by the pharmer 137 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
the pharmer . . . Good day to you
Keep in mind Mark Twains words quoted earlier. DJEggnog in spite of his genius, is one who has stopped searching . . . and is now trying to tell a searcher how to search . . . and is plainly out of his depth on this question
· These same JWs knowingly held fast to an incorrect view.
(This seems unreasonable)
Ok.
· As regards the incorrect view, these JWs spoke that view to others as a correct view.
(This seems unreasonable and just plain wrong)
Ok.
djeggnog,
The above highlighted points, along with the following two conflicting statements of yours which I pointed out earlier, remain to be reconciled -- even after your most recent post. As much as I appreciate all your efforts and information, I would most like to have you address these points specifically and have these important conflicting issues resolved, if you don't mind. Thanks.
If you were to read a passage of Scripture and were to draw a conclusion that is a different from the one reached by Jehovah's Witnesses, this would not necessarily mean that your conclusion was incorrect.
…
If you were to read a passage of scripture and conclude about it something that opposes my view as one of Jehovah's Witnesses as to the meaning of this same passage, in my mind you have a mistaken view that needs to be adjusted to the Scriptures
you'll get an answer all right just like I did after having a conversation with a "friend" two elders will ask you to meet with them after the meeting to see if you are questioning the wtbs and if you are they'll say "that would be apostasy"
How can there be a meeting of minds if we aren't even speaking the same language? djeggnog, in your extensive education, it might be useful to take an introductory course in logic. Let me give one of these statements a shot using the logic symbols:
"I believe is true" ∧ "Watchtower teaches as true" ⇔ true
Everything considered so far, it makes me wonder how taking the WT out of the equation might affect the difficulty or comfort level with this question as seen from a JW’s perspective. For instance, since I’m also examining Mormonism (I have a good friend who is Mormon), the question would then be:
If I read a passage of scripture and conclude about it something that opposes the Mormon view of the same passage, in your mind who has the truth about the passage (i.e. who is correct)?)
If you asked a JW the question above, he/she would answer that your view is probably right and the Mormon view probably wrong. You could replace "Mormon" with any religion that isn't JW/Watchtower and you would get the same answer. They are indoctrinated to believe their religion is the only correct one and that all others are run by Satan. Even your personal, imperfect reasoning would be closer to "truth" than a "false religious" view.
Djeegnog comes onto a thread a talks total crap again. The GB NEVER admit they were wrong. All the time they are wrong about something, they expect 7 million plus people to follow them in the falsehood.
7 million plus people can not challenge the GB without being booted out of the organisation.
When the GB chnages their thinking, those who were booted out are told they were "running ahead" of "Jehovahs" (by which we mean the WTS's) creaky old chariot. They are not apologised to, or reinstated, they are classed as "proud" and "rebellious".
DJeggnog you talk so much shit you must smell of it!
@the pharmer:
The above highlighted points, along with the following two conflicting statements of yours which I pointed out earlier, remain to be reconciled....
I'm perfectly ok with this. Recall that in your initial post, you wrote the following:
I wanted my JW friend's perspective on something, so I asked them this question:
If I read a passage of scripture and conclude about it something that opposes the WT's view of the same passage, in your mind who has the truth about that passage (i.e. who is correct)?
You may recall that my reply to your question began this way:
If you were to read a passage of Scripture and were to draw a conclusion that is a different from the one reached by Jehovah's Witnesses, this would not necessarily mean that your conclusion was incorrect.
What is true today may not be true tomorrow, and to be more precise, what I mean by this is that what we might have viewed yesterday as being true we may not view as being true any longer today, or something might happen tomorrow that changes our view of the truth today. One day someone may be pointing out to someone today that none of their children have ever had a serious illness and then, when H1N1 comes on the scene, it turns out that what was true yesterday is no longer true today. Your might be speaking to someone about what you were told about this person's kids being always in fine health and your conclusion as to what you were told wasn't necessarily an incorrect one yesterday, but today one of these children got sick due to H1N1. Yesterday what you said was true, but today, the truth you believed to be true is no longer true.
One last point I want to make here so that there can be no mistake about what I am saying here about the conclusions -- right or wrong -- that one might draw from the things one reads in the Bible. First, there is a passage of scripture -- Genesis 11:26 -- that states the following:
And Te´rah lived on for seventy years, after which he became father to A´bram, Na´hor and Ha´ran.
From reading this verse alone, you might conclude that Terah was 70 years old when he gave birth to his sons, Abram (Abraham), Nahor and Haran, which would be the correct conclusion to reach, but some, like Yose ben Halafta (a Jewish rabbi that wrote "Seder 'Olam Rabba," which chronicles creation to the second Roman-Jewish war [132-136 AD), have read Genesis 11:26 and wrongly concluded that Terah was 70 years old when the patriarch Abraham (Abram) was born.
However, if one were to also read and consider what Genesis 11:32 --
And the days of Te´rah came to be two hundred and five years. Then Te´rah died in Ha´ran.
-- and Genesis 12:4 --
At that A´bram went just as Jehovah had spoken to him, and Lot went with him. And A´bram was seventy-five years old when he went out from Ha´ran.
-- say, then you would realize that Terah had to have been 130 years old when Abraham was born, for were we to do the math, we would deduce that if Abraham was 75 years old when Terah died at the age of 205, then this would mean that he (Terah) had to have been 130 years old when Abraham was born. Does this mean that Rabbi ben Halafta was incorrect in calculating Abraham to have been some 60 years older than he actually was when Abraham's father died? Since Genesis 12:4 clearly states that Abraham was 75 years old when Terah died, I'd have to say, "Yes, the rabbi was."
Second, consider the scripture at John 3:16, which states the following:
For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.
This verse indicates that "God loved the world," but which "world" does God actually love? When you read this verse, do you conclude that Jesus was referring to everyone in the world? Actually reading John 12:46, 47, you might notice how Jesus uses "world" in two (2) different ways:
I have come as a light into the world, in order that everyone putting faith in me may not remain in the darkness. But if anyone hears my sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I came, not to judge the world, but to save the world.
First, Jesus refers to the world as a whole, and says that he didn't come to judge "the world" that hears, but doesn't keep his sayings. Then, Jesus goes on to refer to a second "world" that is "putting faith" in him, saying that he had come to save "the world," those that do not wish to "remain in the darkness" in which is the first "world." It is concerning this second world that Jesus states what he does in a prayer to his heavenly Father at John 17:20-23:
I make request, not concerning these only, but also concerning those putting faith in me through their word; in order that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, in order that the world may believe that you sent me forth ..., in order that they may be perfected into one, that the world may have the knowledge that you sent me forth and that you loved them just as you loved me.
God loved this second world that believed He had sent forth His son, Jesus, the "world" that had gained knowledge and who He loved just as He loved Jesus, but not the first world. Note that at John 17:25, 26, Jesus states about this first world, that it "has, indeed, not come to know you; but I have come to know you, and these [this second world] have come to know that you sent me forth. And I have made your name known to them and will make it known, in order that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them."
If you were to read a passage of Scripture and were to draw a conclusion that is a different from the one reached by Jehovah's Witnesses, this would not necessarily mean that your conclusion was incorrect.
The above scriptural conclusions that I've provided here are the ones reached by Jehovah's Witnesses, and the conclusion that you might draw upon your reading of the above-cited scriptural texts might differ from what I have concluded as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. This does not necessarily mean that the conclusions you reach are incorrect if it should turn out that I have reached different conclusions than you have reached upon reading the above-cited scriptural texts, for, let's face it, my conclusions could be totally wrong. However, I would not be one of Jehovah's Witnesses if I held a viewpoint that differed from that which is officially being held by Jehovah's Witnesses, and this is why anyone that hold a scriptural viewpoint that differs from the official position of Jehovah's Witnesses and teaches others to this effect can no longer be considered one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I know I've said this before, but I'll say it again: We know that there are things that we do not know accurately and that in time we will come to know those things that we currently do not know at present accurately. The teaching with respect to "the generation that will not pass away" is just one of our teachings -- which as you may know is still in flux -- that we will eventually comprehend as more and more Bible students -- which is what Jehovah's Witnesses are -- give consideration to what it was Jesus meant at Matthew 24:34, with the help of God's holy spirit.
Our faith, @the pharmer, isn't based upon our having acquired an accurate knowledge of all things, but it is based upon our faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as "the Savior of the world." (1 John 4:14) We truly believe that "there is no salvation in anyone else, for there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved." (Acts 4:12)
@jgnat:
How can there be a meeting of minds if we aren't even speaking the same language?
I accept the fact that you and I do not speak the same language. Let's not pretend that we ever could.
djeggnog, in your extensive education, it might be useful to take an introductory course in logic.
As the apostle Paul stated at 1 Corinthians 2:2, was the case for him, I, too, have "decided not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ, and him impaled," but thank you very much for the "refresher" on logic. Let me repeat for you my usual saw to illustrate what truth is regarding what almost five years ago was considered to be a planet, Pluto:
Pluto = Planet ? February 18, 1930 ? August 23, 2006
-- even as --
@jgnat is pursuing sanctification ? @djeggnog is pursuing sanctification
-- might be a false statement.
Now it's possible that the above logic symbols will not display correctly, so in order to avoid editing this post, I've substituted them both spelled out and parenthesized below:
Pluto (equals) Planet (double arrow left and right) February 18, 1930 (greater than or equal) August 23, 2006
-- even as --
@the pharmer is pursuing sanctification (Logical And) @djeggnog is pursuing sanctification
-- might be a false statement.
I really have nothing else to say to you. You want to pick an argument with me, but I have no interest in arguing with you about anything at all, @jgnat. Again, I will not pretend that you and I speak, or will ever speak, the same language, and as someone that believes in the exercise of one's own free will, I'm ok with you being you.
@djeggnog
Djeggnog,
Thank you for responding on a different thread to my question.
I feel maybe you misunderstood what I was saying.
I have no idea how long the creative days were. The Witnesses taught me they were 7000 years long. Now it seems they don't believe this anymore.
They still claim that the 7th day started after Adam's creation in 4026. They claimed this was the start of the 7th creative day. They also claim that we are living very close to the end of this system of things and that Christ's reign of a thousand years will follow immediately after then the 7th creative day will end when Jesus hands back everything to his father. Am I wrong?
So I assume that this is around 7000 years in length. Maybe this is a different day than all the rest? Admittedly it is hard to keep up with what is truth and what isn't in what JW's believe.
My question
Are you suggesting we may have thousands of years to go until the end (Armageddon)?
I hardly know no better way to answer his question that to quote Jesus' words at Matthew 24:36: "Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father."
Unyet JW have preached for so many years that it would come within the lifetime of one generation of people who were alive and old enough to see the events of 1914. Maybe they didnt read that scripture.
@The Finger:
Thank you for responding on a different thread to my question.
I would normally have responded to your post on @Mr. Falcon's thread (about the water canopy), but you were really hijacking his thread with your question, and so I had hoped that by using what you said in that thread to make a point in this thread, you would eventually discover and read my response.
I feel maybe you misunderstood what I was saying.
Ok.
I have no idea how long the creative days were. The Witnesses taught me they were 7000 years long. Now it seems they don't believe this anymore. They also claim that we are living very close to the end of this system of things and that Christ's reign of a thousand years will follow immediately after then the 7th creative day will end when Jesus hands back everything to his father. Am I wrong?
Jehovah's Witnesses do not officially teach that the seven creative days are 7,000 years in length. We have speculated as to their length and have given our reasons for so concluding in our literature, but at no time should anyone have concluded what you evidently concluded since we just do not know how long these creative days were. It is important when teaching others what you believe that you explain on which your beliefs are based, because without having been provided such, as clearly occurred in your case -- and I'm sure that you are not alone! -- you were persuaded to believe this to have been what we officially teach.
The Bible supports our concluding that the seventh creative day has continued uninterrupted into our own day, so with the 1,000-year Judgment Day yet ahead of us after mankind has been walking upon the earth for more than 6,000 years now, it could be -- but we do not know -- that the seventh creative day is, as of the year 2011, some 7,036 years in length (6,036 + 1,000) if Armageddon should arrive this year, and so it might well be the case that ten years from now, in the year 2021, this number will be revised to 7,046 years in length should Armageddon arrive in that year.
Whatever year it is that Judgment Day begins, we might reasonably conclude that each creative day was 7,036 years or 7,047 years in length, as the case may be, as we human beings reckon time, but what we do know to be true is that the end of this system of things is near, and our faith is that we need to 'prove ourselves ready, because at an hour that we do not think to be it, the Son of man is coming.' (Matthew 24:44)
Now you did say something about Jesus 'handing back everything to his father," but here's the "skinny" about that:
First Corinthians 15:28 states:
But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone.
Notice that in this verse the apostle Paul states that the time would come when the Son would subject himself" to Jehovah so "that God may be all things to everyone." When did the apostle say that Jesus' handing over of "the kingdom to his God and Father" would occur? The answer to this question is found a few verses back at 1 Corinthians 15:24-26:
Next, the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power. For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. As the last enemy, death is to be brought to nothing.
So "the end" to which Paul refers at 1 Corinthians 15:28 is not the end of this system of things, as you imagined, but refers to the end of the 1,000-year Judgment Day, for at this time not only will "all enemies" be put under Jesus' feet, "all things will have been subjected to ... the Son," but even death itself will "be brought to nothing," which is the purpose for which the kingdom serves, namely, "that the creation itself also will be set free from enslavement to corruption and have the glorious freedom of the children of God." (Romans 8:21)
It is only at this time -- when the 1,000-year Judgment Day had ended -- that Jesus "hands over the kingdom to his God and Father" and then goes on to "subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him," subjects himself to Jehovah God, so "that God may be all things to everyone."
I hardly know no better way to answer his question that to quote Jesus' words at Matthew 24:36: "Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father."
[And yet] JW have preached for so many years that it would come within the lifetime of one generation of people who were alive and old enough to see the events of 1914. Maybe they didnt read that scripture.
Jehovah's Witnesses have speculated many things, but what some of them have failed in this regard is to explain that our belief that the end would come within the lifetime of a generation of people -- and, yes, there have been many ideas suggested as to what constitutes "this generation" to which Jesus referred at Matthew 24:34 -- was based upon what we understood at the time the word "generation" to mean. Jesus did say that "concerning that day and hour nobody knows ... only the Father," but we are all anxious to see the end of this system of things, so that many Jehovah's Witnesses have failed to explain that this conclusion is based on how we interpreted Jesus' words, to point out to folks that while we cannot be 100% certain what Jesus' meant by "this generation," we do believe Jesus when he said that "this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur."
Since it isn't possible for Jehovah's Witnesses to know the "day and hour" when the end of this system of things will come, then it should be obvious that no one should have been teaching this without providing a clear explanation of that on which our belief in this regard are based. But it is clear that Jehovah's Witnesses had no desire to mislead anyone, but were misled themselves by those that tended to skip the explanation that our belief was and will be speculative until we become 100% certain what Jesus meant by "this generation."
(I trust that we are done with the hijacking of @the pharmer's thread now.)
@djeggnog
Whatever year it is that Judgment Day begins, we might reasonably conclude that each creative day was 7,036 years or 7,047 years in length, as the case may be, as we human beings reckon time, but what we do know to be true is that the end of this system of things is near, and our faith is that we need to 'prove ourselves ready, because at an hour that we do not think to be it, the Son of man is coming.' (Matthew 24:44)
So considering this statement of yours am I to conclude bearing in mind that JW still teach the end is very close that the creative days are still believed to be about 7000 years in length?
(I don't believe I hijacked anyones thread (I apologise if I did) I was merely responding to a point you made in the thread before I went on with another one which both were related to the thread. You are the one that responded to my question on this one. You could have given me an answer on the previous thread and we could have moved on.)
