and started screaming that somehow I lied. But the facts are the facts. The Watchtower never existed prior to "1881" as Derrick Holland would lead you to believe.

Again, Rando’s pride is hurt, because HIS own friends had to admit the opposite of what he was claiming.

Eddie G admits it here…..  

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Jehovah-s-Witness-1617/2014/11/1874-1915.htm

What are you going to do with that, Rando?  Pout?  Scream?  Cry?  Try to make everyone think its me and my friends who are in disagreement?  Or, just admit what Eddie had to admit?

Actually, Richard and I both acknowledged the teaching originated with the Adventists.  And both Richard and I acknowledged that Russell “borrowed” it from them, and taught it himself, in the pages of the magazine that HE started, ZION’S WATCH TOWER , and that THE WATCH TOWER/WATCHTOWER continued teaching it for approximately 50 years.

You still deny it, but those are the facts.  Nothing more, nothing less.

And by the way, Richard and I both have already refuted your lie that we were in disagreement.  Its really sad that all you can do, is repeat the same already-exposed lies.  Get some new material, will you?


RANDO:  "In 1881 Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society was formed, and in 1884 it was incorporated, with Russell as president. The Society’s name was later changed to Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society." http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102000101”

Yeah, again, this was never under dispute.  The question was never about when the Watchtower incorporated….It was about why they taught that Jesus had “returned” in 1874.

However, this statement of yours, was false…

“the Watchtower never existed until "1881"

Sure it did.  The first edition of the Watch Tower, begun by Charles Taze Russell, was published in July, of 1879.  And when the WT became incorporated as a Society a few years later, they then continued to teach the 1874 “fiasco”, as you call it.

You want to hide the truth from our readers, by claiming it was “a teaching from the Second Adventists, NOT a Watchtower teaching” .  In fact, it was both.  It was originally taught by the 2nd Adventists, and C.T. Russell fell for it, as well. And he continued teaching it in the Watch Tower.

Even Eddie admitted that….

EDDIE:  “Yes you're correct. After going back and reviewing our old publications, Brother Russel was further convinced by Nelson H. Barbour that Christ’s invisible presence had begun in 1874.”

“So on this point, you're correct. I should have read more of our old publications because this is what critics wants to keep coming back to. They like to go back to old times instead of the now and the future.”

Its about time you admitted it too, don’t you think?


In fact, Rando, why don’t you just tell our readers who aren’t aware, the FULL name of the Watch Tower when it was begun?  Shall we?  I think so.  Here it is….

“Zion’s Watch Tower and HERALD OF CHRIST’S PRESENCE” (emphasis mine)

This was in 1879.  Rando, would you care to explain just WHY this magazine was “heralding Christ’s presence”, unless they were teaching that Christ was ALREADY present?  And would you care to explain just HOW LONG they believed He had been present?

RANDO:  “Derrick Holland is exposed for what he is. A Liar. Nothing less, nothing more, just the facts!”

No, not quite.  You made the mistake of trying to slander me over this again, so I had to prove you a liar once again.  Hated to do it, but you need to quit the lying.

Oh, and I couldn’t help but notice that you gave us a nice link at the end of your writing, to www.jw.org, which of course, is your religion’s official web site.  Your link referred to the end of the Gentile times, not the topic under discussion….When Jesus became “invisibly present”.  Always trying to change the subject, aren’t you, ole’ Rando?

Well, your link got me to thinking.  So, I took a little trip over to www.jw.org myself, and I thought I might also share a link with you and the readers, from that site.

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200271564?q=1874+Christ%27s+presence&p=par

Scroll on down on that page to 1874, and tell us what you see, Rando…..

Must be lonely for you right now.  Other JWs have admitted this was taught by the WT, your two closest friends on this site have had to admit it, your OWN RELIGION’S OFFICIAL WEB SITE admits it, and you’re the only one left NOT admitting it.

Pride is a bad thing, Rando.  Especially when it continues to make a fool of you, after your lie has been long exposed.

Just admit it…You got it wrong.  You didn’t tell the truth. Why not admit it?  Everyone knows it, anyway.  Regardless of how many more times you write to yourself, with your multiple aliases.


But you know what, Rando?  I have a very simple way that we can get to the bottom of this, once and for all.  I am going to ask a question, and there is NO WAY you will answer it.  Everybody is watching, and they will see you NOT answer this question.

I am going to pick a year out of the hat here….the year 1890.  Since you fail to admit that the WT (magazine/publication) began in 1879, but you do admit that the WT (Society) came about in 1881, then 1890 is a good year to use as the basis for my question, since even you have to admit the WT was fully in existence as an Organization by that time.

So, since you want to pretend that 1874 was only an Adventist teaching and NOT a Watchtower teaching, and since you admit that the WT Organization existed in the year 1890, then here is my question that I am quite positive you will not answer….

If a person asked a member of the Watch Tower Organization in the year 1890, when they could expect Jesus to become “present”, of if He already was “present”, what would the member of the Watch Tower Organization have answered?”

Simple question, Rando….Let’s see your answer.  Bet you don’t give us one.  

Jehovah`s Witness

All Answers


Answers by Expert:


Ask Experts

Volunteer


Derrick Holland

Expertise

I was raised in the religion known as Jehovah`s Witnesses for 13 years. Since becoming a born-again Christian, I have researched extensively this religion, especially their doctrines and their history. I can answer questions about their doctrines from the perspective of Biblical Christianity. To be clear: Jehovahs Witnesses is the religion of my upbringing, though I myself was never baptized into the religion, nor have I ever been considered as a Jehovahs Witness.

Experience

29 years of Biblical research into the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith, and how they differ from the teachings of the Watchtower.

Organizations
I would advise each questioner to this forum, to carefully READ the profiles of the various volunteers. There are several such as myself, who are not practicing JWs, but will provide you with an accurate and honest answer, regarding JW teaching. If we don't know the answer, we will try to research and get it for you. There are also some excellent practicing JWs here, who also endeavor to give you a factual and honest answer, based on their point of view. I believe by getting both points of view, the questioner can weigh the evidence for themselves, and make an informed decision. Unfortunately, there are also 3 here who claim to be JWs, but do NOT give honest, or well-researched answers. They will tell you only what they want you to believe, and they often hide facts about the history of their religion, as well as print untruths about other people's beliefs. This is done in an attempt to deceive the unsuspecting reader. It can be easily seen who these 3 are, simply by reading the public posts and "answers" which they write. Their posts will normally be filled with personal attacks, and if you question them about some teaching or aspect of the Watchtower that makes them uncomfortable, they will often reject your question, question your motives for asking it, tell you that you have been reading "apostate" sites, or turn the conversation into an attack on another expert. These ones are better avoided, as there is nothing to be gained by way of positive discussion, as they are not interested in intelligent conversation, or honest dialogue. If after reading the forum, you still have any questions as to who they are, just ask me, and I will be happy to tell you. And I can also provide documentation of their willful dishonesty. One thing is for certain...in a forum where people from both sides claim to be "Christians", there should never be any willful lying. Such ones only create a distraction in the forum, and provide nothing of any real value.

Education/Credentials
High School, some college. Studies of God's Word, the Bible, and how it compares to JW theology. I have found my own personal study and experiences to be far more valuable than any formal education or training. The Bible message is clear...Salvation is ONLY through and by the shed blood of Jesus Christ, and no religious organization has a thing to do with it. While attendance at a Bible-preaching, Bible-believing church is a must for spiritual growth and fellowship, no church can grant salvation to its members. Nor is joining a particular group a prerequisite for being saved.

©2016 About.com. All rights reserved.