did you see this ?

mouthy

Comments from the Friends - Online Edition - October-December 1998 - page 16

JH

You mean this?

'NEW TRUTH':

Formerly reserved for elite "heavenly class"
"in union with Christ"
now applies to Jehovah's Witnesses in general

WITHOUT admitting that a doctrinal reversal is taking place, the June 1, 1998 Watchtower has begun applying to Jehovah's Witnesses in general, terminology previously reserved for the small elite who profess a heavenly hope as 'the anointed remnant' of 'the 144,000.'

For decades after "Judge" Rutherford in 1935 assigned the 'great multitude' of his followers an earthly hope, the privilege of being "in union with Christ" was clearly reserved for the 'heavenly class':

Those...with hope of being "joint heirs with Christ" of the heavenly Kingdom... this relationship is described as being "in union with Christ" or "in Christ"

— Insight on the Scriptures (1988) Vol. 1, pg. 439

To them exclusively it is written: "You have an anointing...remain in union with him." (1 John 2:20, 27, NW)

— New Heavens and a New Earth (1953), pg. 307

Millions of JWs learned to respond to such New Testament promises by saying

"That does not apply to me, for I am one of the 'other sheep' and not begotten of God's spirit."

— Life Everlasting-In Freedom of the Sons of God (1966), pg. 153

The February 15, 1986 Watchtower took a small step toward blurring the distinction when it said both classes "are 'in union' in that they show oneness in cooperation" but quickly added, "the ones of the anointed heavenly class enjoy that union now in a special way." (pg. 13) It explained that only they "are 'assigned as heirs' of the Kingdom in union with Jesus. ...Jesus encouraged them to remain in union with him... precious union with Christ Jesus..." (pg. 12) They are "born again" but "the 'other sheep' do not need any such rebirth..." (pg. 14)

Now, suddenly and without explanation, the June 1, 1998 Watchtower addresses its general JW readership with a major article (pages 9-14) titled 'GO ON WALKING IN UNION WITH CHRIST.'

It applies the expression to even the newest members: "Because they want to walk in union with Christ...in 1997 alone, over 375,000" got baptized as JWs. (pg. 10)

With much of the New Testament 'written exclusively' to a dwindling number of elderly 'anointed ones' who are fast dying off, the sect faces the prospect of being left with a Bible that "does not apply" to anyone alive! Is the new usage of "in union with Christ" evidence that the expected doctrinal revision has begun? Time will tell!

See order form for new booklet: "NEW TRUTHS" of the '90s
a Decade of Doctrinal Changes for Jehovah's Witnesses

- - - - - - - - - -

Page design by Webshowplace

mouthy

Oh sorry did you see it already DAH!!!!

JH

No, I haven't seen it before Mouthy. I just clicked on your link and pasted it here so that it would be easier to read.

I never heard of that "New Light" beck in the 90's.

mouthy

Thanks XX

Must obey!

99% of JW's would never have perceived that as anything close to being "new light". They would just mean it to be that the GC walk 'in step' with Jesus or something like that, not signifying a shift in thought that the GC are in union with Christ the same as the anointed are.

Anyway, now that the numbers of the anointed (memorial partakers) have started to increase rather dramatically in the last couple of years and the generation has just been redefined to mean that class (of anointed remnant partakers since 1914), there is no need for the Society to blur the distinction.

mouthy

Good to see you "must obey" ... Welcome to the forum,maybe you posted before -but being the oldie on board I am often "behind" all
Hope to read more of your posts ...... Mouthy

evergreen

sorry just testing my replies

xjwms

Did you bring up a NEW Truth?

.

BluesBrother

I read the article on the c/d rom.. It seems to use the expression "In union with Christ" in a very general way, as of walking with God by walking with Christ. However they have many times maintained the distinction of the two groups, particularly at Memorial time. Their solution to the problem of static numbers of partakers, and the time running on, has been to take away the time restraint - by saying that the 1935 date is not relevant anymore and that the call may still be open

I think that this article has been taken out of context by the writer of the website - dubs still believe fervently in two classes.

did you see this ?

Share this