Timeline of the 'Light Getting Brighter'

[Evacuated]

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I don't get it

Ask Rick

[Evacuated]

46 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

As every one knows, there are mistakes in the Bible

As everyone knows, the Bible is a collection of books and as such needs definition. We all know it has contained to a greater and lesser degree both copyists and translators errors over the years, even one or two blatant falsifications.That has not stopped it's circulation or reduced it's value even although certain texts have been for various reason in error. That is probably the spirit behind the argument that error in the text was no reason for not distributing the Society's literature.

[JW Insider]

4 hours ago, Gone Away said:

We all know it has contained to a greater and lesser degree both copyists and translators errors over the years, even one or two blatant falsifications.

There is a surprising nuanced qualification to most of the items that are listed by @The Librarian above as doctrinal topics that are unchanged since 1879 (or at least since they were first mentioned. I'd think you are right that the copyists' errors and blatant falsifications such as in 1 John 5 were at the top of Rutherford's thinking.

• Still, Rutherford said surprising things about evolution.
• Russell said surprising things even about the Ransom that have been dropped or changed over the years.
• "God's name is Jehovah" is actually not a teaching of the Watchtower. The earliest Forward to NWT and supporting Watchtower articles documented that "Yahweh" was considered to be the preferred choice to be closer to the Hebrew, but that Jehovah is used because it is more commonly known.
• The fourth bullet point about what Russell taught about determining Christ's presence through the chronology of the 6,000 years and the "Gentile Times" is completely false. The 6,000 years was ended initially in 1872, and the Gentile Times were ended in 1914 and then 1915 and then 1914 again. So none of this tied to the fact that he started the "presence" in 1874.

There is actually a point to be made on every one of those bullet points supposedly representing unchanged doctrine, but I'm sure that wouldn't interest too many.

Back to the issue of the Bible contains mistakes.

This is kind of an obvious point as you made it. But the logic Rutherford used would have been a mistake on an LSAT or even some "Bar Exam" questions for barristers/lawyers. He mixes apples and oranges by NOT speaking of those types of problems (copyists errors and deliberate falsifications) in the 7th volume. Rutherford says he is referring to misapplications and misunderstandings. Reading the full quote without leaving anything out of that context, shows this:

Watch Tower, April 1, 1920, p.103:

• "The Finished Mystery," as one of the series of seven previously announced by Brother Russell. The doctrines therein set forth are in exact harmony with those announced by the other six. That it contains some mistakes is freely admitted. Even the Bible contains some. By mistake we mean a misunderstanding or misapplication. It does not contain any erroneous doctrines. It does attempt to carry and, we will be pardoned for saying, succeeds in a measure at least, the measure which seems to be contemplated by the commission given to the six described in Ezekiel 9. The Society in its annual official meeting adopted it as Volume VII of the series of STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES when, by an overwhelming majority, it required each officer to be elected to state that he accepted it as Volume VII: It was therefore in exact harmony with this that any ecclesia subsequently would ask its prospective elders and officers : "Do you accept the Seventh Volume and are you willing to teach it?" . . .  We prefer to have someone to teach us who is in harmony with the Society and its work."

Anyone who reads the Seventh Volume today will be surprised that you cannot go even two pages anywhere in the book without finding something else that you could be disfellowshipped for insisting upon today. There are literally hundreds of false teachings. Many more of its teachings are considered false today than those that might still be considered true. 

[Evacuated]

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

By mistake we mean a misunderstanding or misapplication.

As you point out, the 1920 WT article gives no examples of these.

Copyist and translator error, tampering, falsifications, additions etc. are still a possibility. Also, Luke 4:9-11 could be cited as a bona-fide misapplication. Luke 19:16 and Acts 1:6 are examples of genuine misunderstanding.

The erroneous logic process you refer to is an example in itself of how a mistake can be made, but, in the absence of a response from the writer himself, we can only assume or guess, (educated or otherwise), at what was meant by "misunderstanding or misapplication".

The basic argument in the WT appears to be that mistakes in text or explanation occur in all human writings. This is extended to include the Bible. The existence of such in the so called Vol7 of Studies in the Scriptures was not felt (at the time) to constitute sufficient reason for rejecting it outright, any more than the BIble would be rejected on the same basis due to any (unidentified)"misunderstanding or misapplication" .

On reflection, using the Bible as a basis for this argument without considerable clarification regarding what was meant seems risky. (I would have cited the Encyclopedia Brittannica as an example more easily identified with), but I can see that Rutherford was using a rather extreme example to support his point

An affirmed acceptance of the substance of that Bible study aid was seen at the time as a necessary criteria for those serving in a representative way within the publishing organisation of Bible Students ("The Society"). I believe it was a time when loyalties were being tested, with some similarities to the events recorded at 1Ki.18:1-40.

I have always liked the thought expressed at Ps 119:160 which seems to allow for the accumulation of a "patina" due to human imperfection, even in the transmission of the word of God: 

"The very essence ("substance" NWT 1984) of your word is truth,"
 

 

[Srecko Sostar]

Regardless of the terminology and methodology we use to logically lay the foundations of what is true or false, with a mistake
or without a mistake, correctly understood or incorrectly understood, and so on ... there is one more thing to be taken into account. That is: self-persuasion and self-deception.

Most of people, of us,  will think/thinks about self with believing that they are among those who are healthy, beautiful, smart, good, ... belonging to the right, true group, religion, politics, family, nation... etc.

And with more self persuasion and self deception we are more sure in fictitious, wrong, err, distorted picture about yourself, who we are, what we are, and by that about other people, who are belong or not belong in "our group" or in "our idea" of how other people should  be look like, think like, act like and all other likes.

Good thing in such "self" can be self confidence and similar "selfie" that help us to survive in society.

Bad thing is this. If we are wrong, and many times we are :)))), we are, because of our self persuasion and self deception in position to deceive other people because they can see our sincerity and our faith in "story" we talking about. Some will be sceptious but some will accept "our faith in truth", but  that is in fact "faith in error, misrepresentation, misunderstanding, mistake, misapplication ...". :))

[Evacuated]

@Sreko Sostar. I think you are basically saying that sincerity is good, but one can be sincerely wrong and therefore at times a posssible danger to others who might be inclined to follow men.

The Scriptures consistently warn us about this , but, thankfully, reassure us that Jehovah and His Son Jesus Christ know their sheep, and will ensure that they are cared for, kept safe, and importantly, are forgiven for their errrors. Rom.14:4 is very good advice to keep us focussed on the "more important things", and to avoid the pitfall of looking to men for salvation.

[Srecko Sostar]

13 hours ago, Gone Away said:

The Scriptures consistently warn us about this , but, thankfully, reassure us that Jehovah and His Son Jesus Christ know their sheep,...

Thanks again GA. 

But   , as you well aware too, we can again make same self-deception, with such quote that "Scriptures ... reassure us that Jehovah and His Son Jesus Christ know their sheep..." Yes, i can accept that "They know their sheep", but in the same time humans(religions, believers) are implement that statement how they (people) know what They (JHVH and Jesus) know... how particular group are their sheep. :)) 

"I know what God know about me" - can you accept my statement as true, correct?  

[Evacuated]

23 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

same self-deception

Doesn't really matter in the context you refer to.

"If anyone thinks he has acquired knowledge of something, he does not yet know [it] just as he ought to know [it]. But if anyone loves God, this one is known by him." 1Cor 8:2-3 also

"Therefore, let those of us who are mature be of this mental attitude, and if you are mentally inclined otherwise in any respect, God will reveal the above attitude to you." Ph 3:15

So in summary, if I am sinning beyond redemption, there is no hope for me. Heb.10:26

But , from the scriptures quoted above, if I love God, He knows me, and if I have the wrong attitude, He will put me right.

30 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

"I know what God know about me" ?- can you accept my statement as true, correct?  

"Now, when I talked to God I knew he'd understand
He said, "Stick by my side and I'll be your guiding hand
But don't ask me what I think of you
I might not give the answer that you want me to"  ?
 

 

 

[Jesus.defender]

The "light" is NOT getting brighter. It is flickering on and off!

 

IE:

Will the men of Sodom be resurrected?

Yes....Watchtower 7/1879 page 8
No.....Watchtower 6/1/52 page 338
Yes....Watchtower 8/1/65, page 479
No.....Watchtower 6/1/88, page 31
Yes...Live Forever (old Ed.) page 179
No....Live Forever (new Ed.) page 179
Yes...Insight, vol. 2., page 985
No...Revelation book, page 273.

[Jack Ryan]

Old light is New Again:

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

On 10/25/2017 at 11:37 PM, Anna said:

Just like understanding how the body functions was progressive for medicine (and still is).

Contemplating the differences between various "doctrines" and what is True does make me think of certain bodily functions.

The only "saving grace" is that everything that lives poops and pees, and there are NO exceptions.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

If someone cutting firewood accidentally kills me with an ax ... I could as I was dying forgive him for his error, which I would in fact do ... but how much better is it to not be too close to careless people who think they are God's gift to chopping wood.

(Let the reader use discernment ....)

Its better to be a live dog than a dead lion ...... but better still to be a live lion.

... AND A LOT EASIER.

There is the eternal question "How much wood would a Woodchuck chuck, if a Woodchuck could chuck wood?"

Probably none at all ... as they have other concerns.

And who was that Masked Man ... I never even got to thank him!