Why Remain a Witness when Bad Things Happen?

[TrueTomHarley]

4 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

It has been typical of AllenSmith, J.R.Ewing, Gnosis Pithos, etc., to rely on a kind of "word salad" or various other types of "plays on words" and twisted and incorrect meaning of words.

I have misinterpreted the remarks - or did I? - of these guys so many times that I have given up. That is not to say it is intentional, though it could be. But it might also be from coming from a very different part of the world or from using English as a second language. 

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

Then, that would speak more to bible understanding than clarity of perception by uneducated bible based people.

A simply misguided perception would be with Russell and 1874. Up until 1876, Russell had “NO” interest in the year 1874. It was only when Barbour mentioned that Christ Presence had begun in 1874 that Russell started looking into Jesus return, as an invisible return, not a visible one.

But, Russell never “predicted” anything at all concerning 1874. So contrary to an ex-bethelite assurance in Watchtower knowledge? Evidence points to that FACT, not the made-up nonsense, from opposers, especially the one that supposedly points to Russell claims of the “end of the world” in 1874.

Therefore, who then, makes a play on words, when the shoe is on the other foot. Apostasy comes in many colors and shapes. So, how is a bible student supposed to shift through “spirit directed truth” in literature rather than the assumptions given by opportunist? JWI, JTR, O’Maly etc.

So let us NOT be superficial when claiming to be well versed in the English language when evidence shows the contrary from the supposed intellectual "left". No one commands the English language no better than any other language.

[TrueTomHarley]

53 minutes ago, J.R. Ewing said:

when evidence shows the contrary from the supposed intellectual "left".

OH NO! I get the 'right' and the 'left' all day in the aspiritual world. Don't tell me it's going to start here as well.

[JW Insider]

9 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

As for the younger generation of witnesses that enter into a perception of faith, only to be throttled by “bias” teachings are a good example for causing someone to stumble. The difference is, No one here is willing to see the person in the mirror to object to such callousness.

Exactly!

9 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Now, the use of Russell, and Rutherford to benefit the argument, when most of the time, their core doctrine was rarely understood, especially by people with no scriptural understanding. How about a reality check, of not clumping together Bible Student ideology with Witness ideology? Then, perhaps, the understanding of “revision” made by Christ to the Jewish laws can be understood, as it is done, in modern times.

You are probably thinking only of the times when Russell and Rutherford held beliefs that we now consider ridiculous. I was thinking about the times when Russell and Rutherford made statements that were Biblically and logically true. (For example: when Russell pointed out that the wars, earthquakes, pestilence and famine mentioned in Matthew 24 were NOT signs of the last days, but were the kinds of things that "must happen" over the entire course of the 1,800+ years since Jesus mentioned them. Or when Rutherford spoke about how evidence works, and how one piece of evidence is not worth that much, but when two or three pieces of corroborating evidence confirm each other, the likelihood of truth cannot be overlooked, and when that is multiplied half-a-dozen times we have something that might as well be called absolute truth.)

But you should recall, too, that it is the Watchtower, not any of us, who have clumped together the Bible Student ideology with the Witness ideology. The Governing Body is identified as beginning in 1919 among Bible Students. Elijah is now supposed to be a prophetic picture of Russell from the 1870s to 1916 preparing the way for these "Bible Students" to come on the scene 1919. Some of the major Bible Student traditions that have been dropped were not dropped until 1943/4, and one of them in 1961/2. Of course, many of the Bible Student traditions have not been dropped at all. And many of them should not ever be dropped because they were correct from the start.

10 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

As for it being a requirement of acceptance of “all” core doctrines are based on scripture with a complete understanding of prophecy. No different than in ancient times. If that is the case, people here, are unwilling to submit to understanding GOD’S law and have gone rogue with their own understanding.

There is no more need to go back to the problems of ancient times to use them as a justification for making the same mistakes in modern times. The examples were meant for our instruction. When Jesus says to watch out for something it is so the same mistakes are not repeated in future generations.

11 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Then, the next generation of witnesses should reframe themselves from such association as not to have their faith tainted by “false” teachings of scripture.

To some it could sound like you are suggesting that the next generation of Witnesses should break off and form their own association, something like what Rutherford did, or even what you suggest Jesus was doing in breaking off from Judaism.

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

7 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

OH NO! I get the 'right' and the 'left' all day in the aspiritual world. Don't tell me it's going to start here as well.

Well, if you hear it all day, then, that implies there’s some known truth in the matter!

6 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Exactly!

So, what makes you believe, your truth is much better than the Watchtowers?

7 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

To some it could sound like you are suggesting that the next generation of Witnesses should break off and form their own association, something like what Rutherford did, or even what you suggest Jesus was doing in breaking off from Judaism.

What an erred perception. But expected. When we both know, I 'm referring to apostate teachings, NOT Bible truth. You mentioned "wordplay". I'm glad you made a good example of one!

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

32 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

You are probably thinking only of the times when Russell and Rutherford held beliefs that we now consider ridiculous.

 

32 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

But you should recall, too, that it is the Watchtower, not any of us, who have clumped together the Bible Student ideology with the Witness ideology.

How, is your statement factual? and how is my statement not been proven?  For someone that indicates wordplay by others, you sure use a lot of it!

 

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I have misinterpreted the remarks - or did I? - of these guys so many times that I have given up. That is not to say it is intentional, though it could be. But it might also be from coming from a very different part of the world or from using English as a second language. 

The following, as always, is just my personal opinion: A few times you have started off with a misunderstanding of the position of two out of the "three persons in one" that I mentioned. I have counted about six different monikers that all appear to come from the same source. But these last three just mentioned are the most used recently, in my opinion. I think that you might have been surprised that you have sometimes (even very recently) been "judged" especially by the primary one of the "three in one" as supporting dangerous ideas, even though you have mostly defended that same primary one. Having been here for nearly three years now, it's easier to get a handle on a person's reactions, language, style, and even which words are repeatedly misused/misspelled across the various personas. Some of these "elements of style" have already been explained by Allen under a couple of previous topics. I once defended Allen's language by also guessing that it was from using English as a second language. Big mistake! I was accused for a couple of years as "making fun" of him. Allen has since explained that some of these same types of misunderstandings are related to dyslexia. Still, I only bring this out because I think more people would be less confused by his take on things if they understood where the personas were coming from.

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

24 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

There is no more need to go back to the problems of ancient times to use them as a justification for making the same mistakes in modern times. The examples were meant for our instruction. When Jesus says to watch out for something it is so the same mistakes are not repeated in future generations.

How does apostasy not fit into this ideology? So, in other words, when Jesus mentioned being vigilant with signs, it should mean nothing for each generation.

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

2 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

The following, as always, is just my personal opinion: A few times you have started off with a misunderstanding of the position of two out of the "three persons in one" that I mentioned. I have counted about six different monikers that all appear to come from the same source. But these last three just mentioned are the most used recently, in my opinion.

That's funny, I find the same with some of you!

[JW Insider]

Just now, J.R. Ewing said:

That's funny, I find the same with some of you!

It's called projection. I've seen you do it now under almost all of your personas. The problem with your projection is that I have never posted here under any name except @JW Insider.

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

3 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

It's called projection. I've seen you do it now under almost all of your personas.

Then, your meter is off!!!!

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Then, that would speak more to bible understanding than clarity of perception by uneducated bible based people.

One day you (correctly) highlight the fact that it is the uneducated, unlettered and ordinary persons who can more easily see the wisdom of God's word, and at other times I see you touting someone's education, PhD's, and titles as proof that persons like COJ, for example, should be judged as unworthy of consideration.

1 hour ago, J.R. Ewing said:

A simply misguided perception would be with Russell and 1874. Up until 1876, Russell had “NO” interest in the year 1874. It was only when Barbour mentioned that Christ Presence had begun in 1874 that Russell started looking into Jesus return, as an invisible return, not a visible one.

Exactly! I believe you are exactly correct on this point. (Although I'm not sure why you brought it up.)

1 hour ago, J.R. Ewing said:

But, Russell never “predicted” anything at all concerning 1874. So contrary to an ex-bethelite assurance in Watchtower knowledge? Evidence points to that FACT, not the made-up nonsense, from opposers, especially the one that supposedly points to Russell claims of the “end of the world” in 1874.

Exactly! Russell could NOT have predicted anything concerning 1874. As far as we know he was even disdainful of Second Adventist chronology until late in 1875 or early 1876. So whatever you meant by the question" "So contrary to an ex-Bethelite assurance in Watchtower knowledge?" you are right to point this out, just as I have, by the way.

1 hour ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Therefore, who then, makes a play on words, when the shoe is on the other foot. Apostasy comes in many colors and shapes. So, how is a bible student supposed to shift through “spirit directed truth” in literature rather than the assumptions given by opportunist? JWI, JTR, O’Maly etc.

A complete non sequitur. Just because I have pointed out the same thing you just did, you were forced to use a kind of "vagueness" about this supposed accusation involving an ex-Bethelite. I'm sure you knew that I have never ever even implied that Russell claimed the end of the world in 1874. So to answer your question about "who then makes a play on words" the answer is quite obvious. You just did! 

And it's this same kind of twisting of words and meanings about which many people have pretended that doctrinal issues have been answered. This is one of the bad things that happens to Witnesses when they have doctrinal questions or believe that they can see a contradiction in some of our traditional teachings that go back to the time of the Bible Students. If the question cannot be answered through bluster and wordplay, then the next step is to just dig in our heels and call the questionable doctrines "spirit directed truth" and associate all concerns and questions as "apostasy."

1 hour ago, J.R. Ewing said:

So let us NOT be superficial when claiming to be well versed in the English language when evidence shows the contrary from the supposed intellectual "left". No one commands the English language no better than any other language.

'Nuff said! Thanks. I didn't see myself, or you, or TTH, or anyone else here claiming to be well versed in English or commanding the language better than any other.