The "Overlapping Generation" Revisited.

[TrueTomHarley]

11 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I guess I will note here that I called True TomHarley's bluff in the previous thread, and challenged  him to explain the "overlapping generations" in such a simple manner that EVEN AH could understand it ... and he looked at his cards, and folded.

I shouldn't do it. Apologies to @Annaand others engaged in serious discussion. I will not do it again (ideally). I certainly will not if this character does not misrepresent me, and I am too petty not to respond....

I did not fold. I did explain it. What I could not do - could anyone? - is rise up to the additional condition that he added: "explain the "overlapping generations " in such a simple manner that EVEN AH could understand it"

There! No more. Even if he (predictably) chimes in with something equally outrageous and insulting. My apologies to everyone else present.

[PeterR]

1 hour ago, bruceq said:

PeterR : "I dare say you'd squeeze your version of it past an average 5 year old though. I can't argue with that.

 

Odd how you appear to have quoted me prior to me even posting. Making later revisions to make things appear a different to what they actually were - I wonder where you learned that?

 

1 hour ago, bruceq said:

 

Jesus agrees:

"At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to young children. ²⁶  Yes, O Father, because this is the way you approved."  Matt 11:25,26. 

 

Ah, I see. So Jesus was encouraging a kind of spiritual intelligence test whereby the willingness to suspend any power of reason would open you up to God's wisdom.

It's not how I've traditionally understood the scripture. But I guess it works well for you.

And all those who quietly find ways to politely ignore the overlapping generations teaching, no matter their level of spiritual maturity and qualifications in the congregation, I guess these too have not made the cut. Only people like you and TTH actually meet Jesus' requirements to receive unique revelation. I imagine that must feel quite special.

It does leave us in a bit of a predicament though if that's what Jesus meant. It makes it impossible to challenge any doctrine from any religion if the bottom line is that only those that put their reason to one side would understand.

Does Jehovah reveal things to those who are humble and beggers for the spirit? By all means.

Does Jehovah demand that we accept things that have no basis in scripture and no reasonable foundation? Not at all.

 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

5 minutes ago, PeterR said:

Only people like you and TTH actually meet Jesus' requirements to receive unique revelation. I imagine that must feel quite special.

Uh oh. There is an ad hominem attack that I will let slide.

[PeterR]

4 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Uh oh. There is an ad hominem attack that I will let slide.

And there is a post that I'm not going to respond to. Not now. Or ever.

... oh but I ... oh never mind ... I'll let it slide.

[JW Insider]

6 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

There are illogical dissections going one. For example:

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

most of them left the Watch Tower organization,

 Who are "them"? How do we know that those disputing and leaving the Bible Students back then were actually anointed at all? Maybe only those proving loyal in the face of trials were genuine in the first place.

It was easy to anticipate that you might judge them all as having never been genuinely anointed. This is why I said it was "by their own count" and "per the Watch Tower publications."

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

If they are referring to the entire group of faithful anointed ones (by their own count) who were actively serving God, then no one could say, per the Watch Tower publications

Also, think about what you are saying. Many of those "disputing and leaving the Bible Students back then" were disputing and leaving because of false doctrines being promoted by Rutherford and the Watch Tower. The 1917 dispute was about men wrestling over who should have dictatorial power and the promotion of a book "The Finished Mystery" where the majority of its content is now understood to be false doctrines. The first promotions of the Watch Tower Society under Rutherford was the false doctrine (actually a false prophecy) that millions then living would never die because the proofs that the end would come in 1925 were even better than the proofs of 1914 and that Bible Students had more evidence that the end would come in 1925 than Noah had evidence that Jehovah would cause a flood upon mankind. Do you think that all true anointed Christians would be expected to merely put up with these attitudes and false doctrines and false prophecies? Using the Watch Tower's biblical definition of apostasy, ultimately, Rutherford himself apostasized from the Bible Students movements which he had taken part in promoting. We consider Rutherford's apostasy in this case to be a good thing!

Remember that the congregations themselves were responsible for rooting out error. There was no hint in the Bible that they were to wait upon a central body to root it out for them. Note what Jesus tells John:

(Revelation 2:2) 2 ‘I know your deeds, and your labor and endurance, and that you cannot tolerate bad men, and that you put to the test those who say they are apostles, but they are not, and you found them to be liars.

(Revelation 2:6) 6 Still, you do have this in your favor: that you hate the deeds of the sect of Nic·o·laʹus, which I also hate.

(Revelation 2:14) 14 “‘Nevertheless, I have a few things against you, that you have there those adhering to the teaching of Baʹlaam, who taught Baʹlak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel. . .

(Revelation 2:15) . . .In the same way, you also have those adhering to the teaching of the sect of Nic·o·laʹus.

(Revelation 2:20) . . .“‘Nevertheless, I do hold this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezʹe·bel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and misleads my slaves . . .

(Revelation 2:24-26) 24 “‘However, I say to the rest of you who are in Thy·a·tiʹra, all those who do not follow this teaching, those who did not get to know the so-called “deep things of Satan”: I am not putting on you any other burden. 25 Just the same, hold fast to what you have until I come. 26 And to the one who conquers and observes my deeds down to the end, I will give authority over the nations,

etc., etc.

If any of these anointed Christians were serious about their obligations as congregations under the leadership of Christ Jesus, they should have been expected to dispute the same false doctrines, false prophecies, and political idolatry, that the Watch Tower admits had been the cause of so much stumbling. Later, especially around 1927 to 1930, Rutherford went so far as to equate some of the teachings of Russell with the teachings of Satan.

[Shiwiii]

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Above, I also quoted a WT QFR that mentioned overlapping generations from the Sept. 1, 1952 WT, and it showed why overlapping generations do not effect the length of the generation Jesus spoke about.

Isn't this exactly what the current teaching is today? I mean, isn't it the assumption that it DOES alter the length of a generation according to the wt? 

 

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Note that it isn't by believing in a potential 'two-lifespan' generation that we are keeping up with advancing light and the leadings of holy spirit, but only explcitly by maintaining a sense of urgency, and keeping on the watch. As Christians we would do this with or without the two-lifespan generation, based on other scriptures, for example:

While I understand your position, I find it interesting that the dismissal of the length of generation concept to accept something that we already know, is perplexing. To further clarify what I mean, how long have we already known to keep watch? Since the NT was written, yes? So that is information we were given far before there was a thought of an overlapping generation, and now it is being used in the wt pubs to give people an easy answer to side step the actual point being raised by the wt,  that a generation according to the wt  is completely different from the  perspective of anyone else, to include the Bible itself. 

[Shiwiii]

6 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Something goes rather subtly off track in all these "generation" discussions for me. It really makes absolutely no difference to the reality of the situation whatever any of us think about the way the final "generation" before Armageddon is structured.

Oh I agree it really makes no difference! My only question/problem is that the adherence is required to keep up with the gb. Why? 

 

6 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Really, the only way we are going to know if our current view of an overlapping group of people, connected by their shared experience and destiny, are indeed the "generation" Jesus was referring to, is to be there when the "great tribulation" starts, and by Jehovah's underserved kindness, to be there when the final post Armageddon dust settles. Isn't that the important element of this?

 exactly.  So why is a doctrine that is overlapping, changed from previous thought, hard to explain, required by the wt/gb of its members? 

[Shiwiii]

40 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Remember that the congregations themselves were responsible for rooting out error. There was no hint in the Bible that they were to wait upon a central body to root it out for them.

If that was the practice then, which I agree it was, then why is it required now? 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Sigh ...

How many MILLIONS of words are going to be expended TRYING to rationalize something that sane, rational people will always choke on?

The only opinion that counts is what was commonly understood in the time of Jesus, and the meaning Jesus MEANT, which would have been INSTANTLY understood by EVERYONE without the need of a million word thesis, years of discussion, and charts from art departments.

Here is the fact:

Generation, as understood back then, and now by EVERYBODY except the GB is ONLY one thing.

THE AVERAGE LIFESPAN OF ONE BEING GENERATED.

The reason a generation is called a GENERATION, and not an epoch, an age, or Howdy Doody Time, is that  when a man and a woman have sex, and create a baby ... THAT IS THE NEW GENERATION. 

OF COURSE (hopefully) it overlaps the PREVIOUS Generation ... but each is of a DIFFERENT Generation ..... they were "generated" at different times.

TWO GENERATIONS ARE NOT ONE GENERATION, as called for in Scripture. "This Generation will not pass away, before all these things occur .."

THEY HAVE "GENERATED" A LIFE.    The lifespan of that child is ONE GENERATION!!!!

This is how all sane, rational people view a generation .... when they are not trying to defend ... the indefensible.

.( ... for those in Rio Linda ... that is somewhere between, on the average ... 40 and 108 years ... usually somewhere around 80 years ..)

When you quit trying to defend the indefensible it gets REAL simple. 

Just use the same definition that EVERYBODY on the planet ... back in Jesus' time and continuing to this day .... except the GB  .... uses, and HAS USED, for the past 4,000 or so years.

"Overlapping Generation(s)"  are NOT ONE GENERATION.

 

[Evacuated]

James. I would love to share your simple view.

39 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

when a man and a woman have sex, and create a baby ... THAT IS THE NEW GENERATION.

I agree with this, but you cannot be serious when you say that "THE AVERAGE LIFESPAN OF ONE BEING GENERATED." is what Jesus meant in his prophecy. This word "generation" has more than one meaning which has been thoroughly discussed elsewhere.

I'm only going to quote the Insight article on the subject which says of Jesus:

"However, he was also using the word “generation” with reference to humans whose lives would in some way be associated with the foretold events during his presence."

That definition allows for more than "the average lifespan of one being generated" in that it does not focus on a chronologoical aspect of the word's meaning, but on an associative or qualitative aspect. That of course allows for more than one generation, by your definition, to be included in the same grouping.  Do you think that is wrong? 

[Evacuated]

3 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

I agree

Good.

3 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

hard to explain

I don't think it is?

[Evacuated]

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

judge them all

No, wrongly anticipated. We have no basis for judgement is my point, faithful once, or otherwise. All we can see is their desertion, regardless of their justification.

It may well be that erroneous views were promoted at the time, which we can pronounce as so now very well, in hindsight.

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Do you think that all true anointed Christians would be expected to merely put up with these attitudes and false doctrines and false prophecies?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do....and many, if not all, did! There was enough truth adhered, to even in those days, for any so minded as Peter to conclude: "“Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life." John 6:68.

But........connect me back up with the theme?????