1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

My Dad used to take me deer hunting when I was a teenager.  We'd go out when it was dark and be in a deer stand in a tree as the light began to come up.  At first you could make out precious little, but as the light slowly intensified, the tree stump that may have initially looked like a sleeping bear, became more easily identifiable.  Once the morning had broken, much more became clear.  Now if someone had asked me at that point if I felt I was required to believe that what I had thought was a bear really was a tree stump, the question would make no sense.  Of course, it was a tree stump.  Why would someone ask a person was required to believe it was tree stump when that was so obviously clear?

But what about the seedling that was growing out of the ground 30 yards away?  Well, at first, that was not even visible when  there was little light.  But then at mid-morning, one could see the seedling, but still it was unclear exactly what it was.  Likely a relative of a nearby plant or tree.  But upon returning to the sight a while later and doing some in research into the leaf shape, etc, we might come to some pretty good conclusions.  But even then, the passage of time made the identification more discernible. 

Of course, in some situations, identification of the plant could have been mistaken or need to be altered if one realized that there could have been a slight error at the initial or subsequent examinations.  

Likewise, JW's understanding of the scriptures continues to grow and mature.

This is one of the great advantage that Jehovah's Witnesses have over most other religions.  It is their willingness to change or adjust based on new insights or investigations.  That is in fact how science works (or at  least is supposed to).  How silly it would be to be required to, for instance, be bound to the beliefs astronomers had back in the 1900's.  As Hubble peers into space and other bits and pieces of information are discerned, our knowledge of the stars and space grows.  Likewise with the scriptures.  

The question as to whether we are required to believe the new insights might be best rephrased, "Does one want to progress in knowledge or not?"

By way of contrast, it is most apparent that most churches are mired in the doctrine of the third - sixth centuries. They cling to, for instance, the Athanasian Creed.  It's as if they are required to believe that the tree stump is really a bear!

Now as to which camp one chooses to belong, that is a choice for each individual.  But as for me and my household, we choose continual progress.

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. 

On 4/7/2016 at 6:42 PM, Jesus.defender said:

If the NWT is correct in saying that Jesus is Michael the Archangel, then why would God command the angels to worship a fellow created angel (in Hebrews 1:6)? 
 

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.

1 hour ago, The Librarian said:

Please start a new thread.

The original question is at the top of this thread.

You can always "tag" the other person with the @ symbol @HollyW 

 

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

Quote

On 7/2/2016 at 1:13 AM, Eoin Joyce said:

 Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden to stop them from eating from the tree of life. There is no mention of them eating from this tree prior to sinning or that they even knew of its existence. So, whilst perfect and not subject to sin and its consequence death, they still had not been granted everlasting life by Jehovah by being permitted to eat from that tree.

On 6/15/2016 at 5:41 PM, Shiwiii said:

I Like This story

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.

On 7/1/2016 at 10:13 AM, Witness said:

I have appreciated your thoughts, Holly.  Just as Hymenaeus and Philetus preached that the “resurrection has already occurred” the warning given in 2 Thess. 2:1-4tells us to equally be on be on guard…

 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters,  not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come.  Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.  He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

Again, those who prophesy such words influence “brothers and sisters” in faith.  Yet these are ones who “have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge”  Rom 10:2

By subjecting oneself to the comfort and securitysuch a false belief may provide, Christ warns, “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.”  Rev 16:15

It seems apparent that by accepting official doctrine that goes beyond scripture is accepting man's philosophy over the inspired scripture, which is sufficient enough for our spiritual heath. 2 Tim 3:16  

"So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him, rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.  See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, ("unique to Jehovah's Witness"), which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world  rather than on Christ."  Col 2:6-8

http://4womaninthewilderness.blogspot.com/2013/05/mark-of-beast.html

 

 

 

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?

19 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

Melinda, these things we research are from your organization, and not from outside sources. You are correct in this, however we bring these things up so that you and others can research them too. If there is another understanding, other than what we observe, by all means provide the information or link to clarify. You see, we are taking what the wt says and comparing it to scripture if it fits great but if not our question is why? 

I took the liberty to include Holly in my comment, and if I misrepresent her I expect her to correct me.

Exactly right, Shiwii.

On 7/2/2016 at 2:40 AM, Melinda Mills said:

Hi Holly, I endorse the statements of Eion above.  I don't have time now to go into detail. I am dressing now to attend the convention.

 

Eion, the following statement is Holly's and not mine. "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 ".

What I was glad to see is that Holly and Shiwii have the ability to research the online research to get opinions from the Watchtower but I don't think they are getting the correct understanding still from what they are quoting.  Thanks for answering.

 

Kind regards and Agape

 

 

Melinda

 

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. 

1 hour ago, Melinda Mills said:

Yes, it mentioned the points we made in our own words. Thanks for researching it. Hope you gained something from it as well.  It is good to do research, as it helps us to learn more and know the mind of Jehovah. Jesus said knowledge leads to everlasting life. John 17:3.

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)

6 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

and again, doctrines of MEN instead of from God.

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?

47 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

What is the point of being on a forum if there is no personal opinion to present? I mean to regurgitate text from any source, without personal input,  does nothing to foster a discussion.  Isn't that what a forum is about? To foster discussion? 

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.

1 hour ago, Melinda Mills said:

Seems you all know where to find Watchtower resources. Good of you to quote them as well. As the brother said, let the readers be the judge of the information.

Preparing for spiritual feast this weekend at the regional/inter-island convention themed, "Remain Loyal to Jehovah" - 1-3 July.

Agape

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:

Quote

 

Insight Vol. 1, Holiness The state or character of being holy. Holiness means “religious cleanness or purity; sacredness.” http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002055

[ibid p.1130] Christian Holiness. The Leader of Christians, the Son of God, when born as a human, was holy (Lu 1:35), and he maintained that sanctification, or holiness, throughout his earthly life. (Joh 17:19; Ac 4:27; Heb 7:26) This holiness was thorough, perfect, filling his every thought, word, and action. By maintaining his holiness even to a sacrificial death, he made it possible for others to attain holiness. Consequently, those called to be his footstep followers are called with “a holy calling.” (2Ti 1:9) They become Jehovah’s anointed ones, the spiritual brothers of Jesus Christ, and are called “holy ones” or “saints.” (Ro 15:26; Eph 1:1; Php 4:21; compare KJ.) They receive holiness by faith in the ransom sacrifice of Christ. (Php 3:8, 9; 1Jo 1:7) Holiness, then, does not inhere in them, or belong to them, through their own merit, but it comes to them through Jesus Christ.—Ro 3:23-26. http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002055 

[ibid, Immortality, p.1189-1190] Kingdom Heirs Granted Immortality. For the anointed Christians called to reign with Christ in the heavens (1Pe 1:3, 4), the promise is that they share with Christ in the likeness of his resurrection. (Ro 6:5) Thus, as in the case of their Lord and Head, the anointed members of the Christian congregation who die faithful receive a resurrection to immortal spirit life, so that “this which is mortal puts on immortality.” (1Co 15:50-54) As with Jesus, immortality in their case does not mean simply everlasting life, or mere freedom from death. That they, too, are granted “the power of an indestructible life” as fellow heirs with Christ is seen from the apostle Paul’s association of incorruptibility with the immortality they attain. (1Co 15:42-49) Over them “the second death has no authority.”—Re 20:6; See INCORRUPTION.

 

 

This grant of immortality to the Kingdom heirs is all the more remarkable, in view of the fact that even God’s angels are shown to be mortal, despite their possessing spirit bodies, not carnal ones. Angelic mortality is evident in view of the judgment of death entered against the spirit son who became God’s Adversary, or Satan, and also against those other angels who followed that satanic course and “did not keep their original position but forsook their own proper dwelling place.” (Jude 6; Mt 25:41; Re 20:10, 14) So the grant of “indestructible life” (Heb 7:16) or “indissoluble life” to those Christians who gain the privilege of reigning with God’s Son in the heavenly Kingdom marvelously demonstrates God’s confidence in them.—See HEAVEN (The way to heavenly life); LIFE  http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002155

 

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2006607 QFR answers the question: After the final test at the end of the Millennium, will it be possible for humans to sin and die?

 

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.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

To be clear, I was saying that your question is good because it raised points about some chronological inconsistencies in our current explanations of (four) otherwise consistently-themed parables. I brought up the "talents" parable because the Watchtower brought it up, too, as part of the presentation about how these parables are related, but addressed to different groups. It's the idea that they are given to different groups that drives the differences in the chronology attached to each of them.

Also it's the "talents" parable that specifically mentions Jesus "going away." 

However, no one is claiming that Jesus went away anywhere in 1919. In all cases Jesus "went away" in 33 C.E. (just after his resurrection) which most Christian-oriented denominations will agree on. The Watchtower agrees, too.

The Watchtower freely admits that all these parables (4 of them) are related, but gives no reason why some are applied to one group of people and some applied to another. (With one exception.) In only one case is a new reason "hinted at" for applying one of those parables to a different group. Note:

*** w15 3/15 pp. 19-20 par. 3 Learn From the Illustration of the Talents ***
3 The parable of the talents is one of four related illustrations recorded at Matthew 24:45 to 25:46. The other three—about the faithful and discreet slave, the ten virgins, and the sheep and the goats—are also part of Jesus’ answer to the question about the sign of his presence. In all four illustrations, Jesus highlights traits that would distinguish his true followers in these last days. The illustrations about the slave, the virgins, and the talents are directed to his anointed followers. In the illustration involving the faithful slave, Jesus highlights the need for the small group of anointed ones entrusted with feeding his domestics during the last days to be faithful and discreet. In the parable of the virgins, Jesus stresses that all his anointed followers would need to be prepared and to be vigilant, knowing that Jesus is coming but not knowing the day or the hour. In the parable of the talents, Jesus shows that the anointed would need to be diligent in carrying out their Christian responsibilities. Jesus directs the final illustration, the parable of the sheep and the goats, to those with an earthly hope. He emphasizes that they would have to be loyal and give full support to Jesus’ anointed brothers on earth.* Let us now focus on the illustration of the talents.

The sentence containing: "they would have to be loyal and give full support to Jesus' anointed brothers on earth" is followed by a footnote that says:

The identity of the faithful and discreet slave is discussed in The Watchtower, July 15, 2013, pages 21-22, paragraphs 8-10. The identity of the virgins is explained in the preceding article in this magazine. The illustration of the sheep and the goats is explained in The Watchtower, October 15, 1995, pages 23-28, and in the article following this one in this magazine.

In other words, the "sheep" in the parable of the sheep and goats are thought to be the "other sheep" not sheep of the "little flock" because the parable speaks of the sheep doing good to Christ's "brothers" (Matthew 25:40) . . .‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’ In the last days, this is explained to be loyalty and full support to the remnant of the anointed, meaning especially the "Governing Body." 

Because there was some reasoning given for identifying the addressees of one parable, I'm assuming that there might also be some reasoning behind the identification for the other parables, but that it was not yet given.

Maybe. I don't see enough evidence for this. Maybe you have seen more.

I believe the new explanation of "this generation" that will not pass away can now allow for keeping 1914 until nearly 2114, another 100 years in the future. Over time, the problem becomes convincing others of the relevance of a date that no one really remembers. Of course, the end could also come any time between now and then which would provide a full resolution to that problem.

There already are two different groups identified as being "faithful slave(s)." One group is the class of "faithful slave" of the talents parable that includes all the anointed since 33 C.E. who have taken part in making disciples. The other group is the "Governing Body" since 1919 who are identified as the class of "faithful slave(s)" who have been providing the domestics with food at the proper time. Of course, technically, there is a third class of "faithful slave(s)" because Paul evidently applied the expression in general to all Christians when he said:

(1 Corinthians 4:2) . . . Besides, in this case, what is looked for in stewards is for a man to be found faithful.

Paul's traveling companion, Luke, refers to the "faithful and discreet slave" as the "faithful steward." (NWT)

(Luke 12:42) . . .“Who really is the faithful steward, the discreet one, whom his master will appoint over his body of attendants to keep giving them their measure of food supplies at the proper time?

 

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

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

It's a good question. I would agree that the original reason for starting that the FDS was appointed in 33 CE was exactly as you have stated. Jesus in a very similar parable of the silver "talents" (Luke 19:11-27, and Matthew 25:14-30) said that he was going away in order to secure a kingdom. (And we explain this as having taken place when Jesus ascended to heaven in 33 CE.)

In that parable of the talents he said that, while the master as away, some would be faithful slaves with respect to their current appointment, and some would be unfaithful. When the master returned, the faithful ones would be appointed over something greater, but the unfaithful would lose everything. 

This is almost parallel to Matthew 24:45-51, where the faithful slave is given an assignment to handle while the master was away. When the master got back the faithful slave would be appointed over something greater. The unfaithful would lose everything. In fact, Luke 12:41-49 is Luke's version of the FDS parable in Matthew 24:45, and it is even a more exact parallel to the Luke 19 parable, where there are different levels of reward/punishment in each.

Both of them (FDS & talents) could be called "the parable of the faithful slave." But really they about both the "faithful and the unfaithful slave."

In both parables, per our latest explanation, Jesus goes away in 33 CE. In both cases the judging is now considered to be future, when he arrives for judgment day. Just because we used to teach that the judgment began in 1918 (then 1919) doesn't mean that Jesus had gone at some time other than 33 CE. Now we teach that the judgment is future, even though we once believed that this judgment that allowed the appointment over all the belongings was in 1918/9. That was true of both parables:

*** w87 8/1 p. 16 par. 5 Christ’s Active Leadership Today ***
The modern history of God’s people shows that this time of accounting came in 1918-19. The parable of the talents illustrates how the Master would settle accounts with the remnant of his anointed slaves.

The only "discrepancy" is that the Watchtower has changed the timing of the appointment in Matthew 24 (and therefore Luke 12) for the faithful slave to begin in 1919, but has not changed the appointment for the faithful slave in Luke 19. The faithful slave of Luke 19 still begins the appointment in 33 CE, and is still considered to be the entire "little flock." The FDS change that was made in 2013 now says that the FDS was appointed in 1919 instead of the older explanation: 33 CE. And the change now says that it's the Governing Body since 1919 instead of the older explanation: the "little flock" since 33 CE. 

The discrepancy this created in 2013 was partly addressed in the Watchtower in 2015. Note that the 33 CE date doesn't change, however:

*** w89 10/1 p. 8 The Illustration of the Minas ***
The slave with ten minas pictures a class, or group, of disciples from Pentecost 33 C.E. until now that includes the apostles.

*** w15 3/15 pp. 20-21 pars. 6-8 Learn From the Illustration of the Talents ***
Hence, shortly after his resurrection and before his ascension to heaven, he gave his disciples the weighty commission: “Go, therefore, and make disciples.” (Matt. 28:18-20) Jesus thus entrusted them with a precious treasure, the Christian ministry.—2 Cor. 4:7.
7 What, then, may we conclude? When giving his followers the commission to make disciples, Jesus was, in effect, committing to them “his belongings”—his talents. (Matt. 25:14) Put simply, the talents refer to the responsibility to preach and make disciples.
8 The parable of the talents reveals that the master gave to one slave five talents, to another two, and to still another just one. (Matt. 25:15) Although each slave received a different number, the master expected all of them to be diligent in using the talents, that is, in serving to the best of their ability in the ministry. (Matt. 22:37; Col. 3:23) In the first century, starting at Pentecost 33 C.E., Christ’s followers began doing business with the talents.

The 33 CE date doesn't change because we currently treat the illustration of the talents in Matthew 25 (Luke 19) as if it is to a different audience than the parallel illustration of the "FDS" in Matthew 24 (Luke 12).

But the judgment that used to be in the past for both parables, is now future for both parables:

*** w15 3/15 p. 23 par. 11 Learn From the Illustration of the Talents ***
Hence, when Jesus said that “the master of those slaves came and settled accounts,” he was evidently referring to the time when he will come to execute judgment at the end of this system.

The question about why one of these is important to 1919 and one of them is not, is still a good question. The only explanation so far is that they are simply addressing two different groups of faithful slaves - and that we need not be concerned about anything specific regarding the fulfillment for the unfaithful slaves.

So the question is good because it makes us think about why we put different dates on one illustration and not the other. I don't think we've given a reason for that yet, but if and when the closeness of the parallels among the related parables are discussed, I would think that a further explanation should also be forthcoming.

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?

On 6/15/2016 at 11:05 AM, JaniceM said:

 

If there's an official policy that says we have to agree with every interpretation of scripture, I would like to see it.  However, I'm in a bit of wonderment and awe as to the obsession with everything the society does and says.  Most churches I went to, you had to abide by their rules, policy or what they believed.  If one church said no pants, we could only wear dresses.  However if the society said men wear ties, it's a major crime against humanity. (smile)

 

 

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."

3 hours ago, JaniceM said:

Hi Holly,

Thank you.  This was quite an interesting translation.  I did check several other translations as well.  It appears only the Aramaic Bible included the name Jehovah. 

The Divine Name King James Bible which restores God's name throughout its translation rendered 1 Cor 12:3:  "Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."

From my research, wording is different from Bible to Bible, and each one may render some verses completely different from the majority of Bibles.  This is not an unusual occurrence from Bible to Bible.  However, scrutiny is directed more toward the NWT.

I have not responded to the thread in a couple of weeks due to work and being busy with other things.  It was also taxing on my time to go around in circles.  Misery does love company as they say.  However, I don't mind dialogue as long as it's not too mean-spirited and we can actually learn something.  I am thankful you increased my knowledge and will add it to my reference of information.

You please have a good day.

Janice

 

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

On 4/28/2016 at 4:56 PM, Jesus.defender said:

If the name Jehovah is so important, then why is it never used in the entire Greek New Testament? If men edited out the name of God, "YHWH" when they copied the New Testament, as only the Watchtower organization claims, then how can we have any confidence in any of the New Testament? Should we discard the New Testament or the Watchtower organization as unreliable?
 

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

2 hours ago, JaniceM said:

 

Hi again Holly,

There are many responses here so due to time restrictions, this may be my last comment or response.

I understand God's name is not Lord or God, so the initials/consonant/YHWH Tetragram was replaced with LORD/Lord or GOD/God by scribes in the ancient manuscripts that we have.  God or Lord are just titles for there are many Lords/lords and Gods/gods.  Most English Bibles do not include God's name however, the old KJV Bible included God's name maybe in about four (4) scriptures.  However, when the NKJV Bible was published it completed removed God's name from even those four (4) verses.  See below:

Psalm 83:18  King James Version (KJV) That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth.

Psalm 83:18  New King James Version (NKJV) That they may know that You, whose name alone is the Lord, Are the Most High over all the earth.

 

There was not solid proof God's name was included in the the OT until the 20th century with new discoveries of ancient fragments or manuscripts and later the dead sea scrolls.  We face the same problem with the NT whereby some writing do say the Divine Name was included whereas their is no solid proof to date. 

 

I think I have covered the other issue of preaching in Jesus' name, etc. in previous posts, so you may find my answer there.  I will try to read your future posts, however, I may not be able to respond.

Thanks, Janice, I appreciate your reply.  It is a very busy world we live in.

I just want to call your attention to this statement that you made above:  "I understand God's name is not Lord or God, so the initials/consonant/YHWH Tetragram was replaced with LORD/Lord or GOD/God by scribes in the ancient manuscripts that we have."

If you're saying this about the ancient OT Hebrew manuscripts, it just isn't true.  The Tetragram is still there in the Hebrew.  It had not been removed from the OT manuscripts at all.

If you're saying this about the NT manuscripts, there is no evidence that the Tetragram was ever in them nor ever removed from them.

If I've misunderstood what you mean, please let me know.

Thank you.

Holly

On 4/15/2016 at 5:26 PM, JaniceM said:

 

God's name appeared originally in the Bible almost 7,000 times, so I don't think it was God's decision for His name not to be spoken or excluded from the Bible or pronounced only as Elohim/God. 

 

I recall speaking to some Jews and they often refer to God as "The Name" ("haShem").  They will also write G-d, instead of God.  Maybe they felt God's name was too sacred to be spoken or disrespectful to be mispronounced, however, I think it's very disrespectful not to acknowledge God's name or deny even the correct spelling and title of God.  We do have a short form of God's name in scripture, Yah/Jah.  Despite their best objective not to say God's name or keep it hidden, God's name is not entirely lost as they fail to realize, many Jewish names include this short form or sound which they speak regularly: 

 

(Isa'iah) [Salvation of Jehovah]; (Jeremi'ah) [possibly, Jehovah Exalts; or, Jehovah Loosens [likely from the womb]]; (Obadi'ah) [Servant of Jehovah]; (Zephani'ah) [Jehovah Has Concealed (Treasured Up)]; (Zechari'ah) [Jehovah Has Remembered]; Jesus (Greek, I.e.sous’; Hebrew, Jeshua, (Yeshua); Jehoshua (Yehoshua) meaning “Salvation [or Help] of Jah (Yah) [Jehovah/Yehovah].”  (Hal·le·lu jah).

Hi again, Janice.  I'm still working my way thru this thread and I notice that you've said several times that God's name has been removed from the OT.  That's simply not true.  Any of the Hebrew manuscripts our English Bibles are translated from still have God's name in them, the YHWH Tetragram.  It is brought into English variously as LORD, GOD, Yahweh, and Jehovah, depending on the Bible.   

But this is not true of any of the Greek manuscripts of the NT.  It's goes beyond reasonable to believe that the Hebrew characters for God's name, YHWH, was originally in the NT and was removed from more than 5,000 copies in exactly 237 places.  However, if it had been there, would it have been read as "Lord" (Adonai in Hebrew; Kyrios in Greek)?

Also, the name the disciples and early Christians preached in was not "Jehovah".  They were beaten and imprisoned for preaching in the name of Jesus and were told to stop preaching in his name.

Acts 4:18  And when they had summoned them, they commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. 19But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; 20for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.” 

On 4/18/2016 at 1:29 PM, JaniceM said:

Hi Jay,

Thank you for your response. 

The holy scriptures are from God, not men, which I'm sure we can both agree. 

Romans 10:13  Aramaic Bible in Plain English - “For everyone who will call the name of THE LORD JEHOVAH shall be saved.”

 

Hi Janice, 

Interesting quote from the Aramaic Bible.  I'm new and haven't read all the posts in this thread yet, so please forgive me if this has already been mentioned.

In that same Bible (Aramaic Bible in Plain English), there's this at 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.

Not sure if you were aware of this or not.

Holly

On 6/14/2016 at 6:00 PM, Shiwiii said:

So not many jws know that the society has excluded Jesus from being their mediator.  Interesting, but they have to have a mediator,  right? I mean, how could a regular jw have access to God otherwise?

JWs don't look to Jesus as their mediator because he's the mediator of the new covenant and they've been told they are not in that covenant, only 144K people are in it and those people began to be numbered from the 1st century, so one can't help but think there aren't that many openings left.  However, they do look to Jesus as their high priest---which is kind of odd since they don't consider that they are the Israel of God (again only the 144K are) and surely the high priest ministered only to Israel.  But anyway, they also believe Jesus will die as their high priest by the end of the 1,000 years (despite Hebrew 7:25), and thereafter they will continue to live based on their own merit.

Hebrews 7:25 Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.

Holly