Can anyone explain this to me?: The rest of the dead did not come to life UNTIL the 1,000 years were ENDED.

[Melinda Mills]

*** it-1 pp. 616-617 Destruction ***
Will all persons who were destroyed by God in times past be dead forever?
The Bible indicates that not all destruction is eternal. This is demonstrated by the fact that the Hebrew word ʼavad·dohnʹ (destruction) is used twice to parallel “Sheol.” (Job 26:6; Pr 15:11) The prophet Zephaniah spoke of the destruction of Assyria, whereas Ezekiel said that the Assyrians would go down to Sheol. (Zep 2:13; Eze 32:21, 22) When speaking of the destruction of the rebels Dathan and Abiram, Moses wrote that they went down “alive into Sheol.” (Nu 16:31, 33) Since Sheol in the Bible denotes the common grave of mankind from which there will be a resurrection, it is evident that not all destruction—not even all destruction at the hand of God—is necessarily eternal.

Everlasting Destruction. The Bible does not indicate that all the dead will be resurrected. Jesus implied this when he spoke of “those who have been counted worthy of gaining that system of things and the resurrection from the dead.” (Lu 20:35) The possibility of eternal destruction for some is also indicated by Jesus’ words at Matthew 10:28: “Do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; but rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” Regarding this text, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (edited by C. Brown, 1978, Vol. 3, p. 304) states: “Matt. 10:28 teaches not the potential immortality of the soul but the irreversibility of divine judgment on the unrepentant.” Also, Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (revised by F. W. Gingrich and F. Danker, 1979, p. 95) gives the meaning “eternal death” with reference to the Greek phrase in Matthew 10:28 translated “destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” Thus, being consigned to Gehenna refers to utter destruction from which no resurrection is possible.—See GEHENNA.
“Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about them . . . are placed before us as a warning example by undergoing the judicial punishment of everlasting fire.” (Jude 7) That punishment evidently applies not merely to the physical cities but to their inhabitants as well, because it was the people themselves who committed the gross sins that led to their annihilation.
The possibility of eternal destruction is particularly an issue during the conclusion of the system of things. When Jesus was asked by his disciples what would be ‘the sign of his presence and of the conclusion of the system of things,’ he included as part of his answer the parable of the sheep and the goats. (Mt 24:3; 25:31-46) Concerning “the goats” it was foretold that the heavenly King would say: “Be on your way from me, you who have been cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels,” and Jesus added, “These will depart into everlasting cutting-off.” Clearly the attitude and actions of some individuals will result in their permanent destruction.  END QUOTE

The Bible  at Jude 7 did say Sodom and Gomorrah have undergone "everlasting fire".  Certainly Satan and his demons, Judas, Ananias and Sapphira, those destroyed at Noah's Day and at Armageddon, are in that lot.  (Matthew 24: 37-39; Matt 25:41,46))

I think the point was raised by JWI about Jesus reading hearts and saying the people of Sodom would have repented after seeing certain signs. 

(Matthew 11:20-24) 20 Then he began to reproach the cities in which most of his powerful works had taken place, for they did not repent: 21 “Woe to you, Cho·raʹzin! Woe to you, Beth·saʹi·da! because if the powerful works that took place in you had taken place in Tyre and Siʹdon, they would long ago have repented in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I say to you, it will be more endurable for Tyre and Siʹdon on Judgment Day than for you. 23 And you, Ca·perʹna·um, will you perhaps be exalted to heaven? Down to the Grave you will come; because if the powerful works that took place in you had taken place in Sodʹom, it would have remained until this very day. 24 But I say to you, it will be more endurable for the land of Sodʹom on Judgment Day than for you.”

Checking here is says Sodom would have remained until this day, and that the people of Tyre and Sidon would have repented and it brings the people of Sodom and Gomorrah into the conversation about Judgement Day.  So that is where the speculation begins.

Thanks for the impetus to do more research. Look forward to your comments and those of others. 

 

 

 

 

[JW Insider]

8 hours ago, Anna said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I have a feeling I read somewhere in our publications (not too long ago) that it will be too late for those at Armageddon to repent.  There are plenty of scriptures that make it clear that only those who put faith in Jesus will be saved....but I don't think there is anything that puts a time frame on it.

Yes. We know that the Bible itself says that for many, a time will come when it will be too late for some to repent. But as you say, we don't know when, exactly in the timeline this point occurs. We know that it would be "wicked" for any of us who truly know God's undeserved kindness to use it as an excuse for badness, using the idea that we could always repent at the last minute. But there are so many things we don't know about God's judgment. For example, what if the Great Tribulation goes on for three months, and Armageddon goes on for 25 seconds? What if the Great Tribulation is 100 years long and Armageddon is 200 years long? I think most Witnesses anticipate a period shorter than the common 3.5 and/or 7 year speculation that is often attached by fundamentalists and literalists to either or both of these events. But we have no direct knowledge from the Bible about these timelines, except from Revelation, a book which we usually interpret non-literally. Therefore I don't think most of us would be deeply offended if the Watchtower someday taught that the Great Tribulation turns out to be the entire history of mankind. I don't expect that, and I don't believe it, but there is a lot of flexibility available in the interpretation of symbols.

8 hours ago, Anna said:

Also it might be easy for those who live in Christian countries to put faith in Jesus at the last minute, but what about those in non Christian countries, who don't know much about Jesus or the requirement for salvation.

For that matter, who is to say whether any great majority in Christian countries have faith in the same Jesus who taught "undeserved kindness" and heart motivation as opposed to those who think Christianity is about a reward for righteous works? Allen Smith has previously questioned whether it is, in fact, only a smaller minority of Jehovah's Witnesses who are really Jehovah's Witnesses. Jesus said at Luke 18:8:

• (Luke 18: 6-8) 6 Then the Lord said: “Hear what the judge, although unrighteous, said! 7 Certainly, then, will not God cause justice to be done for his chosen ones who cry out to him day and night, while he is patient toward them? 8 I tell you, he will cause justice to be done to them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of man arrives, will he really find this faith on the earth?”

The "type of faith" here is in a God who gives justice, not based on our own merit or works or legalistic requirements, but based on our petitions and desire, as he loves us enough to patiently "put up" with us in our sinful state. This is a difficult concept for most works-based organizations promoting Christianity. There could be an implication that those in supposedly Christian nations are in pretty much 'the same boat' as those in nations who have barely (or never) heard of Jesus.

8 hours ago, Anna said:

What of those over 3 billion people, does the org. believe we will reach all those people before Armageddon, I doubt it.

And speaking of patience and those "3 billion." Every year that goes by brings an even greater number of people who are not being reached. If as Peter says, that the patience of our Lord means salvation to more people, then there is no evidence that this salvation is related to our efforts to preach to more people. The number of persons alive who will have effectively never even heard of Jehovah's Witnesses (or Jesus) goes up every year. If the end comes today, this might be, as you say, "3 billion." If the end comes in 10 years, the number of persons alive at that time who will never have heard of us (or Jesus) might be "3.5 billion." If the end comes in 20 years, the number of persons alive at that time who will have never heard of us (or Jesus) might be "4 billion." So if it were based on our efforts as Witnesses to reach these persons, then the patience of our Lord would mean greater death and destruction to billions more people.

[JW Insider]

On 9/19/2018 at 4:48 PM, JW Insider said:

I'm not sure why you keep insisting on this particular point about Russell's supposed "initial thinking" that only the 144,000 would go to heaven. It is clearly not true, and I'm sure you saw the evidence from what Russell himself said.

Your answer:

On 9/19/2018 at 6:06 PM, AllenSmith34 said:

Probably because no one has come to understand the beginning ideology of Pastor Russell since you keep insisting he erred in judgment when he didn’t have all the facts and God’s guidance that he eventually received.

I certainly don't claim to understand everything about Russell's ideology. I'm actually not even insisting that he erred in judgment. He may very well be right when he claimed that the great crowd of Revelation 7:14 will be in heaven. Our own current teaching on that particular verse could change. Of course, this would not change the Scriptural fact that a great crowd of people would survive the great tribulation and live on earth. And it would not change the fact that Russell also knew --from places outside this particular verse-- that there would be a great crowd of people on earth, which you and I already accept.

But it makes no sense for you to complain about a claim that Russell might have erred if you also admit that there was a time when he didn't have all the facts and would only eventually receive God's guidance in certain matters. I'm sure that you yourself would also admit that he might have erred in judgment before having all the facts. But you haven't been clear if this means that his "initial" judgment was wrong and he eventually came around to seeing that the "great crowd" would NOT be in heaven, or if he never believed what he said, and/or meant something different all along.

Neither choice would explain why Rutherford also believed the "great crowd" would be in heaven . This was something Rutherford believed up until at least 1933, and probably up until closer to 1935.

On 9/19/2018 at 6:06 PM, AllenSmith34 said:

So, it is NOT I that make those claims, they come from you. That’s where the revision comes from for the great crowd, and the little flock, not before. So, as far as you can tell, it merits further analyzes in your part.

I'd be happy to change my opinion about what Russell said, if you could show the evidence that he meant something else, or didn't mean what he said, or changed his opinion on this matter over time. That's not just for you, but for anyone who can show any evidence.

Based on years of interaction, I have a feeling that you dig in your heels and insist on making claims without evidence because you seem anxious to prove your own superior knowledge about Russell and the Bible Students. On certain points, I think you have provided valuable references and resources. On this point however, it's not just Russell's own words you are up against, but you are also opposing the more current understanding of the Watchtower when the beliefs of Russell and the Bible Students are reviewed:

*** w64 12/1 p. 724 Out of the Tombs to a “Resurrection of Life” ***

• For many years Christian Bible students understood the “resurrection of life” to include (1) the church or congregation of the 144,000 joint heirs of Christ, and (2) an unnumbered “great company” of spiritual Christians not included in the 144,000 but serving under them in heaven

I think you've seen evidence that the Watchtower is correct here, and that your claim is incorrect. Bible Students held this belief from as far back as the 1880 Watchtower, and put it in print as recently as 1933. I didn't double-check the Watchtowers of this period, but I see it in Vindication (1932) and Preparation (1933). (When the Jonadab class was still considered separate from the "great multitude.") It's possible that it was even repeated up until the doctrine was changed in 1935.

Here's a mention of that in 2003 and elsewhere:

*** w03 2/15 p. 19 par. 9 What Does the Lord’s Evening Meal Mean to You? ***

• But on May 31, 1935, in a discourse given at a convention of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Washington, D.C., U.S.A., it was Scripturally explained that the “great crowd” (“great multitude,” King James Version) refers to the “other sheep” who live during the time of the end. (John 10:16) After that convention, some who had previously partaken of the Memorial emblems stopped partaking because they realized that their hope was earthly, not heavenly.

*** w98 2/15 p. 20 par. 8 Glorious Freedom Soon for the Children of God ***

• In 1935 the “great multitude,” or “great crowd”—formerly thought to be a secondary spiritual class that would be “companions” of the bride of Christ in heaven

*** w95 2/1 p. 13 par. 16 A Great Crowd of True Worshipers—From Where Have They Come? ***

• For a time Jehovah’s servants believed that the great multitude (or, great crowd) of Revelation 7:9, 10 . . . Because the Bible says that they are “standing before the throne,” it was thought that they would be in heaven, not on thrones, ruling as joint heirs with Christ, but in a secondary place in front of the throne. They were viewed as less faithful Christians, ones who did not show a spirit of true self-sacrifice. In 1935 that view was corrected.

On 9/19/2018 at 6:06 PM, AllenSmith34 said:

Therefore, the one that has been wrong about Pastor Russell, and Rutherford, along with their initial views is yourself. And that’s been the problem here that you can’t seem to accept, along with your followers.

You said that following a quote from Volume 2 of "SiS" The Time is at Hand. Unfortunately, that quote and that book also does not support your opposition to Russell's clear statements, and your opposition to the Watchtower's more recent statements quoted above. That book was written when Watch Tower publications were still consistent that both the 144,000 and the "great multitude" would go to heaven. 

After this you quoted quite a few things from Volume 3 of "SiS" Thy Kingdom Come, especially the portions about the wheat and tares. If you read more of Russell's words on the subject you will see that the portion you quoted was not relevant to his understanding of Revelation 7:9-17. Russell did have a confused belief about the tares, but this was necessary because if you read the contemporary Watch Tower articles on the subject you will see that he actually did tie the tares to other Christian groups and religions of Christendom, and he therefore had to try to remove the idea that being "burnt in the fire" referred to their destruction. After all these "burnt" ones were still going to heaven in Russell's view. Watch carefully how Russell managed this amazing feat, in the same book you quoted, Thy Kingdom Come:

• Is not this a most remarkable agreement between this stone "Witness" and the Bible? The dates, October, 1874, and October, 1881, are exact, while the date 1910, though not furnished in the Scriptures, seems more than a reasonable one for some important event in the Church's experience and final testing, while A.D. 1914 is apparently well-defined as its close, after which the world's greatest trouble is due, in which some of the "great multitude" may have a share. And in this connection let us remember that this date limit--A.D. 1914--may not only witness the completion of the selection and trial and glorification of the entire body of Christ, but it may also witness the purifying of some of that larger company of consecrated believers who, through fear and faint-heartedness, failed to render acceptable sacrifices to God, and who therefore became more or less contaminated with the world's ideas and ways. Some of these, before the end of this period, may come up out of the great tribulation. Many such are now being closely bound in with the various bundles of tares for the burning; and not until the fiery trouble of the latter end of the harvest period shall burn the binding cords of Babylon's bondage shall these be able to make their escape--"saved so as by fire." They must see the utter wreck of Great Babylon and receive some measure of her plagues. The four years from 1910 to the end of 1914, indicated thus in the Great Pyramid, will doubtless be a time of "fiery trial" upon the Church  . . .

What Russell did here, of course, was to replace the fiery destruction of the tares (weeds) with the idea that these actually represented the place from which the "great multitude" would be saved from. The "fire" became a time of "fiery trial" with a purifying effect. It becomes 4 years of a great tribulation (from about 1910 to 1914) that would come on the Church. The "great multitude" would be saved out of this "great tribulation." This fire would evidently also burn some of the tares, but notice how he turns the focus of that fire to purification and salvation: "burn the binding cords of Babylon's bondage" and being "saved so as by fire" and "the purifying of some of that larger company." This particular sleight-of-hand interpretation was soon dropped from Russell's teachings, and the tares began to refer only to those fit for destruction, while the less worthy "great multitude" continued to be seen as having a heavenly destination. (See the full article from the February 1916 Watch Tower, for example, quoted in a previous post.) 

On 9/19/2018 at 6:06 PM, AllenSmith34 said:

By understanding who Pastor Russell was referring to in proper English, which fails modern people.

Understanding who Russell referred to doesn't have to fail modern readers. There are people who can even read Shakespeare, or the KJV of the 17th century and understand it. Reading Russell's English is relatively straightforward compared to older English.

I hate to have to point it out again, but I get the feeling you are doing something that you have become infamous for doing in the past. Your name has become almost synonymous with opposing some small bit of truth that shouldn't even matter that much in the long run. And then when you are shown that you are opposing the evidence, and even opposing the Watchtower in this case, you dig in your heels and start going on about things that were not really related to the question. And another favorite tactic, apparently, is to copy quotes from somewhere that might seem relevant and might make some people believe that you found "evidence" you were right. Perhaps it even convinces some people. But it's very difficult for me to see how you can look at evidence of something and just oppose it or deny it without responding to the evidence and without giving any counter-evidence.

[Melinda Mills]

11 hours ago, AllenSmith34 said:

Or are we confident, those have already been judged by God? What is the difference in this theoretical focus? Would Judas have the same prospect? would those that committed suicide, be raised? On suicide, it would merit considering the mental state of a person rather than just being fed up with life.

 I think I am confident the people in Sodom and Gomorrah, Judas, and others sinning against the holy spirit,  were already judged by God and have undergone eternal destruction.  See my comment above.  Others may wish to comment on people committing suicide, etc.

[JW Insider]

32 minutes ago, AllenSmith34 said:

Is it I that question God’s authority?

No, I've never seen you do that. Nor have I seen myself do that. What I wrote was that you are often seen "opposing some small bit of truth that shouldn't even matter that much in the long run" and that you don't actually deal with the evidence. You often just throw out unrelated points in response to evidence. Even if these unrelated points are perfectly true, they have nothing to do with the evidence you are opposing and denying. In this case, you are even opposing the Watchtower's version of events.

32 minutes ago, AllenSmith34 said:

At what point did this become unclear, that ALL arrangements would have been set in place by the end of the millennium.

If that question was directed at me, I never thought any of these particular points were unclear (about ALL arrangements being set in place by the end of the millennium), nor did I ever say they were. Perhaps you are referencing the fact that earlier you said: "I [Allen] think I [Allen] have been quite clear . . . " After you said that, I pointed out that on this particular topic you have been very clearly opposing the evidence, and the Watchtower, too. Your method of responding to evidence by throwing out a lot of unrelated points is clearly typical for you, but it's also very clear what you are likely doing. From past experience interacting with you, I'm guessing that you find it impossible to admit a mistake. That's OK with me. I don't particularly like that style; it's not for me, but it's one I've seen a lot. I wouldn't judge you over this, but for your sake, I hope it's not a reflection of your offline persona.

In the meantime, I'll assume you still have found no evidence for your theory about Russell's teaching regarding the "great crowd" of Revelation 7:9-17.

[JW Insider]

5 hours ago, AllenSmith34 said:

If you know of such a thing within scripture, feel free to elaborate, since that kind of includes 99.2% of Christianity in just this one point, alone. So, what good does it do to be admirable or exemplary in charity or love, if in the other hand you cancel all that humanitarian good with one evil action?

Your post was worth an up-vote just for this one point alone (about not participating in warfare). In general, it's my own favorite when discussing why Witnesses have a right to claim "authority" and "high ground" over other religions who feel we should have no right to try to convert others, or imposing our own view of the Bible as better than theirs. Other doctrines like Trinity and Hellfire are up there too, but this one should appeal most closely to the true practice of Christianity. Wisdom is proved righteous by its works.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Anytime you want to invoke "What credentials do you have?", remember that Adolph Hitler saved Germany from destitution left over from World War I, made the trains run on time, created the Autobahn, was a vegetarian, and loved dogs.  He was TIME Magazines "Man of the Year" ... twice, and rooted out Communism from Germany.

In fact, in the minds of most Germans he was adored, and the Churches even celebrated his birthday.  He fought in World War I, and twice received the Iron Cross.

With all these super-fine  "credentials" ........ we are STILL talking about Adolph Hitler.

[Anna]

On 9/19/2018 at 10:34 PM, JW Insider said:

There could be an implication that those in supposedly Christian nations are in pretty much 'the same boat' as those in nations who have barely (or never) heard of Jesus.

I agree, but I meant it more in the sense "who will they call on if they've never heard" in which case, I guess, Jehovah can read their hearts and predict how they would have reacted had they heard.

 

On 9/19/2018 at 10:34 PM, JW Insider said:

So if it were based on our efforts as Witnesses to reach these persons, then the patience of our Lord would mean greater death and destruction to billions more people.

True!

So going back to God reading hearts, that will ultimately have to be the case, I can't see how else people could be judged righteously. We (the org.) don't seem to say much about that though. We talk about those billions who have died (apparently over 100 billion to date). But we don't talk about those who will be alive during Armageddon.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

2 hours ago, Anna said:

But we don't talk about those who will be alive during Armageddon.

We should not repeat unsubstantiated personal opinions ..... so listen carefully the FIRST time !

[Shiwiii]

On 9/17/2018 at 6:41 PM, JW Insider said:

Many persons will no doubt witness such spectacles of Jehovah's selective judgments, and realize they are not random, but purposeful. This would have to be interpreted as a true and spectacular judgment message from heaven. That means that, in effect, EVERYBODY who witnesses Jehovah's judgments will now be one of Jehovah's witnesses at this point,

This absolutely makes no sense. While yes with a play of words it is true, but not in the sense of jws today. I think that is a bit of grasping at straws really. 

I don't have the articles on hand at the moment, but I do recall the sentiment of actual jws will be the only ones left. This was my question and point. Since no one here has come out and said "only jws will be left", I'll have to find the articles. I think Tony Morris spoke on this as well and mentioned something of the sort of likeness between human flesh and hotdogs on a grill.  

I'll dig up the articles, but even if I do it seems as though most will shrug it off and make some excuse. But the question still remains:

Is it your position that only jws, as they are defined and structured today, will be left after the 1000 year reign? 

[Evacuated]

5 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

Is it your position that only jws, as they are defined and structured today, will be left after the 1000 year reign? 

This was addressed to @JWInsider , but I would like to cite a couple of scriptures very much in the consciousness of all true Christians today. They are:

1Co.11:12 "So let the one who thinks he is standing beware that he does not fall."

Matt.7:21 "“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will"

These have a bearing on who will "left after the 1000 year reign.

[Shiwiii]

1 minute ago, Gone Away said:

This was addressed to @JWInsider , but I would like to cite a couple of scriptures very much in the consciousness of all true Christians today. They are:

1Co.11:12 "So let the one who thinks he is standing beware that he does not fall."

Matt.7:21 "“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will"

These have a bearing on who will "left after the 1000 year reign.

While there are PLENTY of scriptures we can quote, I'm more interested in the official stance on the matter from the gb vs regular jws.