ANOTHER Difficult Doctrine. With a less complex explanation.

[b4ucuhear]

On 12/17/2019 at 2:12 PM, JW Insider said:

The only problem I have with putting too much emphasis on 1914 is that Jesus warned us NOT to look to wars and pestilence and earthquakes as part of any SIGN that could be used to inform us about the parousia. Recall that Jesus said, there would be a great judgment upon the Jerusalem Temple where it would be completely destroyed. So the disciples asked if they could learn if there would be any signs so that they would know WHEN this parousia might happen. So Jesus said, don't be misled, you will see lots of things that are bad, the kinds of things that fool people into thinking they are seeing a sign, but that this particular judgment will come like a thief in the night, by surprise, as if with no warning. But that was their warning - so they would be prepared for the right reasons at all times. It was enough to know that it MIGHT come in their own lifetime.

I'm not sure I follow what you are trying to say here. I agree that we put too much emphasis on human-inspired dates - including 1914. I also get how the Scribes, Sadducees and Pharisees of that time/generation were described in Matthew 12:38, 39 (and elsewhere): "...some of the scribes and Pharisees said: "Teacher, we want to see a sign from you." 39 In reply he said to them: "A wicked and adulterous generation keeps on seeking a sign,..."  But Matthew 24 has Jesus' faithful disciples asking a legitimate question with pure motives, unlike the Pharisees' request for signs to trick Jesus or for their own lack of faith. True his answer in vs 4 was: "Look out that nobody misleads you, 5 for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will mislead many." He then follows in vs 6 with "Your are going to hear of wars and reports of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for these things must take place, but the end is not yet." Jesus then continues with an ongoing list of events including in vs 45 of the appearance of a "faithful and discreet slave."

So my question to understand your point is: Are you lumping in the entire prophecy as dealing with events that might "mislead" them? (You had stated: "Jesus warned us NOT to look to wars and pestilence and earthquakes as part of any SIGN that could be used to inform us about the parousia") Or... was Jesus specifically cautioning them not to be misled by the false Christs he refers to directly afterwards in vs 5? And continuing on with other events that would form part of the sign they actually asked him about. It would seem redundant to warn them not to look to these signs if they weren't on alert to look for them in the first place. Why even bring it up?

Also, who and at what point would a faithful and discreet slave manifest themselves and in what way? I'm not clear on your reasoning here as well. If Jesus was referring to his rulership over early Christians and onward, who would be filling that role during the centuries the Catholic church et al held sway for the parable of the wheat and weeds? I'm not saying I agree or disagree, rather I am not clear of where you are coming from as to this part of the discussion. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

@b4ucuhear 

Quote " Also, who and at what point would a faithful and discreet slave manifest themselves..."

I don't think there is a F&DS as such. I don't think anyone should give themselves that title. If Jesus as the Master returns and finds a certain group of humans doing what he wants them to do, then Jesus himself will decide who that 'slave' is. BUT for a person or group of people to exalt themselves to such a position, well the scriptures tell us what happens to those that Exalt THEMSELVES. 

This bit is so funny :-

Quote " Dates are of little concern to anyone who intends their dedication to God to be forever. "

So, in that case, the Bible Students and Watchtower writers / GB / JW Org et al, are not intending to dedicate themselves to God forever. Because they have always guessed at dates, told lies about dates, destroyed peoples lives with dates, and made a mockery of God with their guessing about dates. It has always been GOING BEYOND THE THINGS WRITTEN. 

 

[b4ucuhear]

27 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

To be wrong in understanding, in expectations and beliefs, is normal human business. To revise things we see as wrong is also normal and beneficial.

Thank-you for being honest enough to acknowledge that. Some posters here only see from dark glasses and do not appear to be honest even with themselves. So on your point above, we are in agreement.

29 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

What is NOT normal is when leaders, in this endless process of revision, condemn and exclude all those who disagree.

To be fair, "shunning," "excommunication," "disfellowshipping" isn't just a part of JW's beliefs. In fact, other religions feel they have a scriptural basis for doing just that. How much they implement it is up to them. But there is a practical aspect to this as well. It is one thing to have "doubts" and not be fully convinced about certain things - even disagree, but another try to "draw disciples away after themselves" - or basically start your own religion based on your own personal thoughts. Right now, we enjoy world-wide unity in thought, belief and action. (even though there may be variances as to who believes how much and what - as evidenced on sites such as this). If someone is so disillusioned with our beliefs that they want to leave, that is a choice they can make. Some quietly leave with no fuss and just leave off. But others are very vocal and opposed within the congregation and are more disposed to tearing down than building up - causing dissensions. (Some on this site I would consider such and some I consider outright apostates who never have anything good or constructive to say.) To them I would say: "Stop wasting my time and yours and get a life. If you don't like it go." It's that simple. But others, based on the many changes that have been made, (changes that are often in line with their thinking all along) are willing to take a wait and see attitude, with the faith that if it's that important, Jesus can ensure changes are made at a rate we can handle or understand. (And NO, I don't believe that "Jesus controls everything that goes on in the congregation." I believe the other explanation given, that he grants authority and we are accountable as to how we use that authority based on God's Word. 

6 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

So, in that case, the Bible Students and Watchtower writers / GB / JW Org et al, are not intending to dedicate themselves to God forever. Because they have always guessed at dates, told lies about dates, destroyed peoples lives with dates, and made a mockery of God with their guessing about dates. It has always been GOING BEYOND THE THINGS WRITTEN. 

What an absurd conclusion to draw. But that is not surprising since I now believe you are an apostate and I shouldn't be wasting my time responding. My point btw, was that we shouldn't base our dedication to God on a date - whatever date that may be. Of course, it may not stop some from doing just that. But don't be surprised if I rarely if ever respond to your apostate views again. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

@b4ucuhear  It was sarcasm. But i see it stung. The truth as they say, hurts sometimes, and you are hurt by truth. I'm not going into the list of dates from the late 1800's through to 1975 and probably more afterwards too. You will know of such things, or you will have built yourself a wall to hide from them. 

But i see you are a typical JW, no real strength of faith, so you have to hide behind that old old word 'apostate'. 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

I would like to remind everyone that Charles Taze Russell was considered an apostate, as was Jesus.

In the very first issue of the Watchtower CTS observed that if we received a truthful statement from Satan (possibly referring to how he was viewed as "satan" ...) .... that statement is still the TRUTH.

Everything has to be evaluated on its own merits, and THAT ALONE ... irregardless of the messenger.

The FIRST refuge of the incompetent is to call someone an apostate.

The second refuge of the incompetent is to in effect say "... take your baseball, and go home.".

...

[b4ucuhear]

5 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

that old old word 'apostate'

An oldie but goodie. Especially when it's appropriate. Its not about "strength of faith or hiding." It's about not stupidly wasting time on nonsense. 

2 Tim. 2:23 "Further, reject foolish and ignorant debates, knowing they produce fights. 24 For the slave of the Lord does not need to fight...showing restraint when wronged, 25 instructing with mildness those not favorably disposed. Perhaps God may give them repentance leading to an accurate knowledge of truth, 26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the Devil, seeing that they have been caught alive by him to do his will." 

1 Timothy 6:3 "If any man teaches another doctrine and does not agree with the wholesome instruction, which is from our Lord Jesus Christ, nor with the teaching that is in harmony with godly devotion, 4 he is puffed up with pride and does not understand anything. He is obsessed with arguments and dates about words. These things give rise to envy, strife, slander, wicked suspicions, 5 constant disputes about minor matters by men who are corrupted in mind and deprived of the truth..."

I couldn't have said it better myself.

20 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

The FIRST refuge of the incompetent is to call someone an apostate.

The second refuge of the incompetent is to in effect say "... take your baseball, and go home.".

That is a cop-out explanation/repsonse. For a better one read the Insight book under Apostasy to show you what a scriptural view of apostasy is - including within the Christian congregation. And how it is proper and scriptural to avoid such individuals. Both Jesus and Russell were considered apostates by apostate religion - which in effect is a compliment. It's like the world telling us we aren't doing the right thing in behaving like them and yet we are doing the right thing in not behaving like them. It's a matter of perspective. The scriptural perspective fortunately, doesn't rest on your personal opinions. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

The Insight Book is from the Org, because they are frightened to answer honest questions. 

And you @b4ucuhear just follow the GB / Orgs directions blindly. 

I like the second scripture you used 

1 Timothy 6:3 "If any man teaches another doctrine and does not agree with the wholesome instruction, which is from our Lord Jesus Christ, nor with the teaching that is in harmony with godly devotion, 4 he is puffed up with pride and does not understand anything. He is obsessed with arguments and dates about words. These things give rise to envy, strife, slander, wicked suspicions, 5 constant disputes about minor matters by men who are corrupted in mind and deprived of the truth..." 

The Bible Students and the Directors / GB / of Watchtower & JW Org have constantly argued about things. GB members have bee d/fed. Some on here that have worked in Bethel can give you first hand information about regular squabbles there. 

And the puffed up with pride bit, defo' refers to the GB calling themselves the F&DS. 

[JW Insider]

It finally appears that we are winding down and I like that @b4ucuhear has already tried to reduce this conversation to only the most important points. However, there is still a chance that someone will read what @César Chávez said, and begin to believe that there are now some new scholars that agree with the Watchtower chronology, which Cesar claims 'has been correct all along.'

On 12/23/2019 at 5:37 PM, César Chávez said:

. . .  to give you a comprehensive new look into chronology.   Jonathan Stökl, Caroline Waerzeggers book was from 2015, while Knoppers, Gary N.; Ackroyd, Peter R.; Grabbe, Lester L.; Fulton, Deirdre N is from 2009. Nothing old about their new understanding.     What continues to be your sources, COJ, Wiseman, Grayson. Update your sources and try not to be dismissive just because scholars don’t agree with tainted or outdated, material.

Let's just make this simple in case others might look at what was written here and get confused. You are pretending that the Watchtower has been "correct all along" and your evidence is supposed to be found among these six "new" sources. From what I have found so far, the folowing is more accurate:

"New Chronology" Scholar	Agrees w/ WTS for Jerusalem destruction - Nebuchadnezzar's 18th/19th year as 607-606	Agrees with COJ, Wiseman, Grayson - Nebuchadnezzar's 18th/19th year as 587-586
Jonathan Stokl	Disagrees with Watchtower dates	Agrees with COJ, Wiseman, etc.
Caroline Waerzeggers	Disagrees with Watchtower dates	Agrees with COJ, Wiseman, etc.
Gary Knoppers	Disagrees with Watchtower dates	Agrees with COJ, Wiseman, etc.
Peter Ackroyd	Disagrees with Watchtower dates	Agrees with COJ, Wiseman, etc.
Lester Grabbe	Disagrees with Watchtower dates	Agrees with COJ, Wiseman, etc.
Deirdre Fulton	Disagrees with Watchtower dates	Agrees with COJ, Wiseman, etc.

Of course, now you are telling me that I am putting too much emphasis on the word destruction, as if the Watchtower doctrine doesn't emphasize the destruction of Jerusalem.

On 12/23/2019 at 5:37 PM, César Chávez said:

The sad thing, you’re fixated on the word “destruction”. Look at other words like “restoration and exile revisited” to give you a comprehensive new look into chronology.

But here are just a few of the Watchtower references, using only articles from the last 10 years, and some samples from just a few of the books. Who is it, you think, who is fixated on this word destruction?

*** w18 February p. 3 par. 2 Imitate the Faith and Obedience of Noah, Daniel, and Job ***
Apostate Jerusalem was nearing its foretold destruction, which occurred in 607 B.C.E.

*** w16 June p. 16 Questions From Readers ***
apostate Jerusalem prior to its destruction in 607 B.C.E.

*** ws14 7/15 p. 18 par. 9 “You Are My Witnesses” ***
After that, Jehovah continued warning his people until the year 607 before Christ, when Jerusalem was destroyed.

*** w14 7/15 p. 25 par. 9 “You Are My Witnesses” ***
That was 125 years before Jerusalem’s destruction in 607 B.C.E.

*** w11 3/15 p. 31 par. 14 Keep Awake, as Jeremiah Did ***
Some Jews as well as non-Israelites survived Jerusalem’s destruction in 607 B.C.E.

*** w11 10/1 p. 26 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part One ***
the year of Jerusalem’s destruction. Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses say that it was 607 B.C.E.?

*** w11 10/1 p. 29 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part One ***
But if the evidence from the inspired Scriptures clearly points to 607 B.C.E. for Jerusalem’s destruction, why do many authorities hold to the date 587 B.C.E.?

*** w11 10/1 p. 31 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part One ***
Counting back from that year would place Jerusalem’s destruction in 607 B.C.E

*** w11 11/1 p. 25 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part Two ***
then his 18th year would be 607 B.C.E.—the very year indicated by the Bible’s chronology for the destruction of Jerusalem!

*** w11 11/1 p. 27 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part Two ***
This, therefore, supports the date of 607 B.C.E. for Jerusalem’s destruction—just as the Bible indicates.

*** w11 11/1 p. 27 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part Two ***
Those statements strongly indicate that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C.E. As the above evidence shows, that conclusion has some secular support.

*** w09 3/15 p. 14 par. 14 Keep Your Eyes on the Prize ***
In time, the entire nation turned apostate, resulting in its destruction in 607 B.C.E.

*** g 1/11 p. 11 A Book You Can Trust—Part 3 ***
In 607 B.C.E., Babylonian armies destroyed Jerusalem and took the survivors off to Babylon, where they were treated cruelly.

*** g 5/09 p. 11 A Receipt That Corroborates the Bible Record ***
Nebo-sarsechim was one of King Nebuchadnezzar’s commanders at the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E.,

*** rr chap. 6 p. 67 par. 13 “The End Is Now Upon You” ***
Thus, both time periods would end in 607 B.C.E., the exact year in which Jerusalem fell and was destroyed, just as Jehovah had foretold.

*** rr chap. 7 p. 74 par. 8 The Nations “Will Have to Know That I Am Jehovah” ***
from the time of the Exodus to the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E.

*** rr chap. 8 p. 89 par. 14 “I Will Raise Up One Shepherd” ***
In 607 B.C.E., with the destruction of Jerusalem, the “high” kingdom of Judah centered in Jerusalem was brought low

*** rr chap. 11 p. 126 par. 17 “I Have Appointed You as a Watchman” ***
who spoke to God’s people in the period surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E.

*** rr chap. 16 p. 175 par. 9 “Put a Mark on the Foreheads” ***
Ezekiel’s prophecy was fulfilled in 607 B.C.E. when the Babylonian army destroyed Jerusalem and its temple.

*** rr chap. 16 p. 178 par. 17 “Put a Mark on the Foreheads” ***
As we saw earlier, those who survived Jerusalem’s destruction in 607 B.C.E.

*** dp chap. 4 p. 50 par. 8 The Rise and Fall of an Immense Image ***
These words applied to Nebuchadnezzar after Jehovah had used him to destroy Jerusalem, in 607 B.C.E.

*** cl chap. 8 p. 78 par. 5 Restorative Power—Jehovah Is “Making All Things New” ***
Just imagine how faithful Jews felt in 607 B.C.E. when Jerusalem was destroyed.

*** dp chap. 6 p. 96 par. 27 Unraveling the Mystery of the Great Tree ***
If we were to count 2,520 literal days from Jerusalem’s destruction in 607 B.C.E.,

*** po chap. 2 p. 20 par. 27 The Immortal Possessor of the “Eternal Purpose” ***
God’s protection through the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple by the armies of Babylon in the year 607 B.C.E.

*** po chap. 14 p. 173 par. 11 Triumph for the “Eternal Purpose” ***
Before the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E.

*** jr chap. 15 p. 188 par. 13 “I Cannot Keep Silent” ***
True worshippers were affected by the appalling conditions that prevailed before Jerusalem’s destruction in 607 B.C.E

So you seem to be conflicted over this fixation the Watchtower has with the word "destruction." But you know you can't admit a conflict with the Watchtower itself, and therefore you "project" that conflictedness onto me. I'm willing to do what I can to help you work through this. I've seen it before with others on unrelated topics. What you might need to do as a start, is to spell out exactly what you think the right solution is. You might not be ready to be definitive, and that's OK, but you should start with what you think is probably correct, and how you think the Watchtower should change their wording so that they don't appear to be "fixated" on this word "destruction." How do you think they should have worded it instead?

If you try to answer that question, I'll know you are serious about researching this issue. If you won't even try, then I'll have to consider the next most likely assumption about your motives. 

[Srecko Sostar]

53 minutes ago, b4ucuhear said:

It is one thing to have "doubts" and not be fully convinced about certain things - even disagree, but another try to "draw disciples away after themselves" - or basically start your own religion based on your own personal thoughts.

Does this means how GB and elders have no doubts today, and never did. And was/are in agreement (fully convinced) in all false teachings from past to today and to tomorrow, and how such false and error teachings still deserved to be called "Past Truth", "Old Light", "Temporary Truth", "Present Truth" and similar ????.  :))))

55 minutes ago, b4ucuhear said:

But others, based on the many changes that have been made, (changes that are often in line with their thinking all along) are willing to take a wait and see attitude, with the faith that if it's that important, Jesus can ensure changes are made at a rate we can handle or understand.

So, many are willing to wait and keep on preaching errors in various modes as individuals who have; doubts, are not fully convinced, are in disagreement or are in full agreement?

55 minutes ago, b4ucuhear said:

(And NO, I don't believe that "Jesus controls everything that goes on in the congregation." I believe the other explanation given, that he grants authority and we are accountable as to how we use that authority based on God's Word. 

It is possible, but then what about verses who speaking about Jesus as Shepherd of his congregations, Master, Lord who have stars aka elders in his hand. ?? And how He is the One who sets and removes elders from position?? This sounds to me how He should be in control. :))

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

There are people that will stand in the middle of quicksand, and declare adamantly that they are not ... even as they drown, and their head disappears from sight.

There is NOTHING you can do for such ones.   Nothing at all.

They are doomed to always be wrong, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

 

[b4ucuhear]

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

It is possible, but then what about verses who speaking about Jesus as Shepherd of his congregations, Master, Lord who have stars aka elders in his hand. ?? And how He is the One who sets and removes elders from position?? This sounds to me how He should be in control. :))

You can answer your own question by reading the actual Bible passage you are referring to and ask: Was Jesus saying he "controlled" all behaviour and decisions in the congregation? Or was it that the elders were responsible to use the authority granted to them in harmony with his direction and God's Word? What was going on in the congregations even while he was speaking? (Answer: apostasy, immorality, lukewarm Christianity...) Did Jesus cause or control that? Or what happened soon after that? (Answer: A great apostasy that started from within the congregation). Can we rightly blame Jesus for that as well? How do other factors come into play, such as freedom of choice; imperfection; recognizing (or not) the leadings of God's spirit; scriptures like 1 Timothy 5:24... Added to this is the fact that even while men in authority use their authority to judge others, they themselves are judged and held accountable. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

It is still so funny how JWs need to compare modern day Elders to those Anointed Christians of the first century. Anointed Christians back then were inspired of God, hence they wrote Bible books that we have now. Obviously the apostates were not inspired of God.

Elders, just like the GB, are not inspired by God, and do not have a clue. There really is no comparison. 

I have faith that God through Christ will inspire Anointed ones again soon.