HollyW

None of the Greek mss of the NT have YHWH in them.  The WTS knows this and has even acknowledged it.  But then they round up the J Docs (from what? the 1500's and later) and use them to put "Jehovah" where they want to and ignore the other places the J Docs have Jehovah.
 

Allen, how can one misinterpret those statements? They are pretty plain. It seems that you do know, but choose to bury those thoughts because the society tells you to. If I have misinterpreted those statements, please explain them to me one by one. I'll list them again for your convenience:
"To receive everlasting life in the earthly Paradise we must identify that organization and serve God as part of it." Watchtower 1983 Feb 15 p.12
"These overseers faithfully seek to apply instructions received from JehovahGod and Jesus Christ by means of the faithful and discreet slave and its Governing Body." Watchtower 1990 Mar 15 p.20
 
"Come to Jehovah's organization for salvation" - Watchtower 1981 Nov 15 p.212
Who is the one who brings salvation? Not some organization!!!!! JESUS is the answer!
 
The Watchtower 1975 Sep 1 p.531 asks "Where could we turn if we would leave God's organization today? There is nowhere else! 
This is a play on Simon Peter's words in John 6:68 "  Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." Not an organization, but rather Jesus! 
 
"But if we were to draw away from Jehovah's organization, there would be no place else to go for salvation and true joy." Watchtower 1993 Sep 15 p.22
"They must appreciate that identifying themselves with Jehovah's organization is essential to their salvation." Kingdom Ministry 1990 Nov p.1
"And while now the witness yet includes the invitation to come to Jehovah's organization for salvation, the time no doubt will come when the message takes on a harder tone, like a "great war cry."" Watchtower 1981 Nov 15 p.21
 

As usual with WTS bans, the beard ban has undergone some 'adjustments' so that if it's a cultural thing in ones area, JW men are permitted beards now (still not for women, though ;))
So when you say "thank you" to Russell, do you believe he hears and answers you?
 

Its ONLY going about JEHOVAH'S WORD, the wonderful TRUTH, okay ?
Not about beards or especially clothes, etc. etc. All nations and tribes are SO different and in Jehovah's sense, I'm pretty sure.... Jehovah not wants Robots !   Our heart for Jehovah is most importend for him.
Discuss that in another area, I not like that here, under my postings. THANKS !

But that isn't the point on page 20 of the book.  It's saying that it was in 1914 that they began to discern the sign of Christ's presence.  That isn't true.  That's why I asked if you would reword their sentence to make it tell the truth.  You seem to indicate that you do know it isn't an accurate statement yet you continue to try to uphold it.
Let's look again at the statement in "God's Kingdom Rules" on page 22:

Long before 1914, the Bible Students said that a time of trouble would begin in that marked year. Notice that it is saying "long before 1914" -- it's a bit of a stretch, don't you think, that they mean 10 years is "long before 1914"?
Also, do you see how you are characterizing the very publications Jehovah and Jesus would have been inspecting and evidently approving as "food in due season"?  I mean, I'm very glad you see how off-base those publications are, but to maintain that God reviewed them and considered them proper spiritual sustenance is contradictory.

These articles are quite good for Jehovah's people in general because so many actually "hate" gay people. I was sitting in a car with brothers and sisters who got talking about gay people. everything they said was "hateful" of gay people. They had forgotten that it's the act not the person that we should hate. I spoke up and asked, what would happen if a gay person became a brother or sister, would we still talk that way, or would we think they no longer had the desire just because they became a witness. Some said yes quoting "because that's what some of you were." 1 Corinthians 6: 11. It was an awkward discussion, but they only realized how they sounded when someone raised the issue.
On the other side, many gay people may allow the act or even the desire to act to define who they are. 
While we define it as a person who "acts" on the urge and commits such "acts". The world holds the view that if you have even the desire to act you are gay. Most witnesses that I've listened to talking about gay people don't differentiate it either. When you hear it from the platform, it's not differentiated and much of the time it's hate for the people using words like "they are disgusting or filthy." Not the acts they do. This is really unfortunate. And I believe it is our own fault. 
Those whom I have known to have come out of that lifestyle, have really struggled in the truth. From vicious back biting, mockery and isolation. Yet, we preach a message of peace but do not always show it to "all sorts of people." For them, it can be a very lonely place within the organization.
Yes, it is sad that when you call in to see a Bible Student, that they tell you how brother so-and-so told them to be careful of brother x because he is gay. Notice it was not past tense as in "that is what some of you were."
Such, brothers and sister who struggle with same sex attraction would prefer to hide who themselves if they knew the whole congregation viewed them as "unchanged".
I just think, we have a long way to go in many area's, we are not as righteous as we make ourselves out to be at times. I believe this is a big problem at the moment especially with a big focus on it in the last year. That focus has not instilled wise or loving traits in Jehovah's people. Granted not all of us are "hateful" or "malicious" of gay people. But I think we do need to realize some things:
1. For a gay to convert is a really difficult challenge, it cannot be compared to a straight person turning to God.
2. There is a difference between being gay and no longer committing gay acts, it does not mean they stop having gay desires.
3. Many are now our brother's and sister's but they know that if they were open about it that they would be treated badly, so they work hard to hide that side of them to the detriment of the physical and mental health.
We need to be more loving to those who were gay, and realize how hard it is for them to exist in the truth. We should be amazed at their daily struggle to resist the flesh, it cannot be compared to straight people's struggle with sexual desire. If you want to show love, involve them in group socializing. And just so some get to know, it's not the one's that are known that should be worried about. Many "straight looking" brothers may have a struggle as well, they may even persecute or mock those who are known or even be married now, with children. It's not as simple as, that brother looks "camp" so he must be gay or he has a gay voice or likes ballet etc Feminine traits are not always an indicator of gay desire. You don't have to "look" gay to have that desire.
I hope some witnesses will change from a "hateful" disposition toward gay people. We are not the judges. However, this problem is so big it will not likely change over night, sad, but true.
To all you brothers and sisters out there who struggle everyday with gay desire. May the God of peace grant you peace and reward your efforts.
 
 
 

Cheeky, yes. 'Plain nasty,' no. Hence the wink smiley. Nevertheless, you were trying to wriggle round the evidence from Watchtower history that showed the "Kingdom Rules" statement to be untruthful.
Why don't we add Harold Camping to the list of those validating BSs' and JWs' eschatological expectations too?
Unless one is a preterist, Christians generally believe in a future return of Christ, so how is it remarkable that Adventists and fringe Christian-based religions expect it as well?
The 'mouth of two or three witnesses' is insufficient to 'establish a matter' for you? How much testimony from the period literature would it take to convince you that the BSs had begun to discern the sign of Jesus' presence nearly 40 years earlier than 1914, according to their beliefs, thereby rendering the "Kingdom Rules" brochure inaccurate on that point?
Indeed he does.  However, as much as I enjoy and learn from reading JW Insider's posts, we have different styles and time availability. I'm a 'bullet point,' 'tl;dr' kinda gal who prefers cutting to the chase and using 10 words to express a thought rather than 100. 

Now you're just being plain nasty. You are listening to AllenSmith too much!!
Eloquent!  
Advent Testimony folk and Armstrong's WWCG's may have demonstrated weird beliefs on various issues, but a common factor in their beliefs was that of an imminent return of Jesus Christ to rule as Jehovahs King. That is pretty amazing despite it's obscure expression... regardless of their eccentricities, even they could see it. More than can be said for others of the self-proclamied intelligensia.
Who said that?? Anyway, your attempts to convince me have been unsuccessful on this occasion. It's not about your quotes of what's written in Watchtower's period literature, it's more about the paucity of them.
I have answered JWInsider a little more comprehensively on this matter. So I don't see the point of repeating it all here.
Actually, there's a thing. He does have communication skills so why not take a lesson there?  
   0   Quote   Options  

Did you read this brochure in Greek?!
Martha has admitted what she did during those 40 years of being an inactive JW.  How else did the WTS get her story.  The implication in the brochure is that she was welcomed back with open arms.
Again,  Is that the correct message the WTS is trying to convey?

What seems to me to be missing from the brochure is any mention of those returning being disciplined. Why is that?
Martha's story stood out because of the length of time she was an inactive JW, and because her sins were of the gross kind to the WTS: politics, birthdays, churches.  But no mention of the elders sitting down and talking to her to determine what her sins were for those 40 years, how many times she had committed those sins, and which ones, if any,she was still practicing. The brochure's recounting of Martha's experience gives the impression that after having confessed her sins to Jehovah and evidently been forgiven by him, she returned to the meetings and was welcomed back with open arms.
Is that the correct message the WTS is trying to convey?
We both know "return to Jehovah" means "return to the WTS", don't we.

Absolutely!

These two statements by the both of you are not synonymous, and they were asked with the same question.

What on earth do you mean "nevermind" ? As if that is some side note. If Jesus commands it, then it is God's will. Not some extra bonus that God gives us to do, it is commanded. 
 
You do know that this is not what is written in the Bible, right? 
 

Thanks for your kind expressions @HollyW. I hope they are as sincerely meant as they sound. 

Allen, Why should any of us argue for any "religion", other than for God and Christ?  Col 2:20-23
 

Allen,
Just point out what was said that you believed was wrong. No one is going to understand what your point is if you keep telling people they don't have their facts straight, and then, when you can provide any evidence at all, the source of that evidence invariably shows that what people have concluded was correct, and that you were making a false argument.
It's as if you are saying:
"Hey! You are all insidious and embarrassing fools if you don't accept that 2+2=5. I even have proof from an expert who knows it's true. I'll quote him here: "2+2=4" [Mathematical Society Quarterly, p.267]. See there! 2+2=5!!!"
If your words that I quoted from you at the top of this post were directed at me, please stop making general accusations that I am wrong, and then copying and pasting evidence* that indicates that I am right. I can't see any reason that anyone would do that!
*When I say "evidence" I mean the many sources you have quoted which are generally correct. I am not referring to any of the comments that you have often interspersed between them, because more often than not, most sentences of yours contains factual errors. Even your quote above mentions that Barbour was still eminent in seeing 1874 as the rapture date while Russell was teaching that Christ's spiritual presence would last from 1874 to 1914. This is, of course, untrue. It was Barbour who came up with 1874 as the start of an invisible, spiritual presence (via B W Keith after failed expectations of a rapture in 1874) and Russell later agreed with this. Barbour was not still teaching 1874 as the rapture date, but by the summer of 1875 had already moved on to 1878 as the date for the rapture. 1878 was also the end of the Gentile Times for a while in Barbour's view. 

That's a pity. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. 
We can know what Bible Students did or did not discern in 1914 or at other times because their writings from those times are available to read. If you can find a Bible Student publication from 1914 or the years following that specifically connects the year 1914 with the start of Christ's presence, then please post it here. Otherwise, we have to conclude that the 'Kingdom Rules' book has made an erroneous and misleading statement.
 You cannot wriggle around it, Eoin. The BSs believed Christ's presence began in 1874 and, yes, that it was continuing through 1922 and beyond (duh). But this isn't what the 'Kingdom Rules' book claimed, is it? It claimed: "In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence" and not "In 1914, the Bible Students continued to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence that began in 1874."
This is like using Armstrong's WWCG beliefs about what would happen in 1975 to validate the old JWs' beliefs about 1975. It's truly amazing that non-JWs also came to the conclusion that 1975 would be the end of the system of things, is it not? 
Anyway, the Bible Students were not looking forward to the Lord's Second Coming, because they thought he had already done so invisibly 40 years earlier. The Advent Testimony Manifesto also didn't have a year in mind for the close of the Gentile times - only that it would occur once Israel had been restored and converted. 
As for you being unpersuaded by what's written in Watchtower's period literature about what was taught and believed, well, 'a man convinced against his will ...' 
 

I have taken what the current book is saying and researching it from the older publications.
The letter from the GB said to picture yourself there in 1914 when Charles Russell announced that the Gentile Times had ended. I researched Russell's writings and found out what his announcement meant to his audience.  Isn't that the logical place to go to in order to find out why his audience greet this news with such enthusiasm?
The current book says, "In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence." That couldn't be true because in 1914 they had already discerned the sign of Christ's presence from 1874.  Where else would you look except in what they were publishing back then?
The current books says, "Long before 1914, the Bible Students said that a time of trouble would begin in that marked year." I went to what the Bible Students were saying long before 1914, and it was that it would END in 1914, not BEGIN.
Please research these things for yourself, and do that with ALL the references throughout this book.  

I'm sorry, Eoin, but this is very weaselly worded - whether you intend it to be so or not.
The Bible Students simply did not 'begin to discern' or 'distinguish with difficulty by sight or with the other senses' in 1914 or in 1915 or in 1922* etc. that Jesus' presence started in 1914 because, as Holly has already pointed out to you, the Bible Students had already discerned that Jesus' presence had started in 1874. Bible Students 'began to discern' (or rethink the 1874 presence idea) long after 1914 
* The 1922 Cedar Point, Ohio convention and the famous call to 'advertise, advertise, advertise the King and his kingdom' re-establishes the Bible Students' firm belief that it was a fact Jesus' presence began in 1874. 

The 'Advent Testimony Manifesto' was a) in 1917 - not 1914, and b) the reasoning behind their thinking that Christ's return was imminent was down to the Balfour Declaration and the move to re-establish Palestine as the Jewish homeland which was understood as fulfilling prophecy about the restoration of Israel, the rapture of the church, and Jesus' physically taking his kingship in Jerusalem! Is this in any way representative of JWs' version of 1914's significance? 

But the Bible Students and other people didn't begin to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence in 1914. The idea that Christ had been invisibly present didn't begin to be discerned by Bible Students until about 1930 (g1930, April 30, p. 503-4 - the earliest published comment "that Jesus has been present since the year 1914"). The rest of the world continued not to discern it.
 

The scriptures Christians base their belief in the rapture on are the following:
1 Thessalonians 4:16-18, “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.”
1 Corinthians 15:20-23, “But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming.”
1 Cor. 15:51-52, “Behold, I tell you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.”
Does the WTS still say this event is an ongoing one since 1918 involving just a small segment of Jehovah's Witnesses as "the dead in Christ" ?

Eoin, thank you for the page correction, but your disappointment should be in your own religious leaders who are being dishonest in relating WTS history to you.  Please research this for yourself.  In 1914 they were saying they had discerned Christ's presence as having started in 1874, not 1914.  It is a lie to say otherwise.  And they hadn't actually discerned it as having started in 1874 until Barbour convinced Russell of it in 1876.
They were wrong about 1874 and they are wrong about 1914.  Being dishonest about their history isn't going to change that.  You and all JWs should be carefully and diligently researching all of this as you study "God's Kingdom Rules" together, because this is a lie: "In 1914, the Bible Students began to discern the sign of Christ's invisible presence."
The other lie is on page 22 where they say the following in paragraph 29: "Long before 1914, the Bible Students said that a time of trouble would begin in that marked year."
They were not saying it would BEGIN in 1914, they were saying it would END in 1914.
ZWT 7/1/1894 p.226: "But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble."
Here's the context, referring to 1914 as God's date:
In reference to Armageddon, ZWT of Jan 15, 1892 p.24-25, has the following about “the battle of the great day of God Almighty.”

   It is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874.  The date of the close of that “battle” is definitely marked in Scripture as October, 1914.

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.

Hello Praeceptor,
This phrase, “to take the lead”, has allowed men, elders, to judge another.   Is this the intention?  As Shiwii said, the word, hēgeomai, is used in many different formats in the scriptures, which gives us a well-rounded view if one takes the time to study it.  I noticed you said you read the Greek, then you know one terminology is “to go before”; we have Jesus as the best example of this.  He set the path for our feet, showing us the way to life.  The apostles did the same, exhorting, “esteeming” (one use – Heb 11:26), “accounting” (2 Pet 3:15) for those who listened to their words.  In the book of Hebrews alone, this word, hēgeomai, is used six times in various forms. 
In translation, the WT Greek Interlinear does not say, “over you”, but “among you”.  There’s a difference, do you see?  This implies working together, not a ruling over one.

The further scriptures you are referring to are in reference to the Chosen anointed ones, who have no voice in the organization.  You are speaking of men appointed by men, who are concerned with earthly organizational matters.  Jesus was concerned with the spreading of "good fruit" and chose those who would represent words of Truth. “Disfellowshipping” was never a term used by the apostles, it is a word and decree of men. 

The struggle men have in their determination of the righteous heart of another, by following documented organizational policy, is not based on Jesus’ direction.  Because of this need for an outlined set of rules, it is obvious Holy Spirit does not back their decision making in “taking the lead”.  God’s laws are “written on the heart” of one faithful chosen/anointed by Christ.  2 Cor 3;3; Rom 2:15; Heb 10:16  Would not God’s laws be sufficient enough to help another in faith, those very laws that Christ fulfilled and based on love?

The elder body certainly “takes” the lead and “rules over” the congregation, because they cannot comprehend Christ’s way, which is through love.  Would they struggle to assess a situation using a rule book if Holy spirit guided them?  The determination to set up man's arrangement has led to much suffering through use of organizational policy, a rejection of Christ's own Body.

"There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day." (John12:48)

Everyone has one advocate, Jesus Christ.

“My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.  He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” 1 John 2:1,2

Greek word for “advocate” -   paráklētos, par-ak'-lay-tos; an intercessor, consoler:—advocate, comforter. “one who pleads another's cause before a judge, a pleader, counsel for defense, legal assistant, an advocate”

 “Judge not, that you be not judged.  For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.”  Matt 7:1
 
Should men assume this role before God?  Consoling and disciplining in love is one thing, judging one by marking them as “spiritually dead” is another, which is the foundation of disfellowshipping and shunning. 

 

 

Martha’s story is in the Return to Jehovah brochure which came out in January of 2015.  Martha claims to have been inactive for 40 years before she returned to the WTS.  If that return was in 2014, the year before the brochure came out, she would have been inactive from about 1974. 
Returning to the WTS is also called returning to Jehovah by JWs, but it is also called returning to the truth…..a word that becomes rather fluid among JWs since it doesn’t ever refer to the truth of their teachings.  One has only to look at what WTS teachings were 40 years ago when Martha became inactive, to what those teachings are today.
The world was going to end in 1975……obviously not the truth.
There were no more spirit-anointing going on to fill the ranks of the 144,000….not true any more.
The 144,000 were the faithful and discreet slave…….not true any more.
The faithful and discreet slave was appointed over all the Master’s belongings…….not true any more.
The other sheep were the belongings of the parable at Matthew 24:45-47…….they’ve been elevated to domestics now.
The generation of Matthew 24:34 would be remembered by Martha as being, beyond question, worldly people, as described in the wt:

"The actual meaning of these words is, beyond question, that which takes a generation in the ordinary sense, as at Mark 8:12 and Acts 13:36, or for those who are living at the given period. So it was on this generation that the accumulated judgments were to fall. (Matt. 23:36) This therefore means that from 1914 a generation shall not pass till all is fulfilled, and amidst a great time of trouble." Watchtower 1951 Jul 1 p.404 This teaching has gone thru three changes since Martha became inactive.  I wonder if she would recognize the current “overlapping” scenario as being “the truth.”