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?

10 minutes ago, HollyW said:

What should Martha do to show fruits of genuine repentance?

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.

1 hour ago, HollyW said:

How did Martha do?

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:

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:

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:

The brochure goes on about what happened to Martha:

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:

21 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

  The idea of the first resurrection in 1918 was once definitive, and has now become only "an interesting possibility."

*** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 12 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
Could it, then, be reasoned that since Jesus was enthroned in the fall of 1914, the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility. Although this cannot be directly confirmed in the Bible

 

And yet, 

I know this was the April 1st WT, but they weren't joking, were they?

1 hour ago, Anna said:

Well I guess it depends how you look at it. From our perspective, yes, the Bible Students did begin discerning Christ's presence in 1914.  It is no secret that the Bible Students were disappointed. It was written about quite a number of times, that their expectations were wrong. In fact, page 50, paragraph 5, of God's Kingdom Rules, does not hide the fact either.

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:

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 !! 

37 minutes ago, Anna said:

OK, to put an even finer point on it: to be granted the prospect of everlasting life.

Christian don't have just the prospect of everlasting life, they have everlasting life already:

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)

26 minutes ago, Anna said:

Yes, plenty long enough, perhaps "generation" is just a time period, and not a literal generation.

How do you mean?  

1 minute ago, Anna said:

OK, to be even more specific, to be granted the prospect of everlasting life.

I knew what you were referring to. This area is something that I think we haven't got quite right yet.

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?

1 minute ago, Anna said:

In this particular instance I mean survive Armageddon. I should change the title.

Another group? No, I can't see that. The scriptures only mention 2 groups, the anointed and the other sheep

 

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".

January 15, 2014, pages 30-31 of The Watchtower

 In his detailed prophecy about the conclusion of this system of things, Jesus said: “This generation will by no means pass away until all these things happen.” (Read 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. —Rom. 8:14-17.

The second group included in “this generation” are anointed contemporaries of the first group. They were not simply alive during the lifetime of those in the first group, but they were anointed with holy spirit during the time that those of the first group were still on earth. Thus, not every anointed person today is included in “this generation” of whom Jesus spoke. Today, those in this second group are themselves advancing in years. Yet, Jesus’ words at Matthew 24:34 give us confidence that at least some of “this generation will by no means pass away” before seeing the start of the great tribulation. This should add to our conviction that little time remains before the King of God’s Kingdom acts to destroy the wicked and usher in a righteous new world.—2 Pet. 3:13

Just now, Anna said:

Well I guess it depends how you look at it. From our perspective, yes, the Bible Students did begin discerning Christ's presence in 1914.  It is no secret that the Bible Students were disappointed. It was written about quite a number of times, that their expectations were wrong. In fact, page 50, paragraph 5, of God's Kingdom Rules, does not hide the fact either.

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?  

2 hours ago, Anna said:

Or, is "this Generation" a lot longer than we think.....

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?

3 minutes ago, Anna said:

It is relative. As "fully" as humanly possible, in their limited human capacity. There is STARK contrast between how "in full" harmony Christendom is, and how "in full" harmony Jehovah's Witnesses are. There is no comparison. Christendom is based on "the traditions of men" .

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?

6 hours ago, Alexa said:

Yes, even if I am in my very young age with classes and schools... I can sense the reality of 2 Tim. 3:1-5.  It's no doubt 

Back then, that might be true. The difference is for "anointed", already understand the times have started because the war become evident after hearing the talk about "gentile times". Its just evident for them because they experienced it for themselves. 

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.

14 hours ago, Anna said:

There is no dishonesty. Russell got his ideas about the date from Barbour and soon after that parted ways with him and also scrapped the date. The important thing was that Russell discerned, as opposed to what Christendom taught, that Christ's presence would be invisible. There is no mention of the year 1874 in the booklet. Russell states "It is not my object in this pamphlet to call attention more fully to the TIME.......those interested in knowing the evidences as to the time I would refer to Dr. N H Barbour... (page 62. The object and manner of our Lords return).

1874 was Barbour's date.

What I posted from the 2014 book, "God's Kingdom Rules"........

.....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.

15 hours ago, Anna said:

" Would you not expect the teachings of a religious organization that claims to be the sole communication between God and mankind as the appointed faithful slave of Matthew 24:45 to be in full harmony with God's Word?"

If this was the argument, used to identify the true religion 

The WTS says that is the argument used to identify the true religion:

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:

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:

Why the dishonesty in the 2014 book?

8 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Huh? 

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?

16 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

That was in 1927. But an organization can change its beliefs without being "apostate." You might be surprised, but I just wrote several paragraphs defending Rutherfod in most of those changes from 1927 to 1931, even if he did get some of them wrong. Maybe I'll save what I wrote for a more appropriate topic.
 

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.

11 hours ago, JW Insider said:

What do such beliefs include?
. . . 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. . . .

I'm sure you notice the one just before that one:

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.

Quote

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
......

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 apostates, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship.

[w86 4/1 p.31]
 

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?