by M.J. 25 Replies latest watchtower bible
Oh man, I feel so friggin' sorry for those of you who have to sit through this crap, whether it be your first, second, third, or fourth time. I was braindead during the first two times, I rarely went during the third time, and I'm happy to be completely absent from this round. The only thing that was remotely cool was the pictures.
Anyone have the dates of when this shitty book was studied for the first three times?
Just bookmarking this topic. My coworker (JW) asked me if I wanted to go to his study series. I think I'll just follow it online.
Might I suggest that you just don't go to the meeting?
What's the worst that can happen?
Thanks for the tip. But I do have my own reasons for attending. I'm a non-JW "UBM", by the way, so this is my first time in a bookstudy.
I attended last night and it really was interesting. First impression walking into the room and looking at the group of gathered dubs...kinda dorky. But everyone seemed pretty nice.
I was impressed by the maturity of some of the kids who answered some of the questions, but felt kind of sad for them too at the mindset imposed on them.
As for the point of the book being addressed to "anointed", one guy commented that despite that, the book is no less relevant to "us", as members of the great crowd, since "we" will enjoy the promises of the New Earth spoken of in the book as well.
Undercover, it really is interesting how the "great crowd" came about. A really good explanation of the basis of the great crowd and how they evolved is contained in chapter 26 of A People For His Name by Timothy White:
Here's an exerpt, p 289-292:
The existence. of two classes of people in each congregation posed many problems. How does one tell if he is of one class or the other? Should the Jonadabs go out preaching from door to door? ShouId the Jonadabs call themselves Christians? Should they call themselves Jehovah's Witnesses? Should they become leaders in the companies? ShouId they vote? Should they participate in the Lord's Supper? Should they be baptized?
His answers to these questions reflect Rutherford's character. For example, the question, Should a Jonadab concern himself with preaching? In 1927 the answer would have been No. "He who is called to be a minister of God must be a new creature, begotten of Cod's holy spirit; none other can have a share. In this ministry onIy those who are new creatures in Christ Jesus are entitled to serve." [W 1/15/27, pp 26, 27] The thought here is quite Scriptural. "How shall hey preach unless they be sent?" asked St. Paul, (Romans 10:15). The church is sent by virtue of its anointing, "The LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek." (Isaiah 61:l; Luke 4:17). But the Janadabs are not anointed to preach.
But from what we know of Rutherford, we may predict that his answer would be affirmmative when the question was raised after 1932, And so it was. 'Jehovah's Witnesses . . . should encourage the Jehonadab class to come along with them and to take some part in proclaiming to others that the kingdom of God is at hand. 'And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely.' (Rev. 22:17). Let the anointed encourage all who will to take part in teIling the good news of the kingdom. They do not have to be anointed of the Lord 50 declare the Lords message." [Vindication, Book III, pp. 83, 84.] Two years before Rutherford had not applied the text he quotes the Jonadabs. [Light, Book 11, p. 280.] However, anointed or not, the Jonadabs today are preaching as vigorously as their companions, and the same urgency.
Are the Jonadabs Christians? In 1930 the answer would have been No. "Since 'Christ' means the anointed of God, it is manifestly true that no one can properly be termed a Christian who is not in Christ and who has not received the anointing. [W 3/1/30, p. 71.] Ruthelford may even have called a Jonadab who claims to be a Christian an antichrist. "Since 'Christ' means the anointed of God, 'False Christ' would mean those who claim to have the anointing, but who in fact have not received the anointing of the holy spirit." [Ibid., p. 70.] But when a fourteen-year-old girl wrote to Rutherford and asked if she, a Jonadab, were a Christian, he replied, "Because you love Jehovah and obey his commandments in the way Christ Jesus obeys, that canstitutes one a Christian."[W 11/1/37, p. 336.]
In some companies there was a tendency toward class distinction. The remnant manifested a boastful, overbearing or domineering disposition toward the Jonadabs. "It is reported that fiere are even contentions and disputes amongst those who claim to be of one or the other of the two companies:" [W 8/15/37, p. 244] It was for this reason that Ihe Judge tried to eliminate the differences between the two classes as much as possible.
Should the Jonadabs take the name Jehovah's Witnesses? Judge Rutherford reasoned correctly when he answered No. "The great multitude therefore are witnesses for Jehovah, but they do not bear the official name" [W 8/15/37, p. 250] The text from which the name is taken uses the term only of Israel, and, in fact uses the term in contrast to dm non-Israelites of the previous verse. (Isaiah 43:9) In harmony with this the Judge used the phrase Jehovah's Witnesses and their companions." But since his time, probably as a result of carelessness, the Jonadabs are also caned Jehovah's witnesses, even in the official publications. No Witness that I have met reaIizes the name is used incorrectly.
....[in the interest of brevity]...
As for the older Revelation publications, it is interesting how there was a discussion about them. The question was asked whether anyone in the group had read any of the older books. A comment was made that Freddy's Mystery book (of course he didn't say "Freddy's") had tons of extraneous historical information. Of course the "new light" thing was brought up as to why we needed a new book. But everyone was pretty oblivious to what the Finished Mystery and Light actually says.
I have the pleasure of conducting the book study and had fun and games this week. My auxillary questions are a bit sneaky, as they have a double meaning to tease out answers that I know support the doublethink theory.
In regard to paragraph 7 this week, we discussed the illustrations, which is one of the so called reasons why we have a new revelation book to replace the previous four. My question was "although the illustrations are produced by our humble, imperfect brothers at bethel, how can we be sure that they depict the images that Jehovah wants us to imagine in our mind as we study this publication?"
Hand goes up....
Brother "J" please..
Brother J: Well, clearly, Jehovah wants us to have the truth and he would ensure that our brothers illustrate in the way he wants. In any case, if the illustrations we not correct, he would put a stop to it, and the book would not be published.
Me: Very good brother, excellent answer...
(Everyone nods in agreement...)
How tempted do you think I was to refer to such reasoning when we addressed paragraph 8, which discussed the reasons why the publications have been changed over the years.
If Jehovah would step in and put a stop to incorrect illustrations, how much more so would he put a stop to lies published as truths?
Dunno
S8
S Eight,
I tried that strategy with the Daniel book when I conducted. I thought I got busted a few times (as a matter of fact, I'm sure I did) by a pretty sharp brother. I tried the sneaky leading questions, but honestly I don't think anyone was paying attention anyway. I even brought up the 587 vs 607 debate, just to say most historians think Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 and then I moved on. I was hoping to spark further research but if it did, I'll never know.
I swore that I would never conduct another prophetic bookstudy by the WTS. And, I've arranged it so I'm not a BS conductor anymore.
This one is going to be tough for you!
P.S. - Welcome to the board.
Man, I wish one of you guys was my study conductor!
