Jump to content
The World News Media


PeterR

Recommended Posts

  • Member
1 hour ago, PeterR said:

why do our publications say "Jesus evidently meant ..." and then go on to give a meaning that is outside all acceptable norms?

"Evidently meant" to me implies "we understand by inference". I'm not writing these publications so do not choose the specific wording, but that's how I understand it anyway. I can't speak for what others do or don't understand, but I can't really see why there is an issue. I certainly don't find myself disputing with any of the JWs I know on these matters or that it is a bone of contention for them. Perhaps (as@JWInsider suggests) they ARE all hiding behind avatars and the like. Perhaps I'd better get one myself!  :ph34r:

1 hour ago, PeterR said:

outside all acceptable norms

Now that is simply not true. Outside norms that maybe you define for yourself as acceptable, and likely this is what many others feel. But I haven't noticed that the way in which we understand the concept of the "generation" Jesus spoke of is in any way unique. It may well be a unique application of that particular scripture verse, but the concept behind our understanding of the term is not.

1 hour ago, PeterR said:

why promote it as something given by God?

I thank God for any meal prepared by my wife, and I thank her as well. I don't understand your problem with this, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 13.1k
  • Replies 151
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

@Eoin Joyce quoted one of the first real hints of the overlapping generation doctrine from the Feb 15, 2008 WT (above). Above, I also quoted a WT QFR that mentioned overlapping generations from t

I'm glad that The Librarian moved the "generation" posts from the unrelated topic over to this topic. It was clear that on this topic, the questions remain unsettled to some and unsettling to others.

Because knowing ... when others do not ... is what has given, scam artists, flim-flam men, shamans, priests, and ecclesiastical tap-dancers  power prestige, and money, and position in various societie

Posted Images

  • Member

There is a very simple solution to all of this ...uh .... we have already defined one generation as really being two generations that overlap... two, yet one ...uh ... so ... as the time runs out  having ALREADY established this principle ... we can make a THIRD generation overlap, and it STILL be one generation that will not pass away, before all these things occur ... and even a FOURTH or FIFTH generation overlap, and STILL call it the generation that will never pass away until all these things occur .... or ...uh ... or as many as we need to keep the whole thing from unraveling.

PROBLEM SOLVED!

.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
53 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

I thank God for any meal prepared by my wife, and I thank her as well. I don't understand your problem with this, really.

 

Me too. But I thank him for the food that was available to make the meal. If my wife burns it or adds way too much salt I don't pretend that God did the cooking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

.

Thank you for a PERFECT analogy.

I don't see many of those.

.

 

16 minutes ago, PeterR said:

 

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

I thank God for any meal prepared by my wife, and I thank her as well. I don't understand your problem with this, really.

 

Me too. But I thank him for the food that was available to make the meal. If my wife burns it or adds way too much salt I don't pretend that God did the cooking.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
7 hours ago, Anna said:

If we assume the meaning of the generation is the same as in 70 CE, then should we be expecting some other significant sign (other than what has happened since 1914) to which the "this generation will by no means pass away until THOSE THINGS happen" would apply? What things could they be?

This is a follow-up because I remember I never tried to address a very good question you had about the fig tree under another topic:

(Matthew 24:32-34) . . .“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. 33 Likewise also you, when you see all these things, know that he is near at the doors. 34 Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things happen.

This was right after Jesus had reached the main point of his answer. Again, Jesus had been asked for a sign of his visitation (parousia) which to them meant, essentially, "the end of the world" and the ushering in of the Kingdom. The first words out of Jesus were "Don't be fooled" because there are a lot of things you might think of as signs (wars, rumors of wars, etc.) but this is not a sign of the end. ("but the end is not yet"). The most direct answer, then, to the disciples' question is the verse where Jesus tells them what the true sign really is: "THE SIGN of the Son of man in heaven" that is immediately preceded by "signs" in the sun, moon and stars:

(Matthew 24:29-31) 29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with a great trumpet sound, and they will gather his chosen ones together from the four winds, from one extremity of the heavens to their other extremity.

The order of each of these statements is probably not as important as we have made them out to be in the past. We used to split up Matthew 24 into three parts and claim that certain parts meant the generation of 70, certain parts meant the generation of 1914, and certain parts meant both. This is proven to be untrue and untenable by the accounts in Mark and Luke, which is probably part of the reason for the change in the Insight book already shown above.

But after Jesus makes statements about what the sign is NOT, and then makes the above statements about what the sign IS, Jesus also provides a summary conclusion, a kind of moral of what they should now learn from the answer he gave, and what this means in a practical way. It seems that Jesus' conclusion also makes a good answer to the initial question of the disciples. Note:

QUESTION:

(Matthew 24:3) 3 While he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached him privately, saying: “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?”

SUMMARY ANSWER:

(Matthew 24:36-44) 36 “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father. 37 For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 38 For as they were in those days before the Flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, 39 and they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 40 Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken along and the other abandoned. 41 Two women will be grinding at the hand mill; one will be taken along and the other abandoned. 42 Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. 43 “But know one thing: If the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 On this account, you too prove yourselves ready, because the Son of man is coming at an hour that you do not think to be it.

And then Jesus gave some more illustrations and examples about how the disciples should prove themselves faithful and discreet under those circumstances.

Working backward from that "summary" answer Jesus gave, his audience would come to the same conclusion about why wars, famine, earthquakes, etc, were NOT part of the sign they asked for.

At any rate, I think this is the best context in which to understand why Jesus would say what he said about the "fig tree." It seems that Jesus is saying this as another way to answer to their question about how to determine the "sign" that all these things will happen. But it's now in the context of how they would ask the question in the context of the full answer that Jesus has given them. So "all these things" could very well include the wars, earthquakes, food shortages, pestilence, and of course, finally, the fearful signs in the heavens. All these things will be looked at over this "season" that they are in, and they would want to know which of them is a real sign, and which isn't. So Jesus has given them a way to understand the "season" they are in -- the generation living between right then and the final destruction of Jerusalem as the center of Jewish worship. These things would take place, but it didn't mean "the end" that they were asking about (his parousia/visitation) would occur immediately.

That is the idea that Luke gives when you read Jesus' answer in Luke 21. Look especially at 21:10.

There are other possibilities, of course, but this way of looking at it does not conflict so much with the current understanding in the Watchtower, where the main difference is that for the "1914 generation" the "parousia" is started at that time. But Jesus answered the question to the disciples about when the parousia would be visited upon the stones of the Temple grounds in Jerusalem. It seems reasonable that Jesus answered that question for them. In fact, the disciples, called that prediction about the Temple stones coming down as "these things." To them, THAT was the "parousia." The judgment visitation, the visible manifestation from the heavens that would be the same as the sun and moon no longer giving their light, and the stars falling. But Jesus said there was no sign that could help them prepare for that, because it would come as a thief. However, he did let them know they were in the season, and that when all things up to and including the fearful signs in the heavens occurred, that they should know that Jesus was near.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, PeterR said:

 

Me too. But I thank him for the food that was available to make the meal. If my wife burns it or adds way too much salt I don't pretend that God did the cooking.

Perfect analogy. So if your wife burns your food what is your attitude toward your wife? Do you beat her over the head with the burnt food or do you thank her and be patient with her for trying her best as an imperfect person? Mt. 24:49!!!

"Love  is PATIENT  and kind.  Love is not jealous. It does not brag, does not get puffed up,   does not behave indecently does not look for its own interests does not become provoked It does not keep account of the injury It does not rejoice over unrighteousness,  but rejoices with the truth.  It bears all things,  believes all things,  hopes all things,  endures all things Love never fails." 1 Cor. 13.

But what if the spiritual food gives you an upset stomach? Or you do not like the taste of it?

 "Whether good OR bad,  we will OBEY the voice of JEHOVAH our God," Jer. 42:6 

" Be OBEDIENT to those who are taking the lead among you and be SUBMISSIVE" Heb 13:17. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
14 minutes ago, bruceq said:

Perfect analogy. So if your wife burns your food what is your attitude toward your wife? Do you beat her over the head with the burnt food or do you thank her for trying her best as an imperfect person?

 

 

Actually as it happens I tend to cook more often than my wife. And I also burn and over-season things from time to time. I beat neither myself nor my wife. But we know when to throw something out and order take-out instead.

What we do not do is claim to our guests that our failure to repurpose God's ingredients correctly is part of his gift to us. 

By always attributing the ingredients to God, and always accepting that any repurposing is down to us, we don't stray into the territory of - your plated meal is totally from God ... um ... unless it gives you a funny tummy later, in which case it wasn't.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
9 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Aposticizing from Former TRUTH .jpg

Usually, it works something along the lines of this:

JTR posts this graphic on his congregation's information board. It is taken down. He posts a similar one, for he has hundreds. In time, he is disfellowshipped for violating one of the many verses discussed here and on other threads against public rabble-rousing in the congregation.

Then he TELLS everyone he was just minding his own business one fine day, when he casually let slip he didn't buy the overlapping generations' explanation, and he was summararily DFed for that reason alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

or as many as we need to keep the whole thing from unraveling.

You have probably hit the nail on the head here James. (Not sure who the "we" is for you). Anyway it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what "we" think because the reality will unfold anyway. Until it does, "we" can explain, rationalise, adjust as "we"wish. The way things turn out, however, is not the province of "we", and if "we" want to be there when the whole thing does resolve (or unravel depending on your point of view), then "we" had better be sure "we" are rootin' for the right side.

Ah do declare!...Ah think ah've got it!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, PeterR said:

If my wife burns it or adds way too much salt I don't pretend that God did the cooking.

Sorry to hear that your wife may be culinarily challenged!. However, you took the bait and came out, so I at least applaud your belated honesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Usually, it works something along the lines of this:

JTR posts this graphic on his congregation's information board. It is taken down. He posts a similar one, for he has hundreds. In time, he is disfellowshipped for violating one of the many verses discussed here and on other threads against public rabble-rousing in the congregation.

Then he TELLS everyone he was just minding his own business one fine day, when he casually let slip he didn't buy the overlapping generations' explanation, and he was summararily DFed for that reason alone.

Yes, that's probably how it works. He's probably also wanted for crimes against humanity. Thankfully the "overlapping generations" doctrine was the way he was eventually brought down.

It's a bit like Al Capone and his taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • stephwat

      stephwat 3

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • George88

      George88 556

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.