Anna

10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The suggestion is that, for Jesus, the parousia appears to come at the END of the generation, not the BEGINNING.

I think that Matthew 24:37-39 not only 'sits well' with this suggestion, it offers additional evidence for it. But I also think it depends on whether we are willing to interpret Jesus' words in a consistent manner, or a contradictory manner. If we are willing to accept contradictions, then we could make Matthew 24 say anything we want. I prefer to see if there is a way to read Matthew 24 without so many serious contradictions.

For example, go back to some verses just leading up to these verses:

(Matthew 24:23-27) . . .“Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look! Here is the Christ,’ or, ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will perform great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones. 25 Look! I have forewarned you. 26 Therefore, if people say to you, ‘Look! He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out; ‘Look! He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence [parousia] of the Son of man will be.

Why is it that Jesus said not to believe anyone who claims that "The Christ is here!"?

Yet, many religions, including our own, have based their core message since 1878 on this specific claim that "The Christ is here!"

The reason Jesus said that this could not be claimed is that it would imply that they thought they had seen a sign or evidence prior to the actual event. This would, of course, be impossible because the actual parousia would be as unmistakable as lightning that flashes from one end of the horizon all the way to the other end.

So is it possible that this great event, "the parousia of the Son of man," could be invisible? Is it possible that Christ is here, but we just can't see him from where we are? Jesus covered this claim as well when he predicted that some might even claim that he was in the wilderness, or in the inner rooms. Jesus said: "Do not believe it!" Jesus perfectly covered the idea that people might claim falsely that "Christ is present, but he's invisible." How, would we know they were wrong? Because Matthew 24:27 explains that the parousia of the Son of man will be as visible as lightning.

In other words, his parousia should be compared to the most obviously visible event we can think of. More proof that it is an appearance, a manifestation is found by looking at the context of ALL the other mentions of Jesus' presence. A couple of them are included below:

(2 Thessalonians 2:8) 8 Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence [parousia].

(2 Timothy 4:1) 4 I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his manifestation and his Kingdom:

(2 Thessalonians 1:7-10) 7 . . . relief along with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels 8 in a flaming fire, . . . from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength, 10 at the time he comes to be glorified in connection with his holy ones and to be regarded in that day with wonder . . .

(1 John 2:28) 28 So now, little children, remain in union with him, so that when he is made manifest we may have freeness of speech and not shrink away from him in shame at his presence [parousia].

Note especially that the word "parousia" is sometimes replaced, paralled, and modified with a word that means "glorious epiphany" in the Bible. In Thayer's Greek Lexicon, the definition includes the following:

ἐπιφάνεια, ἐπιφανείας, ἡ (ἐπιφανής), an appearing, appearance : often used by the Greeks of a glorious manifestation of the gods, . . .  not only that which has already taken place and by which his presence and power appear in the saving light he has shed upon mankind, 2 Timothy 1:10 (note the word φωτίσαντος in this passage); but also that illustrious return from heaven to earth hereafter to occur: 1 Timothy 6:14; 2 Timothy 4:1, 8; Titus 2:13 . . . ἡ ἐπιφάνεια (i. e. the breaking forth) τῆς παρουσίας αὐτοῦ, 2 Thessalonians 2:8.

 

(2 Thessalonians 2:8) 8 Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence [parousia]. (NWT)

the brightness of his coming: (KJV)

the splendor of his coming. (NLV)

(Titus 2:13) while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of our Savior, Jesus Christ, (NWT)

Taking a cue from the new "Kingdom" book, we could therefore speak of the beginning of the parousia as "the greatest event" (p.13). The parousia is indeed the "epiphany of his presence," the "glorious manifestation," the "brightness," the "lightning," the "revelation," the time of "flaming fire."

That is of course the background for answering the question about Matthew 24:37-39. (Next post)

 

 

I was always under the impression that the invisible part of Christ’s presence was when he came into Kingly power and kicked Satan out of heaven (1914) Rev 12:10

 and then his presence coming to execute judgement, at  Armageddon, obviously very visible

2 Peter 3:12 “as you await and keep close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah,  through which the heavens will be destroyed in flames and the elements will melt in the intense heat”

On 10/11/2016 at 2:01 AM, JW Insider said:

Maybe. But I have to wonder why a person would "stick their neck out" sometimes with an actual "month" and "year" or even attempt to pinpoint a specific day such as October 1, 1914 or "the fourth day of the seventh [Jewish] month of 1874" or "Passover 1878" or even as John Aquila Brown was quoted earlier:

"We have seen also, in deciding on the other chronological periods, that many proofs point out the year 1844 as a remarkable crisis. . . . I submit therefore as a memorable circumstance, that the 49th jubilee year, reckoning from the rise of the Babylonic monarchy, or the period of Nebuchadnezzar's ascending that throne . . . would take place January 1, 1845. . . . the commencement of an everlasting jubilee. . .  I conclude, therefore . . . from the rise of the four monarchies . . . to their final dissolution, there will be . . . 2520 years . . . and will terminate January 1, 1917." (p. 152)

This seems a bit arrogant when Jesus & Paul said:

(Acts 1:7) . . .“It does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction.

(1 Thessalonians 5:1, 2) . . .Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night.

It is difficult to understand how someone can make a prediction without taking into account Jesus' words, and yet it becomes possible to rationalize, in spite of Jesus' words:

*** w68 8/15 pp. 500-501 pars. 35-36 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
This is not the time to be toying with the words of Jesus that “concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Matt. 24:36) To the contrary, it is a time when one should be keenly aware that the end of this system of things is rapidly coming to its violent end. Make no mistake, it is sufficient that the Father himself knows both the “day and hour”!
36 Even if one cannot see beyond 1975, is this any reason to be less active? The apostles could not see even this far; they knew nothing about 1975.

 

 

 

True....

How does Jesus’ illustration of the fig three fit into this?

“Now learn this illustration from the fig tree: Just as soon as its young branch grows tender and sprouts its leaves, you know that summer is near. Likewise also you, when you see all these things,  know that he is near at the doors”.

I am kind of more inclined like the Praeceptor to think that it was more of “I don’t want to die”. But on the other hand, death would have meant their reward of heavenly life, so maybe it was the fact that they wanted to see the vindication of Jehovah’s name in their life time, but one could also argue that what better vantage point than heaven to see this,....  

I have to wonder too, why would one want to stick ones neck out....

I am trying to put myself in their shoes, especially with Russell and his associates, how exciting it must have been to be discovering  Bible truth, a bit like solving a mystery in an Indiana Jones movie,  and how tempting it must have been to get carried away in interpreting Bible prophesy. As we know, Russell for a time even saw Bible prophesy in the Pyramids....

I guess it’s natural to assume that YOU are the one who is going to see the fulfillment. We have been saying the end is NEAR  for over a hundred years, and this is technically true since 100 years in the grand scheme of time is not really that long, especially when 1000 years is as a day to Jehovah.  That’s why I would find it a little hard to believe that two years for example would hold much significance, when we used to say that was the period of captivity to Babylon. (1916 –1919, think it was) I always kind of thought that didn’t sound right so when the brother (br. Lett?)  asked that “million dollar question”, I guessed it immediately, because it made so much more sense (period of captivity to Babylon from the first apostasy in the 1^st century up to when  Russell started to pave the way as Jehovah’s messenger  (rattling of the bones)). Sorry I digress a little here, but it’s just to show that what was previously 2 years, became  nearly 2000 years, much more realistic.  Back to my point, 100 years in comparison is nothing, but admittedly it’s not long looking back, but it can appear long when you are looking forward.  So if we were to say Armageddon won’t come for another 100 years, well, all of us posting on here would no longer be alive, so then it would be rather long! And it would definitely not feel like it was near!  So this is why I think it was more natural for them to put a time limit on it during their life time.

 But I can see why you would say it is a little arrogant, especially when one proclaims that "millions now living will never die”. That does seems kind of presumptuous, although I believe it was said in genuine faith. What I can’t understand is that after a series of disappointments I wonder why the slave is trying to explain the generation again. When bro. Splane introduced it on broadcasting I don’t remember him saying  “by popular demand” or “some have wondered” or “some found it difficult to understand” ....etc. therefore I will explain it using this chart....etc.  

Since you still keep in touch with a few Bethelites, would it be possible to find out the reason WHY the overlapping generation was explained again?

4 hours ago, ThePraeceptor said:

Before a few days ago I didn't know M.J.Penton, C.O.Jonsson and others even existed. You can safely say I was a happy man according to Psalm 1:1. ;-)

Now that I know some more things about them I just feel sad about these people that, when out of the congregation, couldn't go on with their lives and "pursuit happiness" but had to "research" and write books etc just to prove that THEY were right...

I hear you!

I look at it his way though, information IS power. But you are so right when you say they.." had to "research" and write books etc just to prove that THEY were right..."

THAT was their downfall, and pride. It always is. So if we keep information from making us haughty (merely informed/empowered) then we can still be happy 

P.S I like to read both the good and bad reviews when buying something or booking a vacation. I just like to be informed about the positive and the negative, it makes me feel...um...yes, empowered

19 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Well, that would mean you don’t know the person your defending very well then.

Being “dogmatic” in arguing against the WTS 607BC and 1914AD is his forte. And he personally has stated as much.

Why would an honest Witness find a need to read apostate books to satisfy their need to know if they are false, and is a misrepresentation of the WTS. If one is interested in 586/7BC? All that is needed is to research history.

But people like JWinsider that agrees with Carl Olof Jonson assessment by calling the Works of Rolf Furuli dishonest, is the very definition of apostasy.

Now your statement makes no sense. JWinsider is the last person you should be using as a fine example of being a witness. But, that's your god given right. And I don't need to prove anything that shouldn't already be in one’s heart if you’re and honest and true witness.

I guess this is where that revered experience (“real life and experience”) comes into play. Raymond Franz was a good friend of mine. But that never stopped me from expressing how foolish and ignorant he had become by listening to his Df’d very good friend and apostate. But I have dealt with hundreds of others, if not thousands.

Yes, this point has been exhausted already by many here. Unfortunately, you defend people without having all the “facts” on how I’ve been treated here. In this respect, I’m not here to be defended like JWinsider? I’m here to show the dishonesty, deception and misrepresentation of the WTS. I don’t need a rapport with anyone.

But it’s interesting how you all of a sudden chose to defend JWinsider, when you haven’t with others. Kind of reminds me of Anna from the old forum.

 

 

 

I really do not feel like there is any point in arguing with you extensively, merely a few points to make sure other readers do not misunderstand.

1. I never said I wanted to read C. Jonsson's apostate book. I was referring to his treaties he sent to the society in the 70's, he was still a Witness in good standing then.

2. I said I was going to stick with the WTS because they are the best out there. And I said JWInsider said something similar. Where doesn't that make sense?

3. Please get out of the habit of assuming. The best thing to do is ask questions. Such as: "when you said this and that did you mean this?" It is very frustrating when you attribute thoughts to people, when the person didn't even think them. When I said I like real life and experience, why did you think that included reading apostate books? I did not mean that at all. Also I don't believe R. Franz was a good friend of yours. I think you made that up.

4. I have quite a few facts on how "you've been treated here", from the other forum as well. And yes, I am Anna from the other forum, I kept my name just like you and the others did.

5. I don't think you meant to say "I’m here to show the dishonesty, deception and misrepresentation of the WTS"

No need to reply to this. I don't really want to talk to you anymore. It seems like you are suffering from some kind of persecution complex and that hampers normal discussion. Thank you.

On 10/6/2016 at 5:23 AM, JW Insider said:

I think that if 587 were ever accepted we would not use it to end 2,520 years in 1934 so that we could reach 2034. If the WTS had wanted to reach 2034 it was still possible by pointing to the fact that there is always the possibility of 120-year-olds still alive in 2034. And of course, 120 could be argued to have a similar meaning in Noah's generation.

(Genesis 6:3) . . . Accordingly, his days will amount to 120 years.”

Because of the thousands of references to 1914 in the history of the Watchtower magazine (over 4,000 of them just since 1950), it's hard to see why 1914 would be tossed out just on account of a potential for a 20 year adjustment. Even if we accepted 587, we could still use 607 as the beginning of the time when Jehovah replaced the Assyrian empire with his "servant" the Babylonian empire in order to punish the nations around them (including the desolation on Judea and Jerusalem). It would not be any different from what has already been said about Babylon:

*** ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 par. 21 Jehovah Profanes the Pride of Tyre ***
He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble.

*** it-2 p. 1136 Tyre ***
Since the nations mentioned in the prophecy of Jeremiah were to “serve the king of Babylon seventy years” (Jer 25:8-11), this suggests that both the prophecy of Isaiah and that of Jeremiah related to Nebuchadnezzar’s campaign against Tyre.

In other words, the Watch Tower writers are already very aware that the "70 years" need not run from the destruction of Jerusalem, but can (and should) run from the beginning of Babylon's hegemony. The original tradition that Barbour utilized to reach 1914 came from chronology by Christopher Bowen, and likely included Even-Tide by John A Brown, but another book that Barbour claims to have studied (Horae Apocalypticae) mentioned 1914 directly by adding 2,520 years to the beginning of the Babylonian conquest -- the 70 years. A Bible Student site shows this at http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/history/05 Horae Third Edition Chronology.htm

Of course if calculated from Nebuchadnezzar's own accession and invasion of Judah, B.C. 606, the end is much later, being A.D. 1914; just one half century, or jubilean period, from our probable date of the opening of the Millennium.

This could also have started at the time of Nebuchadnezzar's time as an army general, or when his father first started their campaigns after the fall of Assyria in 609 BCE. The chronology appear to match within one to two years, depending on how soon after Assyria fell that Babylon would have begun their campaign for empire.

What would be ideal for the GB is to find a good reason to keep 1914 or at least 1919 without any need for chronology to reach the date. I'm sure they are already aware that the Bible only ties a time period of 1,260 days to the Gentile Times, not 2,520 -- so any major change to the chronology would have to address that problem, too. It might seem weak as a stand-alone doctrine, but the WTS has always seen a lot of significance in the reaction of a council of churches to the League of Nations in 1918 and 1919, during the same time period when the WTS underwent persecution nearly to the point of destroying the WTS. This is seen as prophetically significant even though there is no independent Bible chronology that points to 1919. Yet, there are several publications that mention 1919 more than 1914:

• In Isaiah's Prophecy I, the score is 27 to 10 (1919 mentioned 27 times, and 1914 only 10 times)
• In Isaiah's Prophecy II, the score is 67 to 20
• In Know Jehovah, the score is 82 to 31
• In Paradise Restored, the score is 105 to 67

And several other books are nearly tied or both dates are mentioned dozens of times. In God's Kingdom Rules book the score is 34 to 65. The Revelation Climax book scores 102 to 77, Worldwide Security scores 32 to 31.

1919 is critical because it is the means by which the GB gains authority. A "foundation" document or "foundation" event has always been necessary to the authority of any particular religion, and it is extremely difficult to have such a date (or document) appear in the recent past; too many people remember the chaos of disbelief and doubt. It is always more credible at a distance.

(Matthew 13:57) . . . A prophet is not without honor except in his home territory. . .

 

Sorry I forgot to comment, well I can't properly yet because I hate numbers (although they are very useful ) so it takes me a while to digest everything, but in essence I can see where you are coming from.

Have you noticed a common thread though, whenever anyone talks about the "end" it always comes in THEIR life time, (regardless of any Generation calculations) Russell 1874, Rutherford 1925, Franz (was it?) 1975 and now, although there is no date as such it is still supposed to happen in the current GB's life time. Isaac Newton was the only one that I know of that "predicted" the end well past his.

6 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Hello, Anna.

I guess a wolf in sheep clothing makes no sense to you, but it does to me. The best way to deceive people is to make them think, that these opposing views merit consideration if other active witnesses are thinking along the same line apostates have been for decades with this issue. Personally, I think it’s a clever scheme. Unfortunately, it’s easy to spot.

No respectful active witness would argue against their own core value as much as JWinsider has. I also know my opponents and which other apostate sites they visit and write in.

But, I also have experienced Df’d witnesses pretending to be active and speak against the WTS. Perhaps reasoning becomes cloudy when one hasn’t experienced it.

 

 

I do not think JWInsider is arguing against his own core values at all.

I do not agree with everything JWInsider posts, and he himself is rarely (if ever) dogmatic. None of us should really insist that we are right, because regarding some subjects we REALLY DO NOT KNOW,  not a 100% and we won’t know until Jehovah finally reveals it all to us, (probably after Armageddon). What we are doing is reasoning on the information available to us. Some of that information may be wrong as well.

I cannot really comment properly on the 607/ 587 Chronology because I have not researched it enough myself like you and JWInsider have. I would have to read Carl Jonsson’s treatise, and a host of other things. I do not think I will any time soon, the main reason being that it is not THAT important to me (echoing the Praeceptors sentiments). I am more of a practical person, although I do find that kind of thing very interesting, to me there is nothing like real palpable evidence, not on paper, but real life. To me real life and experience proves that what we call Jehovah’ organization really does seem to have his blessing. It is by no means perfect, and I am good with that because that would not be realistic, but it is the best that’s out there, (echoing JWInsiders sentiments) so I’m going to stick with the best unless they prove otherwise…

I have personally not experienced Witnesses pretending to be Witnesses and actually be apostates or Df’d. That is not to say I am not aware or familiar with apostate reasoning and propaganda (Malawi/Mexico, NGO, Cigarettes, pedophilia, flags, Hitler, blood fractions, organ transplants, theocratic warfare, pyramids, Beth Sarim, etc. etc…….too many to name, and not including a host of “conspiracies”) . Also, I have read Raymond’s book, which was very interesting and informative, but also filled with little twists and half truths. So you see I am not ignorant when it comes to apostate reasoning.

By the way you write, it appears that you are pretty young. Age, experience and Christian qualities teach that we can put our point across with tact, and without resorting to insults and ad hominem remarks. Jesus and Jehovah never do that, and we should try to imitate them as best as we can, although it can be a struggle at times (talking about myself).

1 hour ago, AllenSmith said:

 

I’m also glad you finally admit you’re not what you claim to be, and ex-bethelite in good standing. Only and apostate or Df'd witness can make such outlandish claims and still think, the truth is on their side. I debate frequently with apostates and Df’d people to know, you have the same intention of discrediting the WTS with your misrepresentation, in this forum and other apostate sites where you make people think your and active witness as well. Just another wolf in sheep’s clothing. As I have said it since last year. Unfortunately, last year, you had the ability to “delete” me when your lies were challenged by me.

 

I am sure JWInsider is quite capable of defending himself but I am wondering why you insist on him being either an apostate or df'd? And why would he post on apostate sites, as a supposed apostate himself, posing as an active Witness?  Your reasoning makes no sense to me.....

On 10/6/2016 at 7:15 PM, HollyW said:

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.  

Of course everything we need is already in the Bible. No one is disputing that. We are talking about dispensing Bible truth though. The Bible itself, sitting on peoples bookshelves gathering dust, isn’t going to do much good at all. The Bible does not jump off the shelf and “dispense” itself in due season, someone has to do the dispensing. I have quoted this scripture before on here I am sure; Romans 10:15, but there is also the example of the Ethiopian eunuch at Romans 8:30-31 “Philip ran alongside and heard him reading aloud Isaiah the prophet, and he said: “Do you actually know what you are reading?”  He said: “Really, how could I ever do so unless someone guided me?” So he urged Philip to get on and sit down with him....." And of course there are scores upon scores of other verses in the Christian Greek scriptures regarding evangelizing.

As long as the WTS adheres to the Bible, then what they say is the word of God essentially, because it is FROM the word of God. Of course we can argue about interpretation, but so far, I cannot disagree with most things the WTS “interprets” . Even my Bible study understood that the WTS publications are not intended to replace the Bible, but are simply Bible AIDS. JWs do not follow the WTS, they follow Jesus, and cooperate with the WTS. Big difference.  If ever the WTS starts “teaching” contrary to the Bible then I will be among the first to exit. And in case you want to argue chronology, then I have to let you know, getting chronology wrong is not an indicator to me of “teaching contrary to the Bible” . Chronology is something non essential to me. I cannot see how one’s relationship with Jehovah would have to depend on dates.

On 10/6/2016 at 7:15 PM, HollyW said:

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.

No, that was actually not the point at all.

The quotation marks are rather important because as I am sure you are aware, in speech they indicate a kind of irony, same goes for written language. They are called sneer quotes.  In other words, the kind of ‘bible reading’ these people were doing was actually NOT independent or exclusive Bible reading at all, it was merely “so called” (such) Bible reading, whatever that entailed, regardless, or not including reading it apart from WTS publications. So that was the point the authors were implying. In other words they do not believe someone reading the Bible would come to the same conclusions as Christendom if they were totally ignorant of Christendom's ideas and teachings in the first place. Would someone reading  the Christian Greek scriptures with no prior knowledge of the teachings, customs and traditions of Christendom  think that God was three persons in one? Would they think that Jesus wanted us to celebrate his birth every year? Would they think God wants them to take up arms and fight? I don't think so.

On 10/6/2016 at 7:15 PM, HollyW said:

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!

OK. This is the funniest thing I have read on here! Thank you for the laugh. Now seriously, you are not being serious right? But if you are, then it proves my point above.

6 hours ago, Anna said:

As I see it, you would have three choices: 1.Don't let it bother you, pray about it, and wait until perhaps things cleared up 2.if it really bothered you, talk to a mature Christian about it, or 3. Leave, because why would you stay if you don't agree.

What you do, would be up to you. What you chose to do in the end would probably depend on what you disagreed with, and how important it was to you.

I realize you are talking about a scenario where it concerns another religion besides JWs, but the answer is essentially the same, if it bothers you that much, then do something about it. I should have included a fourth option, which would be research, but I was assuming that  research was already done, as I believe someone would not disagree with something just for the sake of it, but would have a legitimate (at least to them) reason for their disagreeing.This goes for JWs also.....

20 hours ago, HollyW said:

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?

As I see it, you would have three choices: 1.Don't let it bother you, pray about it, and wait until perhaps things cleared up 2.if it really bothered you, talk to a mature Christian about it, or 3. Leave, because why would you stay if you don't agree.

What you do, would be up to you. What you chose to do in the end would probably depend on what you disagreed with, and how important it was to you.

On 9/27/2016 at 2:14 PM, HollyW said:

Don't you think that's why they added "or harbor private ideas" at the end of their statement?

He does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbor private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding.

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".

11 hours ago, HollyW said:

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:

 

[w81 8/15 p.28-29] From time to time, there have arisen from among the ranks of Jehovah’s people those who, like the original Satan, have adopted an independent, faultfinding attitude. They do not want to serve “shoulder to shoulder” with the worldwide brotherhood. (Compare Ephesians 2:19-22.) Rather, they present a “stubborn shoulder” to Jehovah’s words. (Zech. 7:11, 12) Reviling the pattern of the “pure language” that Jehovah has so graciously taught his people over the past century, these haughty ones try to draw the “sheep” away from the one international “flock” that Jesus has gathered in the earth. (John 10:7-10, 16) They try to sow doubts and to separate unsuspecting ones from the bounteous “table” of spiritual food spread at the Kingdom Halls of Jehovah’s Witnesses, where truly there is ‘nothing lacking.’ (Ps. 23:1-6) 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!

 

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

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.

On 10/3/2016 at 10:59 AM, JW Insider said:

 The God's Kingdom Rules book gives us another glimpse into the reason, and it's very consistent with the reason that invariably follows the context of prior claims just like it. It's so that we have more trust in the men who "discerned" these things in advance. If we can be impressed that a "true prediction" as important as this one could have been predicted so many years in advance, then we will be more apt to believe that the persons behind that prediction were "spirit-directed." We will be more apt to believe that the entire "spirit-directed" organization that these men represented must have been blessed with powers of discernment that carries over into all other teachings. In other words, our belief that they were able to make this prediction can lull us into a false sense of security. It may have the effect of motivating us to defend a false teaching because we feel it must be "spirit-directed.
 

 

This is just my opinion, trying to be logical about it: Anyone with the right qualifications (long years of faithful service, spirituality,  being of the anointed, and rubbing shoulders with the right people) can become a member of the GB. Besides that, there really is nothing "special" about any members of the GB. I believe any JW who knows their Bible can come to the same conclusions as the GB, and I am sure there are hundreds of brothers and sisters who have already, before it ever becomes an "official" teaching, come to the "right" conclusion about a specific subject themselves. I don't want to brag, but it has happened to me several times. (And I can't even say my Bible knowledge is THAT good). So does that mean I was spirit directed? Of course not. No more than the members of the GB are. But somebody on earth has to take the lead of course. It would also be good however if the "leaders" were able to humbly accept mistakes and not feel the need to have to "appear infallible" because everybody knows they are not anyway.  I am aware that they are concerned with "the sheep in their care not losing their confidence in them". Because I guess if that happened everything would come crumbling down? I don't really think so. You mentioned the "overlapping Generation Theory" that was so "masterfully" explained by Br. Splane. The truth is that IF 587 was the TRUE date of Jerusalem's desolation, that would buy us 20 more years, and if we assumed a generation to be 100 years it might make the  "overlapping" unnecessary. We have "dug" ourselves in so deep with 1914 (now with the Kingdom book) would going back on that date cause the "sheep to lose confidence in the slave"? I don't know how others feel, but I don't think so. After all, is being in the Truth about dates, or is it about our relationship with Jehovah, and our trust in Him? I wonder if the insistence on 1914 is merely to "save face" or is it because the slave REALLY believes 607 is the correct date? On the other hand, no one can deny that 1914 really was a pivotal date in world history. This cannot be said so much about 1934 except that Hitler appointed himself Fuhrer in October of that year.....How about Hitler becoming Fuhrer in 1934 being the direct opposite of Christ who would have been made King in 1934, and Satan who was hurled out of heaven exerting his influence on him (Hitler) to start WW2? Doesn't sound any more unbelievable to me than an overlapping generation ....

On 9/28/2016 at 3:54 PM, HollyW said:

Thank you, Anna!  That certainly supports the fact that the statement on page 20 is false.  Quite a bungle, wouldn't you say!

Now if they would just admit the statement on page 22 is also false.

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.....

9 minutes ago, HollyW said:

Eoin, the key is for the WTS to tell the truth about when it was that they began to discern the sign of Christ's presence in 1914.  That way you'll finally believe what several of us now have already told you: i.e. it was not in 1914 that they began to discern the sign of Christ's presence in 1914.  It wasn't until long after 1914 that they began to discern the sign of his presence in 1914.

You're absolutely correct that they could not have discerned something that was not there, yet that is exactly what they said they were doing from 1876 to long after 1914.

Can I put an end to this argument (discussion)? On page 50, paragraph 5 and 6 of the book says:

"As we saw in Chapter 2 of this book, the Bible Students spent decades pointing out that the year 1914 would be significant in fulfilling Bible prophecy. However, at that time they believed that Christ’s presence had begun in 1874, that he had begun to rule in heaven in 1878, and that the Kingdom would not be fully set up until October 1914. The harvest would extend from 1874 to 1914 and would culminate in the gathering of the anointed to heaven. Do mistaken ideas such as these cast doubt on whether Jesus was guiding those faithful ones by means of holy spirit?

⁶ Not at all! Think again of our opening illustration. Would the premature ideas and eager questions of the tourists cast doubt on the reliability of their guide? Hardly! Similarly, although God’s people sometimes try to work out details of Jehovah’s purpose before it is time for the holy spirit to guide them to such truths, it is clear that Jesus is leading them. Thus, faithful ones prove willing to be corrected and humbly adjust their views.—Jas. 4:6."

3 hours ago, HollyW said:

Doncha hate it when that happens.  

So, in what way did I read your answer improperly?  Please explain.

 

" there is nothing wrong with a personal opinion, it is the advocating or insisting on it". I would never insist on my opinion with the friends. I will mention it once, have a discussion,  but I will not keep on going on about it.

I am talking about it here, as this is a controversial section, and people have the choice to either come here and read it or not. In this regard I am not pushing my opinion on a captive audience. In fact I don't think I am pushing my opinion at all (correct me if I am wrong) I am merely explaining how I feel and why.

On 9/26/2016 at 7:07 AM, JW Insider said:

Me, too.

 

I wasn't suggesting that it was haughtiness or self-serving just to use the slogan. (Although that could be true, too.) I was thinking that it could be an indication of haughtiness in several ways:

It's fine to try to fill in the blanks, but why is it necessary to call your current solution and claim that it is the one that is proven to be correct by all the facts and evidence. In the case of the MILLIONS campaign, we made "sure" predictions for 1925 with "incontrovertible proofs." They were claimed to be  even more sure than 1914. Now, it's fine and appropriate to share this knowledge and explain why we believe it is Biblically supported. But it seems quite different (and haughty) to claim that our explanation is the explanation, and that others need to believe it, too. This seems especially odd if we had just failed at 100% of the verifiable predictions for 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, 1915, and 1918. If the "need to finally get one right" influenced the predictions for 1925 then that is also a form of haughtiness.

There is a humble way to explain prophecy and interpretation and a haughty way. There seems to be only one reason that someone says something will happen instead of being discreet and saying that if our understanding is correct, such-and-such may happen. (You might remember that this change from "may" to "will" was exactly what happened with the Millions campaign slogan.)

But there is another way that haughtiness can enter the picture. What if we, personally, kept telling people about our résumé  but always hid or shifted away from anything embarrassing. That's wrong, but probably normal, and there is no reason to shame ourselves. But what if we also made incorrect claims about our history, admitting some things as they happened but making other things sound better than they really were? No matter what the purpose, this is dishonest, but if we keep repeating the history over and over, and focusing on the exaggerated or untrue portions, then it is likely because we want to boost our own ego. (There are about a dozen times, for example, when we have published a "false" claim about what we had predicted for the year 1914, and at least another dozen times, when we published a misleading claim.)

 

Mostly true. As you know, I find it curious that "we" find it necessary to keep "explaining" the Generation. (Actually, it really gets on my nerves. So much so that I think I will have to go to the bathroom when we are going to go over the chart in the Kingdom Book). The question is, what can we do about it? Nothing really. Well there is something, we just continue doing our part as the Praeceptor rightly reminded me, concentrate on helping other see the fundamental truths in the Bible and the comfort for the future, and let the "haughty" (it that's what they are) worry about what they've said or not said. I have to keep telling myself this.

After all we will all stand before Jehovah individually.

9 hours ago, ThePraeceptor said:

 

Anna, an elder cannot tell you what you are supposed to believe. No man can or should. We grow our christian maturity by studying and trying to apply the scriptures in our life immitating Jesus' example. This is what makes Jehovah happy and this is what is gaining us His approval not the exact meaning of a word in a prophecy. I'm more than sure that you know all this better than me. If an understanding comes that we don't agree with or can't fully comprehend what should we do? Believe it blindly? Discard it? Oppose it? None of this! Expect Jehovah and He will clear out any doubts or incomprehensions. What did the first congregation do on the matter of circumcision or preaching to the gentiles? These things were not well received by everyone for years. ;-)

Let them worry about that. Luke 12:42-48 is very clear. If the "steward" acts in ways not ascribed to him by his appointment, WILL answer for them to the Lord.

 

PS: Wow! I realy liked that prophecy.pdf! Great find and thanks for sharing!

Thank you for your kind reminders. I appreciate it!

On 9/25/2016 at 0:25 AM, HollyW said:

I'm all for you having your own opinions, Anna, but what I posted is from your own religious leaders and I'm not sure they want you quibbling and mouthing objections to what they've said, do you?  You seem to be coming up with all sorts of excuses not to accept what they've said.

Does JW Insider share the view of the men on the WTS Governing Body, the viewpoint I posted from the Revelation Climax commentary or is he voicing his own opinion? 

You didn't read my answer properly.

19 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

 

Let's get real here! I'm not going to worry about the colour of my shoelaces when I am out in the pouring rain!

Thanks for the prophecy .pdf by the way. Most interesting.  

I agree with everything that you and the Praeceptor have said.

That is my point: why is the Slave "worrying" about it?

And you are welcome

22 hours ago, ThePraeceptor said:

Of course the answer will be that elder's opinion on the matter.

Why we keep discussing the symbolic meaning of the generation is beyond me. I get that it's fun to do it and even helpful, if done among brothers who try to encourage and fortify in the faith one another. Discussing such subjects in a place where a number of opposers are lurking and will not hesitate to use anything we write to slander WTS and the brotherhood is not something we should do.

I totaly agree with the statements made in the w13 1/1 p8

HAVE JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES GIVEN INCORRECT DATES FOR THE END?

Jehovah’s Witnesses have had wrong expectations about when the end would come. Like Jesus’ first-century disciples, we have sometimes looked forward to the fulfillment of prophecy ahead of God’s timetable. (Luke 19:11; Acts 1:6; 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 2) We agree with the sentiment of longtime Witness A. H. Macmillan, who said: “I learned that we should admit our mistakes and continue searching God’s Word for more enlightenment.”

Why, then, do we continue to highlight the nearness of the end? Because we take seriously Jesus’ words: “Keep looking, keep awake.” The alternative, to be found “sleeping” by Jesus, would prevent us from gaining his favor. (Mark 13:33, 36) Why?

Consider this example: A lookout in a fire tower might see what he thinks is a wisp of smoke on the horizon and sound what proves to be a false alarm. Later, though, his alertness could save lives.

Likewise, we have had some wrong expectations about the end. But we are more concerned with obeying Jesus and saving lives than with avoiding criticism. Jesus’ command to “give a thorough witness” compels us to warn others about the end.—Acts 10:42.

We believe that even more important than focusing on when the end will come, we must be confident that it will come, and we must act accordingly. We take seriously the words of Habakkuk 2:3, which says: “Even if [the end] should delay [compared to what you thought], keep in expectation of it; for it will without fail come true. It will not be late.”

An Elder should not really give his opinion, especially as regards whether someone will have God's approval or not. My point in asking that question is to see whether it is something we as JWs are supposed to believe. Because I sure find it hard to believe, and I wholeheartedly agree with you that "why do we keep discussing it"? (on JW broadcasting as "masterfully" explained by Br. Splane, then later on broadcasting I forget by whom, and now we will be discussing it in the Cong. Bible study). It is not really important, as you pointed out, and so I cannot understand why it is so important to the Slave, important enough to construct a chart, and discuss it twice, a few months apart.

I totally with agree WT 13 1/1 p3. as well. The thing is who is "we"? As in "we" have had some wrong expectations. You and I have only had wrong expectations because the Slave has had wrong expectations first. If the slave hadn't had those expectations and if they hadn't written about them in our publications then I doubt any of us would have had those expectations in the first place. Highlighting the nearness of the end is one thing, but placing time limits on it is another. I do not want to criticize the Slave for this, I am merely trying to understand the reason for them insisting on trying to figure out the generation, after not a very good track record of getting that kind of thing right.....I hate to think this way, but what IF this overlapping generation runs out too? Not that I am bothered by that personally, because I believe we should all "keep in expectation of it and be "ready" regardless of any time limits and numbers", but how will this make the Slave look? So I am thinking they must be very confident that they are correct with this overlapping Generation theory......

Here is an interesting article regarding JWs as "prophets" from a non JW"s point of view.

JW prophesy.pdf

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

 Fortunately, the problem could be far enough off into the future not to matter, we hope, but the issues surrounding the re-definition of "this generation," for example, are already building towards a similar time limitation. Brother Splane even came up with a new "Chart of the Ages" to explain it.

 

That is something I cannot understand. WHY try to explain the generation? Obviously this "new  (overlapping) understanding" is not something just put out there to see if it sticks. The GB never publicize anything unless it has been studied, and re-studied and re-searched, sometimes even over several years apparently. So it has to have been the same in this case. What I would like to know is what is it that made them arrive at this conclusion?  And also why did they think there was a need to explain the Generation again?  It is obvious in Jesus day it was 40 years. Abraham's 400 years was 4 generations. So a generation is either 40 or 100 years. Why overlap anything??? There is nothing about overlapping in the scriptures is there?

Next week, when we study it in our Cong. Bible study, I am going to ask an elder if someone does not believe in the overlapping generation, would they lose Jehovah's approval. I will let you know what answer I get .

21 hours ago, JW Insider said:

 

Still, we have no problem finding quotes from the older publications that spoke of Russell and even Rutherford as "prophets" in this era. But is it the course of humility or a course of pride to speak of the false teachings of others, but never admit that we could have been guilty of a "false" teaching or a "false" prophecy? I know it's OK to say that a teaching or prediction was "mistaken," or that it was a "old light," or a previous teaching before the "light got brighter," or that it was "the right thing expected at the wrong time" or the "wrong thing expected at the right time." We might even say that it was "untrue." But, for many decades now, we can never bring ourselves to admit that we were teaching a "false" teaching.

 

I agree with you there. It seems that "we" just cannot plainly come out and say "we were wrong" instead of beating around the bush or using all the other adjectives you described. I think this may be because "we" feel, as God's ambassadors that, we really cannot, or should not make any mistakes in the eyes of others. I remember when I was a child, I thought my mother was perfect, that she never made any mistakes. She was my protector and someone I looked up to. Of course as I got older I realized she was not perfect. I also realized she was trying to keep me from finding out her imperfections by never actually admitting when she erred. I asked her why. She said it was because she did not want me to lose my trust in her. That she wanted me, as a child, to view her with confidence. This reminded me of something I read about the GB saying something very similar. That they do not want the "other sheep" to lose their confidence in them. I think this may very well be the reason why "we" just cannot plainly and freely admit mistakes, after all, "we have a reputation to live up to"!

On 9/22/2016 at 5:10 PM, JW Insider said:

I was trying to come up with the most controversial question that Witnesses might ever have to face. This one might appear silly at first, but it also might draw out some of the same controversies that we most often attempt to avoid.

The "Millions" Campaign ran from about 1918 to 1925. It was the primary focus of the Watch Tower sponsored public talks,billboards, assemblies, books and booklets publications from during those years. The primary slogan and talk title was called "Millions Now Living Will Never Die."

Because it started in 1918, and it made a very specific prediction, it seems that as of some time earlier this year, this prediction can no longer come true under any possible circumstances or calculations.

This brings up multiple questions:

1. Is there any way to interpret the title (slogan) in any way so that it could still turn out to be true?
2. Is the Watchtower, or Watch Tower Society or "Governing Body" or "Faithful and Discreet Slave" always immune from the charge of "false prophecy" no matter what is published and promoted? Is there anything that could ever be said or published that could actually fall into the category of false prophecy?
3. Might it reflect poorly on the heart condition (motivation) of any persons who were drawn to learn more and who then converted to the Bible Students during the period from 1919 to 1925?
4. Is it possible that the Governing Body's claim that the Governing Body was appointed as the "faithful and discreet slave" in 1919 is presumptuous? Indiscreet? Haughty? Self-serving? Or is it possible that the date is just a bit too early? Perhaps 1919 was not an appropriate time? Even if 1914 was the start of the Kingdom, does it have to be 5 years later (1919) that the "slave" was appointed? Why not 6 years, or 16 years?
5. Does it matter? Isn't it just as possible that, even if this was a false prophecy, that the Watch Tower's Governing Body was still appointed as the "faithful and discreet slave" either with the idea that this was not a serious prediction, or it wasn't really a prophecy, or perhaps that Jehovah and Christ Jesus could still see the heart (desire, goal, motivation) of these brothers, and knew that a cleansing operation would produce the correct outcome in time?
6. Is it possible that Jehovah and Jesus approved of this type of promotion of the good news because it was a way to promote the other core doctrines of truth which have not changed much at all through the years? Is it possible that this method of drawing in converts to the faith was just a temporary way to cut through the noise of so many competing voices crying out for attention?

1)      How about  John 11:26? Obviously  those people in Jesus’ day died. But they didn’t die in Jehovah’s memory and will have the prospect of living forever. Although obviously Rutherford was being literal, we could look at it in a similar way, so in view of the above, it was not a lie.

2)      In my opinion the GB etc. never prophesied about  anything as such. What they put forward was merely the interpretation of existing Biblical prophecy.

3)      Not sure about that one...

4)      After the disappointment and anticlimax of 1914 I guess they  now felt excited and vindicated when they were exonerated and released from prison, and felt this was a good a time as any to “recognize” themselves as the FDS with now the great task of taking care of the domestics and advertising the King and his Kingdom. They recognized that evidently the job Russell started was not done.

5)      To me personally it does not matter. Fundamental truths are the same and have been almost since the inception of the Bible Students. I don’t view it as a false prophesy, merely an eager and ambitious statement coming from one man and his associates excited about this “new” understanding and  Bible prophesy regarding this subject.  After all, this IS the good news in the Bible, so I don’t think that just because the timing is off, one has to view it with suspicion, or that it should have never been talked about. "Millions now living will never die" WILL eventually happen.

6)      Possible....Plus Jehovah’s organization on earth will never get everything  perfectly right in this system, for obvious reasons.

So that's my two shillings