HollyW

He proved that the pen is mightier than the sword by writing the great crowd out of heaven and shutting the door in their faces without even a struggle or a whimper. I've read there was just a hushed silence. Even Michael didn't have it that easy throwing the devil out of heaven.....and he needed help to do it. Rutherford threw the great crowd out single-handed.

In Martha's case, if the elders determine that she is genuinely repentant yet still find reason to reprove her, at what point does the congregation show her forgiveness?

Even if Martha is able to convince the elders she is genuinely repentant, they still might decide to reprove her by limiting her participation privileges until the elders are sure she won't be a danger to others in the congregation. If they do decide to reprove, even though they do believe she is genuinely repentant, they'll tell her that their decision is to reprove and they'll explain what restrictions she will have on her participation in the congregation. They'll also tell her whether or not it will be announced to the congregation. A judicial reproof includes more than just making a decision or announcing it. It involves reinforcing the wrongdoer's resolve to do what is right. They will want to be sure Martha doesn't allow herself to fall away from the Organization again, to keep up regular attendance at all the meetings and to diligently study their publications. In this case, being it presents such a good opportunity to counsel all the congregation about the evils of falling away from the WTS, announcing the reproof would give the elders a chance to reinforce to others who aren't being regular in their attendance and studies.

Well, if the elders are unclear about her repentance after having talked with her and discussed the questions I posted in an earlier post, there are still some other questions they may want to consider before they welcome her back or administer loving discipline. Some indications of repentance is whether Martha volunteered her confession or if others in the congregation brought her wrongdoing to the attention of the elders. I don't know but it sounds like she probably volunteered her confession to them, so that would be a point in her favor. Was she being truthful----confessing to 40 years of wrongdoing, well, probably. Did she answer the elders' questions forthrightly? Was she cooperative with them? Did she try to minimize her guilt? Was she deeply regretful, i.e. showing godly sadness---not necessarily with tears which can be faked but with knowledge that her trespasses hurt Jehovah? These are factors the elders are to take into consideration, the bottom line for them is that there would be no basis to extend mercy if fruits of repentance are lacking. What should Martha do to show fruits of genuine repentance?

How do the elders determine if Martha's repentance is genuine? Well, here are some of the guidelines they are to follow: Determining Genuine Repentance 6. In Greek, two verbs are used in connection 'with repentance. The first stresses a changed viewpoint or disposition. The second emphasizes a feeling of regret. Therefore, repentance involves a deep regret over a damaged relationship with Jehovah, remorse over the reproach brought upon Jehovah's name and people, and a sincere longing to come back into God's favor. It includes a heart-motivated rejection of the bad course as something repugnant, hated. (Rom.12:9) Such an attitude should be demonstrated by "fruits that befit repentance," making evident to an adequate degree a sinner's claimed repentance.-Luke 3:8; it-2 pp. 770-777. So, even though we're told that Martha approached God in prayer and asked him to forgive her, and even telling the elders of her deep regret and her sincere longing to come back, this would not necessarily meet the standards of the elders, nor, evidently, would it mean Jehovah has forgiven her yet. The elders would be looking for "fruits that befit repentance", making evident to an adequate degree Martha's claim to have repented of her 40 years of serious sins. How would the elders go about this? Well, they do have some further guidelines for determining this: The extent to which the person deviates from righteousness may be major or minor, and logically the degree of regret (repentance) ought to be commensurate with the degree of deviation. Let's hope that doesn't means they want to see 40 years of Martha producing fruit that befits repentance before they determine that her repentance is genuine. After hearing her confession and repentance, they would probably meet together and ask some of the following questions: Question: Was the Martha caught off guard so that she momentarily succumbed to temptation, or did she plan to do wrong? Answer: Probably not---40 years, and the sins she was involved in (celebrating holidays, participating in political events, and attending church) all take some forethought and planning. So, Martha did plan to do wrong. Question: Was she unaware of the gravity of her sin, or did she deliberately ignore counselor warnings? Answer: Well, No and No. She was not unaware of the gravity of her sin, as acknowledged in her confession. But since she was not attending meetings and evidently not being counseled by an elder or overseer, she probably wasn't guilty of ignoring warnings. Question: Was it a single offense, or was it a practice? Answer: Martha makes it sound like a practice, doesn't she. They would have asked her about this, no doubt, about how many times she did those things. The elders know that the more an individual repeats serious sin, the more that one reasonably gives evidence of being like wicked people who are "practicers of what is hurtful." -Ps. 28:3; it-2 p. 771 par. 5. How did Martha do?

Let's look at the example of Martha from the brochure. This is her story: “My new job improved our family’s standard of living, but it also led me into all sorts of questionable activities. I began to celebrate holidays, to participate in political events, and even to attend church. I was inactive as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses for 40 years. The more time that went by, the more I thought I was beyond Jehovah’s forgiveness. I felt that I couldn’t forgive myself. After all, I knew the truth before I headed down the wrong path.”—Martha. The brochure goes on about what happened to Martha: “My son kept sending me the Watchtower and Awake! magazines. Little by little, I became reacquainted with Jehovah. The hardest part of coming back was asking forgiveness for all the sins I had committed. But finally, I approached God in prayer and asked him to forgive me. It’s hard to believe that 40 years went by before I returned to Jehovah. I am living proof that even after many years, someone can be given another chance to serve God and be back in his love.” Let's also look at some of the instructions the elders are to follow concerning inactive persons who have been involved in serious wrongdoing but who now want to return, such as Martha: When an inactive person has been involved in serious wrongdoing and now desires to return to the congregation, the shepherds need to reflect Jehovah's endearing quality of love. If the person acknowledges that he has sinned against Jehovah and he demonstrates genuine repentance, the shepherds will help him to appreciate that he can receive Jehovah's forgiveness. Loving discipline may be required.

And yet, 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 apostates, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship. I know this was the April 1st WT, but they weren't joking, were they?

On that page an article in a 1925 WT is referenced. The article is "Birth of a Nation" and in it Rutherford still referenced 1874 as the date of Christ's invisible presence: Michael, who is Christ the Lord, has been present since 1874 And it looks like that's when they first say that the child born in Revelation 12 isn't the antichrist after all (as they had been saying since the 1870's and were still saying during and after 1914 clear up until 1927), but is the Messianic Kingdom. How about that? Looking at the birth of the Messianic Kingdom and seeing the birth of the antichrist !!

Christian don't have just the prospect of everlasting life, they have everlasting life already: John 3:14-18 As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; 15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. 16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18 He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 3:36 He who believes in the Son has eternal life For Jehovah's Witnesses to have everlasting life, they must come to Jesus, receive him and believe in him and become children of God by being born of God. (John 1:12,13)

How do you mean?

Well, you had asked if "this Generation" is a lot longer than you think, hasn't another hundred years been added to it already with the overlapping second group?

The Great Tribulation and Armageddon......not to put too fine a point on it. Yes, another group. I was referring to the two groups of spirited-anointed JWs that make up "the generation".

They didn't begin discerning it in 1914. In fact, it wasn't an official "discernment" until 1943.

Will only Jehovah's Witnesses be saved from what? Sin and death? What do you think about the possibility that there's another group of spirit-anointed JWs whose lives overlap the second group of that generation?

Do you think they meant to say, "Are its teachings relatively in harmony with God's Word?" Can a religious organization that says that also say the entire range of their teachings must be accepted as the truth on pain of being excommunicated and shunned for apostasy?

Thanks, Alexa. Actually the war that started in 1914 must have been a total surprise for the Bible Students back then because they had been predicting that Armageddon would END in that year. Nothing they had been saying about 1914 came true though they still say something invisible happened.....'fraid there's no way to check on that.

What I posted from the 2014 book, "God's Kingdom Rules"........ "In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence." .....is not honest since it was not in 1914 at all but in 1876 that the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence as having begun in 1874......and, yes, Russell was convinced of 1874 by Barbour in 1876, which is why in 1879 he named his magazine Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence ---- he was heralding Christ's invisible presence as having begun in 1874. And, as Ann has pointed out (thank you, Ann) that continued to be the WTS teaching clear thru 1914 and on into the 1930's. So, in reality, Russell and the Bible Students missed BOTH dates of his invisible presence---the first by a couple of years and the second by 20 years or so. What they were actually discerning in 1914 was that all of Russell's predictions about that year had failed miserably. They were expecting to be raptured to heaven, that didn't happen. They were expecting the Great Tribulation and Armageddon would be over, instead a world war erupted. They were expecting the Millennium Kingdom to come, it didn't. You can see the other things they were expecting from the seven proofs Russell had been teaching them since 1889---none of them took place either before 1914 nor after, nor any time since 1914. So, no, the Bible Students had not begun to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence in 1914 and it is dishonest to say they had. The religious leaders of the WTS should know this.

The WTS says that is the argument used to identify the true religion: [w69 3/15 p.165-167] 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. It should be the sincere desire of every one of us to learn what God’s will is for us, and then to do it.—John 8:32. Or do you think maybe they meant that for just other religious organizations and not their own?

I was just reading Revelation 6:2 in the WTS commentary of 1917, "The Finished Mystery", about the rider of the white horse: 6:2. And I saw. — John beheld in vision the first strange and wonderful feature of the Divine plan for the permission of evil as it related to epochs of the Church, beyond his own epoch — that of Smyrna And behold a white horse. — The doctrines, teachings of the Lord and the Apostles recognized as the one and only rule of faith and practice of God's Church. And he that sat on him. — The Bishop of Rome, the embryo Pope, the personal representative of Satan.

On page 21 of this book, "God's Kingdom Rules", there's a drawing of a street scene with Jesus above it and this caption printed on it: "In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence." However, history buffs will know that the Bible Students had already discerned Christ's invisible presence as having begun in 1874, and they continued that declaration throughout 1914 and several decades after it. This is from Rutherford's Biographical sketch of Russell after his death: Like other Christians he was looking for the Second Coming of Christ. Between 1872 and 1876 he discovered that the Scriptures clearly teach that the Lord would return as a spirit being, invisible to human eyes, not in a body of flesh, and that His Second Presence was due in the autumn of 1874. This led to the publication of a booklet entitled "The Object and Manner of Our Lord’s Return," which had a phenomenal sale. Many students of the Bible throughout the United States and Canada responded to the information derived from that book, and Pastor Russell’s correspondence became voluminous. Realizing the necessity of keeping the Truth before the minds of those who had begun to investigate, in 1879, he began the publication of "The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence," and was its sole editor to the time of his death. [Overland Monthly/OV442- The Late Pastor Russell (By J.F. Rutherford) Why the dishonesty in the 2014 book?

I had one of those Huh? moments when I read somewhere that JWs believed Jehovah had brought the Holocaust on them and therefore they shouldn't try to escape from the camps. That can't be right, can it?

Thanks for the date. The men who decide beliefs for those in their organization can and should be held to the same standards they hold others to, just as Jesus said, "by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you." Matthew 7:2. I'll see if I can find those paragraphs you mention about Rutherford. He's on record as saying anyone who went against Russell's teachings was going against God......then he did that very thing.

I'm sure you notice the one just before that one: 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. The one that has always stood out to me is the example they use from the Bible to support accusing someone of apostasy for rejecting just one of their beliefs: the timing of the resurrection. It would be interesting to see when they stopped preaching 1878 and changed it to 1918. I wonder if they ever confessed their own apostasy in that regard.

Ann, I'd been following the Barrie's case some years back but hadn't known the outcome so I was glad to hear he's in jail. Hard to believe that the JWs still did not believe the girls even after he had been convicted in a court of law and sentenced to prison. The Cousins case was just as mortifying. He confessed to the elders that he had sexually abused his oldest daughter, yet they sent him home where he proceeded to do the same to his younger daughter. And when she went to the elders about it, they made her feel like she was lying, when they knew for certain that she wasn't.

WT 1/15/2015: Matthew 24:33-35. We understand that in mentioning “this generation,” Jesus was referring to two groups of anointed Christians. The first group was on hand in 1914, and they readily discerned the sign of Christ’s presence in that year. Those who made up this group were not merely alive in 1914, but they were spirit-anointed as sons of God in or before that year. This teaching about the 1914 anointed is actually one from the past, as stated in this 1968 Awake: "Jesus was obviously speaking about those who were old enough to witness with understanding what took place when the 'last days' began. ... Even if we presume that youngsters 15 years of age would be perceptive enough to realize the import of what happened in 1914, it would still make the youngest of 'this generation' nearly 70 years old today." Awake! 1968 Oct 8 p.13 But from some calculations in another thread, the age made be being reduced as it was in the 1980's, to 10 years of age. Ten years of age, baptized, spirit-anointed, readily discerned the sign of Christ's presence in 1914. Sound about right?