ComfortMyPeople

5 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

WTJWorg has always maintained that the Bible is consistent with itself, regardless of the various authors and the time period in which the text was written.

I would like to ask a question. Were the writers of the Bible aware that they were "inspired", 

lol

Srecko:

(2 Samuel 23:2) . . .The spirit of Jehovah spoke through me; His word was on my tongue.

(Mark 12:36) . . .By the holy spirit, David himself said, . . .

(2 Timothy 3:16) . . .All Scripture is inspired of God . . .

(1 Corinthians 7:10) . . .To the married people I give instructions, not I but the Lord, . . .

(1 Corinthians 7:40) . . .and I certainly think I also have God’s spirit.

Well, not only those who wrote, but the apostles speaking of themselves or with reference to the past positively believed that Jehovah directed their writing, at least in part, of what they were writing.

Concerning the modern "doctrinal guardian", nowhere in Scripture do we find support for believing that they are inspired. A separate issue are reckless or pretentious statements by themselves that they are "guided." I would like more humility on your part (their part I meant to say).

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

That seems likely that there are two different contexts. But the two contexts of faith and works are very understandable because they are so intrinsically tied and therefore relatable. If you had first heard only James' "motto" you would understand why Paul was transforming it to make a point, and if you had first heard only Paul's "motto" you would understand why James was transforming it to make a point. A relatable "synthesis" is possible.

But in terms of what we can and can't eat we have two extremes that are not relatable. The differences are so extreme that a Jamesian Christian would react much like @Thinking just reacted before. Something like: "Well, if Paul says we can eat meat sacrificed to an idol, then that's like Paul saying fornication is now OK." 

So, right or wrong, I'm just thinking that a different perspective --which has already been posited by several Bible commentators in the past -- is the most likely one that the WT would consider if the blood doctrine were to be given a complete adjustment. And, to be clear, that perspective is the one that says the directive against "blood" and "things strangled" was important for Jewish acceptance of Gentile believers during a specific time when Jewish-Mosaic norms were still extremely strong among MOST of the original Christians. Jewish Christians didn't trust Gentiles to be truly ready for Christianity. Here are some of those more obvious reasons:

• At the time, Gentile pagan rituals included direct forms of polytheistic idolatry.
  • And Gentile Christians had therefore come from cultures where multiple gods were accepted at once, so that a Gentile Christian might think it was OK to accept Jehovah as God and Jesus as Lord, but still think it was OK to continue the rituals for other so-called gods.
• Gentile idolatry and the religious temples themselves were often associated with immorality. Some pagan festivals highlighted drunkenness (Bacchus) and fornication (Emperor cults, etc) and other obscenities related to fertility, phalluses, etc.  
• Greek and Roman pagan feasts and rituals included eating bloody meat, drinking blood, and might even allow someone to bathe in the dripping blood of a freshly sacrificed bull (Mithraic). 
• Greek and Roman mystery cults did not announce their secret rituals which allowed Jews and Christians to become suspicious of even more grotesque practices.

Yes, I see your point, I see your point...

I think that for any 1st century Christian of Gentile origin, when they learn that Jehovah from the beginning (Noah) prohibited the consumption of blood. This was later highlighted in dozens of mentions in the Mosaic Law and, finally, in the apostolic decree (with Paul present) of Acts 15. In short, I am sure that in no way would they want to consume blood.

As we know, even Tertullian writes that Christians abstained from the custom of drinking blood. Yes, the Early Church held this commandment as a whole.

So, from my point of view, any exegetical possibilities about some passages like the ones you mention pale next to the rest of the evidence. They are that, a possibility. For me, the certainty is that since Noah the servants of Jehovah did not drink/we don't drink/we will not drink  blood.

10 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I agree that blood is not in the context at all. But this was also my point. If abstaining from unbled meat was so important for a Gentile to learn about when it came to matters of conscience, then why wouldn't Paul make the reminder? Especially here, when he uses the same exact term for "meat sacrificed to an idol" that the Jerusalem congregation used (Acts 15 and Acts 21).

Paul said, don't abstain from εἰδωλοθύτων [meat sacrificed to an idol].

James said, abstain from εἰδωλοθύτων [meat sacrificed to an idol].

Yes, I see your point, and I agree. It could, from our point of view, have been made clearer. Could it be because they are two different contexts?

Like when Paul says:

(Romans 3:28) 28 For we consider that a man is declared righteous by faith apart from works of law. . .

And James mentions something apparently contradictory:

(James 2:24) . . .You see that a man is to be declared righteous by works and not by faith alone.

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I think the reasoning the WT would go with will be something like this: The Acts 15 decree said to abstain from food polluted by idols, and from the meat of strangled animals, too: 

Then in 1 Cor 10, Paul goes on to say that we don't even need to question whether food was strangled, or whether it was bled correctly, or whether it was sacrificed to an idol. The only thing to be concerned about are those people with weak consciences who are still around and who think we still need the Mosaic Law. (Or at least they were still around in Paul's day.) 

for the city that is to come. Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to do good and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God is pleased.

I would say that Paul, in the aforementioned texts, is alluding to eating meat previously offered to an idol in a pagan temple of worship. Meat that was sold in the temple itself, and the income from the operation financed said place.

Paul says that the Christian with a weak conscience thinks that he is contributing to false worship, but the strong one only thinks that he is paying for a service: receiving food. That is, he does not make a donation to promote something idolatrous.

In other words, I don't find that Paul even remotely addresses the issue of whether or not the meat was bled. That idea was not under consideration in the context we are talking about. I believe that if the Christian suspected that this was the case (that the meat contained blood), his conscience would prevent him from eating it. But that point is not discussed in those verses.

(1 Corinthians 10:25-28) 25 Eat whatever is sold in a meat market, making no inquiry because of your conscience, 26 for “to Jehovah belong the earth and everything in it.” 27 If an unbeliever invites you and you want to go, eat whatever is set before you, making no inquiry on account of your conscience. 28 But if anyone says to you, “This is something offered in sacrifice,” do not eat because of the one who told you and because of conscience. 
 

So the question was whether or not the meat was offered in a pagan sacrifice, not the blood it might contain.

I think so, but I may be wrong.

(1 Corinthians 5:1) . . .Actually sexual immorality is reported among you, and such immorality as is not even found among the nations—of a man living with his father’s wife. 

Well, I agree that the fault lies with the perpetrator, but the shame falls on the whole of God's people. What are we to think of what Paul mentions to the Corinthians? Well, surely the Christians of that city would be criticized, it is most likely.

In fact, when we used to say to the victims something like: "don't report him so as not to bring reproach to the name of Jehovah" it was because, sadly, his name really did get dirty.

I also agree with the report that our site only presents positive information: successes, victories and achievements, but not the opposite. As a politician here in Spain said (and I'm sure it's the same everywhere) "others are already there to criticize us, we don't have to do it ourselves."

And I agree with the argument that we have used naivety in acknowledging the errors of the biblical writers as proof of the authenticity of the Bible.

I do not think it is debatable that at the Organization level there have been very few times where we have recognized doctrinal or other errors. And I prefer not to delve into this precise subject because he is one of the ones that hurts me the most.

Finally, with regard to Spain, from where I write, due to the fact that general elections have been called for next July, this tax exemption measure has been postponed, and we will see if with a new government it will be able to enter into force or not. A letter read to congregations this week acknowledged this situation.

2 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I suspect that you know the answer but will dodge the question and, if past is prologue, you might even claim that I'm the one dodging the question. Still, they are simple questions, and if you can't or won't answer, people can just make a note of that and move on. Perhaps more serious persons would be interested in the topic.

Not sure, but this kind of reasoning remember me to another person very tidy [not sure if this is a correct word] you used to have long talks with him

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I suspect that @Mic Drop, the original poster of this topic, didn't expect it to turn into a discussion about interpretation of Bible prophecy. But it might be interesting to bring this up elsewhere. If you'd like, I (or you) could start a new topic under one of the JW forum 

Please, do it you for me!

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Also, Rice was not the only person to admit that Europe needs to be forced into a greater dependence on US energy. It's a well-known, and sometimes openly admitted goal of US war in the Middle-East to gain control over the energy resources. Trump admitted it openly at least once. The very reason that the US continues to occupy about a third of Syria has been to continue stealing control of its oil. The commission that looked into whether Assad (Syria) actually "gassed his own people" was actually debunked by the same people who would later be forced to change their story. Libya was building up better relations with the US, when Gaddafi started pushing for national control of the oil resources, and cooperation among African nations. It is not really a secret that this is why Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and others decided to murder him (and laughed about it).

(Daniel 11:43) . . .And he will rule over the hidden treasures of gold and silver and over all the desirable things of Egypt. And the Libʹy·ans and the E·thi·oʹpi·ans will be at his steps.

I guess this assessment is a bit controversial...

3 hours ago, Pudgy said:

If I have full and complete understanding about everything there is to know about these two subjects. Or know nothing whatsoever … what’s the practical, applicable difference in a normal person’s life and daily activities?

we have no control over any of it. 

You're right. Nothing in our Christian life should change if the prophecies (such as those of the KoN) were fulfilled, are being fulfilled or will be fulfilled. If we serve Jehovah out of devotion we will continue to worship him no matter what the end comes tomorrow or in a million years.

In fact, not giving prophecies too much emphasis protects us from disappointment. But what happens to me is that since a good part of the Bible consists of prophecies, I can't help but "take a look".

(2 Peter 1:19). . .So we have the prophetic word made more sure, and you are doing well in paying attention to it as to a lamp shining in a dark place (until day dawns and a daystar rises) in your hearts. .

By the way, I love your cartoons

4 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Jews of that generation would already have identified Caligula with Antiochus Epiphanes,

https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/daniel-11/

Yes, I see your point. And I also think that Jews and Christians thought they were seeing the fulfillment of the prophecies (and also many of us).

Considering that Jesus refers to Daniel as a "prophet", and that many of his prophecies culminate in the "time of the end" (for example Daniel 2:44) it is still very interesting to investigate where, in Daniel 10 to 12, we could discover specific events of our era.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

And if Jesus was allowing for a second fulfillment , or completion of the fulfillment in those years, then do we have the right to go beyond what Jesus said and also make it about who the King of the North and King of the South should be in all the future years after Rome?

Yes, at some point the character is no longer a Seleucid king, not even a Roman, because nothing of the next verses happened in past times:

(Daniel 11:45-12:2) . . .And he will plant his royal tents between the grand sea and the holy mountain of Decoration; and he will come all the way to his end, and there will be no helper for him. 12 “During that time Mi'cha·el will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of your people. And there will occur a time of distress such as has not occurred since there came to be a nation until that time. And during that time your people will escape, everyone who is found written down in the book. 2 And many of those asleep in the dust of the earth will wake up, some to everlasting life and others to reproach and to everlasting contempt.

Evidently, at some point the prophecy abandons the past and tackles the future. The problem is knowing where to cut!

Several problems arise when we approach Da 11 from a preterist or historicist perspective.

First of all, I believe that the first mistake in approaching this prophecy (along with those of Revelation) is to try to apply them to events "of the present moment" as soon as we think we determine that some piece fits in the puzzle, only to discover some time later that we have to readjust (Zenobia, for example).

A problem that we JW's have is that since everything pivots around 1914 we try to make the key turn in that lock, closing our eyes to any other possibility. Actually, it must be admitted that there are two possibilities.

• 1. Everything was fulfilled at the time of the Hellenic kings who influenced Israel, mainly Antiochus IV Epiphanes
• 2. Much of what we believe has already been accomplished is still in the future and must be fulfilled.

I am only going to get involved at this point with point 1.

DANIEL 11:25-27
Scholars mention that these passages have to do with some Syrian wars (KoN) against the Ptolemies (KoS) but they are not sure what specific events.
Until recently we talked about Queen Zenobia and her generals as antagonists of Rome and KoS. Now, we see in these verses the German Empire and its defeat in the IWW

...And so on. Scholars focusing on Syria-Egypt, JW's on 20th and 21st century events.

WHY ANTIOCUS IV IS NOT THE GREAT PROTAGONIST OF DANIEL 11

Daniel 11:40-45
This is in no way related to the acts of Antiochus or any other Hellenic KoN. Numerous commentators apply these words to a character related to the Antichrist.

Daniel 11:45

When biblical scholars try to apply this passage to the death of the Syrian king they have to admit that Daniel (or a pseudo-Daniel) was wrong, since the king is known not to die in the Promised Land ("of Decoration")

Daniel 11:31b
Although many think that this refers to the desecration of the temple by this impious king, as collected in the Maccabean books, Jesus Christ himself (Mat 24:15 and Mr 13:14) applies it to the future, not to events of the 2nd century BC .

5 minutes ago, Thinking said:

But then the Anglo American powers have not really hurt Jehovah’s people to badly…so that doesn’t fit ?

Yes, yes. But...

Why do we have to limit ourselves only to past events? WWI and WWII events

Are we sure that the situation is not going to change? I mean, that the USA will remain relatively moderate and tolerant until the end, that it will always respect us

Are we sure that the horn persecution of Daniel 7 (and 😎 has already happened? And that of Revelation 11, 12 and 13, has it already happened? Sure?

Well, it could be, but it doesn't add up to me.

19 minutes ago, Arauna said:

Putin is justifying this war - and while he has more than enough evidence and good reason to distrust the West - we know he represents the king of the North and will get a message from the remote north and east (Jehovah and Jesus) and go out to annihilate... (most probably together with his allies).....before he comes to his demise.... but this will happen at jehovah's time when the West and King of North have both reached the point where Jehovah decides - now is the time.

Very interesting what you say, as always.

But, look, I think there is a lot of evidence that the USA is the king of the north. I hope to have time one day to explain myself better, just to advance two things:

• In our explanations it has been said that Russia has worshiped the "god of fortresses" as meaning that it invests a lot in armament (more tanks and less butter), as they used to say.

But according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures it turns out that the USA spends TWICE as Russia, India and China TOGETHER.

• And about the King of the North's mood to invade. Sure, drawn from the Western perspective Russia is the bad guy, but what if we include the US role in Afghanistan, Iraq, South America, Vietnam and many others?

Well, just this that I don't have time today. But I insist, AND I MAY BE WRONG, but I think there would be grounds for thinking that the north and the south...

39 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

My wife tells me that this is terrible for my health, and I know I should listen, but it's probably a kind of stress, or ADD, or ADHD or some other thing that ought to be diagnosed.

Well, the simplest explanation, as indicated by the principle of Ockham's Razor, is that you are a lizard with human skin (as in the "V" series).

I hope your health does not suffer (too much) from lack of sleep, and so the rest of us enjoy your posts. (At least some of us)

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Even today, when breaking out the flight simulation again, I found myself flying down the Hudson River, and flying under the bridges instead of taking the easy route over them. I flew low through Central Park and so had to dodge skyscrapers at 150 MPH (240 KM/H) all the way down through Manhattan and made it under the Brooklyn Bridge again before circling the old Brooklyn Bethel stomping grounds. Google flight simulator doesn't crash you if you hit most obstacles (except hills, water, ground without landing gear) but you can still enjoy the maneuvering.  

 

@JW Insider, now my suspicions have been confirmed! You are an alien!!.

It is humanly impossible to have such an ability to do so many things. I already told you once to explain to me how you made time to sleep. And now you say that you also play video games !!

I am going to investigate if it is correct to have dealings with aliens ...

1 hour ago, Outta Here said:

Talk from where?

ABOUT WHERE IT'S BEING HEARD...

@JW Insider has referred some comments for others. I have other sources as well. A Bethelite with many years at the world headquarters tells me that when they meet by chance some members of the G.B. half jokingly, half seriously, they comment aloud things like "how well the zoom meetings work, how well everything is working" or the like. I know that these brothers want the G.B. keep thinking that there is a new approach to celebrate meetings, that they consider it.

WEEKLY IN-HOUSE MEETINGS
The face-to-face meetings, held in a physical location, I see as absolutely essential. There are emotional, delicate and uplifting conversations that I myself cannot have with some brothers because I cannot touch or see them up close (perhaps things from my Mediterranean culture). This is only one of the negative effects of not having face-to-face meetings, among many others that could be cited. Now, where in the Bible does it say that there are to be one, two, or three weekly meetings? Do biblical principles prevent some of these meetings from being in an online format?

Real -positive- cases that are occurring due to the zoom meetings:

A brother who comes home late from work, often missed the meeting or was late, because it is not enough for him to just get home, he has to fix himself, go back to the K.H., park the car ... Now He says he's arriving, puts on his tie, and you're done!

Young couples with small children who used to return late from the meeting on weekdays. When he returned, it was his turn to feed the children and fix them for bed. Now he saves a lot of time.

Brothers who at the time of the meeting have some discomfort or another and do not see themselves with the strength to go to the meeting. Being less expensive (even if they look bad for health they turn off the video) they don't miss the zoom meeting at home.

Saving effort, time, money ... well, there would be more, but not to extend myself.

THE ASSEMBLIES
I think it is another anachronism: as Israel had three major annual conventions, so did we. As I have said before, many brothers attend the assembly and find out absolutely nothing: they take care of young children or relatives in poor health. They get up early every day to get ready and be at the assembly hall on time. They invest money in this process. Then you are asked to spend about 5 hours of attentive program, taking notes and everything.

The benefits of zoom assemblies have been impressive. We can listen, repeat the videos, absorb the information much better, save effort, money.

On the latter, thousands and thousands of brothers have invested hours of work for the preparations of the assemblies, or for the weekly care of the premises in the case of the assembly halls. Many of us have missed entire programs doing essential work for the operation of the program.

And isn't it nice that we see thousands of brothers in a beautiful assembly hall? Yes of course! That is why I say that, following the format of international assemblies, these face-to-face assemblies should be scheduled each year. Families and siblings whose personal and financial circumstances allow them to attend in a given year would simply sign up to attend. The rest would see the assembly at home, or in kingdom halls, in short, in zoom format, like last year.

THE PERSECUTION
The JWs believe that we will soon face a worldwide violent persecution that will affect our meetings (as now in Russia, but all over the world). Therefore, the ideal would be to continue having experience in this type of online format.

Well, I better not extend myself further. I don't know what you think. I'm sure that I left things in the pipeline, and I don't think I have the absolute truth, let me know!
 

Just out of curiosity... do you already have time to sleep? Sometimes I wonder if you are not an alien.

Well, now seriously, I just wanted to tell you that all this information is appreciated. It is sure to be valuable to some. Frankly, I don't understand practically anything. It happens to me like when I go to a museum and see a beautiful painting, I don't have the ability to paint it, but I recognize the merit of whoever did it.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

As far as I know, "Comfortmypeople" is a Witness from Spain. I don't think he is Anna, just as I don't think I am Arauna.

 

This was a real case, in a kingdom hall. He was going to start the circuit overseer's talk. A little boy approached to say something to him and he, complacent, did as he attended, smiled and soon he got on the platform for his talk.

The overseer was surprised to see the faces of those seated in the front rows. They made gestures and signs with their faces, surreptitiously. In the end, he discovered the problem: he was wearing his trouser fly open.

The little one, as "he was at the right height" realized the problem, which no one else did. But, as I said before, the overseer ignored him. Too bad, it would have saved the embarrassment. The lesson: you learn from everyone, even the most seemingly insignificant.

I say all of the above because if even a little one can teach us, if we are humble enough, I have learned a lot from some of those who write in this forum. I am not ashamed to admit that I have learned a lot from @JW Insider. There are things that I don't quite understand because they are out of my reach, like all this enormous amount of technical information about chronology. And, by the way, in some things I disagree with him, although they are very few, really.

But I don't only value jwi posts. I have learned things too, and I have enjoyed reading those of many others, it would be unfair to quote them because it would leave me some.

Regarding Allen Smith aka CC and many more aliases. More than once you feel anger because some of us support the arguments of those who do not agree with you. The only answer I can give to people with your personality is this:
 

(Proverbs 26:4) . . .Do not answer @César Chávez according to his foolishness, So that you do not put yourself on his level.

6 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I'll be happy to start a new topic. But it doesn't mean this one is finished. There are still several pieces of evidence to test the accuracy of the Neo-Babylonian chronology.

Oh my!

Let no one think, not for a moment, that I understand not a small part of what is said, although I see it very interesting.

Awesome. I really appreciate all your effort by putting your knowledge at our disposal. In spite of the risk to be misunderstood, I'm always learning a lot of you.
Yes, yes, I hear some ones saying "you're a man's follower..."

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

the generation of 1914 even after that generation has completely died out. 

I think that all this of the generation could have, in fact, a very simple explanation: Jesus was only referring to the living people in his day, and that they would see the destruction of Jerusalem in 70.

What complicates it "a little" is the intersection between the prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem and the prediction of His return, of His parousia.

The apostles, in their ignorance, MIXED both issues. So Jesus' response could lead us to MIX the fulfillments. Even more complicated if we look for TYPES and antitype between the first and second fulfillment ...

What I see less complicated is that the ONLY statements unequivocally referring to the parousia, on his return, are those of

(Matthew 24: 29-31).?.?. “Immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30? Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31? And he will send out his angels with a great trumpet sound, and they will gather his chosen ones together from the four winds, from one extremity of the heavens to their other extremity.

All these followed by verses Mt.24: 36 and until the end of chapter 25

The fact that the statements about the "generation" appear in the midst of statements that ONLY will be fulfilled in the parousia could make us think that they CAN ONLY refer to the parousia

It happens that the biblical writers did not record the words of Jesus in a logical or chronological order, as we would do in our time. Many times they used a linguistic model called chiasm. This mix -apparently- the ideas forming an X (... topic for another day)

Thus, we find in the conversation of the Mount of Olives a mixture of events that had to do with the year 70, then for the parousia, and then back to the year 70.

So perhaps the famous words about generation are some kind of interpolation between the 70 and parousia fulfillments, but related to the fist one. year 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem:

If we apply the generation statement to the period 33-70, the discussions of 1 / when it starts 2 / how long it lasts 3 / when it ends ...  IT ENDS! what happiness!

Perhaps a possible explanation for the Franz / Furuli similarities is that both situations, the time of Franz and the present, share the same problems.

I see a tension, an opposite force, between wanting to have a united, harmonious organization and allowing greater freedom of conscience and thought. Both extremes I think are bad.

Can you imagine going to a congregation that believes in the trinity, or in hell fire?

At the other extreme, it is a shame it is troublesome to wear a beard, not to wear a tie and that sort of thing.