HollyW

Hi again, Lloyd, Let's take your illustration and in the light you and your father had at first, the stump looked like a bear. Did your father require that you believe it was a bear in order for you to be approved association? And did he require you to also teach others the stump was a bear on pain of shunning? Of course not, so there's the difference in reality that your illustration does not speak to. Obviously it was still too dark for either of you say the truth was that the stump was a bear. This is where 1 John 1:5 comes in because the light you were using was not from God: This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. " This verse could not have been written by someone peering into the darkness and seeing a bear where there was a stump. Look for a moment at the practical application of what Russell wrote. In the first light that he had, he looked at the faithful slave and saw 144,000 persons. Later he came to believe he had been looking at one person, himself, and so did all of his followers. This could be a case of adding more light and showing that it was just shadows that made the faithful slave appear to be 144,000 people when really there was just the one. For thirty years this was what everyone in the WTS was seeing, but then the next president of the WTS, Judge Rutherford, said the faithful slave was 144,000 person, not just one, in fact he said it did violence to the scriptures to exclude any of the 144,000. Do you see how the light went back to what it had been in the beginning? That means that if Russell's light had increased, Rutherford's light had to have dimmed or gone out. The current governing body of the WTS has in effect put out both the light Russell used to see just himself as the faithful slave and also put out the light Rutherford was using to see the faithful slave as all of the 144,000, and have turned on another light that shows just themselves as the faithful slave, and only when they are meeting as the faithful slave. If not turning light on and off the way Russell spoke against doing, it surely is showing a dimmer switch being used. You had felt I was misinterpreting your illustration but you offered it as a way to answer my question about being required to believe something that was not being taught when you were baptized. You illustrated something being seen in the darkness. 1 John 1:5 shows that this could not be from God because in Him there is no darkness at all. If the teaching that was changed was akin to what you pointed to as being seen in the darkness, can that teaching be said to be a Bible teaching that one must believe in order to be approved association?

Thanks for the reply, Eoin. I appreciate having your thoughts on this, though I'm not sure about the application of 1 Corinthians 9:17 to this subject. Since the WTS does require acceptance of all of its teachings in order for you to be approved for other JWs to associate with, is that what you mean by fulfilling the terms of your dedication, to be willing to change your beliefs if and when your religious leaders tell you to?

Hi John, I'm not trying to figure the number of those dead with those still alive, I'm trying to figure how there could possibly have been less than 144,000 Christians in nearly 1900 years, especially in view of the nearly 1 million Christian martyrs the WT article cites in just the first few centuries of Christianity's history.

You're probably thinking of one of the questions asked just before being baptized: "Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization?" I wonder if maybe this is the reason they believe they are required to change their beliefs, this association their baptism identifies them as having with the WTS? That would make sense, wouldn't it, that having been baptized into that relationship, they would expect to continue adapting their beliefs about what the Bible teaches based on what the WTS tells them it teaches, even if it cancels out what they believed when they were baptized.

Thank you for your reply, Lloyd. I know you probably worked hard on your illustration, but it seems to me to be out of harmony with what the Bible reveals at 1 John 1:5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. There's also this: James 1:17 Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow. Also, your illustration would not be in harmony with what Pastor Russell said about new light extinguishing older light in the February 1881 ZWT p.3: If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now: But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. "New light" never extinguishes older "light," but adds to it. If you were lighting up a building containing seven gas jets you would not extinguish one every time you lighted another, but would add one light to another and they would be in harmony and thus give increase of light: So is it with the light of truth; the true increase is by adding to, not by substituting one for another. http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/archi...er/w1881_E.pdf Last, but not least, your illustration doesn't reflect the reality of the WTS changes in teachings because you would have the light showing a bear at first, just as you've said, then the light showed a stump, also as you've said, but then the light was showing a bear again, and then a stump again, reflecting that they were going back to older light from time to time. Would that not be illustrative more of regression rather than progression? Ephesians 4:14 tells us, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine.

It's from Psalm 97:7, which speaks about worshiping God, and is applied to Christ at Hebrews 1:6,

This came up during a discussion of some of the recent changes in JW beliefs: I've often wondered, do you think that if a teaching has changed since you were baptized, you should still be required to believe it? If there's any interest in this, there are some follow-up questions I'd like to ask.

Thank you. I appreciate the heads-up.

Is there one Tree of Life which the 144K anointed JWs eat from and receive immortality, and another that everyone else has access to in order to continue to live? I wondered about this when its discussion came up in another thread: http://forum.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/16074-resurrection-during-the-thousand-year-reign/?page=3

I was reading this same story on another site: http://www.fathershands.com/push/ This PUSH idea has been widely used. There's a book about it, don't know if the cabin/rock story is in it, though. PUSH: Pray Until Something Happens: Divine Principles for Praying with Confidence, Discerning God's Will, and Blessing Others This revolutionary book will explain what God wants for and from us when we petition Him for his will to manifest “on Earth as it is in Heaven,” and how to understand the difference. Do you ever feel as if, despite your spirituality and faith, something significant is missing? Most teenagers and college students, as well as tens of millions of adults, are still striving to figure out the purpose and meaning of their lives. The natural struggle for faith in something intangible can be compounded by incorrect teachings and contradictory explanations of the workings of God in our lives. How does “free will” really work? What does it mean to ask for God’s will? When things happen in life, how do you really know whether that is God’s will? Is there really any point in praying for His will if we can’t influence it? These haunting personal questions became the genesis of PUSH as Matthesius sought answers. Now, he unpacks the powerful biblical truths he learned―the result of deep revelation from discovering God and constantly seeking to know him with all his heart. PUSH is about helping you discover God’s dream for your life so you become the blessing you were meant to be. It is about helping you truly embrace the power of prayer and understand what that means instead of simply treating it as a platitude you offer when someone is struggling. This book will instill confidence and promote vision. PUSH will stir you to take action, to remain vigilant, and Pray Until Something Happens.

Thank you, witness. I appreciate your insights as well. From the WT article I quoted, one of the teachings has already changed that is listed as being among those that are unique to JWs and must be accepted in order to be approved association for them: " That there is a “faithful and discreet slave” upon earth today ‘entrusted with all of Jesus’ earthly interests,’ which slave is associated with the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. " This underwent some revisions three years ago, both in the identity of who the faithful slave actually is and it not being yet "entrusted with all of Jesus' earthly interests". I've often wondered, do you think that if a teaching has changed since you were baptized, you should still be required to believe it?

Exactly right, Shiwii.

Neither you nor Eoin have posted anything that shows my statement misrepresents your beliefs at all. In fact, your posts have confirmed that my statement is true. I'm heartened that you are showing signs of reflecting on this important teaching.

The WTS leaves much to be desired in its handling of child abuse, but the story about vandalism of ancient temples by JWs is hardly believable. Are you sure it's true? However, before becoming a member of this church it would be wise to examine it's history, even as it says itself: We need to examine, not only what we personally believe, but also what is taught by any religious organization with which we may be associated. Are its teachings in full harmony with God’s Word, or are they based on the traditions of men? If we are lovers of the truth, there is nothing to fear from such an examination.

Thanks, Melinda, I'll take that as your agreement that I did not misrepresent JW beliefs, as Eoin mistaken said. And John 17:3 says, not that knowledge leads to everlasting life, but that KNOWING the Father AND the Son means eternal life. Knowing both the Father and the Son intimately, in our hearts, our minds, our souls, our very beings because they dwell in us by the Holy Spirit. (John 14:23)

Well, Russell's opinion on changing what was being taught does tend to cast JWs as being followers of men rather than followers of Jesus: His writings are online at these websites: http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/archi...er/w1881_E.pdf and http://www.ctrussell.us/ctrussell/ctrussell.nsf and http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/Zion's Watch Tower February 1881, p.3: If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now: But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. "New light" never extinguishes older "light," but adds to it. If you were lighting up a building containing seven gas jets you would not extinguish one every time you lighted another, but would add one light to another and they would be in harmony and thus give increase of light: So is it with the light of truth; the true increase is by adding to, not by substituting one for another. His writings are online at these websites: http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/archi...er/w1881_E.pdf and http://www.ctrussell.us/ctrussell/ctrussell.nsf and http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/

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?

It might be because of this: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2001563 8. What does attaining “oneness” in the faith and accurate knowledge require? 8 First, since “oneness” is to be observed, a mature Christian must be in unity and full harmony with fellow believers as far as faith and knowledge are concerned. He does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbor private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding. Rather, he has complete confidence in the truth as it is revealed by Jehovah God through his Son, Jesus Christ, and “the faithful and discreet slave.” By regularly taking in the spiritual food provided “at the proper time”—through Christian publications, meetings, assemblies, and conventions—we can be sure that we maintain “oneness” with fellow Christians in faith and knowledge.—Matthew 24:45.

Hi Melinda, Eoin said I had misrepresented his (and your) beliefs but he offered no evidence that I did. My sources for what I said are all on the WTS official website, jw.org. I'll provide them all because, as you and Eoin have said, let the readers judge for themselves, and I agree that they should. So the following is the evidence I based my statement... [Not so with the rest of JWs. Their faith in Jesus evidently doesn't give Jehovah the confidence to grant them immortality and he isn't so sure that they won't ever sin again.]...on: In addition to the above, you and Eoin confirmed your belief that not all death is done away with for everyone who is on earth. Hope this helps.

You don’t think that even in Matthew 24 it’s obvious the Master was going somewhere and that was why he put a servant in charge of his household? Matthew 24:45 [NASB] “Who then is the faithful and sensible slave whom his master put in charge of his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46“Blessed is that slave whom his master finds so doing when he comes. 47“Truly I say to you that he will put him in charge of all his possessions.48 But if that evil slave says in his heart, ‘My master is not coming for a long time,’ 49 and begins to beat his fellow slaves and eat and drink with drunkards; 50 the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour which he does not know, 51 and will cut him in pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. The WT chronology of this now is that verse 45 took place in 1919 rather than in 33 C.E. and none of the other verses have occurred yet. Of the six times 1914 appeared in the Greatest Man book, in the revised version of it, Jesus—The Way, the Truth, the Life---all of them have been removed. There’s only one occurrence of 1914 in the revised version: “In 1914, what became known as World War I broke out.” So has time finally run out for the importance of that date, as it did with 1874 and 1878? You say it won’t run out until 2114 but both generation groups will have died well before then. The first group has already passed away and the second group are no spring chickens.

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 them 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

Thanks, JWI. Reading thru your very fine post, I begin to see that maybe the reason why no one has come forward with an answer is because they don't know where Jesus went away to in 1919. It's difficult enough to follow all the changes made to Matthew 24:45 without adding in another parable about the talents. Several possibilities occur to me. One is that these recent changes (including the ones in the Greatest Man book) are a prelude to dropping the 1914 date altogether. Another is that perhaps a new understanding will come out that, just as Jesus didn't actually return to the earth in 1914 but turned his attention to the earth in 1914, so the Master in Matthew 24:42-51 didn't return to his household on earth but turned his attention to his household on earth. Anyway. You've said an interesting thing there......"two different groups of faithful slaves"....... Does this mean there are going to be two different groups being identified as the faithful and discreet slave?

The policy is there, maybe it's "unofficial". A mature Christian must be in unity and full harmony with fellow believers as far as faith and knowledge are concerned. He does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbor private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding. Rather, he has complete confidence in the truth as it is revealed by Jehovah God through his Son, Jesus Christ, and “the faithful and discreet slave.” By regularly taking in the spiritual food provided “at the proper time”—through Christian publications, meetings, assemblies, and conventions—we can be sure that we maintain “one-ness” with fellow Christians in faith and knowledge.—Matthew 24:45. (Watchtower, August 1, 2001, p. 14) There's a QFR in the April 1st, 1986 wt on p.31 that asks the question: Why have Jehovah’s Witnesses disfellowshipped (excommunication) for apostasy some who still profess belief in God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ? And the article goes on to say:"Approved association with Jehovah’s Witnesses requires accepting the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses. What do such beliefs include?That the great issue before humankind is the rightfulness of Jehovah’s sovereignty, which is why he has allowed wickedness so long. (Ezekiel 25:17) That Jesus Christ had a prehuman existence and is subordinate to his heavenly Father. (John 14:28) That there is a “faithful and discreet slave” upon earth today ‘entrusted with all of Jesus’ earthly interests,’ which slave is associated with the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. (Matthew 24:45-47) That 1914 marked the end of the Gentile Times and the establishment of the Kingdom of God in the heavens, as well as the time for Christ’s foretold presence. (Luke 21:7-24; Revelation 11:15–12:10) That only 144,000 Christians will receive the heavenly reward. (Revelation 14:1,*3) That Armageddon, referring to the battle of the great day of God the Almighty, is near. (Revelation 16:14,*16; 19:11-21) That it will be followed by Christ’s Millennial Reign, which will restore an earth-wide paradise. That the first to enjoy it will be the present “great crowd” of Jesus’ “other sheep.”—John 10:16; Revelation 7:9-17; 21:3,*4.Do we have Scriptural precedent for taking such a strict position? Indeed we do! Paul wrote about some in his day: “Their word will spread like gangrene. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of that number. These very men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some.” (2*Timothy 2:17,*18; see also Matthew 18:6.) There is nothing to indicate that these men did not believe in God, in the Bible, in Jesus’ sacrifice. Yet, on this one basic point, what they were teaching as to the time of the resurrection, Paul rightly branded them as brothers, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship."

That's probably true about the Aramaic Bible and 1 Corinthians 12:3; however, that might be a pretty good indication of who the translators are referring to in the scripture you had quoted at Romans 10:13 “For everyone who will call the name of THE LORD JEHOVAH shall be saved.” What I found interesting about 1 Corinthians 12:3 is that no one can say Jesus is Jehovah except by the Holy Spirit. Since "Lord" was often said in the place of "Jehovah" when they read it in the Bible, think of the meaning behind it. And how many translations have Romans 10:13 the way the Aramaic has it? I think you had said the DNKJ does. (I've had some correspondence with the fellow who did the DNKJ. Interesting character.) And the NWT probably does. But it presents a non-sequitur to be speaking about Jesus being Lord and then say to call on some other name. Look at the context itself: Romans 10:1 Brethren, my heart’s desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation. 2 For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3 For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. 5 For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness. 6 But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down), 7 or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).” 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes,resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not bedisappointed.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him;13 for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.” 14 How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? 15 How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!” 16 However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. The apostle Paul is writing about Jesus Christ being Lord, confessing him as Lord, and calling on the name of the Lord. Holly

Hi JD, That's the bottom line, isn't it. To maintain that the Greek mss of the NT were tampered with in such a way actually casts doubt on the reliability of the Bible itself. It's one thing to insist that the Bible manuscripts have unquestionably come down to us exactly as God had inspired them to be written; but it's something else again to say the NT manuscripts have been tampered with in “one of the saddest and most reprehensible” ways, by removing “Jehovah” from them……which brings up the question what else was tampered with. Bible reliability: Awake, 6/11/1972: Almighty God himself has unquestionably had a hand in seeing that his Word has been preserved so faithfully all these years. Any way one looks at it, the overall reliability of the Bible text is beyond question. Road to Paradise tract, pg. 3: HAS NOT THE HOLY BIBLE BEEN TAMPERED WITH? Almighty God could by no means allow such a thing……... When our present-day Bible is compared with such old manuscripts, it becomes quite clear that the text we have today is the same as that which God inspired his ancient servants to write. Insight-1 p.321: Copies—Hebrew or Greek—Soon after the originals were written, manuscript copies began to be produced. The copyists exercised great care to transmit the text accurately; the Masoretes counted even the letters that they copied. Insight-1 p.448: The available evidence convincingly demonstrates the remarkable accuracy and care that distinguished the copying of the Bible books, resulting in the preservation of their internal integrity. Insight-2 p.313: What assurance is there that the Bible has not been changed? Despite the care exercised by copyists of Bible manuscripts, a number of small scribal errors and alterations crept into the text. On the whole, these are insignificant and have no bearing on the Bible’s general integrity. They have been detected and corrected by means of careful scholastic collation or critical comparison of the many extant manuscripts and ancient versions. 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: Close to Jehovah, p.8: God’s personal name has been removed from countless Bible translations and replaced with titles, such as “Lord” and “God”. This is one of the saddest and most reprehensible things that has been done in the name of religion. Insight-2 p.10: Why, then, is the name absent from the extant manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures or so-called New Testament? Evidently because by the time those extant copies were made (from the third century C.E. onward) the original text of the writings of the apostles and disciples had been altered. Thus later copyists undoubtedly replaced the divine name in Tetragrammaton form with Ky′ri·os and The·os′. Insight-1 p.324: Eventually, in most translations of the Bible the divine name was completely replaced by expressions such as “Lord” and “God.” It is noteworthy that only the most vital name of all—Jehovah—was tampered with; other Bible names were not. Watchtower 10/1/1997 p.20: Show discernment in the selection of the Bible you use. (Proverbs 19:8) If a translation is not honest about the identity of God himself—removing his name from his inspired Word on whatever pretext—might the translators also have tampered with other parts of the Bible text? Holly