A couple questions on Anointed and Selfishness

by Butterflyleia85 8 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Butterflyleia85

  Question #1: What does Anointed mean to you, who are they?

  Question #2: Is it selfish to want the 'Gift' (paradise, heaven, etc.) from God? Even if it meant sacrificing your loved ones fellowship here on earth today?

  I use to picture either being a Jehovah's Witness or a Worldly person (when I was a Jehovah's Witness and had a mindset like them), I was confused for a minute... Would I want to be righteous and live forever by myself or with few family members that I felt were a bet self righteous and worry to much about perfection or image rather then God and forgiveness? OR Would I want to be unrighteous and die on earth here but be with ones that didn't judge and was honest and real imperfect human beings but really caring family members that I felt some how God wouldn't punish, for they were brought down by their own imperfections?

  Thank that's where I started myself stubble (in a sense, as far as Jehovah's Witnesses go).
• 

  Terry

  Like everything else connected to a False Premise you can't look for a Correct Conclusion.

  You have to start over.

  You know what a McGuffin is?

  A movie screenwriter often uses a McGuffin. It is something invented to make a ridiculous premise WORK.

  The Watchtower Society needs to give a reason that is plausible for people to listen to them give their interpretations of the Bible.

  Martin Luther removed any organization from between a believer and God.

  Luther came up with a principle called SOLA SCRIPTURA (the bible alone).

  The Catholic Church presented itself as the sole authority as a necessity for believers to have any relationship with God.

  The Watchtower Society wants the same authority as the Catholic Church without appearing to be similar.

  The Anointing is an equivalent to the Catholic Majesterium doctrine.

  It is a McGuffin because it is simply pulled out of thin air and asserted to be true.

  It is a big thorn in the side because any nutcase can CLAIM to be anointed. In fact, people do claim it. The Wachtower has shut down membership to the "anointing" on several occasions. It did not work. So, they've resigned themselves to just dealing with it another way.

  The only "anointed" that really counts is the BODY of Governing Body fame. Pure invention.

  Either the CATHOLIC doctrine of Majesterium is correct, or Martin Luther's Sola Scriptura (just you and your Bible) is correct---OR....a third possibility exists.

  Mayble the whole PREMISE is false---all of it!

  Maybe nobody anywhere at any time has any connection to Divine anything. It is all delusion.

  Ever consider that possibility?

  We are in charge of our own life and do the best we can and nobody in the sky or in an office building is going to be of any help.

  Is it SELFISH to want a direct connection to GOD?

  No.

  It is merely delusional, in my opinion.
• 

  Inkie

  Question #1: What does Anointed mean to you, who are they?

  Are you speaking of the “Anointed” among the religious organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses? Or are you asking of those actually anointed by God?

  The Anointed of any religious organization are nothing.

  Now, the anointed of God are something special. They are a ‘royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for special possession.’ That is how God describes them. It is not how they see or view themselves. The anointed of God, having been anointed by God with holy spirit, are admonished by him to transform themselves into people who continually display the fruit of that holy spirit, you know: love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, self-control, etc., etc., etc. The anointed of God are individuals who have been called out of the pen/sheepfold by the Gatekeeper/Door and who having been chosen out of the pen receive an anointing by the Nazarene. They follow the Nazarene wherever he leads them. For example:

  1 'In all truthI tell you, anyone who does not enter the sheepfold through the gate, but climbs in some other way, is a thief and a bandit. 2 He who enters through the gate is the shepherd of the flock; 3 the gatekeeper lets him in, the sheep hear his voice, one by one he calls his own sheep and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all those that are his, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow because they know his voice. 5 They will never follow a stranger, but will run away from him because they do not recognise the voice of strangers.'—John 10:1-5, New Jerusalem Bible.

  Notice the Nazarene does not lead or congregate them into another pen/sheepfold. He leads them out—individually—one by oneout of the pen to become a flock led by the Shepherd to find pasturage. (Read more of John, chapter 10.) The flock is free, not confined, and outside of any pen.

  Question #2: Is it selfish to want the 'Gift' (paradise, heaven, etc.) from God? Even if it meant sacrificing your loved ones fellowship here on earth today?

  Selfishness can be both a good thing and it can be a bad thing. It depends. Your question probably uses the bad connotation of the word. Thus, the answer to your question is, no, it is not selfish to want the ‘Gift.’ A gift is something that is undeserved. Often unexpected. A gift is a blessing. Receiving the gift does not mean that you have to sacrifice fellowship with your loved ones. That’s Watchtower thinking and indoctrination. Your premise is flawed. On the contrary, God and the Nazarene want you to fellowship with your family. Let go of the Watchtower thinking and indoctrination.

  It is no wonder that you would be confused by Witness theology. It’s very confusing. It’s simply not true. The questions you ask are based on the false premises of the Society’s teachings. Let them go.
• 

  JWoods

  One interesting thing about the practically unique notion the witnesses have developed on the "Anointed" is that the witnesses themselves have absolutely no clear answer on how a person really knows they are "Anointed". After all, until Rutherford thought up the "great crowd", all the witnesses were anointed and it was no big deal. But now it is made out to be practically like the conversion of Saul of Tarsus - and yet it is still completely a mystery over what actually happens.

  If you ask a Witness who is anointed (and accepted as such, not just a crazy), you will merely get a garble and fade..."well, Jehovah just has a way to guide your thinking this way..."

  I asked a circuit overseer who partook of the emblems, and that was what I got back. And, he was a pretty nice guy - but simply had no clear understandable answer.
• 

  Inkie

  Hi Terry:

  Martin Luther removed any organization from between a believer and God.

  Terry, this is not true. The Nazarene removed the only existing organization that was ever sanctioned by God between a believer and God. After the removal of that organization no other organization ever replaced it. The replacement of that originally sanctioned organization by another organization is a fabrication made up by those who wanted control of others.

  Luther came up with a principle called SOLA SCRIPTURA (the bible alone).

  True.

  The Catholic Church presented itself as the sole authority as a necessity for believers to have any relationship with God.

  Very true and sounds just like the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. Both claim to be the “visible representation of Christ on earth.” Wow! I don’t know about now, but at one time even the Eastern Orthodox Church claimed the same thing. Wow!

  The Watchtower Society wants the same authority as the Catholic Church without appearing to be similar.

  Boy, did you say it!

  Either the CATHOLIC doctrine of Majesterium is correct, or Martin Luther's Sola Scriptura (just you and your Bible) is correct---OR....a third possibility exists.

  Mayble the whole PREMISE is false---all of it!

  Terry, both the Magisterium and Martin Luther’s sola scriptura are in error. There is only one mediator between God and men and that is the Nazarene. Martin Luther’s sola scriptura, while sounding nice, is also in error as the Nazarene said to some: “You are searching the scriptures because you think that by means of them you will have life. . . .” or said another way, ‘you won’t get life by searching the scriptures.’ You get life by going to the Nazarene. (John 5:39, 40)

  Maybe nobody anywhere at any time has any connection to Divine anything. It is all delusion.

  While I understand what you have stated here, I must say that this statement is not true. I know of many have experienced an anointing, including me. Yes, it was subjective for me, but I cannot deny that it occurred for me.

  We are in charge of our own life and do the best we can and nobody in the sky or in an office building is going to be of any help.

  Again, while I understand why you write this, and while I agree that we to a point are in charge of our own lives and that we must do the best we can, there is someone to help us. That one is Jah and by means of his Son the Nazarene, he does help us. I know he’s helped me.

  Is it SELFISH to want a direct connection to GOD?

  No.

  It is merely delusional, in my opinion.

  You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I respect it, Terry. My opinion, however, is entirely different nor is it delusional.

  Respectfully yours....
• 

  sd-7

  Hi butterflyleia--need to e-mail you again sometime.

  This is one of the questions I got during my committee--they read to me 2 Cor. 1:20, 21, which mentioned that he that anointed us is God. "Who are you to decide who is anointed?" they asked me. The problem with that was that it's a valid question that could be asked of anyone, not just me. Who makes that decision, if we follow JW logic? It's a black box, a McGuffin, as Terry called it.

  For me, from the early Christian perspective, all Christians received the laying on of the hands, which anointed them with holy spirit. This is what Paul described (or whoever wrote Hebrews if not him) in Hebrews 6 as one of the "elementary things", one of the basic doctrines of Christianity. Holy spirit enabled people to understand the deep things of God and even provided miracles in some cases.

  Today, I don't suppose miracles happen--and we have no real way of knowing that they ever did, apart from faith. To me, anointing has nothing to do with being superior to those who 'have an earthly hope'. It's about being adopted as one of God's sons, reconciled to him, and receiving his direct instruction without the need for anyone to teach us.

  Is it selfish to want to go to heaven? Of course not. My belief is, assuming the Bible is legit (which may be a false assumption or a true one, only dying will give me that answer), that we'll all die and be resurrected to heaven anyway, so we'll get to see what it looks like regardless before we get judged for the deeds done in the body.

  The irony of it all is that while the Society teaches us to blast other religions by asking them what they plan on doing in heaven, they have no real idea of what these supposed 144,000 will really be doing in heaven either. Only thing we've got is an indication that they're special, they know a special song, and maybe they're kings & priests. But those are pretty vague statements. What they'll actually DO is not something that the Bible reveals. They sure as heck can't be applying the value of the ransom to the rest of mankind, since they would be just as much in need of it themselves. The High Priest alone, Jesus Christ, is the one who enters the Most Holy in our behalf for our sins. Period.

  Those are my thoughts. Talk to you later!
• 

  Inkie

  JWoods,

  One interesting thing about the practically unique notion the witnesses have developed on the "Anointed" is that the witnesses themselves have absolutely no clear answer on how a person really knows they are "Anointed".

  Sad to say, this is true.

  After all, until Rutherford thought up the "great crowd", all the witnesses were anointed and it was no big deal.

  Funny thing too is when they did away with the “great tribulation” (back in 1969) and made it a future event, that automatically did away with the existence of the “great crowd” now, as their coming out of the “great tribulation” must also be a future event. Everybody missed that one.

  But now it is made out to be practically like the conversion of Saul of Tarsus - and yet it is still completely a mystery over what actually happens.

  If you re-read your biblical texts concerning those who have had an experience with the risen Christ, you will note that something specific happened to them. The experience of Saul/Paul is a prime example of that. He was able to describe in detail what happened to him quite well, yes? Others in the biblical narratives of being chosen and anointed also have had experiences that they can specifically describe as well. It follows then too that others can do likewise if they indeed have been anointed. If a person cannot describe with specificity what happened to them when they were anointed, well . . . then . . . one might have reason to question their having been anointed.

  But even so, the describing of what happened to one when he/she was anointed is rather subjective, yes? I can tell you what happened to me but because you did not experience what I experienced doesn’t in any way negate what happened to me. It just hasn’t happened to you—yet. And the experiences can be different too. What actually happens when one has been anointed is not a mystery—not in truth or in fact.

  Blessings.
• 

  Terry

  For God to deal one on one spirit anointing Christians is to do away with the necessity of organizing for evangelism.

  God would simply move to contact people receptive of His grace. Agency would not be required.

  Why?

  Human error.

  Isn't that always the problem with agency anyway?

  The premise of the transmission of Christianity is unnecessarily corrupted by the human agency involved:

  1: Bible transmission

  2.Doctrines

  3.Empowerment (political and internal governance)

  4.Message clarity

  God has always been free to contact whomever for conversion and anointing has He not?

  The real McGuffin is Christianity as an Historical "fact".
• 

  Inkie

  Terry,

  For God to deal one on one spirit anointing Christians is to do away with the necessity of organizing for evangelism.

  And isn’t that exactly what the Nazarene said he would be doing in John 10:3, 4?

  3 the gatekeeper lets him in, the sheep hear his voice, one by one he calls his own sheep and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all those that are his, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow because they know his voice.

  God has always been free to contact whomever for conversion and anointing has He not?

  Absolutely Yes! God will have ‘mercy upon whomever he chooses to have mercy.’

  The real McGuffin is Christianity as an Historical "fact".

  “Christianity” is not of the Christ. It may be that He will say to them/it: “Get away from me you workers of lawlessness. I never knew you.”

  --Inkie