The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AuldSoul

  Flash: You seem like a intelligent person. I'm sure you remember the Christ's Presence is invisible and precceeds His Arriving at Armageddon. Jesus is the Master.

  You also seem like an intelligent person. I'm sure you remember that current JW dogma says the faithful and discreet slave were chosen in 1919 after the master returned in 1914 and started examining religions claiming to be Christian. They base this on the following verses:

  Matthew 24:45-47
  45 “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? 46 Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. 47 Truly I say to YOU, He will appoint him over all his belongings.

  "Arriving" is erchomai. JWs teach that Jesus, the master, has already appointed the happy slave over all the master's belongings. But these verses require that the erchomai precedes that appointment. Thus, stevenyc's question. Your answer failed to answer the question. Would you care to try once more?

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  AuldSoul

  thirdwitness: It is really only a matter of quibbling over a word or phrase and its perceived interpretation.

  See, that is exactly what I've noticed from you apologists. You pick issues to debate that are nothing more than quibbling over a word or phrase and its perceived interpretation, but refuse to debate issues like the source of pre-baptismal requirements of Jehovah's Witnesses where there is a clear-cut difinitive answer available from the Scriptures that does not require interpretation.

  1 Timothy 6:3-5
  If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth, thinking that godly devotion is a means of gain.

  You choose to debate over the 607 BC issue, a matter of interpretation.

  You choose to debate over the parousia issue, a matter of interpretation.

  You choose to debate over all sorts of issues that are nothing more than a matter of interpretation. I debate with you, to a point, but the debate is of your choosing. You will not discuss the other doctrine your organization of men teaches.

  I clearly see your mentally diseased state. I recognize the symptoms, having recently recovered from it myself. I am still recovering, in fact. It is the other doctrine that your organization willfully puts in place of what the Bible says that I want you to discuss. But you have been unwilling, thus far. This is not the complicated matters of interpreting prophecy, this is the basic doctrines of a false religion. You have refused.

  For instance, you cannot support your organization's pre-baptismal requirements Scripturally. You haven't even claimed to be able to, much less demonstrated your claim. It seems that this basic doctrine should be able to be established in very short order by someone of your self-assuming brags.

  There is a verse that recommends the gathering together of those who have an entry into the holy place by the blood and flesh of Christ. You can't explain to anyone why that verse should also apply to unbaptized persons. (Hebrews 10:19-25) I doubt you can even explain why it should apply to those who are not members of the body of Christ.

  You cannot explain how a man who had less than 200 Greek words spoken to him qualified for baptism, along with his whole household, per JW "requirements", much less qualified for receipt of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 10:34-43) He did not have a lengthy bible study, or attend a single meeting, or preach to anyone, or confirm knowledge of the condition of the dead, etc. to congregation elders, or even retire from his position as an officer in the Roman army. But he got baptized immediately. His family did not preach, or attend meetings, or confirm their basic knowledge of the Bible prior to baptism, either.

  You cannot explain how a man who formerly did not believe in God could qualify for baptism, along with his household, per JW requirements after only one late night conversation with Paul and Silas. (Acts 16:25-34) He did not have a lengthy bible study, or attend a single meeting, or preach to anyone, or confirm knowledge of the condition of the dead, etc. to congregation elders, or even retire from his position as a jailer of Philippi. But he got baptized "without delay." His family did not preach, or attend meetings, or confirm their basic knowledge of the Bible prior to baptism, either.

  You cannot explain how a man was qualified for Christian baptism after a brief conversation about the book of Isaiah and Jesus' fulfillment of prophecy, despite not attending a single meeting, not preaching to a soul, and not proving knowledge of basic Bible doctrine to a single person. (Acts 8:26-40)

  You cannot explain how 3,000 in one day could be qualified for baptism when none had attended a meeting, preached to anyone, or confirmed their basic knowledge to anyone.

  And there is no indication in any of these examples of a specific vow of dedication in prayer.

  But you seek to find solace in men's interpretation, and uphold one interpretation of prophecy as superior when the basic foundation doctrines are complete crap, not founded on anything resembling Scripture. The basic doctrines, like the lofty interpretation of prophecy you so highly regard, are nothing but men's thoughts. (Psalm 146:3) Who are you trusting?

  I hope you snap out of it and see what it is you are holding up to people as something to admire. It looks like a pile of crap from where I'm standing.

  AuldSoul
• 

  stevenyc

  The context of Matthew 24 is all that is required to debunk another doctrine from our friends the Governing Body. As has been explained by thirdwitness, the Watchtower society interprets Jesus' second return as happening in 1914 'invisibly' (coming with presence(parousia)), and then his third coming, 'visibly'(coming, not including presence((erchomai)) at armageddon.
  Also, as has been shown, the Watchtower society has assumed authority over its followers by claiming they are the 'faithful and discreet slave' prophesied by Jesus. (Note: the text is actually a parable and not a prophecy, but that is something we can discuss later). And, that Jesus HAS ALREADY appointed ALL his belongings to them. [see The Watchtower Feb 1, 1985, p.21: Hence, the invisible Master has appointed this dependable "slave" class "over all his belongings" of a spiritual kind].
  
  The NWT version of Matthew 24 45-47 says:
  
  45 “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? 46 Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. 47 Truly I say to YOU, He will appoint him over all his belongings.
  
  Using the context of Matthew, Jesus says that he will appoint all his belongings to the faithful and discreet slave when he arrives(visibly(erchomai)).
  
  Therefore, there are two conclusions:
  1, that Jesus came invisibly in 1914 and has still to pick a religion to assume the position of the 'faithful and discreet slave'.
  Or, 2, That he didn't come in 1914, and the Chapter means something else.
  
  Either way, Matthew 24 insists that the Governing body of the Watchtower society loses its proclaimed authority over its worshippers.
  
  steve
• 

  ozziepost

  the text is actually a parable and not a prophecy

  or the only prophetic parable! 's ok, Steve, I agree with ya!
• 

  fullofdoubtnow

  You know, I have been reading through thirdwitness's posts on this thread (yeah, I know, but I hadn't got any paint to watch dry), and done a count on how many he's made. His score so far is 84, a fair percentage of the total.

  So far, despite making enough comments to fill a good - sized novel, he has said nothing of substance. His "answers" to the various questions others have posted have raised more questions than they have answered. He just seems to quote the same tired old jw rhetoric to every question that's posed to him.

  3rdw, your masters at bethel may be proud of you, but most of us are pretty bored by all this. You started this thread, you posed the questions about the Gentile Times, which I admit to be slightly interested in, so when are you going to come up with the goods, instead of all these cut - and paste rehashes of what you've just said? Your answers kind of remind me of Ecclesiastes 12:14 - "Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body."

  In your case 3rdw it's posts, and studying some of yours have been pretty wearisome for me, and I doubt I'm alone.

  fodn
• 

  Hoping4Change

  (a bit off topic - but comments about the discussion that were striking me) Wouldnt it be nice if these kinds of debates/discussions could actually occured WITHIN the organization without fear of reproval, disfellowshipping, shunning, loss of family, etc? So that all who were indeed seeking "the truth" could make up their own minds rather than being threatened if they didnt agree with the 'spititual food' being offered? To be "as brothers in Christ" and not divided over things such as 607/587, perousia, cross/stake, etc....? Didnt Paul scorn the churches of his time for quibbling over things rather than focusing on Christ? Without taking sides on the subject of this board, I hope that jw-apologists here enjoy the liberty and freedom to debate on this board that does not exist (to my knowledge and have yet to see) within the organization. My understanding (and it appears to be many's testimony) is that such debate and holding different view points not only is frowned upon within the organization, but is good enough to get one kicked out and have family members threatened with the same thing if they dont stop associating with the one asking questions For anyone who would be honestly "seeking the truth" of matters in this world, it seems to me the first red flag against anyone or any group would be the inhibiting, stifling, and coercison against such searching and growing. WTBTS to date - strike one, no matter the what faults or how false other religions of the world may have/be.
• 

  barry

  
  Im just reading Matthew 24 and I find some things I would like 3W to explain.

  The question by the diciples is ' What will be the sign of youre coming and th end of the age? The answer by our lord being the gospel will be preached in all the world and then the end will come.' The other answer to this question being 'the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light the stars will fall from heaven and the heavenly bodies will be shaken' then we have in verse 30 'At that time the sign of the son of man will appear in the sky.'

  Please note there will be wars and rumors of wars, but such things must happen but the end is still to come, there will be famines and earthquakes in various places , all these are the beginning of birth pains,

  Note these passages dont point to a war 1914 as being the sign of christs coming or to earthquakes. Is the JW interpretation flawed in the understanding of this chapter? I also read in this chapter I anyone tells you he is out in the desert or here he is inth einner room , do not beleive it.

  I also read that this generation will not pass till all these things are fulfilled. The meaning of this being as I understand that if the gospel had gone to the world at that time Christ would have come then. Thus how important would have been Daniel 4 in those circumstances.?
• 

  AnnOMaly

  Fisherman

  Ann!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! " A leap of Faith" One cannot even establish that the Bible is the word of God. It takes........

  What an enthusiastic fellow you are!

  Naturally I'm working within the paradigm that the Bible is God's Word. But even if it wasn't, we can come to some conclusions about what this unique piece of literature teaches or doesn't teach.

  Regarding the cong of Lao and Jesus siting on the throne. I want to cite an example : in the book GTO, COJ comments on Jesus words "I saw satan falling..." what did Jesus mean. COJ explains that satan had not fallen yet. HIs view is very persuasive when coj explains that satan was defeated when jesus died and could not threat the woman and the child anymore. Anyway, Coj expalins that although Jesus said that he saw satn falling, that event had not yet occured.

  Yes, that's one valid interpretation.

  THe Bible is like that ANN. It is not a text book it is an ambiguous poetic and ironic riddle.

  Jesus told his disciples"To you it has been granted to understand the sacred.. of the kindom.. to those outside it is not granted" According this statement, one can derrive that only Jesus disciples can understand certain things. Ithink that it was minimus that said one can use the Bible to PROVE anything. Even wts teaching on the pararousia is at the very least possible.

  What part of the WTS teaching on the Parousia is possible? It's based on so many wrong premises, that I don't believe that their version of it is possible, imho. However, where the WTS' and some mainstream Christian ideas coincide is that Jesus can be invisibly 'present' while ruling over his followers. The more mainstream view is that he has been doing just that since the first century, while JWs (based on their erroneous chronology) believe he has only been 'present' since 1914.

  To me, there are only 2 feasible possibilities, biblically-speaking. Either Jesus has been 'present' in some sense since the first century, or his Parousia is yet future. But the idea that he sat on his throne in a special sense in 1914 and began his Parousia then, is entirely without scriptural foundation.

  Did you read AF's article on the ransom? WOW!

  No. That one has passed me by I think.

  And yet we have to wait and see because we dont know. To be safe I accept the ransom and have my sins forgiven. But after reading that article I do not pretend to profess that I understand the ransom. It does not make sense to me. But who am I? And who said that things have to make perfect sense?

  I've found that often the more I peer, the more gray I see and the more questions I have.

  But none of this disproves wts dogmas or doctrines about parousia.

  OK. It's your conviction. You have to make sense of it yourself.

  T-wit

  Upon his arrival he realizes that many will not accept him as king.

  Well, he can't blame anybody for that, can he? Even his own followers didn't realize he'd arrived in 1914 until some years afterward. They were even clueless that he'd appointed them over his belongings in 1919 until a few years later. I can imagine him after a great heavenly fanfare and rejoicing, sitting there drumming his fingers impatiently for a several years while waiting for the earth to acknowledge his presence, and then saying to the angel next to him, "You think we should tell them I'm here?"
• 

  thirdwitness

  AlanF: You seem to think that the NWT consistently translates Greek words into the same English word.

  AlanF must be on his way to see the wizard of oz with his strawman. He writes a whole page trying to refute something that I never claimed or said or even thought. Nor does the WT claim this about the NWT. I only mentioned that the NWT consistently translates soul, hades, sheol, and parousia.
• 

  thirdwitness

  Steve and others, you talk about Chirst's coming as if it is a noun. Parousia is the noun. Coming is just a verb. There is no special greatness about the word coming. If you come to the stadium to watch an event such as a baseball game you are present at it. If you come with me to the concession stand you are still present at the stadium. If you then come over to the souvenier shop you are still present at the stadium. After the game you may come down on the field and get autographs. You are still present at the stadium. First you came to the stadium and so you were present. Then you came to the concession stand to get a hot dog. Then you came over to the shop and bought a giant we're number one finger. Then you came down on the field and got Barry Bond's authograph. You only came to the stadium one time. While present at the stadium you have done many things. You try to say there is a 2nd coming and a 3rd coming according to JWs. There is one parousia of Christ and during that parousia he does a number of things. One of the things he does is comes at Armageddon to destroy the wicked. Still during his presence. Do not try to make coming out to be some magic word. It just decribes the actions of someone, anyone, not just Christ. Erchomai (coming) appears many times in the Bible.