When a teaching changes after baptism.....

[HollyW]

1 hour ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

I'm a bit late to the table, but would like to share my thoughts using science as an example. One hundred years ago, science knew all they could know at that time. Today, with the exception of some, many of those facts have changed. Were they wrong? No, not for their time. Today, one hundred years later, yes they are. Why? Because there are various limitations in our abilities at any given time. One hundred years ago, we simply did not have the technology to allow us to see more of what's out there. Right now, we understand that we are limited in our abilities to understand some things, but we can predict what we think should be out there with mathematics and physics calculations. Often we have to wait for the technology to become available to test out those "theories". Some things get proven right, others get disproved and so we must move with the evidence.

So to with spiritual truths, in one hundred years time, spiritual truths will be quite different to how we know them today. A friend of mine died in 2009. Since then there have been so many changes that if he came back today he'd be mind blown! Now, think back a couple thousand years, the apostle Paul was given a vision of the third heaven. But he could speak about the things he saw. It is quite possible that part of what he saw was the spiritual paradise we enjoy today (according to current thinking) But what we know today, might be "words that cannot be spoken and that are not lawful for a man to say." Like scientists who wait for the technology to be invented to allow them to understand deeper truths about the universe, we too must wait on Jehovah, through Christ, to shine light on things we cannot see - isn't that what having faith is?

 

Thank you for joining in Mr V. Others have also posted using the comparison of science to what we believe the Bible teaches.  I don't agree with this comparison because of what the Bible tells us. 

For instance, Paul did not expect his teaching to change: Galatians 1: 8  But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! ⁹ As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

He also cautioned against being "tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine," Ephesians 4:14.

 

[LloydSt]

1. Holly said: " If the men on the governing body did claim to be infallible, what would that change for you?"

Why do I feel like I'm being set up for some quote from many years ago that someone might interpret as the governing body or a Watchtower president saying they are infallible?

So let's skip ahead.  Here's the answer to that upcoming quote (if I have guessed right).  While it may appear that they had been saying that they were infallible, actually they likely did believe that what they had come to believe was correct, perhaps even as if it came from Jehovah's mouth.  But in that, they could have been somewhat mistaken.  The happy conclusion is that, as demonstrated by the quote from the Revelation book, that, as a group, they humbled themselves and purposefully admitted that they were NOT infallible.

2. Holly said: "As you posted earlier, 1 Cor. 1:10 was Paul admonishing the Christians in Corinth to be in agreement and not be looking to a person nor promoting one person over another, even if that person were himself or one of the apostles.  It's a call for Christian unity, not a call for uniform acceptance of teachings that keep changing."

How is it even possible to speak in agreement if there is no agreement about the tenets of the group?  That makes no sense.  When there was a disagreement about circumcision, the governing body of Biblical times decided what was correct and sent out a decree to the congregation so that they would all be in agreement.  This is basic.   

3. Holly said, "Don't you count on those in other churches to ignore this very scripture and change their beliefs to yours?"

I'm not sure I know what you mean.  I know, as I'm sure you do to, that there is an almost shocking lack of agreement amongst even individual denominations, not to mention the so-called "Christian" groups as a whole, and amongst almost all other religions as well, witness the disharmony amongst Muslim religions today.  However, we welcome folks to come out from those non-unified religions to become part of one that is unified on a worldwide basis, in harmony with 1 Cor 1:10.

 

    

[LloydSt]

Holly wrote: "I think the point Shiwii is making is that you would accept the Trinity doctrine, or any other doctrine you were told to accept, in order to, as you've said, not break unity with the other members of the WTS.  This would be looking to men and not to God."

And if pigs could fly.............

That's just a word trap that he's trying to led me into. 

The governing body would never accept the trinity and neither would I.  If one doesn't know that, then one doesn't know who Jehovah's Witnesses are.

 

 

[LloydSt]

1. Holly said: "Others have also posted using the comparison of science to what we believe the Bible teaches.  I don't agree with this comparison because of what the Bible tells us. 

For instance, Paul did not expect his teaching to change: Galatians 1: 8  But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! ⁹ As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!"

Holly c'mon.  Seriously?  We're talking about the attempt at understanding the Bible to be able to preach what it says correctly.  You comment would mean that anything written by anyone in an attempt to understand God's word would by definition be "another gospel".  And it would require that someone be absolutely right about what they wrote on their first attempt and that they couldn't change.  That is ridiculous and unreasonable.  We've already covered this  

2. Holly said: "He also cautioned against being "tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine," Ephesians 4:14."

May I suggest that the very winds Paul was talking about are the non-witness ideas being floated here!

 

[Shiwiii]

1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

2. Shwiii wrote: "So you would accept that the org is right even though you know that they are not. That is called Cognitive dissonance. "

Again an attempt to put words in my mouth, a common tactic called a "straw man" argument where one takes issue with something that is easy to contend with, but which is quite different from the original discussion. 

But the answer is that if I thought I might have happened onto something that seemed more correct than what we had thought, I hopefully would just keep my big mouth shut and wait on Jehovah.  How would I really know that I was correct about a matter anyway?

Your answer here is exactly what I was saying:

Lloyd St.- I would hope that the elders would make that plain to me and I would pray that I would have the humility to accept that counsel.

It is not a "straw man", it is what you said, unless you choose to clarify further. Here you stated that if you knew better, you would still seek the elders to tell you what you really are supposed to believe. You said you would even pray that you would accept it.

1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

2. Shwiii wrote: "So you would accept that the org is right even though you know that they are not. That is called Cognitive dissonance. "

Again an attempt to put words in my mouth, a common tactic called a "straw man" argument where one takes issue with something that is easy to contend with, but which is quite different from the original discussion. 

But the answer is that if I thought I might have happened onto something that seemed more correct than what we had thought, I hopefully would just keep my big mouth shut and wait on Jehovah.  How would I really know that I was correct about a matter anyway?

The same quote of yours I quoted in the response of #1. above is the words out of your "mouth" that supports my statement. 

Why in the world would you want to keep your mouth shut? Is your opinion not worth anything? Of course it is, and the only way "progression" happens is by people questioning things. 

1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

3. "Who according to the Bible is to teach us all things? Who is to be called "teacher"? Who directs us? The answer to all of these is most definitely not an organization."

So is it you?  You're the one that has presumed to know more than the organization right?  Further, who did Jesus tell, 3 times, to feed my little sheep?  Who made the decision about circumcision that was distributed to the congregations?

  As I have already said, it is a group effort and by definition that involves organization.  They try their best to understand the Great Teacher and what is said in the scriptures and to use that understanding to build up those who want to be Jehovah's servants.  Try to grasp that.

No, I am no teacher of the Bible. I am only a person who reads it and tries to apply it to my life. I am one to question things when they claim to be of the Bible and are not. I do know quite a lot about the organization, but in no way do I know everything. You never did answer my questions, but I'll answer them for you. The Holy Spirit is to teach us of all things (John 14:26), The Christ is to be called "teacher" (Matthew 23:1-10), God directs us (Psalms 48:14). Actually Jesus only said to Peter once to feed His sheep, He asked him 3 times if he loved Him. Peter and Paul both said that circumcision was of no real value. 

Trying your best is admirable, forcing others to obey you and your belief without question is not. Building up people who want to serve God is great, it is something we all should do, but totalitarianism is the exact opposite of building up. 

1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

4. Shiwiii said, "So your hope is in the elders to tell you what to do and what not to do. This is not the "main plot" or theme of the Bible."

Again, I never said that.  Just another straw man argument that Shiwiii relies on quite heavily. 

What I hoped that the elders would do in a case where I broke from the unity of Jehovah's people is to point out that I was embarking, like Eve did, on a course of independence.  And yes, choosing independence, as Eve did, over submission to Jehovah IS the main plot! 

I understand you believe that the organization is Jehovah's organization, and submission to the org is the same as submission to God. However there is no proof of this tie between the two. Enough said on this one. 

 

1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

5. Shiwiii wrote: >Lloyd: "I would hope that just because I hit on a point or points that were ultimately correct that I wouldn't feel superior to others or try and push ahead."  Shiwiii: "No one said anything about feeling superior to others or tooting your own horn."

Dude, YOU asked me, and I quote, "So tell me this, if YOU or someone understood a scripture to mean something and it was in disagreement with the WT. YOU were reproved for this because it went against the org, and later it became that YOU were right, what would that say to You?" (caps mine)

See the words, "What would that say to YOU?"  You are asking me to come at this as if I was the one with the problem, not you.  And if I was embracing beliefs that would break unity with Jehovah's people, i would feel like I was being superior and tooting my own horn, at least in my mind.

Yes, I see your point, it is what you would feel. I did ask how you would feel. I was being short sighted in thinking that one would not become proud and boastful in the discovery of truth before the org did. I was thinking more along the lines of how one would deal with the knowledge they attained and still support the org's view. It never crossed my mind that a person would gain a large ego over it. 

 

1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

6. Shiwiii said: "This is the thinking that has been ingrained in followers to not think for themselves, or else they are being proud or boosting their own ego. This keeps people toeing the company line and turning in those who think differently.'

Wow. You really have no idea how Jehovah's people think, do you?  Dude, we've studied, sometimes for years and pondered deeply over just exactly what we are doing, thinking for ourselves, and coming to the conclusion that this is the way.  What you call "toeing the company line" is in reality a purposeful decision to remain loyal to an organization that obeys Jesus command to preach and teach the good news worldwide and has done so in over more than 700 languages with more to come, in some cases risking imprisonment or even death, and in almost all cases being made fun of, or how did Paul put it?  Ah yes, "we have become as the refuse of the world, the offscouring of all things."

Jehovah's people? Who gets to draw the lines of who is and who isn't? Anyway, back on track. When you say "we've" do you mean you helped create the doctrines to which you now follow, or do you mean "we" as a collective org? 

1 hour ago, LloydSt said:

a purposeful decision to remain loyal to an organization

while I know I have taken just a portion of your statement here, it is still within context. 

The organization prides itself on the persecution that it gets as proof, the problem is that it is usually self inflicted. Take for example the Australian Royal Comission, Candice Conti, San Diego Superior Court. The most recent is the San Diego one. The org is being held in contempt of court and sanctioned $4000 a day, yes a day for failing to provide unaltered documents in which they had previously had provided altered beyond legibility. 

2 hours ago, LloydSt said:

Instead, having received this vastly superior knowledge, we try and show gratitude and deep appreciation.  If one receives a beautiful work of art, is it wiser to condemn that art because there is a minor flaw somewhere, or would it be wiser to express gratitude that you even were able to own such a masterpiece?

This vastly superior knowledge is changing on a regular basis. What kind of trust can you put into something that is going to change next week/month/year? 

Would you drink a glass of water if it had just a little poison in it? 

2 hours ago, LloydSt said:

Fact is, you know the drill, and it seems that you have made your choice.  But you have precious little time to become humble, and pray that Jehovah allow you to return.   Everyone would think most highly of you if you did so.  But I'm gonna guess that you will remain stubborn, remain independent, and continue to choose Eve's way.  Big mistake.  Big.

It matters not what everyone thinks of me, what matters is what God thinks of me. 

 

[io.porog]

2 hours ago, HollyW said:

Thank you for joining in Mr V. Others have also posted using the comparison of science to what we believe the Bible teaches.  I don't agree with this comparison because of what the Bible tells us. 

For instance, Paul did not expect his teaching to change: Galatians 1: 8  But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! ⁹ As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

He also cautioned against being "tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine," Ephesians 4:14.

 

I think that is a misapplication of the two verses. God's qualities are clearly seen from "Creation" onward. Jesus was present as the word or logos when the universe was being made. Roman 1: 20; John 1: 1- 3. There is nothing contrary about using science to explain things. Do we not read in Job how Jehovah formed everything and put laws in place to govern those things? Did Job know everything at that time? What was Job's conclusion about creation? 

 

[HollyW]

2 hours ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

I think that is a misapplication of the two verses. God's qualities are clearly seen from "Creation" onward. Jesus was present as the word or logos when the universe was being made. Roman 1: 20; John 1: 1- 3. There is nothing contrary about using science to explain things. Do we not read in Job how Jehovah formed everything and put laws in place to govern those things? Did Job know everything at that time? What was Job's conclusion about creation? 

Where you and I differ is in using new discoveries in science as a basis for changing what you believed the Bible was really teaching when you were baptized.  Paul certainly did not expect what he was teaching to keep changing.  Discovering another planet, or that a planet really isn't a planet, can not be used as an excuse for being wrong about, say, the identity of the faithful slave, or about certain medical procedures that once were banned as being displeasing to God.  Or was that what your thoughts were when you were told the identity of the faithful slave wasn't what you had been taught it was---reasoning that since science had been wrong about a planet, it's okay for Christians to be wrong about who the faithful slave is?

btw....love the sheep.

[Witness]

On 7/6/2016 at 1:19 PM, LloydSt said:

Why are you so adverse to the logical progression of Biblical knowledge, the steadily growing light of progress and understanding? 

Of course, logical progression makes sense, if one is guided by the Holy Spirit’s direction.  But as has been brought out, the progression on doctrine has not followed logic.  Lloyd, The term “wait on Jehovah” or as you have said, “wait on Jehovah’s organization” (notice how God and the organization are as one – a duplicity Isa 46:5) in the scriptures, does not mean waiting for God to make us do what is right.  He gave us two choices, placed before us.  He doesn’t serve a spiritual plate, then later remove it by saying wait on me, because I may want you to toss out that previous spiritual gift that was flawed, and I will provide you with a new one.  Deut 30:15,19

Truly, he is waiting for us to choose life or death, through the use of our free will by obeying all of HIS direction and warnings set out in the bible.  The lie is a “spiritual paradise” where one believes safety exists(1 Thess 5:3; Jer 6:13-15); that any and all corruption that may occur within – either from wayward teaching, the wrongs done to individuals - will be fixed by God in order to keep ourselves alive while in it!  As individuals, we take action for our own sake just as Noah did. Matt 24:37; 1 Cor 10:11; Rom 12:1; Ps 146:3

 “Strive to enter through the narrow gate, for many, I say to you, will seek to enter and will not be able.” Luke 13:24 There is only one gate, Jesus Christ; any other one that we may enter can rob us of life.  John 10:7-10

"So when we obey elders, we show respect for Jehovah and Jesus, the two greatest Shepherds"  WT 11/2013

By signing your identity over to an organization, you willingly put yourself in men’s hands as a servant to obey, following their direction, when God says to us as he said in Moses’ day,

 “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil, ¹⁶ in that I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commandments, His statutes, and His judgments, that you may live and multiply; and the Lord your God will bless you in the land which you go to possess. ¹⁷ But if your heart turns away so that you do not hear, and are drawn away, and worship other gods and serve them, ¹⁸ I announce to you today that you shall surely perish; you shall not prolong your days in the land which you cross over the Jordan to go in and possess. “  Deut 30:15-18; Heb 12:25

 When do we wait on the Lord?  Scriptures refer to this when we, personally, are suffering from persecution from an adversary, or when we are weak –

But those who wait on the Lord
Shall renew their strength;
They shall mount up with wings like eagles,
They shall run and not be weary,
They shall walk and not faint.  Isa 40:31

Teach me Your way, O Lord,
And lead me in a smooth path, because of my enemies.
¹² Do not deliver me to the will of my adversaries;
For false witnesses have risen against me,
And such as breathe out violence.
¹³ I would have lost heart, unless I had believed

That I would see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living.

¹⁴ Wait on the Lord;
Be of good courage,
And He shall strengthen your heart;
Wait, I say, on the Lord!  Ps 27:11-14

He will be as a sanctuary,
But a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense
To both the houses of Israel,
As a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
¹⁵ And many among them shall stumble;
They shall fall and be broken,
Be snared and taken.”

¹⁶ Bind up the testimony,
Seal the law among my disciples.
¹⁷ And I will wait on the Lord,
Who hides His face from the house of Jacob;
And I will hope in Him.  Isa 8:14-17

For evildoers shall be cut off; But those who wait on the Lord, They shall inherit the earth.”  Ps 37:9

Wait on the Lord; Be of good courage, And He shall strengthen your heart; Wait, I say, on the Lord!  Ps 27:14

The organization has taken this term and has convinced the sheep that by remembering to "wait on Jehovah" God will correct their own flawed teachings, that God will fix them, as if saying it is talisman, a charm.  God or Jesus have never told us to listen to false prophesy or to or serve anyone but them.  Matt 16:6

“Thus says the Lord of hosts: “Do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you. They make you worthless; They speak a vision of their own heart, Not from the mouth of the Lord.”  Jer 23:16

“Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” says the Lord, “and tell them, and cause My people to err by their lies and by their recklessness. Yet I did not send them or command them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all,” says the Lord.”  Jer 23:32

The teaching that the organization is “Jehovah’s organization” is an operation of error prophesied for the time of the end. Brushing aside the New Covenant as a new way to worship, the organization has developed its own “laws” of burden as did the Pharisees, with an elder “priesthood” displacing God’s chosen priesthood; the GB supporting false prophesy and continued visions of their own minds, as well as shunning their own brothers in Christ based on a present doctrine at hand. 1 Pet 2:5,9,10; Dan 8:11,24; 1 John 3:15; 2:9-11

On 7/6/2016 at 1:19 PM, LloydSt said:

We don't serve Jehovah based on a date anyway.   

 

 

Those outside the organization might not serve God  based on a date, but in the organization you will be disfellowshiped if you choose to make known that you will NOT serve God based on any date accepted as present doctrine by the organization.  

4womaninthewilderness.blogspot.com/2014/06/operation-of-error.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CharlieM]

(Revelation 1:1, 2) A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent his angel and presented it in signs through him to his slave John, 2 who bore witness to the word God gave and to the witness Jesus Christ gave, yes, to all the things he saw. 

This is the "chain of command" Jehovah > Jesus > Faithful Slave (GB). We cannot say we're loyal to Jehovah without being loyal to Jesus and the organization. The good thing, though, is that Jehovah and Jesus are at the top of the chain, so I don't think that the GB will/can mess up so badly that it affects all the publishers around the world negatively. Just remember who is in charge.

Maybe good to watch the video "Respect Jehovah's authority" again.

Have a great day all!

[io.porog]

9 hours ago, HollyW said:

Where you and I differ is in using new discoveries in science as a basis for changing what you believed the Bible was really teaching when you were baptized.  Paul certainly did not expect what he was teaching to keep changing.  Discovering another planet, or that a planet really isn't a planet, can not be used as an excuse for being wrong about, say, the identity of the faithful slave, or about certain medical procedures that once were banned as being displeasing to God.  Or was that what your thoughts were when you were told the identity of the faithful slave wasn't what you had been taught it was---reasoning that since science had been wrong about a planet, it's okay for Christians to be wrong about who the faithful slave is?

btw....love the sheep.

Holly, maybe you've not read 1 Corinthians 13: 8 - 13? What was it that Paul expected to change? What was the current system in Paul's day? What would eventually happen? Even though some things would change, what would remain unchanged? What then is the identifying mark of Jesus followers? John 13: 35 compare 1 Corinthians 13: 8a

By the way, the personality of sheep varies from country to country, not all sheep are naturally meek or obedient. Jesus however, did say that his sheep know his voice. John 10.

 

[HollyW]

1 hour ago, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

Holly, maybe you've not read 1 Corinthians 13: 8 - 13? What was it that Paul expected to change? What was the current system in Paul's day? What would eventually happen? Even though some things would change, what would remain unchanged? What then is the identifying mark of Jesus followers? John 13: 35 compare 1 Corinthians 13: 8a

By the way, the personality of sheep varies from country to country, not all sheep are naturally meek or obedient. Jesus however, did say that his sheep know his voice. John 10.

 

I was just referring to the cute drawing of the sheep in your profile.

How do those scriptures support the idea of being required to accept certain teachings you believed were the true teachings of the Bible, only to have them changed later?

[HollyW]

2 hours ago, CharlieM said:

(Revelation 1:1, 2) A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent his angel and presented it in signs through him to his slave John, 2 who bore witness to the word God gave and to the witness Jesus Christ gave, yes, to all the things he saw. 

This is the "chain of command" Jehovah > Jesus > Faithful Slave (GB). We cannot say we're loyal to Jehovah without being loyal to Jesus and the organization. The good thing, though, is that Jehovah and Jesus are at the top of the chain, so I don't think that the GB will/can mess up so badly that it affects all the publishers around the world negatively. Just remember who is in charge.

Maybe good to watch the video "Respect Jehovah's authority" again.

Have a great day all!

Thanks Charlie, but up until a few years ago you were saying the chain of command was Jehovah > Jesus > Faithful Slave (144,000).  And that had been changed from being just the one man, Russell, which belief his successor felt was doing violence to scripture by excluding the rest of the 144,000.  Was this also an error, as they say 1975 was, that Jehovah permitted the faithful slave to make in order for them to understand they need to always look to him and the Bible?