by moman 27 Replies latest jw friends
Moman,
I have tried to explain the issue as clearly as I can and respectfully I am not missing the point. Look to the your original post where you present an argument that cannot be sustained under present WTS doctrinal policy.
It does not matter what else the WTS calls itself, it no longer alludes to itself as being a 'prophet'.
Best regards -- HS
Is he prophesying? No, he is not, he is intepreting and this is the very issue. Even when he claims the system will implode next Saturday afternoon at 4.00pm due to an interpretation of some aspect of Amos prophecy, this is an intepretation of that prophecy.
What about prophecies that have found their so called fullfillment in the past and are now promulgated as established 'facts'? Can you please elaborate about the events that took place according the 'interpretators' in the year of 1914? Would you call their teachings in this respect 'interpretations' too?
But, if he were to suddenly utter a statement to the effect that God has revealed to him that in sixteen months time, China will declare was on Palestine and that at that very moment everybody born in the month of April will be taken to heaven, then that is a prophecy, and one which I suggest that you test!For me they still do exactly this, although there's a temporal loophole. They hold on to a historical dogma that claims that in the year 1914 God's prophecy of Daniel 4 was fullfilled, that this fullfillment was only revealed to them (then in their role of prophet?), and that they were chosen to proclaim this fullfillment in Gods name to the world. That a great many were indeed taken to heaven --- to follow your example to the letter --- seems a coincidence.
Since they demand to this very day that every JW who wishes to remain in good standing (euphemism for not getting DF'd) shall believe this doctrine, is to me the same as actively uttering prophecies for the future from the NOW viewpoint.
So let me call them back-to-the-future-prophets. Just try to imagine 'Doc' Russell in a DeLorean... And Rutherford can be Biff.
You Know..........
You do not have a clue what really happened with the Society in the last 75 years or so. All you do is expound a reasoning which is so similar to JW propaganda while at the same time not do any checking whether these things are truly based on facts and unbiased information. You do not really know what an apostate is; anyone who has a different idea, however slight, you brand them as apostates...
Then you rave about Ray Franz, how wicked this man must be, yet you never investigated the goings on with the Governing Body at the time. Of course you have not read his accounts, otherwise you would never come to your false and excessively biased conclusions. If you knew what happened, you would certainly sing a different tune alltogether.
I know for myself that the GB will experience Jehovah's wrath in the future, since they are no different than a modern Pharisaical class.
One last point: I personally find your answers in the various posts very cold, calculated and without any sort of compassion, yes certainly not the sort which exist among those who truly follow Jesus' example. When there is no love, then all is for nothing...
:*) Richie
However I may disagree with WTS, it never stops to amaze me how protestants, and thereby enemies of the true biblical teachings, or frustrated exJWs never seizes to attack JW because of timecalculations that didnt come true. They did it because they felt they were able to make sense out of OT prophecies protestants hardly ever read.
God Bless
Interesting thread. It is always facinating to see elders give the "we are not false prophets" speech. While in many senses they are not due to their semantics, just who exactly would qualify as a false prophet? Any time that particular verse comes up, it is usually with regard to their defending themselves against that particular charge.
What it basically comes down to is they have lost all credibility as "interpreters" since they have consistently interpreted everything wrong or have come up with interpretations with unprovable and untangible meanings.
To claim to be "spirit directed" but falible appears to be a contradiction. At the very least, the claim that their interpretations are fallible along with a history proving that is the case, should allow for individual Witnesses to beg to differ with some of their interpretations if they so desire.
Any outsider would laugh at the thought of putting so much credibility to the words of someone who has been wrong so many times. The whole central doctrine surrounding the FDS is a complete farce if anyone would dare to stop and think about it.
Path
Rev Bll...
I agree with you in this way: True, protestants and many other denominations show themselves to be enemies of bible teachings, although not entirely, as they do know some truth. The Witnesses on the other hand do posses a wealth of biblical information, but the important thing here is how they dispense this biblical knowledge.
Always remember, it's the Society first and foremost, then the bible; with other words: when there is a conflict, you must follow the Society's teachings before anything else... This reminds me too much of the Jewish class (Pharisees), yet the Jewish leaders at the time HAD the truth and enjoyed Jehovah's blessing as well, but they made the truth invalid by their coldheartedness and the many rules and regulations they enforced..... Think about that my friend...!
:*) Richie
Ritchie, from that point I agree :-)
Hi Path,
That was a good point about 'who would qualify as a false prophet' by the WTS definition--if I read it right. (I just viewed c. 8hours' worth of traffic school and am pretty brain dead!)
It's similar reasoning that the RCs use about the pope. Eventually these self-appointed 'glorious ones' don't say anything at all! It's as Sunscapes says: it's spinnier than a White House press conference.
The WT legal staff is doing their job.
Cheers!
Pat
