DRAGGING UP OLD NEWS BUT STILL SOME JWs and others, DON'T BELIEVE, LOCUSTS & SUPERIOR AUTHORITIES.. WERE WRONGLY USED BY WATCHTOWER

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

Unfortunately it seems there is a young JW here that is being misguided by a man that 'thinks' he knows truth.

Can we please set matters straight about the wrong use of scripture. 

https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-april-2020/An-Attack-Coming-From-the-North/

1. The Watchtower—Study Edition  |  April 2020

STUDY ARTICLE 14      An Attack Coming From the North!

² As those Bible students soon found out, however, it can be one thing to learn what the Bible teaches about a certain doctrinal subject but quite another to discern correctly the meaning of a Bible prophecy. Why is that so? For one thing, Bible prophecies are often best understood when they are undergoing fulfillment or after they have been fulfilled. But there is another factor. To understand a prophecy correctly, we generally have to consider its context. If we focus on only one aspect of the prophecy and ignore the rest, we may draw the wrong conclusion. In hindsight, it seems that this has been the case with a prophecy in the book of Joel. Let us review that prophecy and discuss why an adjustment in our present understanding is needed.

 For many years, we have applied that prophecy symbolically to the way in which Jehovah’s people, like an unstoppable swarm of locusts, engage in their preaching activity. We understood that this activity has devastating effects on the “land,” or the people who are under the control of the religious leaders.

However, when we consider the prophecy in its context, we see that a different understanding is appropriate. Let us examine four reasons why this is so.

⁵ First of all, notice Jehovah’s promise with regard to the plague of locusts: “I will drive the northerner [the locusts] far away from you.” (Joel 2:20) If the locusts represent Jehovah’s Witnesses as they obey Jesus’ command to preach and make disciples, why would Jehovah promise to drive them away? (Ezek. 33:7-9; Matt. 28:19, 20) Clearly, Jehovah is driving away, not his faithful servants, but something or someone who is hostile to his people.

Notice that Jehovah promises to “make compensation” for the damage the locusts have caused. If the locusts picture Kingdom evangelizers, this would suggest that the message they proclaim causes damage.

Did you notice that Jehovah says: “After that I will pour out my spirit”; that is, after the locusts have completed their assigned task? If the locusts are preachers of God’s Kingdom, why would Jehovah pour out his spirit on them after they finish their witnessing? 

We previously connected the plague of locusts described by Joel with our preaching work because of a similar prophecy found in the book of Revelation. 

Admittedly, there are similarities between the prophecy in Revelation and the one Joel recorded. However, there are significant differences. Consider: In Joel’s prophecy, the locusts devastate the vegetation. (Joel 1:4, 6, 7) In John’s vision, the locusts are “told not to harm the vegetation of the earth.” (Rev. 9:4) The locusts Joel saw came from the north. (Joel 2:20) Those John saw came out of an abyss. (Rev. 9:2, 3) The locusts Joel described are driven away. In Revelation, the locusts are not driven away but are allowed to finish their work. There is no indication that they deserve Jehovah’s disapproval. 

The significant differences between the two prophecies lead us to conclude that they are not connected.

¹⁷ What has changed? We now have a more accurate understanding of the prophecy found at Joel 2:7-9. Simply put, these verses refer, not to our zealous preaching work, but to the activity of the Babylonian army that invaded Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Watchtower / JW Org / GB, here admitted that what they had been teaching was FALSE.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Romans / Superior Authorities scripture was also falsely used by the Org between 1929 to 1962.

Until 1929, the “superior authorities” or “higher powers” were correctly said by Watchtower to be the earthly rulers to whom Christians paid taxes and whose laws they were obligated to follow.

“They taught the Church to obey the laws, and to respect those in authority because of their office, even if they were not personally worthy of esteem; to pay their appointed taxes, and, except where they conflicted with God’s laws (Acts 4:19; 5:29), to offer no resistance to any established law. (Rom. 13:1-7; Matt. 22:21)” Studies In the Scriptures Series I - The Divine Plan of the Ages p.266

With one of Rutherford’s revelations, this changed in 1929.

“The instruction of the thirteenth chapter of Romans has long been misapplied. The improper application has really been the basis for the false doctrine of the “divine right of kings” or rulers to rule and oppress the people. The apostle is, in substance, telling the members of the church that they should always be obedient to God, and that the motive for such obedience must be love for God and a delight in doing’ his will.” Watchtower 1929 Jun 1 p.163

“Both of these scriptures have reference to the government, order and discipline in the organization of the Lord. Applying these words to earthly governments has been misleading and wrongful so far as Christians are concerned.” Watchtower 1929 Jun 15 p.183

From 1929 to 1962, the Superior Authorities became “the Most High God Jehovah and his exalted Son Jesus Christ.” (This Means Everlasting Life (1950) p.197)

In 1962, the Society returned to the original position of Russell. A statement in Babylon the Great Has Fallen! God’s Kingdom Rules! page 548 indicated there was a change in understanding;

“In spite of the end of the Gentile Times in 1914, God permitted the political authorities of this world to continue as the ‘higher powers’ or the ‘powers that be,’ which are ‘ordained of God’.”

This was explained in detail through the November 1, November 15 and December 1 editions of the Watchtower in 1962.

How does Watchtower justify the change back to the original position? It does not have to, as it rewrites its history to avoid such embarrassment. In an article titled ‘The Christian’s View of the Superior Authorities’ it avoids mentioning that in 1962 the doctrine reverted back to an earlier version.

“For some years, until 1962, Jehovah’s Witnesses held that the superior authorities were Jehovah God and Christ Jesus. However, in line with Proverbs 4:18, light increased, and this view was adjusted.” Watchtower 1990 Nov 1 p.11

Proclaimers presents a stunning portrayal of this part of history, included ironically under the heading ‘The Light Shines More and More.’ It explains that the doctrinal change on Romans 13 is an example of “the light getting brighter”, completely avoiding any mention that this new light was a return to an original belief.

For example, in 1962 there was an adjustment of understanding regarding “the superior authorities” of Romans 13:1-7.

For many years the Bible Students had taught that “the higher powers” (KJ) were Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. Why? In The Watch Towers of June 1 and June 15, 1929, a variety of secular laws were cited, and it was shown that what was permitted in one land was forbidden in another. Attention was also drawn to secular laws that required people to do what God prohibited or that forbade what God commanded his servants to do. Because of their earnest desire to show respect for the supreme authority of God, it seemed to the Bible Students that “the higher powers” must be Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. They still obeyed secular laws, but the emphasis was on obedience to God first. That was an important lesson, one that fortified them during the years of world turmoil that followed. But they did not clearly understand what Romans 13:1-7 was saying.

Years later, a careful reanalysis of the scripture was made, along with its context and its meaning in the light of all the rest of the Bible. As a result, in 1962 it was acknowledged that “the superior authorities” are the secular rulers, but with the help of the New World Translation, the principle of relative subjection was clearly discerned. This did not call for any major change in the attitude of Jehovah’s Witnesses toward the governments of the world, but it did correct their understanding of an important portion of the Scriptures. In the process, there was opportunity for the Witnesses individually to consider carefully whether they were truly living up to their responsibilities toward both God and the secular authorities. This clear understanding of “the superior authorities” has served as a protection to Jehovah’s Witnesses, especially in those lands where surges of nationalism and clamoring for greater freedom have resulted in outbreaks of violence and the formation of new governments.” Jehovah’s Witnesses-Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom pp.146-147

ANOTHER CONFESSION OF FALSE TEACHINGS.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK, it was boring. But it is sad to read when young JWs do not understand the truth about the Org they are part of. And it's made worse whena another man pretends he knows more that he actually does. 

[Space Merchant]

The Locust thing was talked about years ago.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

14 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

The Locust thing was talked about years ago.

The information i have given was only available in April 2020 Study Watchtower.  I have given a link to the source. 

 

 

[Space Merchant]

7 minutes ago, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

The information i have given was only available in April 2020 Study Watchtower.  I have given a link to the source. 

 

 

It does not change of what was said sometime ago for that information is identical to what was discussed, what was presented now isn't anything different hence the view. From your link, if you noticed.

Out of curiosity, granted this is in connection to one of the representation of Locusts, to you who is the Angel of the Abyss? This alone can attest to your claim of misguidance.

an FYI

The figurative usage of Locust can represent God's People, and the parallels being Babylonians. Commentary also shows this on Bible Hub and other sources.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

ABADDON

(A·badʹdon) [from Heb., meaning “Destruction”].

At Revelation 9:11 this Hebrew word is transliterated into the English text. There we read concerning the symbolic plague of locusts that they have “a king, the angel of the abyss. In Hebrew his name is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon.” 

That's all ya gettin'.  

[Space Merchant]

6 minutes ago, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

ABADDON

(A·badʹdon) [from Heb., meaning “Destruction”].

At Revelation 9:11 this Hebrew word is transliterated into the English text. There we read concerning the symbolic plague of locusts that they have “a king, the angel of the abyss. In Hebrew his name is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon.” 

That's all ya gettin'.  

I asked you who is The Angel of the Abyss, I didn't ask for a name. Again, if you are going to say someone is false, prove to your claims, JB.

12 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

who is the Angel of the Abyss?

It isn't a hard question by the way.

 

EDIT:

You continue to prove my points - 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

Once again the Storm Trooper demads answers  He asked a question and I gave him an answer.

But note that I told him 'That's all ya gettin'.  One jump ahead, because I knew he would demand more  .

Unfortunately I think SM is now being a Troll, deliberately trying to throw things off topic. 

[Space Merchant]

8 minutes ago, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

Once again the Storm Trooper demads answers  He asked a question and I gave him an answer.

But note that I told him 'That's all ya gettin'.  One jump ahead, because I knew he would demand more  .

I asked for who. You just gave me a name deemed a title. 

Therefore if you are going to say someone is wrong, you have to explain.

To anyone else who reads, the name was professed by @Patiently waiting for Truth, his reason for not telling WHO Abaddon is, would either make or break his entire thread - Therefore, to make a claim as to someone being wrong about the Locust notation, but unable to back it up, shows a huge level of bluff on his end. - So if I am wrong, show your evidence.

 

2 hours ago, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

being misguided by a man that 'thinks' he knows truth.

Can we please set matters straight about the wrong use of scripture. 

 

That being said, if that isn't addressed, I'd gladly answer by using the Bible alone, if you can't address WHO this angel is. Thanks for the name, despite it is already known, as is, deemed a title.

I thought I should let this known to you, Angel of the Abyss and the Locust has been debated for years now, even predating you and even me. So the make or break factor in this is huge here.

[Space Merchant]

12 minutes ago, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

 

Unfortunately I think SM is now being a Troll, deliberately trying to throw things off topic. 

The Angel of the Abyss is in relation to the Locusts mentioned in the Scriptures, mainly Joel and Revelations.

Asking WHO this angel is, isn't going off topic or trolling. A troll is someone who posts inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages.

After all, you mentioned me, so here I am.

Again, you already addressed the NAME, but in order to know if there is misuse of Scripture, we need to know WHO this angel is.

If we are to as you said [Can we please set matters straight about the wrong use of scripture. ] then let's us get down to the Truth here concerning the Locust.

[Thinking]

45 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

The Angel of the Abyss is in relation to the Locusts mentioned in the Scriptures, mainly Joel and Revelations.

Asking WHO this angel is, isn't going off topic or trolling. A troll is someone who posts inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages.

After all, you mentioned me, so here I am.

Again, you already addressed the NAME, but in order to know if there is misuse of Scripture, we need to know WHO this angel is.

If we are to as you said [Can we please set matters straight about the wrong use of scripture. ] then let's us get down to the Truth here concerning the Locust.

May I ask your view on the locusts in.  Revelation….Russell seems to have had the correct view In Joel..many years ago….some where along the line that was changed to represent Us….which never made any sense to me…so I’m relieved we have corrected that..yet we still claim the locusts in Rev are still talking about us.

yet Russell thought they were the same as Joel…..I am confused on this point..yet aware….that the bow and arrow…horses…crowns..etc all have and do have double meanings..and are interchangeable….with those who are against Jehovah ..and those who are with Jehovah…so it may be the case here….

[Space Merchant]

50 minutes ago, Thinking said:

May I ask your view on the locusts in.  Revelation….Russell seems to have had the correct view In Joel..many years ago….some where along the line that was changed to represent Us….which never made any sense to me…so I’m relieved we have corrected that..yet we still claim the locusts in Rev are still talking about us.

yet Russell thought they were the same as Joel…..I am confused on this point..yet aware….that the bow and arrow…horses…crowns..etc all have and do have double meanings..and are interchangeable….with those who are against Jehovah ..and those who are with Jehovah…so it may be the case here….

The Locust term is used for not only used for God's people, but was also used for Babylonian army of old. One of the reasons why some of the verses interconnect (from both Joel and Revelations) with each other is due to how Locust are, they do not come as one, two or a few, but a swarm:

Christians early on assume the Locusts in Revelations to represent the enemy and or demons, which is in similarity as to how Bible students viewed it early on as did most, even connecting Joel and Revelations at times, however, some after learning, people came to a conclusion in their understanding of things to know who Revelations speaks of, granted the Locust and regards to Joel concerning Babylonians. In Revelations, those who represent the Locusts not only come out of the abyss, they are to finish the gospel work, and proclaim judgement. The way I see it, people's view back then was different due to how the Locust Army seen in Revelations looks like, not knowing that this is a symbolic representation.

The only group who speaks of the Locusts as enemies, even equating Joel to Revelations as identical are anything who shares the same mindset as most Trinitarians. There are other views, which are somewhat nonsensical, and very far from the truth, which some believe today sadly.

For us Biblical Unitarians, we at a time thought of the Locust as Satan's Army against God at a time, ignoring the symbolic representation and took what was said literally, hence the speculation that the horde of demonic locusts, only later to know the true representation.

That being said, people who come to learn and understand what a passage or verse is conveying, it shows that such ones are slowly learning as to what is true; and whatever old reasoning that they had that was not correct, for after learning, they see. If the JW pastor were to continue living, it is by no doubt he would come to that conclusion himself. It is also how they operate due to what Butler linked from the JW website, for the first paragraphs pretty much explains how Christians were back then compared to now, they had to collect findings.

Before the update of this forums, @The Librarian had a list of things concerning how Bible Students, well into JWs come to learn of their findings, you can check it out down here. It will be somewhat difficult because the responses are from the same usual suspects:

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

Concerning both the Locusts and the Superior Authorities, the Watchtower Leaders confessed that they HAD BEEN WRONG.  Therefore they proved they had misused scripture. 

Everything mentioned in my original post at top of page, has a link or information for reference. 

Anything else mentioned on this topic is just trolling. 

 

What is trolling in social media? 

 

Trolls are people who leave intentionally provocative or offensive messages on the internet in order to get attention, cause trouble or upset someone.

 

Points proven, Case closed.