HollyW

Let's take a look at the Bible evidence Russell had been saying would prove him right about the end of the Gentile times. This is from his book called "The Time Is At Hand" which he wrote in 1889:

Available online at http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/english/books-and-tracts/ and http://www.ctrussell.us/ctrussell/ctrussell.nsf

So, these are the events you would be expecting when you imagine yourself in the dining room that day in October 1914 when C.T. Russell announced that the Gentile times had ended.  These events are the evidence that would prove October 1914 was the correct date Biblically for the end of the Gentile times.  Perhaps someone who feels strong enough spiritually to defend him or her self biblically could show which, if any, of these events took place.

On 7/30/2016 at 1:11 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

This maybe a common dictionary definition, but is just inadequate when dealing with the biblical concept. 

This is clear, for example, when looking at Heb 2:10; Heb 5:9 relating to Jesus.

Also, in considering the application of Jesus words at Matt 5:48 and Matt 19:21.

So any argumentation using this rather narrow English definition in discussing the biblical concept is, quite simply,.....flawed.

How about the WTS definition, you don't consider it to be flawed, do you?

[w06 5/15 p.6] During his Thousand Year Reign, Jesus will apply the benefits of his ransom sacrifice to every obedient human. In time, all sin will thus be removed, and mankind will be lifted to human perfection. (1 John 2:2; Revelation 21:1-4) With the effects of Adam’s sin completely gone,perfect humans will meet God’s standards physically, mentally, morally, and spiritually. They will thus “come to life” in the fullest sense when they reach sinless perfection. (Revelation 20:5) How this and the Paradise earth will glorify Jehovah!  

5 hours ago, SonOfcaleb said:

The Tree of Life in Eden as you know was symbolic. The Tree didn't possess anything intrinsic within it that could provide ever lasting life as Adam and Eve were created perfect and thus had the abiity to live forever. Eating of the Tree of Life was a priviliege that they would have been able to partake of if they'd been obedient and not eaten from Tree of Knowledge. As we know they choose to eat from the ToK and were ousted from Eden as a result of their sinful disobedience.

Now the ToL did not bestow immortality on anyone eating from that tree. The Tree symbolically only provided ever lasting life. Also human beings are not and cannot be immortal, and that includes perfect human beings. Immortality is a direct 'gift' from God that was given to Jesus when he returned to Heaven, along with the 144,000 who also recieve the gift of immortality from Jehovahs Holy Spirit which is attested to by the Apostle Paul. Only spirit beings can be immortal and thus recieve immortality. 

In the 'New System of Things' there will not be a 'Tree' to partake of. During Judgement Day those Jesus & the 144,000 deem to be 'righteous' will recieve ever lasting life on the basis of their faith and works.

The WTS says that the tree of life is symbolic of God's provision for sustained life.....immortality for the 144,000…….continuing life for everyone else (until they sin and die in the lake of fire.)

Evidently the WTS does view the tree of life that the anointed eat from and the trees of life the other sheep eat from as being different trees of life:

[Rev.Cli. p.36-37] “Let the one who has an ear hear what the spirit says to the congregations: To him that conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.” (Revelation 2:7) .......the reference here must be to the heavenly gardenlike realm inherited by these conquerors. There, “in the paradise of God,” yes, in the very presence of Jehovah himself, these overcomers who have been granted immortality will continue to live eternally, as symbolized here by their eating of the tree of life.

[Rev.Cli. p.312] “And on this side of the river and on that side there were trees of life producing twelve crops of fruit, yielding their fruits each month. And the leaves of the trees were for the curing of the nations.” (Revelation 22:2b) These “trees of life” must also picture part of Jehovah’s provision for giving eternal life to obedient mankind.

Though it is called "eternal life", in reality the WTS teaching shows that it is not "eternal life" for those on earth, but just "continuing life". IOW they continue to live for as long as they merit it on their own righteousness, without Jesus to plead for them. [Reference: w06 8/15 p.31 QFR]
 

On 6/18/2016 at 9:32 PM, Carmen Erwin said:

Personally I would never grab my jw.org button and pray to Jehovah with it. I would never wear it as a symbol of the Christ .  I would not hang it in my house or in my car for a form of protection. And I would only direct ones to it as a teaching tool that leads them to their bibles and the truth Jesus taught according to jehovahs direction. These are the last days and Jehovah is trying to reach every searching soul. Disciples of truth. Just my two scents?

While not being worn as a symbol of the Christ, how about wearing it and using it as a symbol of the organization you believe Jehovah is using, the WTS.  As a symbol of God's Organization, it could be seen as worship of that organization.

3 hours ago, SonOfcaleb said:

Nothing wrong with my reading ability mon frere. I read your post and its quite transparent the 'debate' you're attempting to stir. You made the fallacious claim regarding these alledged Jehovahs Witnesses prophecies. So putting your hubris to one side and dealing with the facts il repeat what i said again as you didnt seem to understand it the first time. We are not prophets and have never made any prophecies. I think thats quite an easy sentence for most cognitive adults to understand. And not only that its fully supported by Gods own word in the Bible. You know of any prophets foretold or otherwise after Jesus time circa 1AD that were sent specifcally to the Nation of Israel. Nah me neither.....

The WTS claims only to not being inspired prophets; however, they do admit to prophesying and they have pictured themselves as being like inspired prophets such as Isaiah, Ezekiel and Jeremiah.

[rs False Prophets p.136 par.2] Jehovah’s Witnesses do not claim to be inspired prophets. 

[w64 6/15 p.364] As Jehovah revealed his truths by means of the first-century Christian congregation so he does today by means of the present-day Christian congregation. Through this agency he is having carried out prophesying on an intensified and unparalleled scale. All this activity is not an accident. Jehovah is the one behind all of it. The abundance of spiritual food and the amazing details of Jehovah’s purposes that have been revealed to Jehovah’s anointed witnesses are clear evidence that they are the ones mentioned by Jesus when he foretold a “faithful and discreet slave” class that would be used to dispense God’s progressive revelations in these last days. Of this class Jesus said: “Truly I say to you, He will appoint him over all his belongings.”—Matt. 24:47.

17 hours ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

That's a very interesting question Holly. While I don't think they would ever do that, I have seen this or a similar line of thought to this. I think it would take us very close to the Mormons. But the scriptural basis for such a teaching seems pretty weak. I can think of two scriptures that could be interpreted that way. Do you have any scriptures in mind that would present a strong case for that? Keeping in mind that Witnesses will not budge from John 14: 28 and similar scriptures. I don't think such a change would be made drastically, but introduced in stages. Overall I think there are 10 base teachings that are very unlikely to change. The separateness of Jehovah and Jesus is one.

 

Thanks for your reply.  The requirement to accept WTS teachings is not limited to 10 teachings.  The requirement is to accept ALL of their teachings.

The question is, if they did change their teaching about Jehovah and Jesus after you were baptized, do you believe you should be required to believe it on pain of excommunication and shunning?   

On 7/21/2016 at 7:22 PM, Melinda Mills said:

Agree with 1 Cor 9:17 used by Eoin Joyce.  The stewardship is to do the work Jesus left to be done – Preach the good news of the Kingdom of God, which is a real government that will correct forever  the affairs of sinful mankind. People need to know of this solution as it gives them hope and the promise of everlasting life. Christians must live their lives worthy of the kingdom as well (1 Cor 6: 9,10) They must live up to Kingdom standards and requirements as well as preach it.

“(1 Corinthians 9:17) If I do this willingly, I have a reward; but even if I do it against my will, I still have a stewardship entrusted to me.”

 

Melinda and Eoin, I don't believe Paul was saying that even if what he was teaching was wrong, he would still teach it because he believed it was from the Lord.  But that seems to be how you both are interpreting him, as applied to my question in the OP, you believe living up to Kingdom standards and requirements means you are to teach whatever the WTS governing body says to teach, until they change it, and if you don't change your belief when told to, you can be accused of apostasy and be shunned.

A good article to review in this regard might be the one from the April 1st 1986 WT, the Questions From Readers on page 31. It shows that not accepting the entire range of the WTS teachings is considered apostasy.

54 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

 We should take this subject very seriously because if we have done the wrong thing here we have actually removed the word Lord 237 times from the text of the Greek Scriptures and replaced it with Jehovah. In most of these cases there is NOT a quote from the Hebrew Scriptures, and in a couple of cases where it IS a quote from the Hebrew Scriptures where the divine name was used, we do NOT use the divine name, but leave it as Lord.

 

That's interesting.....which scriptures are you referring to?

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

One of the administrators/moderators must have used the "dirty-word-filter" and used it to change the word "a-p-o s-t-a-t-e" to "brother." The original Watchtower article calls them "APO"+"STATE" Christians, NOT "brother Christians."

Don't know if the punctuation I just used will get around the filter. 

Good to know.  Thanks!

On 6/28/2016 at 10:40 AM, HollyW said:

I was going to post this in the Questions section, but then I thought it might become controversial.

What I found interesting about this brochure is its implication that inactive Jehovah's Witnesses can confess violating WTS rules for 40 years and not be disciplined for it, but rather will be welcomed back to each congregation with open arms.  The brochure tells of one coming back after 40 years of being inactive, who during that time had celebrated holidays, gone to other churches, been involved in politics, and probably much more. 

Has something been left out of the brochure....something like 'yes, you'll be welcomed back with open arms....as soon as the elders say you can be, but until then you'll be shunned for your 40 years of sins that you just confessed to them.' ?

I ask because the articles about inactive ones returning to the Kingdom Hall have always said something about  "Loving disciples may be required." There's even been instructions to those who may be asked to study with an inactive JW, such as this in a 2008 wt:

[w08 11/15 Help Them Return Without Delay!, p.12, par.2] If they assign a publisher to study with an inactive person desiring help, what should be done if the conductor learns that the individual has committed a serious sin? Instead of giving counsel about any judicial or confidential matter, the publisher should suggest that he speak to the elders. If he fails to do so, the publisher himself should inform the elders.

If elders can question the sincerity of someone's repentance because he or she waited a month or two before confessing it to the elders, wouldn't it be even more doubtful that a person confessing after 40 years is truly repentant?

 

Holly

 

Well, I know my post is being read....102 views....but so far there have been no replies about this important issue.  What if you are asked about it by the inactive ones with whom you've been placing the brochure, how would you answer them?  

On 6/30/2016 at 7:06 AM, HollyW said:

On the questions forum the video "The Kingdom---100 Years and Counting" was mentioned.  I notice that it begins with the same event the 2014 book "God's Kingdom Rule" does:

October 1st or 2nd, 1914, and C.T. Russell's announcement that the Gentiles times had ended.  The letter in the book from the GB invites you to  PICTURE yourself as a member of the Brooklyn Bethel family on Friday morning, October 2, 1914.  and with the video that's certainly easy to do, isn't it.

But what did that mean to them,  “The Gentile Times have ended; their kings have had their day!” 

What events were they looking forward to?

Did those events take place?

 

I'm not sure this dining room event even happened.....sometimes they say it was October 1st and other times that it was October 2nd. 

The first mention of it that I could find was in the May 1922 WT where Rutherford said this:

Indeed, Volume II of Russell's STUDIES series laid the foundation for October of 1914 being the end of the Gentile Times, and in that Volume he gave seven distinct proofs that his calculations were correct and were Biblical. So, when (and IF) he made that statement in October of 1914 at the dining room, his audience knew exactly what he was referring to. They'd been reading it and hearing about it for the entire time they had been following Russell.

The volume is called "The Time Is At Hand" and Russell wrote it in 1889. It is referred to as Volume 2, or II, but it's actually his third volume because the first volume is referred to as Volume 0.  They started out as "Millennial Dawn" volumes but were changed to "Studies in the Scriptures" at some point. There are several web sites that have these volumes available for download: 

http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/engli...ks-and-tracts/ and http://www.ctrussell.us/ctrussell/ctrussell.nsf

On pages 76-79 Russell presents seven proofs for support that his date of October 1914 for the close of the gentile times is accurate and scriptural.

This is what he wrote:

Ok. So....what did his announcement on October 1st or 2nd of 1914 in the dining room mean to his audience?

Imagine yourself there, as the GB has invited you to in their letter in their book "God's Kingdom Rules!" Imagine hearing those words, "The Gentile Times have ended! Their kings have had their day!" (Just like the song #14 "Be Glad You Nations") Those hearing Russell's announcement were expecting that the "full end of the times of the Gentiles, .....the full end of their lease of dominion" had ended that year in October and "that date will see the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men."

That's our answer to the first question, isn't it, that's what Russell's announcement, “The Gentile Times have ended; their kings have had their day!”  meant to them...."the full end of the times of the Gentiles,....the full end of their lease of dominion,...the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men."

What events were they looking forward to?  Russell lists seven specific events that would take place, showing that his calculations and predictions about 1914 were both accurate and Biblical.

In the early days of the WTS, its founder, C.T. Russell, included the worship of Jesus Christ in the charter of the Watchtower Bible & Trast Society as one of its purposes. If you have the 1945 Yearbook, you'll find it on page 32. If not, it is online at this website:http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/archi...s/yb1945_E.pdf

And this is the text you'll find there---notice the part I bolded:
 

Not only that, these are excerpts from other WTS publications, beginning with Russell's view:

Rutherford continued this teaching: 

Knorr continued this teaching: 

Take into account also that the WTS says not only did God approve of this, but HE Himself was enlightening Russell and Rutherford spiritually to teach this. https://www.jw.org/en/publications/b...-rediscovered/
 

2 hours ago, JAMMY said:

@Jay Witness, I do not know if this will help you any, but I would be remiss if not sharing with you. The articles are rather long, so I am posting the links to the info.,plus what I thought interesting

 

 

George Howard's theory that YHWH was in the OT quotes that are in the NT covers just a small portion of the 237 times the NWT has "Jehovah" in its NT.  There's also the question about how it was actually read, if it did indeed appear there, since it is also stated that Jews read YHWH as "Lord".

One of the articles in your references refers to the use of "Jehovah" by the Aramaic Bible in Plain English.  I wonder if Howard would agree with it's translation of  1 Corinthians 12:3 Because I inform you of this: there is no man who speaks by The Spirit of God and says, “Yeshua is damned”, neither can a man say, “Yeshua is THE LORD JEHOVAH”, except by The Spirit of Holiness.

I'd be interested in your thoughts on it.

On 7/22/2016 at 10:43 AM, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

I'll have to take some time to read over this one. At first glance, it's not readily apparent that you have answered my question or not. To be frank, I'm a bit overloaded, when one or two clear scriptural reference would've sufficed you've gone all out. I agree with the Governing Body's position that Jehovah and Jesus are separate individuals, Jesus being a created being as described in Colossians as the firstborn of creation, both pre-eminent and first thing created. A master worker though not a co-creator.

To keep this thread on track with the question in the OP [which was: "do you think that if a teaching has changed since you were baptized, you should still be required to believe it?] if the WTS Governing Body said they had received new light and changed their teaching about Jehovah and Jesus being separate individuals to one that says Jesus is Jehovah, would you change your belief to agree with them?

If you wouldn't, do you believe you should be subject to reproof and/or disfellowshipping for not accepting their new teaching?

And for the NT lack of YHWH, they blame what they call "brother Christians":

[w10 7/1 p.6-7] When brother Christians made copies of the Christian Greek Scriptures, they evidently took Jehovah’s personal name out of the text and substituted Ky′ri·os, the Greek word for “Lord.” The Hebrew Scriptures did not fare any better. No longer reading God’s name aloud, brother Jewish scribes replaced the divine name in their Scriptures with ʼAdho·nai′ more than 130 times. 

1 hour ago, Jay Witness said:

I have a question I was hoping someone here could answer. I know JW's say that Jewish scribes removed the name of God from the Greek New Testament manuscripts, but I have not seen any documented evidence from reputable scholars to substantiate that claim. In fact, today I was reading through the Watchtower edition #4 under the section titled "The Bible Survived Attempts to Alter Its Message" and I found an interesting quote there. Basically, it makes the argument that due to the strict standard involved in copying the manuscripts, the sheer volume of Greek manuscripts available, and the availability of early manuscripts as early as the second century, we can be confident that the Greek manuscripts read nearly exactly as the originals.
So, if that is true, and I agree it is, how can the claim be made on one hand that the Bible has been accurately transmitted through the centuries, and on the other hand say that Jewish scholars took the name of God out of all 27 books of the New Testament? Either one believes the integrity of the Bible has been preserved through the centuries, or one doesn't. If the name of God has truly been omitted, how can we trust many other things haven't been omitted or changed?
Below is the quote from the Watchtower article.i would be interested to see the sources from credible scholars that show evidence that the name of God has been omitted.
______
A member of the editorial team of the Dead Sea Scrolls concluded that one scroll “provides irrefutable proof that the transmission of the biblical text through a period of more than one thousand years by the hands of Jewish copyists has been extremely faithful and careful.”
The Chester Beatty Library in Dublin, Ireland, features a collection of papyri that represents nearly every book of the Christian Greek Scriptures, including manuscripts dating from the second century C.E.—only about 100 years after the Bible was completed. “Although the Papyri supply a wealth of new information on textual detail,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary observes, “they also demonstrate remarkable stability in the transmission history of the biblical text.”
“It may be safely said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted”
THE RESULT: Rather than corrupting the Bible text, the age and multitude of Bible manuscripts have actually improved it. “No other ancient book has anything like such early and plentiful testimony to its text,” wrote Sir Frederic Kenyon about the Christian Greek Scriptures, “and no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us is substantially sound.” And regarding the Hebrew Scriptures, scholar William Henry Green stated: *****“It may be safely said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted.”*****

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2016247

Originally asked in here

The WTS has two opposing views on the Bible’s reliability.

While on the one hand they maintain that the Bible manuscripts have unquestionably come down to us exactly as God had inspired them to be written; on the other hand they say the NT manuscripts have been tampered with in “one of the saddest and most reprehensible” ways, by removing “Jehovah” from them……which might make them wonder what other parts were tampered with. 

Bible reliability:
 

NWT introduction: Since the Bible sets for the sacred will of the Sovereign Lord of the universe, it would be a great indignity, indeed an affront to his majesty and authority, to omit or hide his unique divine name.

Bible tampered with:
 

On 7/27/2016 at 5:38 PM, Jesus.defender said:

Jehovah has NO organization on Earth. We cannot see this in the Bible at all.

Well, JWs believe the WTS is Jehovah's organization here on earth and that's why they are willing to accept teachings from it that later turn out to be wrong.  That's why I've asked them: Why do you believe the WTS is the organization Jehovah is using?

I was expecting to get more than just "why not?" but so far that seems to be it.

On 7/28/2016 at 1:43 PM, Shiwiii said:

Nope, not robots at all.

My question to you to clear this up a bit would be what is perfection? 

Is perfection having an internal flaw? blemish? Or is it perfect without spot?

The WTS definition of perfect in this instance is to "meet God's standards physically, mentally, morally, and spiritually."

[w06 5/15 p.6] During his Thousand Year Reign, Jesus will apply the benefits of his ransom sacrifice to every obedient human. In time, all sin will thus be removed, and mankind will be lifted to human perfection. (1 John 2:2; Revelation 21:1-4) With the effects of Adam’s sin completely gone, perfect humans will meet God’s standards physically, mentally, morally, and spiritually. They will thus “come to life” in the fullest sense when they reach sinless perfection. (Revelation 20:5) How this and the Paradise earth will glorify Jehovah!  

On 7/27/2016 at 1:32 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

Do you not think Adam was perfect when he rebelled against Jehovah and attempted to destroy his own offspring?

 Adam was perfect but you are wrong to accuse him of attempting to destroy his offspring. 

Quote

They do not have an excuse. That's why "... fire came down out of heaven and consumed them" Rev 20:9

Yet they are perfect JWs with more or less a thousand years of studying WTS publications to have reached that perfect state, and they are persuaded to war against other JWs.

I'll start a thread about this WTS teaching that a vast number of JWs will be persuaded to go to war against their fellow JWs, and we can get into more detail about it, if you'd like.

In the meantime, I notice you haven't responded to the question in the OP, maybe you could do so now:

Why do you believe the WTS is the organization Jehovah is using?

What about the JW icon in comparison to the cross and crown pin?

----[jv p.200]  For years, Bible Students wore a cross and crown as a badge of identification, and this symbol was on the front cover of the “Watch Tower” from 1891 to 1931. But in 1928 it was emphasized that not a decorative symbol but one’s activity as a witness showed he was a Christian.----

-----[yb75 p.148] Another change in viewpoint involved the “cross and crown” symbol, which appeared on the Watch Tower cover beginning with the issue of January 1891. In fact, for years many Bible Students wore a pin of this kind. By way of description, C. W. Barber writes: “It was a badge really, with a wreath of laurel leaves as the border and within the wreath was a crown with a cross running through it on an angle. It looked quite attractive and was our idea at that time of what it meant to take up our ‘cross’ and follow Christ Jesus in order to be able to wear the crown of victory in due time.”

Concerning the wearing of “cross and crown pins,” Lily R. Parnell comments: “This to Brother Rutherford’s mind was Babylonish and should be discontinued. He told us that when we went to the people’s homes and began to talk, that was the witness in itself.” Accordingly, reflecting on the 1928 Bible Students convention in Detroit, Michigan, Brother Suiter writes: “At the assembly the cross and crown emblems were shown to be not only unnecessary but objectionable. So we discarded these items of jewelry.” Some three years thereafter, beginning with its issue of October 15, 1931, The Watchtower no longer bore the cross and crown symbol on its cover.-----

2 hours ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Witness, I'd like to hear your thoughts on these scriptures:

Exodus 3: 1 - 4 Was it God's voice or the angel conveying God's words?

Compare Exodus 14: 19; 23: 20; 33: 2

Numbers 20: 14 - 17 Was it God that brought Israel out of Egypt or was it an angel?

Also, have you read Acts 7: 30 - 38?

Acts 7: 30 “After 40 years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Siʹnai in the flame of a burning thornbush. 31 When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight. But as he was approaching to investigate, Jehovah’s voice was heard: 32 ‘I am the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob.’ Moses started trembling and did not dare to investigate further. 33 Jehovah said to him: ‘Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy ground. 34 I have certainly seen the oppression of my people who are in Egypt, and I have heard their groaning, and I have come down to rescue them. Now come, I will send you off to Egypt.’ 35 This same Moses whom they had disowned, saying: ‘Who appointed you ruler and judge?’ is the very one God sent as both ruler and deliverer by means of the angel who appeared to him in the thornbush. 36 This man led them out, performing wonders and signs in Egypt and at the Red Sea and in the wilderness for 40 years.
37 “This is the Moses who said to the sons of Israel: ‘God will raise up for you from among your brothers a prophet like me.’ 38 This is the one who came to be among the congregation in the wilderness with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Siʹnai and with our forefathers, and he received living sacred pronouncements to give us.

So, was it God's voice that Moses heard or was it God's word conveyed by an angel? Very interested in your answer here.

Edit: Just wondering, do either of you, Witness or Holly consider yourself inspired or moved by holy spirit?

Hi again Mr V,

I'm wondering if maybe a new thread is in order for your questions, unless you are relating them in some way to the question in the OP.  If you are, could you explain how.....for instance, are you saying you believe the men on the WTS governing body are on par with the angel in these passages?

Everyone who has received the Holy Spirit are moved by Him, but it won't be in any way that contradicts scripture.  So, if the men on the governing body were wrong, for instance, about the child in Revelation 12 being the antichrist, that would not have been something that came from the Holy Spirit since it contradicts scripture.  Was the Holy Spirit moving them to identify first the 144,000 as the faithful servant of Matthew 24:45, and then to discard that teaching and identify Russell alone as that servant, then to discard that teaching and again identify the 144,000 as the faithful servant, and now to discard all of those teachings and identify just the handful of men on the WTS governing body as the faithful slave of Matthew 24:45?

How about when they presumed an appointment over all of the Master's earthly interests?  Were they moved by the Holy Spirit to presume that appointment and now moved by Him to discard that belief and say it didn't happen after all and they are still waiting to be found faithful to receive that appointment?

If it's your belief that the leaders of the WTS have been moved by the Holy Spirit in all their teachings, even when those have been wrong teachings and had to be changed, is that the reason you believe JWs should be willing to accept changes in what they've said the Bible really teaches?

2 hours ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

There are lots of straws in your hat, and you are picking at all of them I can answer you by asking questions too, without of course answering the questions. We can play this silly game all day long, but if we have nothing to agree on, then we should agree to disagree, unless of course you want stay on this merry go round.

Do you believe Moses was God's spokesperson or in my native language mouthpiece? Just curious, because if you can accept Moses you can accept the "slave" along with all it's imperfections, just like Moses. If you don't that Moses was God's mouthpiece who are you, in fact, disrespecting?

Whom do you think the child of Revelation 12 is, or what :)?

 

Moses did speak for God, and wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.  The parallel you're drawing is that because Moses was imperfect and the men you are following are imperfect, it's okay to keep following them even when they're wrong.  Shouldn't we then make that allowance for all men.

The child of Revelation 12 is obviously Jesus, the Messiah.  

In 1914 the folks of the WTS believed it was the birth of the antichrist, but now you say it was the birth of the Messianic kingdom, and your book, "God's Kingdom Rules", calls this the greatest event ever to occur in the history of the world.  But at the time that you say it occurred, in 1914, it was being called the birth of the antichrist by the WTS.  Is this the Moses-like mistake that will keep them out of the promised land?

53 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

No, that's not it. As I posted before,

"...  he concludes that there is a disconnect between the Organization's doctrines, with its claims about itself, and the Bible and known facts. Therefore, the Organization doesn't have a special relationship with God after all, and is just another Christian-based group among many with their various strengths and weaknesses. Subsequently, there is no reason to regard the Organization's human leaders in any higher esteem than one would a clergyman. This person would also be praying to God for strength to endure the situation he was in and to find a way through. "

For a believer, absolutely. Organizations come and go and can become corrupt. God's word and Jesus are the Truth.

A child can be pressured or coerced to become baptized as was shown in the other thread.

As already explained, a dissenting JW is presented with a dreadful dilemma - keep the status quo along with his family and friends, or voice his disagreement, leave (or get kicked out), and face losing everyone he holds dear to his heart. I know it's hard to imagine how agonizing it is if you haven't been through it.

The scenario Jesus presents in Matt. 10 is where a family is ripped apart because some wanted to follow Jesus whereas others didn't. He was addressing an audience of Jews, remember? However, why should families be ripped apart when everyone is following Jesus according to their Bible-trained consciences and beliefs? Jesus wasn't talking about Christian family members becoming enemies of other Christian family members. I'm sure he'd be horrified.

And again, if a dissenting JW concludes that Jesus is long dead, following someone that doesn't exist would not figure in his available choices, nor would he ask for a mythical diety's help in making his choice. Nevertheless, the basic choice is the same: keep the status quo along with his family and friends, or voice his disagreement, leave (or get kicked out), and face losing everyone he holds dear to his heart.

Amazing post, Ann.  

I was listening to the testimony of a JW who was faced with a similar dilemma when he came to Christ while still a JW.  His talks before the congregation became filled with praise and glory toward Christ and were so powerful that a woman came up to him after one of his talks, with tears in her eyes, and said, "Brother, you don't believe in Jehovah any more, you're always talking about Jesus!" 

15 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

What??? Didn't you just get through telling me that I was the one who applied these labels? 

 

now you want to say it was God? 

Why don't you read what you wrote a few posts back and get back to me. You need to clarify where you are coming from if I am going to  continue a discussion. 

I'm still trying to figure out how "spike" got into it.

14 hours ago, Witness said:

That's a new one on me, Holly!  When did the GB say that?  Appalling!

From the very beginning of its existence.

This is from the December 1879 WT (Zion's WT) p.2

Quote

 

"The woman, clothed with the sun," is the Gospel church,

covered with the precious promises of God and the glorious

light of truth. The moon is the reflection of the sun's brightness,

so the Law or Jewish age was a shadow of the Gospel.

It was light, but not the real, only reflected light. The woman

had the moon under her feet. She had reached a higher plane,

and yet she rested upon the foundation of the apostles and

prophets, the diadem of twelve stars representing the apostles.

( V. 3). The Roman Empire had seven heads (Rome's seven

successive and distinct forms of government) , and ten horns

(divisions of power). "The red dragon," Pagan Rome, persecuted

the church. "His tail drew the third part of the stars

of heaven and did cast them to the earth." "Stars of heaven,"

-the bright ones or ministers and teachers in the church. The

dragon's tail draws them, i. e., these become followers of Pagan

Rome in hopes of having favor with the empire and escaping

persecution. As a result, they lose their position as stars in

the true church, and are "cast to the earth." Persecuted and

reviled, she was pained to be delivered, and longed for the

completion of the promised "Seed of the woman which should

bruise the serpent's head." Her anxiety and desire in this direction

produced a pre-mature birth-"The Man of Sin" (the

papal hierarchy) being the offspring. This "male child," at

first a weak one (A. D. 314), was gradually "caught up unto

God and to his throne," or exalted to the position and titles,

homage and praise of the true "seed." so that "He as God sat

in the temple [church] of God, showing himself that he is

God." And within three hundred years he did "rule the

nations with a rod of iron."

 

You can download it online at 

And this is from the book Jesus surely would have been inspecting in 1917: The Finished Mystery, Chapter 12 The Birth of the Antichrist, p.187: 12:5. And she brought forth a man child. — The papacy.  — Z.'79-12-2.

http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/finishedmystery/fmr12.html