Jump to content

HollyW

When a teaching changes after baptism.....

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

HollyW -
Witness -
105
3259

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

I disagree with your tendency to seek the worst case scenario and go to one extreme or another. The text is quite clear that what you teach a baby is not the same thing as what you know as an adult. I think you know that deep down. A baby is not able to walk immediately is it? It is not able to speak immediately is it? It cannot think or reason like an adult can it? I wonder if you are a mother, if so does your child know all of your intentions and plans for them? I think understanding this would help an honest hearted person. But solid food only belongs to mature people doesn't it? I am not an elder, nor am I anything special in the congregation, but I took the rafter out of my own eye a long time ago, so I think I have freeness to speak on this matter.

Well, Mr V, you pressed me for my opinions about Paul's statements in 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 and I gave them.  Please tell me how anything in those scriptures apply to the changes the WTS has made in what they said were true Bible teachings, especially those since you were baptized.

Why do you consider what I've posted as being a worst case scenario?  

Even the WTS says that these scriptures are not applicable to the growth and knowledge humans go thru from babyhood to adulthood.  And Paul is not talking about that either.  He is speaking about spiritual matters, gifts of the Holy Spirit.  Nor is he talking about teaching wrong understandings and having to correct them.

Your analogy to a baby would only apply if you believed the leaders of the WTS resembled babies when they began back in the 1870's and still haven't reached adulthood, therefore you continue to follow what they say are true Bible teachings with the expectation that sometime in the future they will finally reach maturity and be able to teach as mature adults and not need to correct any misunderstandings.

But that isn't what you believe, is it.  You believe they are teaching what our heavenly Father and Christ Jesus want them to teach and that's why you are willing to accept what they tell you the Bible teaches, even if that changes what they told you the Bible was teaching when you were baptized.  Isn't that how you would answer the question in the OP?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holly, I feel like I'm regurgitating over and over again. I thought that by quoting the text about "babes" would be enough to explain itself. I;m going to simplify dramatically and just use very plain language. I hope you don't mind:

To explain how the scriptures apply to changes we've made since I was baptized

  • My baptism has no bearing on the changes made by the organization. The changes would have occurred whether I became a witness or not
  • 1 Corinthians 13: 8 - 13 demonstrates that gifts like knowlegde, prophesying and tongues would one day cease. These gifts were temporary things in order to grow the early congregation. 

Why do I consider what you've posted as being a worse case scenario?

  • I consider you statements as only focusing on the faults of the Governing Body. You have not shown a balanced unbiased approach

Paul speaking about the growth of humans from babies to adults

  • I agree Paul was not speaking about literal Babies, he was using similitude to demonstrate spiritual growth, which involves adjustments
  • This time and others he was involved in adjustments in thinking: For example, uncircumcision became allowed, previously not allowed 
  •  

When does the baby analogy apply

  • That is correct, according to current thinking, in the 1870's God's people were still a work in progress and will be until the end of the thousand year reign (wt 92 7/15 Pg 30) 

I am willing to accept what they tell me

  • My relationship is with Jehovah first, I care for this firstly by Bible reading and study. It is inferred that the organization is an extension of Jehovah's sovereignty his visible representative such as were the kings of Israel. Hence, if ever the king was to take the nation into apostasy, I must still respect the anointed one of Jehovah, just as David did Saul. It does not mean that I have to take part in anything that would affect my relationship with Jehovah.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

Holly, I feel like I'm regurgitating over and over again. I thought that by quoting the text about "babes" would be enough to explain itself. I;m going to simplify dramatically and just use very plain language. I hope you don't mind:

To explain how the scriptures apply to changes we've made since I was baptized

  • My baptism has no bearing on the changes made by the organization. The changes would have occurred whether I became a witness or not
  • 1 Corinthians 13: 8 - 13 demonstrates that gifts like knowlegde, prophesying and tongues would one day cease. These gifts were temporary things in order to grow the early congregation. 

Why do I consider what you've posted as being a worse case scenario?

  • I consider you statements as only focusing on the faults of the Governing Body. You have not shown a balanced unbiased approach

Paul speaking about the growth of humans from babies to adults

  • I agree Paul was not speaking about literal Babies, he was using similitude to demonstrate spiritual growth, which involves adjustments
  • This time and others he was involved in adjustments in thinking: For example, uncircumcision became allowed, previously not allowed 
  •  

When does the baby analogy apply

  • That is correct, according to current thinking, in the 1870's God's people were still a work in progress and will be until the end of the thousand year reign (wt 92 7/15 Pg 30) 

I am willing to accept what they tell me

  • My relationship is with Jehovah first, I care for this firstly by Bible reading and study. It is inferred that the organization is an extension of Jehovah's sovereignty his visible representative such as were the kings of Israel. Hence, if ever the king was to take the nation into apostasy, I must still respect the anointed one of Jehovah, just as David did Saul. It does not mean that I have to take part in anything that would affect my relationship with Jehovah.

 

Even though knowledge, prophesying, and tongues would one day cease, this does NOT fit the changes being made by the WTS for all these decades.  That's why I explained to you in some detail how these scriptures are not applicable to either the question in the OP nor to the history of the WTS.  Even in simple terms, it doesn't seem to have registered with you yet.

What would you consider to be a balanced and unbiased approach to a group of men who say to listen to them as you would to the voice of God?

If they said that because they are still babies, would you consider it wise to listen to them as you would to the voice of God?

The changes made between the Mosaic covenant and the New Covenant were inspired by God and outlined in his Word, such as circumcision being a spiritual event rather than a physical one, and in no way can this be used as an excuse for the changes the governing body has been making to the beliefs of JWs for all these years. 

That you are willing to accept what they tell you to believe reveals your dedication at baptism was not to God but to the governing body of the WTS organization, which is why you believe you are to change your beliefs about what the Bible really teaches whenever the men on the WTS governing body tell  you to change them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. The OP is about what happens when there is a change in understanding after your baptism. You are implying that you were tricked somehow. However, if you had been studying for several months you would've learned that changes happen, especially if you prepared for your studies well. That way when you were baptized you wouldn't be under any illusion as to what may happen after your baptism. But let;s just say you feel tricked or fooled what is the common reply. It is 1 Corinthians 13: 8 - 13 and Proverbs 4: 18 they are used hand in hand. But let's go further and say, you don't understand what either of those texts have to do with changes after baptism. The next thread of thinking, is to take you through history from Adam to present day showing you all the adjustments that took place leading down to Jesus then on to our day. I've touched on some of those things. But personally, it is so clear to me that adjustments in thinking have been happening since the beginning it is irrefutable, but maybe you don't believe the taking away of the kingdom from the Jews and to spiritual Israel was a significant adjustment. Did the apostles complain? Saying "this is not what I was baptized into."
 Did they look for excuses to disregard every explanation given or did they accept each adjustment? When they met with the older men of Jerusalem and the result was Acts 15: 28, 29, then it was conveyed to the existing congregations, do you think that was from men or God? I'm interested in your answer to that.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree.

The agreement to disagree is a disgraceful defeat if it means surrendering the hope of agreement through deeper understanding. 

1 hour ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

The next thread of thinking, is to take you through history from Adam to present day showing you all the adjustments that took place leading down to Jesus then on to our day. I've touched on some of those things. But personally, it is so clear to me that adjustments in thinking have been happening since the beginning it is irrefutable, but maybe you don't believe the taking away of the kingdom from the Jews and to spiritual Israel was a significant adjustment. Did the apostles complain? Saying "this is not what I was baptized into."
 Did they look for excuses to disregard every explanation given or did they accept each adjustment? When they met with the older men of Jerusalem and the result was Acts 15: 28, 29, then it was conveyed to the existing congregations, do you think that was from men or God? I'm interested in your answer to that.

It was not changes it was clarification to the people of what was meant. Who was it that made these "changes"? Was it a group of men or was it God? The answer is clear, it was God who corrected the people. There was no group of men changing things back and forth claiming to speak for God. 

Share this post


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

The agreement to disagree is a disgraceful defeat if it means surrendering the hope of agreement through deeper understanding. 

It was not changes it was clarification to the people of what was meant. Who was it that made these "changes"? Was it a group of men or was it God? The answer is clear, it was God who corrected the people. There was no group of men changing things back and forth claiming to speak for God. 

 
 
 

Thanks for your opinion, but I disagree with you thoroughly. This is not about being right, it's about maintaining the peace and dignity of all concerned. If you're only interested in arguing you have missed Paul's words on not getting into foolish disputes and arguments about words.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

Thanks for your opinion, but I disagree with you thoroughly. This is not about being right, it's about maintaining the peace and dignity of all concerned. If you're only interested in arguing you have missed Paul's words on not getting into foolish disputes and arguments about words.

So why don't you tell me who made those "changes"? I said God did and not men. I don't think I said anything about being right. The Bible tells us that God corrected the people. The Bible doesn't say that God changed His mind, but rather opened the mind of people. 

As far as my understanding of Paul, that is between me and God. You can have your opinion about me and what I believe, its ok. I am open to your criticisms and will listen, but that doesn't mean I will change to your views on things. I have the freedom in Christ to do so. If my questions bother you, then by all means let me know. I can rephrase them for clarity. I am simply going off the Bible, and if we both agree that the Bible is the Word of God, then there should be no problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2016 at 8:46 AM, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

1 Corinthians 13: 8 - 13 demonstrates that gifts like knowlegde, prophesying and tongues would one day cease. These gifts were temporary things in order to grow the early congregation. 

 

Hello VHC,

  The path of the righteous is like the morning sun, shining ever brighter till the full light of day.  Prov 4:18

We know this morning sun is Jesus, which before his appearance, causes knowledge to increase – until the fulfillment of the Kingdom. Matt 17:2 Rev 1:16; 2 Cor 4:6; Rev 22:16; Luke 1:78; Acts 3:20; Gal 3:27

1 Corinthians 13: 8 – 13  Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears.11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

10 – or “that which is perfect”  - God’s Kingdom.

This speaks to individuals of the Body of Christ, and to all of us, not to an earthly fleshly organization. Rom 13:14   Has knowledge passed away? Has prophesy ceased?  Not according to scripture.   Acts 2:17; Rev 11:3

If one in Christ, a righteous one following the path of Christ, stays on course, “priests” will  instructed in knowledge through Holy spirit. Mal 2:7  If we perceive a wavering of teachings that are truly off course, with false prophesy, changing doctrine, then priests who present false knowledge have left the path of Christ, as well as the laws written on their heart.  Heb 10:16  It has been prophesied to happen, do we ignore prophesy?

my people are destroyed from lack of knowledge. “Because you have rejected knowledge, I also reject you as my priests; because you have ignored the law of your God, I also will ignore your children.  Hos 4:6

“The days are coming,” declares the Sovereign Lord, “when I will send a famine through the land— not a famine of food or a thirst for water, but a famine of hearing the words of the Lord.  Amos 8:11

There is a time period before Jesus arrives where his people do not reflect the light of the Sun, but stumble in darkness. Joel 3:15; 2:10; Ezek 32:7; Mark 13:25; Rev 6:12,13; Ezek 7:27; Matt 24:29; 5:14,16 

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.  Isa 5:20  Organization’s old light has become bitter; rejected and replaced for something sweet and appealing. How long will that last?

For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.  2 Tim 4:3,4

Only by turning to Jesus who is Truth, clothing ourselves with him, which is identifying our self with him(Gal 3:27),  and away from men who speak visions of their own, will the path of our own righteousness appear as the morning sun.  Jer 23:16; Ps 4:2

Is it not true that previous generation teachings and previous set dates have come to nothing?  Ps 119:118  The knowledge of God builds on a strong foundation and continues until that which is perfect arrives – God’s Kingdom  Matt 7:24-27 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

So why don't you tell me who made those "changes"? I said God did and not men. I don't think I said anything about being right. The Bible tells us that God corrected the people. The Bible doesn't say that God changed His mind, but rather opened the mind of people. 

As far as my understanding of Paul, that is between me and God. You can have your opinion about me and what I believe, its ok. I am open to your criticisms and will listen, but that doesn't mean I will change to your views on things. I have the freedom in Christ to do so. If my questions bother you, then by all means let me know. I can rephrase them for clarity. I am simply going off the Bible, and if we both agree that the Bible is the Word of God, then there should be no problem. 

 

You said it was a defeat to "agree to disagree" this implies that one is right and the other was not, as it would only be a defeat if the matter was one of right or wrong.

God commissions his people to search his word themselves and he dignifies them by allowing them to draw conclusions based on the available evidence. Hence, the "light" or understanding gets brighter with time. If you read Daniel 12, in the final part of the days men would rove about or search in God's word and such knowledge would abound. There have been great increases in Bible knowledge in the last 100 years, understanding in Bible languages, new documents being found, timing of events and as a result better translations have been produced which more accurately render verse that in the past have been difficult to translate. I believe

There are a number of times that the Bible shows that Jehovah "regretted" and subsequently changed his mind about some action. One example is the case of Jonah and the Ninevites. God first intended to destroy them. But when they showed repentance he was willing to change his view of the Ninevites. Another example is that of the Judges. When the people would drift into apostasy, God's anger would blaze against them. Judges 2: 18 has the phrase "moved with pity". The footnote reads "felt regret". To regret is to no longer think the same way about a matter. In other words, to change one's mind. Today, when Jehovah deals with us individually he does something similar. When we show repentance for some sin we have committed he is willing to forgive based on the value of Jesus' life. Otherwise none of us could stand.

This is a forum, it is a place where people should feel free to express their views. I agree, you can keep your viewpoint, just as I. I haven't come into this trying to convert anyone. I find it a great source of information and resources, though some may disagree. I think, there's a difference between having an opinion and a personal attack. But if that should ever happen we all have the choice to report any offending posts to let the Mods deal with. I find that on other forums, Bible discussions descend into attacking each other easily. It'd be great if we could remain civil.

Saying that you are simply going off the Bible is a little bit like saying the other person is wrong lol. The problem with saying that is that if the other person also says they are going off the Bible then the two must inherently be in agreement, one mind and one thought. We are not in agreement on all matters. The issue really is, what have each person "missed"? With the knowledge that you have of the Bible, what is it that you have missed that I have pointed out? Alternatively, with the information that I may have, what have I missed? For example, if I have not read the whole Bible maybe I missed a part that had something different to say on a matter I had come to understand one way. I have shown you two or three instances that you may not have thought of. Judges, Jonah and forgiveness of sins today. If you are familiar with scripture there should be no need to quote or cite verses, you would recognize where I have quoted scripture.

Thanks for posting, I'm goign to answer one other person then, I'll be back later if you want to keep talking.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

There are a number of times that the Bible shows that Jehovah "regretted" and subsequently changed his mind about some action. One example is the case of Jonah and the Ninevites. God first intended to destroy them. But when they showed repentance he was willing to change his view of the Ninevites. Another example is that of the Judges. When the people would drift into apostasy, God's anger would blaze against them. Judges 2: 18 has the phrase "moved with pity". The footnote reads "felt regret". To regret is to no longer think the same way about a matter. In other words, to change one's mind. Today, when Jehovah deals with us individually he does something similar. When we show repentance for some sin we have committed he is willing to forgive based on the value of Jesus' life. Otherwise none of us could stand.

My point was that God made the corrections to men, not men making corrections to men. When you have a group that changes from left to right and back to left again, then you must know that this did not come from God. Could God use this left right left to His advantage? sure, He uses people and circumstances to His advantage all the time, to work out His will. When a group claims to speak for God and these changes become apparent, it is not that hard to see God is not using this group as His mouthpiece. 

You know the saying that the WT uses, the one about tacking into the wind as a sailboat does? A few things came to mind about that. One, if this is describing the mode of operation of the WT how does this compare to say John the Baptist?  John made the pathway before God straight (Isa 40:3/Matt 3:3/John 1:23/Mark 1:3/Luke 3:4). John preached one thing, repentance,  and this didn't change. He did not say "repent" one day and then the next "you don't need to repent yet". The second point that came to mind was how if by tacking, a sailboat gains distance traveled, the sailboat also has a course set out and a destination. What ground/distance is gained in a flip flop of doctrines? It is reversing to a previous point, not advancing. What destination is there in mind when a complete reversal takes place?

1 hour ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

This is a forum, it is a place where people should feel free to express their views. I agree, you can keep your viewpoint, just as I. I haven't come into this trying to convert anyone. I find it a great source of information and resources, though some may disagree. I think, there's a difference between having an opinion and a personal attack. But if that should ever happen we all have the choice to report any offending posts to let the Mods deal with. I find that on other forums, Bible discussions descend into attacking each other easily. It'd be great if we could remain civil.

I completely agree with this, we are here to bounce opinions and ideas off of each other in a civil manner. 

1 hour ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

Saying that you are simply going off the Bible is a little bit like saying the other person is wrong lol. The problem with saying that is that if the other person also says they are going off the Bible then the two must inherently be in agreement, one mind and one thought. We are not in agreement on all matters. The issue really is, what have each person "missed"? With the knowledge that you have of the Bible, what is it that you have missed that I have pointed out? Alternatively, with the information that I may have, what have I missed? For example, if I have not read the whole Bible maybe I missed a part that had something different to say on a matter I had come to understand one way. I have shown you two or three instances that you may not have thought of. Judges, Jonah and forgiveness of sins today. If you are familiar with scripture there should be no need to quote or cite verses, you would recognize where I have quoted scripture.

The difference between us both sticking with the Bible and not being in agreement, it that of a bias we have within ourselves. I am content in using the Bible alone and allowing it to support itself. Are you? 

I agree that neither of us can understand everything there is, and we will miss things along the way, but our willingness to bring forth our ideas for criticism is what helps us remove our bias. Without an independent party (others on this forum and elsewhere) giving us what they see in both our view as well as their view, then we have a group who might as well believe the sky is falling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Forum Statistics

    62,038
    Total Topics
    116,675
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,534
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Marek Markus
    Newest Member
    Marek Markus
    Joined




×
×
  • 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.