Jump to content

HollyW

When a teaching changes after baptism.....

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

HollyW -
Witness -
105
3234

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

This came up during a discussion of some of the recent changes in JW beliefs:  I've often wondered, do you think that if a teaching has changed since you were baptized, you should still be required to believe it? 

If there's any interest in this, there are some follow-up questions I'd like to ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting question.

Baptism is a symbol of dedication to Jehovah, the Sovereign Lord of the Universe. It isn't dedication to a teaching but to a person. (some might want to argue that the forgoing statement is a teaching of course, but I am not going to get into a "who created God?" loop). 

So if I am dedicated to Jehovah, then I believe that no lasting harm can come to me if I fulfil the terms of that dedication. I am quite happy to comply with "teachings" that change from what I learned prior to dedication simply because I did not dedicate myself to a body of instructions. It's a bit like what Paul described at 1Cor.9:17.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Interesting question.

Baptism is a symbol of dedication to Jehovah, the Sovereign Lord of the Universe. It isn't dedication to a teaching but to a person. (some might want to argue that the forgoing statement is a teaching of course, but I am not going to get into a "who created God?" loop). 

So if I am dedicated to Jehovah, then I believe that no lasting harm can come to me if I fulfil the terms of that dedication. I am quite happy to comply with "teachings" that change from what I learned prior to dedication simply because I did not dedicate myself to a body of instructions. It's a bit like what Paul described at 1Cor.9:17.

 

 

Doesn't The Baptism Questions Require You To Dedicate Yourself To The Organization?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

My Dad used to take me deer hunting when I was a teenager.  We'd go out when it was dark and be in a deer stand in a tree as the light began to come up.  At first you could make out precious little, but as the light slowly intensified, the tree stump that may have initially looked like a sleeping bear, became more easily identifiable.  Once the morning had broken, much more became clear.  Now if someone had asked me at that point if I felt I was required to believe that what I had thought was a bear really was a tree stump, the question would make no sense.  Of course, it was a tree stump.  Why would someone ask a person was required to believe it was tree stump when that was so obviously clear?

But what about the seedling that was growing out of the ground 30 yards away?  Well, at first, that was not even visible when  there was little light.  But then at mid-morning, one could see the seedling, but still it was unclear exactly what it was.  Likely a relative of a nearby plant or tree.  But upon returning to the sight a while later and doing some in research into the leaf shape, etc, we might come to some pretty good conclusions.  But even then, the passage of time made the identification more discernible. 

Of course, in some situations, identification of the plant could have been mistaken or need to be altered if one realized that there could have been a slight error at the initial or subsequent examinations.  

Likewise, JW's understanding of the scriptures continues to grow and mature.

This is one of the great advantage that Jehovah's Witnesses have over most other religions.  It is their willingness to change or adjust based on new insights or investigations.  That is in fact how science works (or at  least is supposed to).  How silly it would be to be required to, for instance, be bound to the beliefs astronomers had back in the 1900's.  As Hubble peers into space and other bits and pieces of information are discerned, our knowledge of the stars and space grows.  Likewise with the scriptures.  

The question as to whether we are required to believe the new insights might be best rephrased, "Does one want to progress in knowledge or not?"

By way of contrast, it is most apparent that most churches are mired in the doctrine of the third - sixth centuries. They cling to, for instance, the Athanasian Creed.  It's as if they are required to believe that the tree stump is really a bear!

Now as to which camp one chooses to belong, that is a choice for each individual.  But as for me and my household, we choose continual progress.

Thank you for your reply, Lloyd. :)

I know you probably worked hard on your illustration, but it seems to me to be out of harmony with what the Bible reveals at 1 John 1:5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all.   

There's also this: James 1:17  Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow.

 Also, your illustration would not be in harmony with what Pastor Russell said about new light extinguishing older light in the February 1881 ZWT p.3:

If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now: But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. "New light" never extinguishes older "light," but adds to it. If you were lighting up a building containing seven gas jets you would not extinguish one every time you lighted another, but would add one light to another and they would be in harmony and thus give increase of light: So is it with the light of truth; the true increase is by adding to, not by substituting one for another.  http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/archi...er/w1881_E.pdf

Last, but not least, your illustration doesn't reflect the reality of the WTS changes in teachings because you would have the light showing a bear at first, just as you've said, then the light showed a stump, also as you've said, but then the light was showing a bear again, and then a stump again, reflecting that they were going back to older light from time to time.  Would that not be illustrative more of regression rather than progression?

Ephesians 4:14 tells us, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

Doesn't The Baptism Questions Require You To Dedicate Yourself To The Organization?  

You're probably thinking of one of the questions asked just before being baptized:  "Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization?" 

I wonder if maybe this is the reason they believe they are required to change their beliefs, this association their baptism identifies them as having with the WTS?  That would make sense, wouldn't it, that having been baptized into that relationship, they would expect to continue adapting their beliefs about what the Bible teaches based on what the WTS tells them it teaches, even if it cancels out what they believed when they were baptized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Interesting question.

Baptism is a symbol of dedication to Jehovah, the Sovereign Lord of the Universe. It isn't dedication to a teaching but to a person. (some might want to argue that the forgoing statement is a teaching of course, but I am not going to get into a "who created God?" loop). 

So if I am dedicated to Jehovah, then I believe that no lasting harm can come to me if I fulfil the terms of that dedication. I am quite happy to comply with "teachings" that change from what I learned prior to dedication simply because I did not dedicate myself to a body of instructions. It's a bit like what Paul described at 1Cor.9:17.

Thanks for the reply, Eoin.  I appreciate having your thoughts on this, though I'm not sure about the application of 1 Corinthians 9:17 to this subject.

Since the WTS does require acceptance of all of its teachings in order for you to be approved for other JWs to associate with, is that what you mean by fulfilling the terms of your dedication, to be willing to change your beliefs if and when your religious leaders tell you to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"I know you probably worked hard on your illustration, but it seems to me to be out of harmony with what the Bible reveals at 1 John 1:5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. "

I"m sure you worked hard on your response as well, but I fail to see how my illustration conflicts with John 1:5.  You gave no explanation. What is true however is that though we may progress in our understand of the scriptures, that in no way conflicts with the fact that God is Light and in him there is no darkness.  I fail to see any connection between those facts and the fact that we try to progress in our understand of the scriptures.   

The same would be true as regards James 1:17 ( Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow. ).  You seem to be trying to say that since Jehovah gives perfect gifts and good things means that our attempts at understanding the scriptures must be perfect from day 1, but that doesn't make logical sense nor does it harmonize with other scriptures.  Need I list scriptures wherein Biblical characters grew in knowledge?

And you misunderstand Russell.  He did said, "any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth."  But he was speaking about truth and not about the attempts at understanding it.

Further, you misinterpret my illustration.  It simply shows that what may appear to be one thing in the darkness, may prove to be something else entirely in the light and upon a closer examination.

Moreover, does it really makes sense to you that Jehovah would "speak from the heavens", so to speak, on every little point?  Is that how you see him, as a micro-manager being sure that every single nuance of every single act at understanding the scriptures is rigorously correct at every point in time?  

Or is he not a God who let's folks grope for him and search for him.  Isn't he in fact a God who reveals things progressively, Jesus stating that there were certain things that the disciples were "not able to bear" at a certain point in time.

Doesn't progressive understanding make much more sense?  If pertinent, it would perhaps be wise to not allow pride to get in the way of logic and reasonableness.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again, Lloyd,

Let's take your illustration and in the light you and your father had at first, the stump looked like a bear.  Did your father require that you believe it was a bear in order for you to be approved association?  And did he require you to also teach others the stump was a bear on pain of shunning?  Of course not, so there's the difference in reality that your illustration does not speak to.  Obviously it was still too dark for either of you say the truth was that the stump was a bear.  This is where 1 John 1:5 comes in because the light you were using was not from God: This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. " This verse could not have been written by someone peering into the darkness and seeing a bear where there was a stump.

Look for a moment at the practical application of what Russell wrote.  In the first light that he had, he looked at the faithful slave and saw 144,000 persons.  Later he came to believe he had been looking at one person, himself, and so did all of his followers.  This could be a case of adding more light and showing that it was just shadows that made the faithful slave appear to be 144,000 people when really there was just the one.  For thirty years this was what everyone in the WTS was seeing, but then the next president of the WTS, Judge Rutherford, said the faithful slave was 144,000 person, not just one, in fact he said it did violence to the scriptures to exclude any of the 144,000.  Do you see how the light went back to what it had been in the beginning?  That means that if Russell's light had increased, Rutherford's light had to have dimmed or gone out.

The current governing body of the WTS has in effect put out both the light Russell used to see just himself as the faithful slave and also put out the light Rutherford was using to see the faithful slave as all of the 144,000, and have turned on another light that shows just themselves as the faithful slave, and only when they are meeting as the faithful slave.

If not turning light on and off the way Russell spoke against doing, it surely is showing a dimmer switch being used. ;)

You had felt I was misinterpreting your illustration but you offered it as a way to answer my question about being required to believe something that was not being taught when you were baptized.  You illustrated something being seen in the darkness.  1 John 1:5 shows that this could not be from God because in Him there is no darkness at all.  If the teaching that was changed was akin to what you pointed to as being seen in the darkness, can that teaching be said to be a Bible teaching that one must believe in order to be approved association?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HollyW said:

Hi again, Lloyd,

Let's take your illustration and in the light you and your father had at first, the stump looked like a bear.  Did your father require that you believe it was a bear in order for you to be approved association?  And did he require you to also teach others the stump was a bear on pain of shunning?  Of course not, so there's the difference in reality that your illustration does not speak to.  Obviously it was still too dark for either of you say the truth was that the stump was a bear.  This is where 1 John 1:5 comes in because the light you were using was not from God: This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. " This verse could not have been written by someone peering into the darkness and seeing a bear where there was a stump.

Look for a moment at the practical application of what Russell wrote.  In the first light that he had, he looked at the faithful slave and saw 144,000 persons.  Later he came to believe he had been looking at one person, himself, and so did all of his followers.  This could be a case of adding more light and showing that it was just shadows that made the faithful slave appear to be 144,000 people when really there was just the one.  For thirty years this was what everyone in the WTS was seeing, but then the next president of the WTS, Judge Rutherford, said the faithful slave was 144,000 person, not just one, in fact he said it did violence to the scriptures to exclude any of the 144,000.  Do you see how the light went back to what it had been in the beginning?  That means that if Russell's light had increased, Rutherford's light had to have dimmed or gone out.

The current governing body of the WTS has in effect put out both the light Russell used to see just himself as the faithful slave and also put out the light Rutherford was using to see the faithful slave as all of the 144,000, and have turned on another light that shows just themselves as the faithful slave, and only when they are meeting as the faithful slave.

If not turning light on and off the way Russell spoke against doing, it surely is showing a dimmer switch being used. ;)

You had felt I was misinterpreting your illustration but you offered it as a way to answer my question about being required to believe something that was not being taught when you were baptized.  You illustrated something being seen in the darkness.  1 John 1:5 shows that this could not be from God because in Him there is no darkness at all.  If the teaching that was changed was akin to what you pointed to as being seen in the darkness, can that teaching be said to be a Bible teaching that one must believe in order to be approved association?

you just want to cause trouble and yet give no reasons yourself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Forum Statistics

    61,693
    Total Topics
    114,678
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,513
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    pastel
    Newest Member
    pastel
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Which scriptures, Arauna?  I’m open to discussing them with you. As the “new creation”, they are both human and spirit, as Jesus showed his disciples when he appeared to them after his resurrection.  1 Pet 1:23; 2 Cor 5:17; Mark 16:12; John 21:14; 1 Cor 15:3-8 "For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters." Rom 8:29 "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!" 2 Cor 5:17 " And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man."  1 Cor 15:49  NKJV "And just as we have borne the image of the one who is made of earth, we will also bear the image of the heavenly." LEB “You, however, are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to him.”  Rom 8:9 “But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly”  Heb 12:22 Jerusalem’s temple was made with stones (Matt 24:2), God’s Temple today in Christ, is made with “living stones”, who are also His priests.  Individually and unitedly as Christ’s Bride, they are the dwelling place of God’s Spirit, just as the old earthly temple was blessed with God’s Spirit.  But no longer is there any definitive example of a temple built in a definitive place.  The anointed priesthood are His Temple and House of God.  1 Pet 2:5,9; 1 Cor 3:16,17; Eph 2:20-22  They are his spiritual  “organization”.  This is why the new creation is both.  There are many scriptures in my post that show the Bride with Christ, coming down from heaven.  Rev 21:1-3 He had an earthly body when he appeared to his disciples. He also ate with them.  Should we limit God’s Hand to what He can accomplish with a “new creation”?  Was it limited when He created Adam and Eve and life in general?  Or, when Jesus appeared and disappeared to his disciples?  For those who are “conformed to the image of His Son” wouldn’t they have the ability to do the same?  Oh Arauna, I am not the one saying I will be “co-ruler” with Christ before Christ makes the choice.  That would be your GB.  Matt 25:21  Besides, “co-ruler” isn’t a word found in the Bible. There is only one anointed Body of Christ.  The scriptures are above in the post of what those members are.  (1 Cor 12).  Not all of the "virgins" are found to be wise.  Many prefer to "buy" their oil from one other than Christ.  Matt 25:8,9; Rev 13:Rev 3:18; Rev 13:11,12,15-17 At the patience of the Librarian, I’ve posted links for anyone who cares to, can visit.   The “good news” is the restoration of “Jacob”/”Israel”.  Isa 44:23; Mal 3:1-3; Matt 17:11 …”the inhabited earth” (Matt 24:14) refers to God’s holy people.  John 14:23; 1 Cor 3:9  They are God’s owned land – “Israel”.  In the last days, they receive the message to “come out of her my people”.  Jer 25:29,30; Matt 10:23; Rev 11:1-3; 18:4-8 They and those with them, are drinking in the lie that an earthly organization leads one to salvation.  Rev 12:13-17; 2 Thess 2:9-12; Rev 13:1,2;18:4-8   "The Symbolic Earth" - http://4womaninthewilderness.blogspot.com/2016/06/symbolic-earth.html    
    • The bible itself says that we must not have fellowship with those who are brazen in conduct.  There is no "threat".  When a person is a spiritual threat to other brothers and sisters and does not stop brazen conduct......then only, after they have been requested many times to stop unacceptable behaviour,  are they disfellowshipped.  These are the ones who usually then defame JWs and hide the truth-  that they were disfellowshipped because of a Christian conduct,  be it repetitive lying, stealing, fornication etc...... a practice of some und of unacceptable behaviour. Many realize the need to change and come back into the fold - others become more brazen..... and defame JWs.   I see you did not like this comment. ...... it says a lot about you.  People like to blame "others" .... never themselves.... Adam blamed eve.... lol.
    • My daughter bought a small home in UK in a safe area. One bathroom, 3 bedrooms - and it costs over over half million pounds.   So a 1 million pound house (especially in London must be the size of a dingy) and  is definitely not the epitome of luxury -  which impression you are trying to create. To sell a house that people have been using is good. They can use this money to assist brothers in the rest of the world. I guess they are selling because it is no longer needed..... but if they kept it you would also complain.  One cannot ever please some people.....
    • I guess - according to you -  we can throw out all the scriptures which indicate the anointed will have heavenly bodies such as 1 cor 15 and revelations - too many places to mention.  Not even those which show they will be changed in an instant. And the scriptures in Hebrews which indicate that they will be priests in the heavenly temple of jehovah.   Jehovah is perfect in logic, so why give a heavenly body when a physical body is more suited to the earth?  The marriage of the lamb will take place where? Did Jesus give up his earthly body to receive a heavenly  spiritual body? And did he really say to his disciples they will be with him where he is? Agh, there are just too many scriptures which indicate it is a heavenly kingdom and heavenly rulership....and a heavenly priesthood - a function you have forgotten about by just wanting to " rule"......... .which tells me you are up to your same old, same old behaviours.  You boast you are of the body of christ...... so which "body" do you belong to which has perfect unity? . How many members?  Where do you meet?  And are you and your adherents fulfilling the prophesy that the good news of the kingdom will be preached throughout the earth?     
    • And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10  and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kingsr over the earth.”Rev 5:9,10 - NWT As a JW, this sounded accurate to me, since it fit the supporting doctrine that the “144,000” will rule strictly from heaven – “over” the earth...not within its vicinity, but from the spiritual realm.  What I have since learned about this scripture and Christ’s truth regarding where the anointed will be “ruling” from, has been an important turning point for me. Notice how the organization’s own Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures breaks down vs. 10: “and you made them to the God of us kingdom and priests and they are reigning upon the earth” Here are a few other examples: “And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”  Scripture4all.org “…they will reign upon the earth”.  https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/5-10.htm It is very rare to find a Bible translation using the phrase “over the earth” in this scripture. The organization’s latest pictorial depiction of the 144,000 kings/priests ruling in heaven was of a vast array of emerald green thrones where men appearing identical to one another and to Christ, gazed over the earth as Christ’s “co-rulers”.  I wonder what the anointed JW women feel about a female’s apparent transition into a man, who are clones of each other.  This teaching sounds ridiculous to me today.  However, since the role of JW women is repeatedly slighted, should we expect any acknowledgement of the anointed being both male and female?  I could be in error, but I haven’t seen any photos of women partaking in the magazines.  There is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.  Gal 3:28 To be one in Christ does not mean the faithful sealed anointed take on the same physical appearance as Christ. All of the members of a fleshly body are distinctly different in appearance; working separately yet collectively, with the unified goal to allow the body to work efficiently.  It is the same in the Body of Christ. 1 Cor 12:15-20  All are given various gifts, and all are individuals with individual personalities. They have abilities reflecting the gift they receive.  Paul described it this way: There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them. 5 There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. 6 There are different kinds of working, but in all of them and in everyone it is the same God at work.  1 Cor 12:4-6 If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, but one body. 1 Cor 12:19,20 Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized byone Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 14 Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many. 1 Cor 12:12-14 15 Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ. 16 From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.  Eph 4:11-16 The 144,000 are the Bride of Christ under the New Covenant “woman”/promise.   (2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:29-32; Gal 4:26) It is curious that the WT's leaders rarely go into detail about this.  When I recall their latest illustration described above, I don’t believe the artist had the idea of “bride” in mind. I could only sense an aura of steely authority, without the needed compassion and love that Jesus exhibited and taught his disciples to nurture within themselves. (Isa 42:3; Matt 14:14; John 13:34,35; 1 John 4: 17; Heb 4:15) Just as a bride and groom are not identical to each other, neither is Christ’s Bride of many members; either to Christ, or to one another, as the illustration erroneously shows. (1 Cor 12:29,30; Eph 4:11-13)  Marriage partners compliment and support each other in love.  It is the same with the Body of Christ, being united in one Spirit that imparts love, faith and knowledge of Christ and the Father. The organization’s leaders are unable to perceive this spiritual unity, since they have rejected the Spirit of Christ, in exchange for the spirit of Satan.  (John 15:4-7;1 Cor 6:15-17; 2 Cor 11:3; 2 Pet 1:10; Rev 2:4; 8:10;13:11) Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.  1 Cor 2:12-14  In order to “rule on the earth”, God’s priests must be on the earth.  If we can shed the false belief that once the 144,000 are sealed in “heaven” they will remain there, we are then able to grasp how such “heavenly” angel/messenger/priests will be found ruling, teaching, and helping God’s future children on the earth.  (Mal 2:7; 1 Pet 2:5,9; Heb 1:14; Rev 5:9,10)   We can comprehend God’s “new creation” as having two “births”; one by fleshly parents through Adam and Eve, (Gen 2:7) and one by spiritual parents.  (John 3:3,5; 1 Cor 15:50; John 15:45; 20:22; Gal 4:26) Once Jesus was resurrected, he appeared many times to his disciples in the flesh; and just as easily, disappeared into the spirit realm.   His example set the precedence of what it means to be a “new creation”.  (Mark 16:12; John 21:14; 1 Cor 15:3-8)  By combining this event with Pearl Doxsey's help from her article, “Who are the gods?”, we can visualize the 144,000 “angels” present not only in the spirit realm, but on earth as well: The sons of God ("gods") inherit the promises given to Abraham. What promises are these? "I will make you very fruitful (John 15:8) I will make nations of you (Rev 5:9,10), and kings will come from you (Rev 20:4; 1:5; 3:21; 19:16,15; 2:26,27)". “Jacob had a dream in which he saw a stairway resting on the earth, with its top reaching to heaven, and the angels of God were ascending and descending on it.  There above it stood the Lord, and he said: "I am the Lord, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac. I will give you and your descendants the land on which you are lying  (Ps 37:29; Heb 2:5,16; Gal 3:29; Heb 11:8-10; 13:14; Rev 21:2; Heb 12:22,23; Luke 10:20) (Gen.17:6).  Your descendants will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring (Rev 22:2). I am with you and will watch over you wherever you go (Matt 28:20), and I will bring you back to this land (Rev 21:7).  I will not leave you (John 14:18) until I have done what I have promised you (John 16:22).  Jacob was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place (Heb 12:22,23,28)! This is none other than the house of God (1 Cor 3:9,16; Isa 56:7; Eph 2:19,10); this is the gate of heaven (Rev 11:6; Matt 16:19; Rev 3:12; John 10:9; 2 Cor 5:20)." (Gen.28:12-15,17) "Jesus added, “Very truly I tell you, you will see ‘heaven open (Luke 24:32; Rev 2:17; Matt 13:11; Rev 4:1; 1:1)  (John 3:12; 1 Cor 2:12,13; Col 3:2), and the angels of God ascending and descending (Heb 12:22; Eph 2:6; Rev 3:21) "on* (Greek--*"in service to") the Son of Man.” (John 1:51) The "angels" (Lit. Greek, "messengers" – Isa 43:10,21; 1 Pet 2:9; Mal 2:7; Acts 1:8) referred to here, could not have served before the time of Christ (John 3:13) Jesus specifically said that they are in service on "the Son of Man" (1 Cor 4:1).  The "Son of Man" is Jesus in the flesh (John 1:14). Therefore, these angels serve Christ, after his coming down from heaven.  To be a messenger of Christ ("ambassador") who harbors God's spirit of life within... who has been made new (Rom 12:2; 8:11) as a part of God's new creation (2 Cor 5:17) by means of incorruptible seed, the Word of God (1 Pet 1:23; Luke 8:11)... …who has been reborn as a Son of the Most High (John 3:3,5; Rom 8:16,17,19,28-30)... who has been made an immovable pillar in the eternal heavenly Temple of God (Rev 3:12; Prov 9:1; Jer 1:18)... ...is a "god" (Ps 82:6; Rom 8:14; 1 Cor 8:5).  I do hope readers here find this information to be a personal turning point as it was for me, in learning that both Christ and the 144,000 kings and priests/ Bride of Christ, will have access to heaven as well as on earth, and living among God’s future children in the Kingdom. “You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.” Matt 5:14  Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. Rev 21:1-3  “But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple” Rev 21:22 And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him. 4 They shall see His face, and His name shall be on their foreheads. 5 There shall be no night there: They need no lamp nor light of the sun, for the Lord God gives them light. And they shall reign forever and ever. Rev 22:3-5 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 1 Cor 3:16 Pearl Doxsey: (type in her name and the title of the article in the search bar. The link should appear) “End of the New Covenant” “Those not anointed – what benefit now?” “The Holy City”   PLEASE SEE AND ENJOY,   “The Holy City” - http://pearl-holycity.blogspot.com/   Pearl Doxsey, “End of the New Covenant” Those not anointed-what benefit now? - http://4womaninthewilderness.blogspot.com/2013/04/i-received-two-questions-1.html         And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.” (Heb.1:6) "Jesus will again, be brought into the world. At that time, the totality of his angels/messengers, will worship him... and be in service to, the Son of Man."  Pearl Doxsey
    • We do have very good reasons, the math for 1914 wouldn't work out otherwise Yes, I think we would laugh. After all, messing around with numbers to "fit something you want it to fit" sounds pretty cultish. When looking at this subject again, in light of Br. Splane's talk about types and antitypes, and how he said that (paraphrased) we have to make sure that when we are talking about types, that they are genuine types, because the word of God says they are puts a whole different slant on it. Then the idea is enforced even further when he says who is to decide if a person or event is a type, if the word of God doesn't say anything about it and he quotes Br. Shroeder: ( We need to exercise great care when applying accounts in the Hebrew Scriptures as prophetic patterns or types if these accounts are not applied in the Scriptures themselves). Therefor reading the account in Daniel 4 without any preconceived ideas, I see these main lessons: verse 17  "This is by the decree of watchers, and the request is by the word of the holy ones, so that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he gives it to whomever he wants, and he sets up over it even the lowliest of men.”  Lesson: (quite self explanatory really) Jehovah can do what he wants because he is the ultimate sovereign. verse 27  "Therefore, O king, may my counsel be acceptable to you. Turn away from your sins by doing what is right, and from your iniquity by showing mercy to the poor. It may be that your prosperity will be extended". Lesson: Listen to Jehovah and do right, otherwise Jehovah will discipline you. verse 37  “Now I, Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, am praising and exalting and glorifying the King of the heavens, because all his works are truth and his ways are just, and because he is able to humiliate those who are walking in pride. Lesson: similar to above, and also proof that Jehovah carries out his discipline.  ---------------- The reasoning put forward as to why this particular chapter of Daniel (4) has greater meaning (paraphrased from WT October 2014) is that the book of Daniel has a central theme, that of God's Kingdom, and keeps pointing forward to the establishment of that Kingdom under the rulership of his Son, Jesus. For example what it says in Daniel 2:44: "“In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever.” I can see that Daniel Ch 2 is talking about Neb's. dream of the statue, representing subsequent rulerships, and that during the feet period God's Kingdom will come. In my opinion this is one valid and definite description of when the Kingdom will come. Then Chapters 7 and 8 are full of cryptic beasts, Chapter 9 prophesy about the coming of the Messiah including his cutting off, chapter 11 more cryptic descriptions, this time involving the king of the north and south, and the last chapter (12) the time of the end with Michael standing up. I need an encoder! I must admit, because of my more practical disposition, when we studied the Daniel book, I did not pay enough attention. My son was quite small and I had my hands full, and I can't even remember if we studied it again after that? For example what are these numbers about?: Daniel 12:11  “And from the time that the constant feature has been removed and the disgusting thing that causes desolation has been put in place, there will be 1,290 days. 12  “Happy is the one who keeps in expectation and who arrives at the 1,335 days!" (It's ok, no need to answer, I can look it up myself).   ,Sorry, I was being confusing. I didn't mean 607 was special. I meant what happened when counting 2520 years from that date, I meant that 1914 was a very significant year. (have to go, will carry on later)
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.