HollyW

21 minutes ago, Anna said:

 

I also answered this previously! I copy and paste it here so you don't have to go looking for it: "As for harboring private ideas, well, no one can stop private ideas, and no one except Jehovah needs to know about them. Again to what extend and what KIND of private ideas one harbors does have a baring on the maturity of the Christian. The operative idea is NOT "harboring". This suggests that on the contrary, we should be able to talk about them. And if these private ideas foster doubt, then we should definitely talk to a mature Christian about them".

Anna, if my pastor and the elders of my church were to tell me that I'm not to harbor any thoughts that are in disagreement with what they understand the Bible teaches, what would be your advice to me?

20 hours ago, Anna said:

There is a big difference between arriving at the same conclusions and having a fault finding attitude. I think you misunderstood me. All I was saying was that the Slave are just like us, with the same brain. However someone has to be in "charge", and dispense the spiritual food, despite the fact that others may be just as good at coming to logical conclusions, and maybe even sooner than the Slave.

I have read that highlighted quote a few times before. Wasn't it mentioned on one of the broadcasts a few months ago....I might be wrong. In any case, the point of it was not that they were reading the Bible, after all we are always being encouraged to have a Bible reading schedule of at least a chapter or few a day. But they were using "such" "Bible Reading" (note quotation marks) as an excuse to do what they really longed for, i.e. celebrating Christmas, Birthdays and  whatever else they found more appealing than what the Bible really teaches. Christendom has been doing a good job of that for centuries already, tickling peoples ears with falsehood disguised as Bible truth.

Anna, the spiritual food has already been dispensed---it's in the Bible.  There's nothing to add or take away from what has already been dispensed as food in due season.  The WTS has become an entity almost with a life of its own and with a will to survive, and it is dependent on its Word being taken as the Word of God (that's why it can say to listen to what it says as though you are listening to the voice of God).  JW Insider has posted an important point about the WTS claim to having heavenly authority from Jehovah and Jesus bestowed on it in 1919.  The extent to which JWs adhere to this concept is evident in the governing body being able to change what they had been teaching for decades about 1919 and still have JWs follow them.  

For decades they had presumed an appointment that they now admit was not given to them (over all the Master's belongings), they changed the identity of who the faithful slave is, they have changed their teaching about the generation a number of times, and what I posted about them being critical of JWs who want to study the Bible exclusively and not rely on WTS publications is not a new idea.  Russell said the same thing about his Millennial Dawn series (Studies in the Scriptures).  He even went so far as to say that reading them exclusively was all that was needed and those who put them aside to read just the Bible soon went into what he called "darkness."

So instead of needing the Bible and the Holy Spirit, JWs need the WTS and its publications, which assures the WTS of its own importance and existence.

Look again at what the 1981 WT says:

They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such ‘Bible reading,’ they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom’s clergy were teaching 100 years ago, and some have even returned to celebrating Christendom’s festivals again, such as the Roman Saturnalia of December 25!

As you mentioned, the point was not that they were reading the Bible, the point was that they were reading the Bible exclusively, apart from the WTS publications.

I don't know what you think the quote marks mean nor where you get the idea that it's saying they were longing to believe in the Trinity and celebrate Christmas. It's not saying that at all, but it is saying that by reading the Bible exclusively they came to believe what Christendom has been teaching from the Bible for centuries.  In other words, don't read the Bible alone or you'll start believing what Christians believe!

7 hours ago, Anna said:

I believe any JW who knows their Bible can come to the same conclusions as the GB,

Well, the GB says that can't happen without them and their publications.  They actually say that if a JW were to rely on just the Bible alone, they would believe in the Trinity, hell-fire, the immortality of the soul, and start celebrating Christmas.  Sounds crazy, doesn't it, so let me give you the quote from them and see what you think:

JW Insider can probably give you the history about the JWs who were being targeted in this WT.

8 hours ago, Anna said:

Yes, the statement is false if you want to get technical.  But nobody will really pay much attention to it because it's not false in a sense where it would have a negative impact or become a stumbling block to anyone I'm sure.  I am trying to look at it from Jehovah's point of view (from what we know from the scriptures about his views). Would Jehovah find that statement offensive? Perhaps somebody should call Bethel and point the discrepancy out, or ask why it was stated this way. It would be interesting to learn the answer.....

Bethel already knows it's false, you posted the proof of it from the same book, and from what JW Insider has posted it can be seen why they would state it the way they did---they want their followers to have faith in them even when they're wrong.  Just as you've surmised, JWs aren't going to care much that it's a false statement, even if they ever even realize it's false.  Most will accept it as being true. Others may write it off as just a human error.  Still others may decide Jehovah had a good reason to let them make a statement they know is false.

Will it cast doubt on whether Jehovah and Jesus were guiding them?  I'm sure JWs who do recognize it as being false will give the same answer the governing body gave on page 50: "Not at all!"

On 9/18/2016 at 3:49 PM, Jay Witness said:

JW's use the term "undeserved kindness" while the rest of the christian world generally uses the term "grace".

Is there a difference?

I read this recently in a Christian book catalog and wanted to share it here:

Grace -- More than we deserve, Greater than we imagine.

5 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

Actually when I first saw your question I thought of the birth of the kingdom in heaven and I also thought about the great tribulation

Will you be changing your answer then to that of the 'faithful slave's' answer from the book?

Anyone else who has placed it?

37 minutes ago, ThePraeceptor said:

Assumptions as usual...

The answer is "you don't need to know, it doesn't concern you". 

Thanks Praec.  So you haven't placed it yet.

Anyone else who has placed it?

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Nothing wrong with asking the question, just because the answer is wrong.

If I'm conducting, it's merely: "OK. This paragraph has a very interesting question next to it: . . . [read question] . . . "

And maybe follow up with, "Does anyone believe there's an even greater event than this.....from the Bible, not the paragraph.....an event that caused rejoicing and singing in heaven" (as Melinda pointed out) (Read Luke 2:10-14).

Going from "phone to foam" --- cute.  

On 9/27/2016 at 6:39 AM, HollyW said:

Have you placed the brochure "Return to Jehovah" with an inactive JW?   

I take it the answer so far is: No.

5 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

No!

[speaking only for myself, of course!]

Thanks (that was fast!!)...... will your answer be the same during the study when question 1,2 is asked?  

On 9/16/2016 at 6:31 AM, HollyW said:

What event do Jehovah's Witnesses believe is the greatest event ever to occur in the history of the world?

On 9/16/2016 at 2:20 PM, Melinda Mills said:

Jehovah gave his son by sending him to earth to die as a ransom for mankind.

See what the angels said about the event: (Luke 2:10-14) . . .. 11 For today there was born to you in David’s city a savior, who is Christ the Lord. 12 And this is a sign for you: You will find an infant wrapped in strips of cloth and lying in a manger.” 13 Suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly army, praising God and saying: 14 “Glory in the heights above to God, and on earth peace among men of goodwill.”  

 

On 9/16/2016 at 5:26 PM, JW Insider said:

Even if we are speaking only of the history of the world, and therefore focusing on interaction with humans, I would include not just Jesus birth, but his life.

In view of what you are studying in "God's Kingdom Rules" this week.........

......you can see why I was pleasantly surprised by your replies.

On 9/17/2016 at 7:53 AM, HollyW said:

While I do agree with both you and Melinda, I was expecting a much different answer for the one event JWs believe is the greatest event ever to occur in the history of the world.  I was not expecting you would say Jesus' birth or death so it was a pleasant surprise to find the replies on here tending toward those events.

Do either of you feel you should revise your initial reply?

On 9/24/2016 at 11:31 AM, Melinda Mills said:

Thanks for letting me know. However, I have to digest it first.

How's it going so far?  

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But the real answer to your question is that they never would and never will.

[,,,,,,]

But I'm guessing that the real question is whether we already treat the Governing Body as if they were infallible.

Thank you!  

From the quotes in my OP, it's obvious that the men on the GB don't have to ever claim they are infallible because JWs already treat them as though they are---and that's because they've been told to (as the quoted material shows).  

In essence, then, the leaders of the WTS have accorded themselves the advantages of being infallible while skirting the responsibilities that come with it.  

Bottom line: If the men on the Governing Body were to come right out and say they are infallible, they would not lay claim to anything different than what they've already laid claim to.  In short: nothing would change for JWs.

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I think that's all I'm going say on the idea that they were supposedly beginning to discern that 1914 was the beginning of Christ's presence all the back in the year 1914. Anything is possible, but it still doesn't ring true for me. 

Thank you for all your research, JW Insider.  It becomes more and more obvious that the new book being studied, "God's Kingdom Rules", is an attempt to re-write the history of the WTS and JWs would do well to do their own research into the WTS own publications ---- or, as someone mentioned, they can remove themselves to the bathroom during the study and just tune it out. 

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

*** Watchtower, November 1, 1931, p. 376 ***

Who on earth understood prior to 1918 that Zion is God's organization and gives birth to the kingdom and to her children? The fact that no one on earth did so understand prior to the Lord's coming to his temple [in 1918] is proof that it was not God's due time for them to understand. Who understood prior thereto about Satan's organization, the battle in heaven, and the casting of Satan out of heaven?  Manifestly no one could understand these things until the temple of God was open.

*** end of quote ***

Compare that with pages 28-29 in  "God's Kingdom Rules" where it says the Bible Students were being prepared for the birth of the Kingdom by Russell and his associates way before 1914.  And all along they had been saying the birth of the kingdom in Revelation chapter 12 was the birth of the Antichrist, yet they herald this event as "the greatest event ever to occur in the history of the world" [p.13].  It was also printed up as such in their 1914 book, "The Finished Mystery", and they said Michael in that chapter was the Catholic Pope in Rome.  The truth is Russell was preparing them only for failure and he had been tricked into going against what the Bible says about not knowing the time of Jesus' second coming.

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

*** Watchtower, October 1, 1930, p.291 ***

Understanding that the ''day of Christ'' began when Jesus came to the temple of God, in 1918, it appears that the rebellion must precede that day. The beginning of the falling away or rebellion against God's organization would also mark the beginning of the disclosure of the ''man of sin'', even though none of God's children then on earth understood the matter. The Revelation which God gave to Jesus Christ to show to his "servant" began to be disclosed particularly from 1914 forward, but none of God's children on earth had an understanding thereof for fifteen years or more thereafter. They did see the evidence of things coming to pass which mark a fulfilment of Revelation, but they did not discern the meaning thereof. Likewise the faithful have for some years seen the manifestation of lawlessness and now begin to discern the meaning of the term the "man of sin".

*** end of quote ***

Uh-oh. 

The January 15, 2014 WT says: "The first group was on hand in 1914, and they readily discerned the sign of Christ’s presence in that year."  

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

 

Well, I'm not sure of the specific context of your quote, but someone else is reported as saying to him “I am glad to see you turn the hose on hell and put out the fire.”

Was that recently?

1 hour ago, JaniceM said:

I'm sorry, but I did not see where it mentions you must believe in the year 1914 in order to receive salvation but to be associated as one of Jehovah's Witnesses:

Well, the article mentions this about 1914:

They say rejecting even just one of their teachings is apostasy.......iow, no salvation.

And, the teachings listed in the article aren't the only ones because it says the "entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses."

Anyway, we seem to have gotten off the topic in my OP.  I had wanted to ask you about the scriptures I posted, especially the passage in 1 Thessalonians 4.  Does it seem to you to be talking about two different events, one that happens immediately and then one that takes place over a very large stretch of time?

....this was said: "We thank you Brother C.T. Russell for showing us the TRUTH." 

This brings so many questions to mind. 

First of all, how is this not a prayer?

How is it not creature worship?

Why have JWs rejected most of what Russell taught as "the truth" and yet thank him for showing them the truth?

Any ideas?

 Moving on with the book, "God's Kingdom Rules!", on page 6 it describes the kingdom of God as "the heavenly Messianic government made up of Christ Jesus and his 144,000 corulers". 

How do JWs see and enter the kingdom of God in accordance with Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter." And yet not be born again as in John 3:3,5?

24 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Bye for now.  

LOL, of all the things to repeat.   'Bye, Eoin.

58 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Thanks for being frank @HollyW,  and for indicating your group to include @JWInsider and @Anna along with @AnnOMaly, something I was not aware of.

I understand where you are coming from now. 

Well, you had asked who else had been telling you that statement on page 20 was wrong and that's why I named them.  Is that how you understood me?  I also referenced a cartoon that you posted.

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

I have already expressed my understanding of  what "present in kingly power" means to me in connection with Christ on other threads, probably with participation of others in your group, so I will not repeat here.

Well, I wish you had repeated it here because I don't ever get around to reading all the posts on here.  Maybe I should be following your posts more closely.   I'll see if I can find it with a search of some sort.  What if I had just answered No to your question, would you have followed up to see if we were talking about the same thing?

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

I can see there's no way we can actually reconcile our viewpoints on this particular thread, as the relationship of Christ's Kingdom to the year 1914 is a fundamental element. I have to tell you that my interest in this matter actually preceded, and was a factor leading to, my association with Jehovah's Witnesses.

I'm sure this is something I don't have to point out, but your teaching about 1914 could change.  In fact, it could be under the delete button as we speak.

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

I note the subject regarding Christ and the year 1914 is the subject of other discussions on this forum so I will be tracking them with interest. 

Perhaps we'll run into each other on some of those.

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Anyway, our exchange was interesting and illuminating,  .

Same here.

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

and gave me an impetus to look through every issue of ZWT 1879 to 1914, which was a long overdue excercise for me.

My prayers have been answered then.  Wish we could do it together.  Do you have them readily available?