what a sad loss i personally have enjoyed your comments(most) and your often humorous take on things although not agreeing with everything, never the less you make us think and our faith is tested .wishing you Jehovah's rich blessing in future
I totally agree with you brother. Going over your posts, I noticed some concerns of yours are global, some local. But just like in he first century, the apostle Peter said: “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life..." (John 6:68) Today, no other organization is as close to Jehovah than the JWs. And blessed too despite the numerous "imperfections". Let's stick together and look forward to a brand New World! Cheers....
Seems the practice (since the 4th Century) of adding an extra month, Adar1, every so often to realign the Jewish lunar calendar with the solar calendar puts the modern Jewish calendar out of sync with our Memorial date, particularly in 2016.
This well explained here: http://www.jewfaq.org/calendar.htm#Links
There are other factors effecting the date. The timing of Nisan 1 by the sight of the new moon in Jerusalem rather than the astronomical calculation can mean a difference of 18-30 hours, placing our reckoning of Nisan 14 up to 2 days later. Also, the timing of the Passover Sacrifice as taking place between sunset and darkness of Nisan 14 (as substantiated by Ex 12:6 and De.16:6) differs from those Jewish authorities who place the Passover meal later, as occuring on Nisan 15.
Our calculations are based on the best evidence for the system used when the memorial was instituted by Jesus in the 1st Century, rather than the more recent Jewish methods.
Other references include:
WT 1 Feb 1976 p73
The modern Jewish calendar determines the beginning of their month of Nisan by the astronomical new moon. However, usually it is eighteen hours or more later when the first sliver of the crescent of the new moon becomes visible in Jerusalem. Each year, in recent times, the governing body of Jehovah’s witnesses has determined the actual new moon that becomes visible in Jerusalem, which is the way the first of Nisan was determined in Biblical times. For this reason often there has been a difference of a day or two between the Memorial date of Jehovah’s witnesses and the Nisan 14 date according to the modern Jewish calendar.
*** w73 3/15 p. 175 Is the Date for Celebrating Passover Important to Christians? ***
Is the Date for Celebrating Passover Important to Christians?
JESUS CHRIST, the founder of Christianity, instituted the memorial of his death (the Lord’s Evening Meal) on a day marked by an annual observance, the Jewish Passover. This being the case, reasonably the Lord’s Evening Meal would also be an annual celebration. Hence the date on which the Passover was held would determine when the memorial of Jesus’ death should be commemorated. Christians therefore find it of more than passing interest to ascertain when Passover was observed. It is important, for they are under command to keep the memorial of Jesus’ death.—Luke 22:19.
According to the Jewish calendar, the anniversary date for the celebration of Passover falls in the month of Nisan. Regarding the lamb or goat that was to be eaten during the course of the Passover meal, Jehovah God commanded: “It must continue under safeguard by you until the fourteenth day of this month, and the whole congregation of the assembly of Israel must slaughter it between the two evenings.”—Ex. 12:6.
What does the expression “two evenings” mean? Does it have any bearing on the date for celebrating Passover?
Jewish tradition generally presents the “two evenings” as the time from noon (when the sun begins to decline) on until sundown. As the Israelites measured their day from sundown to sundown, this would mean that the Passover victim was slaughtered prior to the sundown with which Nisan 14 ended and Nisan 15 began. If this were correct, the Passover meal itself would have been eaten in Egypt on Nisan 15 and the Israelites would not have left Egypt until that date.
But the traditional Jewish view regarding the “two evenings” does not harmonize with the Bible account at Exodus 12:17, 18. There we read: “You must keep the festival of unfermented cakes, because on this very day I must bring your armies out from the land of Egypt. And you must keep this day throughout your generations as a statute to time indefinite. In the first month [Nisan or Abib], on the fourteenth day of the month, in the evening you are to eat unfermented cakes.”
Had the Passover victim been slaughtered as Jewish tradition holds, namely, in the last quarter of the fourteenth day, which ended at sundown, then the Israelites could not have left Egypt that “very day.” The event that enabled them to depart was the death of the Egyptian firstborn. But, as this took place at midnight, it would not have come until about six hours after Nisan 14 ended.—Ex. 12:29.
So we must look to a source other than Jewish tradition to find out when the Passover victim was sacrificed and then eaten. We need to examine the Bible itself to determine the significance of the expression “two evenings.” Directing our attention to Deuteronomy 16:6, we note that in the case of the first evening a time beginning considerably later than noon is involved. The instructions to Israel here read: “You should sacrifice the passover in the evening as soon as the sun sets.” So the first of the “two evenings” manifestly designates the time when the sun sets, whereas the second evening would correspond to the time when the sun’s reflected light or afterglow ends and darkness falls.
This explanation of the two evenings was also offered by the Spanish rabbi Aben-Ezra (1092-1167 C.E.), as well as by the Samaritans and the Karaite Jews. It is the view presented by such scholars as Michaelis, Rosenmueller, Gesenius, Maurer, Kalisch, Knobel and Keil.
Viewing the Biblical evidence as a whole, we can see that the Passover victim was slaughtered at sunset, at the start of Nisan 14, and the meal itself was eaten later that evening. Whereas the Jews of today, in keeping with tradition, eat the Passover meal on Nisan 15, their practice is not supported by the Holy Scriptures. The correct anniversary date is Nisan 14.
Thus Jesus Christ must have eaten the Passover with his disciples on Nisan 14 “after evening had fallen” and thereafter instituted the Lord’s Evening Meal. (Mark 14:17; Matt. 26:20-28) Jehovah’s Christian witnesses therefore observe the memorial of Christ’s death on its anniversary date after sundown on Nisan 14.
Γιαννης Διαμαντιδης,
I believe that Ann O'maly has stated the truth about the U.N. involvement about as well as anyone can. I know the brother who got the Society involved with the UN DPI/NGO, and have spoken to him several times since I left Bethel in the 1980's. I know that the paperwork was approved by others including a member of the GB (mentioned by Ann).
It was definitely a mistake. And it has definitely stumbled people. I'm not here to defend it, and I'm not here as one of those Witnesses who will claim that Jehovah has allowed certain mistakes just to filter out those who are disloyal, or those who are looking for an excuse to leave the Organization. People still say this about some of the mistakes of the past, and will likely say such things about mistakes made in the future.
I just searched through the jw-archive site, because I know that we have discussed this before, and I didn't want to just keep re-writing things "from scratch" over and over again -- which is something I have a tendency to always do. In fact, this is the very first time I will be quoting myself from a previous post: I'm no expert on this, and perhaps I don't have all the facts either, but the information is from people I trust.
A portion of the discussion from https://disqus.com/home/discussion/jwarchive/jw_archiveorg_by_the_jw_comic_strip_52/#comment-2009424381
(I made the UN joke because the timing was close to "Sternstorm." The WTS applied for the NGO status through their DPI (Dept of Public Info.) in 1991 and received it in 1992. I believe we requested disassociation in 2001, just after an investigative journalist exposed the NGO/DPI connection.)
If you are asking about the UN, then unfortunately, the answer is Yes. The Watchtower joined the UN as an NGO. I know the brother who spearheaded the effort, still in Writing (last I spoke to him), and also knew others who approved it at the time (now deceased). They meant no harm, but it proved to be an embarrassment. They didn't really need the NGO status, for the original purpose -- access to informational materials, but the status seems to have given them quicker information about conferences and events that could have even helped the Watchtower Society learn more about the behind-the-scenes political circumstances of our brothers in various countries. The most embarrassing part, of course, was getting "disfellowshipped" by the UN. (That really happened, but it happened just after the WTS requested it.) Also, for a while, the Watchtower Society was supposed to write one informational article per year that informed our audience of some of the work the UN was doing. (That's one of the ways the DPI works.) So while the Watchtower magazine bashed them negatively, a small piece here and there in the Awake! magazine was doing articles on UNICEF etc that were between neutral and positive.
...
I should also say that I don't think this started out as anything very big. But those who got involved should have realized that almost everything goes public and becomes searchable. For a while you could even search the U.N.'s site and see which Awake! articles had been submitted for NGO/DPI compliance.
My motto: If you think you'll have trouble defending it, just don't! (Don't start something you might have to defend later.)
But I have to say that even in 1976, I was doing some follow-up research on Mr. Banda, the president of Malawi who had allowed widespread persecution of the Witnesses for several years just prior. And it turns out that he made some anti-JW statements that blamed the Witnesses for their own troubles -- saying that the problem was not just the 25 cent political party card. I only found this info in some heavy encyclopedic U.N. publications that no one in Writing had seen or heard of -- although these publications were at a large university library. It's quite possible that, 15 years later, a couple brothers were convinced that this type of information, although available without the NGO/DPI connection, would become more accessible. (I don't know if that would really be true.) Or, even more likely, that if we could gain a respectable status with THEIR researchers, we could merely request things to be xeroxed and mailed to the WTS, rather than traveling over to DPI repositories, and hardly knowing where to start.
----- and in another place on jw-archive, it came up again ------
There is additional evidence or information that I'm sure you can find from others, but what I write below is based mostly on what I know personally and have seen with my own eyes. It is mixed with a few things I have learned from other trusted and current Witnesses.
A very interesting man in Bethel's Writing Department is best known for some of his non-outline talks that he has given in hundreds of congregations. You can find many of his recorded talks on the Internet. He is a good speaker with a "dramatic" personality. I know the man well, and still count him as a friend although we rarely speak. I have seen him outside Bethel, in NY, NJ, even PA, oddly enough, buying books for his own library and for the Bethel libraries. (I have been a book collector for 30 years, and still take on research work for authors, so we have often frequented the same places.)
From the time I first knew him, 1976, this brother was in the Service Department and finally moved to the Writing Department. He was quickly given a lot of autonomy under the supervision of Lloyd Barry because he did more research and book purchasing than pure Writing compared with most others in Writing.
The brother I am speaking about was very highly embarrassed over the fact that it was mostly his own idea that got this thing started. I have not talked about it with him. He began using the UN library regularly in 1990, then weekly in 1991, and initially signed up with the UN's "Department of Public Information" (DPI) in 1991 (and officially accepted 1992) for easier access to library materials, but in the process of accessing those materials he learned a lot about different types of access to conferences and areas of interest that aligned with the Society's interests outside of just the library resources. (It was thought that association might have made it easier to publicize JW human rights violations, learn more about what other religions were doing when they had similar issues with religious persecution in many countries. It made it easier to get information about international religious taxation issues, and Holocaust publicity, etc.)
Brother Barry agreed with him that these other areas of access were also valuable, and they continued the association as an "NGO" (non-governmental organization). The names of both of these brothers, including the GB member, and another direct report to a GB member from the Service Dept are still on some forms at the UN.
They also had to agree to produce articles that helped to promote the work of United Nations' initiatives. The first one was the September 8, 1991 Awake! One initiative that the WTS could most easily agree with was UNICEF. The December 8, 2000 Awake! for example prints out the entire UN Declaration of the Rights of a Child in a single issue that mentions UNICEF 10 times (in a positive context). I'll quote it below.
But first notice by using the 2014 Watchtower Library CD for example that in the 10 years that the WTS was associated with the UN it mentioned UNICEF about 75 times (from 1991-2001). After a leak by the Guardian, the WTS was disassociated from the UN in 2001 when it was exposed to the UN that the Watchtower was simultaneously speaking out AGAINST the UN at the same time the Awake! was speaking positively about it.
(UNICEF has been mentioned just 11 times in the much longer time period since 2001, and always just to quote negative statistics.)
I have seen a list that included articles that were presented to the UN/DPI as proof that the WTS was keeping it's agreement by publishing at least one positive article per year. I don't have a copy of it, and don't know if anyone else does. I forget whether it included the issue below from 2000. I wish I had kept a copy. As I recall, it had references to about 10 different issues of the Awake! over a period of several years.
*** g00 12/8 p. 5 An Ongoing Search for Solutions ***
The UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child:
● The right to a name and nationality.
● The right to affection, love, and understanding and to material security.
● The right to adequate nutrition, housing, and medical services.
● The right to special care if disabled, be it physically, mentally, or socially.
● The right to be among the first to receive protection and relief in all circumstances.
● The right to be protected against all forms of neglect, cruelty, and exploitation.
● The right to full opportunity for play and recreation and equal opportunity to free and compulsory education, to enable the child to develop his individual abilities and to become a useful member of society.
● The right to develop his full potential in conditions of freedom and dignity.
● The right to be brought up in a spirit of understanding, tolerance, friendship among peoples, peace, and universal brotherhood.
● The right to enjoy these rights regardless of race, color, sex, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, and property, birth, or other status.
--------------
Back to your current post. What I'm trying to say is that I don't think we need to cover up anything. A mistake was made, and we ultimately resolved it. I don't see what it proves to keep bringing it up. It does not show that we supported the U.N. It shows that we found areas of agreement. We used the relationship to our advantage and the "cost" to us was the need to write about ways in which another organization was also trying to resolve world problems. For all we know, we would have been writing about such things anyway. Personally, I think we ended up looking more reasonable by discussing what the world was trying to do, and how it was at times making progress. Even their limited progress still highlighted the need for a more comprehensive solution.
So it's not like any JWs really needed to take their focus off the Scriptural reasoning for resolving the world's problems. Perhaps it made us more sympathetic and knowledgeable about the viewpoint of others. In the more distant past, we often did nothing but show derision for such efforts. Surely we are better off now for such research. I don't see this whole thing as a one-sided proof of hypocrisy with no up-side. I believe the posts also show that (through the mistake) we discovered avenues and venues for involvement in human rights awareness that we were not aware of previously.
Not sure how "he brought some brothers" to serve as witnesses to this incident.
Matt 5:32
However, as you probably know, porneia is not dependent on the sex of the persons involved. So, a proven case is grounds for the innocent party to scripturally divorce.
Melinda Mills reacted to finny in Epilogue - Ruminations of a Cantankerous Old Barbarian