The GB and Headquarters learned after the "1975" disaster, if they "print" it only a few times, but have the CO's & DO's 'trumpet' it constantly in their talks during their visits and at assemblies, then when 'time' proves otherwise, they can blame that 'some' or 'others' said it and that they didn't. Most rank & file will accept their denial.
Is the Watchtower shy about repeating their new "generation" teaching?
by slimboyfat 245 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
slimboyfat
But unlike the old generation teaching or the 1975 fiasco, it is not as if the overlapping generations teaching is running out of time any time soon. They could string it out for another sixty years or more.
It's the pure absurdity of the new teaching that makes them embarrassed to repeat it in print.
-
00DAD
DJEggNog: What "overlapping generations" do you mean? To my knowledge, there has been no such teaching by Jehovah's Witnesses.
Well DJ is technically correct of course. But like most times when he is "right" he completely misses the point, whether it's deliberate obfuscation or just the result of too much rum in his Kool-Aid, er, rum, one can only wonder. Either way ...
The SOCIETY does not refer to this New Light as "Overlapping Generations" because, according to their obfuscated "reasoning" and willingness to capriciously change the meaning of the word "generation, it is only ONE GENERATION made up of TWO GROUPS WHOSE LIVES OVERLAP.
Never mind the fact that there is a potential 99+ year age difference between the oldest person in the FIRST GROUP and the youngest in the SECOND GROUP.* They are "evidently " only one generation!
Jesus "… evidently meant that the lives of the anointed who were on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation." - w2010 4/15, p. 10; w2010 6/15 p. 5
What, you ask, is the EVIDENCE that proves that Jesus "evidently" meant what this WT says he meant? Good question! The answer is: No one knows because none was given. I would posit that it is "evidently" because Armageddon has not come. This unfortunate development left the WTBTS with only a few options. They could either admit:
- They were wrong about 1914
- That they have absolutely no idea what Jesus meant
- Reinterpret the meaning of the word "generation"
They obviously chose Option #3. Why not, this is the sixth time "New Light" has flashed up regarding what this word means! It's worked before, it'll work again!
Now, since we're so clear on who make up the members of this single "Overlapping Generation," only one question remains:
Who are the Underlappers of this Generation?
-------------------------------------
* Frederick William Franz (September 12, 1893 – December 22, 1992). His life was used in the 2010 District Convention discussing the latest generation teaching to illustrate the life of an anointed person from the FIRST GROUP of this single "Overlapping Generation":
"Since Brother Franz lived until 1992, many present-day anointed ones were contemporaries of his and are part of the 'generation' that Jesus said would not pass away 'until all these things occur'."
See the comprehensive JWFACTS article "Changes to the Generation Teaching" for more details.
-
djeggnog
@yesidid:
Well djeggnog what you wrote may not have made a lot of sense, but it probably took a while, so you will have a bit of time to count.
I didn't write what you read for your benefit, but for the benefit of those that were interested in the OP's question and in reading definitive responses to it.
@slimboyfat wrote:
But am I correct in thinking they have only actually mentioned the new "overlapping generations" teaching once or twice in the literature?
@djeggnog wrote:
What "overlapping generations" do you mean? To my knowledge, there has been no such teaching by Jehovah's Witnesses.
@slimboyfat wrote:
Mention it once or twice, don't dwell on it, hope everyone just accepts it, and don't bring it up again. Is that the strategy?
@djeggnog wrote:
I know of no such strategy. What you are saying would seem to be rather speculatory.
@slimboyfat wrote:
Oh the irony.
What do you find ironic about there being no strategic methodology in play for Jehovah's Witnesses to neither mention nor bring up the subject of "overlapping generations" when this idea exists only in your own mind?
@Alfred:
djegnogg... aren't you afraid of being destroyed in [Armageddon] for continuously ignoring the Society's directives regarding participation on apostate forums?
So if apostates join JWN this in your opinion makes JWN an apostate forum? As to whether the Society has prerogatives that give to it the right to override the consciences of Jehovah's Witnesses to smoke, to engage in military service, to accept blood transfusions, to engage in in vitro fertilization procedures, to post messages to any website, I'll leave it to you to judge, but my reading of the Bible suggests that no human being has authority over the conscience of another human being, especially with regard to the Christian freedom enjoyed by Christians, for why would anyone permit their own freedom in Christ to be judged by another person's conscience? (1 Corinthians 10:29)
I hope you are praying to Jehovah for forgiveness... ... it doesn't look good for you right now...
Why would Jehovah listen to your prayers on my behalf, when he'll never hear them (or have you perhaps forgotten that all prayers to him must be directed to him through the Lord Jesus Christ to whom you do not look for your salvation)? Rather, you should consider praying for yourself (through Christ) that the opportunity will be afforded you to repent before it is too late for you to do so.
@djeggnog wrote:
What "overlapping generations" do you mean? To my knowledge, there has been no such teaching by Jehovah's Witnesses.
@Black Sheep wrote:
That is correct djeggnog.
It's a teaching of the Watchtower, not of Jehovah's Witnesses.
How do you split this hair so as to separate the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, a publishing corporation staffed by Jehovah's Witnesses that produces Bibles and Bible-related literature used by Jehovah's Witnesses from the rest of Jehovah's Witnesses? Contrary to what you evidently believe, Jehovah's Witnesses do not teach anything regarding "overlapping generations," and we never have taught such.
All of the JWs I have brought it up with have declined to discuss it except for two old time JWs who agreed that I was correct not to believe it.
And this means what? That those Jehovah's Witnesses were taught something about "overlapping generations" whereas the rest of Jehovah's Witnesses, like myself, were not? If someone doesn't understand the interpretation provided back in 2010 regarding the meaning of the expression, "this generation," as was used by Jesus at Matthew 24:34, I wouldn't expect that person to try to explain it to others until he or she did understand and felt competent to explain this interpretation to others.
Many Jehovah's Witnesses cannot explain scripturally how it is we teach that the Gentile times that began in 607 BC ended in 1914 AD, they do not know how to explain the "seven times" (Daniel 4:25), nor do they appreciate the significance of Jesus' mention of these "appointed times" (NWT) or "times of the Gentiles" (KJV) at Luke 21:24 either, so I also wouldn't expect these Witnesses to explain how we interpret the scriptures that relate to these "times" until they were competent to do so either.
It really doesn't matter what "old timers" among Jehovah's Witnesses might have believed for several decades and might continue to believe today according to what may have been our previous understanding of the scriptures. What matters is what Jehovah's Witnesses believe today.
What I'm telling you here is not unlike what Jesus told the Samaritan woman (John 4:5-26), who tried to acquit herself as a religious person that also worshiped Jehovah the same as the Jews, she worshipped what she did not know, for salvation originated with the Jews. What this woman knew about Jehovah as a Samaritan, whose knowledge of God had been limited to the Torah, was incomplete, and many Jehovah's Witnesses today -- these "old timers" of whom you speak -- are just like this Samaritan woman in their not 'paying more than the usual attention to the things heard,' and so their knowledge of Jehovah is really incomplete, and for this reason they are steadily 'drifting away.' (Hebrews 2:1)
@designs:
Black sheep- That's interesting about the old timers, reminds me of 1995.
What's so "interesting" about what @Black Sheep" said in his post? Being totally clueless, I suspect there is much that @Black Sheep doesn't know or understand about the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses.
@sir82 w rote:
I recall using the "there can't be much time left for the generation of 1914" meme in field service in the 80's pretty frequently. It was typically one of the first things you brought out to a "progressive" return visit or bible study. "Better hurry up & get on the ark, the youngest of that generation is already in their 70's!"
@djeggnog wrote:
Jehovah's Witnesses no longer make reference to a "generation of 1914," since in 2010, the 1914 generation interpretation was discarded. Jehovah's Witnesses now understand Matthew 24:34 to refer to the generation of the sign that began in 1914.
@Alfred wrote:
wtf? did you fall asleep during that assembly part? did you even read the garbage that was put in the Watchtower with nothing more than Exo1:6 as biblical basis?
In my previous post to this thread, I suggested that one read Post 553, which appears on this page, to read an explanation of something you (obviously!) didn't comprehend while you were listening intently to the part entitled, "Remain 'in the Secret Place of the Most High,'" given at the "Remain Close to Jehovah!" District Convention back in 2010. Here is an excerpt from the transcript of this talk to which you refer, but for clarification I've added the words that appear in red type:
You see, recent clarification of Matthew chapter 24, and verse 34, underscores that we are living deep in the time of the end. In fact, let’s turn there please, Matthew chapter 24, and let us read together and carefully examine Jesus’ words. Matthew 24:34 of course we know this chapter, Jesus is giving us detailed information about the last days and what to expect, but then this key point is made in verse 34: "Truly I say to you, that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur." Now here's a question? What is a generation? What is that referring to? A generation consists of contemporaries, individuals who live at the same time. Now for example, in the Bible, in Exodus chapter 1 and verse 6, it refers to Joseph, that very faithful man, and all his brothers, as "all of that generation." Ten of Joseph’s brothers witnessed events before Joseph was even born. And at least two of his brothers lived on after Joseph had died. So although their ages varied, these contemporaries were viewed as being a part of one generation, namely, Joseph's.
Now correspondingly, the generation that is referred to here in Matthew 24:34 comprises of two groups of anointed Christians. You see, the first group was on hand in the year 1914, when the generation of the sign of Jesus Christ’s presence first began to be observed. Now the second group, made up of those who were later anointed, are for a time contemporaries of the older group who were on hand during the generation of the sign. So Jesus’ words at Matthew 24:34 indicate that some in the second group will witness the beginning of the great tribulation, hence the length of the generation is limited. Are you with me? Let's illustrate it this way. Brother F. W. Franz, we’re all familiar with Brother Franz, he was born in the year 1893. He was baptized in 1913. And thus, he was alive to discern the sign in 1914. Now Brother Franz lived a long life. Yes, he lived way on until 1992, almost 100 years! Many present-day anointed ones were contemporaries of Brother Franz. And they are part of the generation of the sign that Jesus said would not pass away until all these things occur.
It is patently obvious to me that you don't understand that many of the things that Jehovah's Witnesses teach are based on the Bible interpreting itself, so the fact that you don't appreciate the reference to Exodus 1:6 that was used in the Watchtower article dated April 15, 2010, entitled "Holy Spirit's Role in the Outworking of Jehovah's Purpose," is quite telling.
Nevertheless, in defining the word "generation," the Watchtower dated May 15, 1984, makes reference to The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament from Walter Bauer's Fifth Edition, 1958:
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology
"Those born at the same time.... Associated with this is the meaning: the body of one’s contemporaries, an age."
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament from Walter Bauer’s Fifth Edition, 1958
"The sum total of those born at the same time, expanded to include all those living at a given time generation, contemporaries." (Page 5)
Also, the Watchtower dated September 1, 1952, stated the following with reference to the word "generation" as used at Matthew 24:34: "Three or even four generations may be living at the same time, their lives overlapping...." (Pp. 542, 543)
Consequently, Exodus 1:6 provides the "biblical basis" for how Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the meaning of the word "generation" used at Matthew 24:34.
@slimboyfat:
But unlike the old generation teaching or the 1975 fiasco, it is not as if the overlapping generations teaching ....
What you're not getting here is that there is no "overlapping generations teaching." Jehovah's Witnesses do not teach and have never taught anything pertaining to "overlapping generations."
It's the pure absurdity of the new teaching that makes them embarrassed to repeat it in print.
No, that's not why such a teaching doesn't appear in print. This "overlapping generations" about which you are going on here isn't something that Jehovah's Witnesses teach or have ever taught. Jesus never spoke about "overlapping generations," but his mention of "this generation" referred to merely one generation, and that "generation" we now understand based on Exodus 1:6 to refer to the generation of the composite sign of Christ's presence which began in 1914.
@djeggnog wrote:
What "overlapping generations" do you mean? To my knowledge, there has been no such teaching by Jehovah's Witnesses.
@00DAD wrote:
Well DJ is technically correct of course. But like most times when he is "right" he completely misses the point....
And what point is that?
The SOCIETY does not refer to this New Light as "Overlapping Generations" because, according to their obfuscated "reasoning" and willingness to capriciously change the meaning of the word "generation, it is only ONE GENERATION made up of TWO GROUPS WHOSE LIVES OVERLAP.
I don't discern a change having been made as to the meaning of the word "generation." You are the one here referring to "overlapping generations" as if this expression has some relevance to anything that Jehovah's Witnesses teach or have ever taught when the fact is that we have never taught a thing about any "overlapping generations," which is my point. A generation comprised of two groups whose lives overlap with one another, yes, but not two 'overlapping generations.'
Never mind the fact that there is a potential 99+ year age difference between the oldest person in the FIRST GROUP and the youngest in the SECOND GROUP.* They are "evidently" only one generation!
The point you make here though is eclipsed by the fact that of the 16 visions recorded in the Bible book of Revelation, all but six of them remain to undergo fulfillment -- just six visions are left! The 11th vision has already undergone partial fulfillment with the abyssing of "the scarlet-colored wild beast" as the League of Nations in 1939 and its ascending out of that abyss as the United Nations in 1945. What is yet to occur is the scarlet-colored wild beast's turning on what this harlot, Babylon the Great, represents, namely, religion, for this vision states that this beast will hate, devastate and completely destroy this woman.
It is then that is the fulfillment of the 12th vision with respect to the "great tribulation" to which Jesus refers at Matthew 24:21 comes into view, which event is followed by the execution of God's judgment upon the world by Jesus Christ and his angels to which Jesus refers at Matthew 24:30-34, when the sign of the Son of man appears in heaven and the "chosen ones" are gathered during "this generation" of the sign following which will be Jesus' separating of the sheep from the goats to which Jesus refers at Matthew 25:31-33.
What, you ask, is the EVIDENCE that proves that Jesus "evidently" meant what this WT says he meant? Good question! The answer is: No one knows because none was given.
I would say that you could not have read the article, "Holy Spirit's Role in the Outworking of Jehovah's Purpose," that appears in the Watchtower dated April 15, 2010, for had you done so, you would have come to realize the significance of Exodus 1:6 which was the evidence on which our interpretation of the word "generation" used at Matthew 24:34 is based. Either this or you just didn't understand what you were reading.
I would posit that it is "evidently" because Armageddon has not come. This unfortunate development left the WTBTS with only a few options. They could either admit:
They were wrong about 1914
That they have absolutely no idea what Jesus meant
Reinterpret the meaning of the word "generation"
They obviously chose Option #3.
As I stated in another post, interpreting the Bible isn't an exact science, and for this reason, we must discern what the Scriptures mean based on what other Scriptures say or according to how certain related expressions are used in the Bible. Just as the Bible points out at 1 Peter 1:10, 11, the prophets of old made a "diligent inquiry" and "careful search" of the Scriptures and "kept on investigating" as to what particular season or what sort of season] the spirit in them spoke concerning Christ, and just as occurred among God's people during the first century during the days of the apostles, so the same investigation has taken place among God's people today.
Russell and Rutherford passed away leaving Jehovah's Witnesses with an understanding of what Jesus meant by "this generation" at Matthew 24:34 that was different than what Jehovah's Witnesses believed under Knorr. In their day, Jehovah's Witnesses believed Jesus was referring to the lifetime of people when he referred to "this generation." Today, we now know this to have been a mistaken viewpoint.
Since we now realize that Jesus had employed a bit of hyperbole at Matthew 24:34, we are now of the belief that Jesus' reference to "this generation" referred to the sign of his invisible presence during which his anointed brothers lived contemporaneous to the composite generation of the sign. We cannot be dogmatic about this matter, but we are now of the belief that those of Jesus' brothers that were living when the generation of the sign began in the year 1914 as well as those of his brothers that are alive when the generation of the sign ends at which Armageddon begins is what Jesus meant when he said that "this generation" would not pass away before all of the things that Jesus indicated would occur in his prophesy about the conclusion of this system of things had taken place.
Now, since we're so clear on who make up the members of this single "Overlapping Generation," only one question remains:
Who are the Underlappers of this Generation?
I don't see this as a legitimate question to explore, but feel free to explore it with someone else that sees this question of yours as being relevant.
@djeggnog
-
00DAD
DJ, you a funny boy. You argue with me for agreeing with you! What a maroon!!!
-
Black Sheep
Who's splitting hairs?
Describing the WT's new attempt at redeeming their generation doctrine as 'overlapping generations' is very appropriate as their new definion of “this generation” includes people who cannot be described as the same generation "...whose lives overlap during a particular time period..." Spin it any way you like, these people are different generations. You're not fooling anybody.
When talking to these oldies, I didn't use the description 'overlapping generations'. I used their own terminolgy, straight out of the April 2010 WT. It was clear that they understood the new doctrine, they just couldn't agree with it. They've invested fifty years of their lives and shunned their own family members for leaving their church. They can privately admit the WT is wrong, but they can't leave without losing face in a country where everyone knows who they are.
-
Vidqun
Djeggnog, remember we spoke about dishonest scholarship in an earlier thread. First of all, check out the English meaning of “contemporary”. I know you don’t like Webster, but humor me. Secondly, study the quotes according to the Watchtower. Thirdly, study the quotes in the Dictionaries and Lexicons. Can you spot the difference? That’s what I call dishonest scholarship.
con•tem•po•rary \ k?n-'tem-p?-?rer-e, -?re-re \ adj
[com- + L tempor-, tempus] 1631
1: happening, existing, living, or coming into being during the same period of time
2a: simultaneous
b: marked by characteristics of the present period : modern , current — con•tem•po•rar•i•ly \ -?tem-p?-'rer-?-le \ adv
syn contemporary , contemporaneous , coeval , synchronous , simultaneous , coincident mean existing or occurring at the same time. contemporary is likely to apply to people and what relates to them Abraham Lincoln was contemporary with Charles Darwin > . contemporaneous is more often applied to events than to people contemporaneous accounts of the kidnapping > . coeval refers usu. to periods, ages, eras, eons two stars thought to be coeval > . synchronous implies exact correspondence in time and esp. in periodic intervals synchronous timepieces > . simultaneous implies correspondence in a moment of time the two shots were simultaneous > . coincident is applied to events and may be used in order to avoid implication of causal relationship the end of World War II was coincident with a great vintage year > .
———————
2contemporary n
pl -rar•ies 1638
1: one that is contemporary with another
2: one of the same or nearly the same age as another
Merriam-Webster, I. (2003). Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary. (Eleventh ed.). Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc.
Watchtower Quotation:
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology
" Those born at the same time .... Associated with this is the meaning: the body of one’s contemporaries, an age ."
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament from Walter Bauer’s Fifth Edition, 1958
" The sum total of those born at the same time, expanded to include all those living at a given time generation, contemporaries. " (Page 5)
Dictionary Quotation:
Vol. 2 : New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology
CL & OT genea, derived from the root gen-, means birth, also (noble) descent, then descendants, family, race (i.e., those bound together by a common origin). Those born at the same time constitute a generation (“three generations of men are a hundred years”, Hdt. 2, 142). Associated with this is the meaning: the body of one’s contemporaries, an age. In the LXXgenea is almost always the translation of dôr and means generation, in which case the whole history of Israel is often regarded as a work of God extending through many generations, from generation to generation”, “from all generations”).
Morgenthaler, R., & Brown, C. (1986). Generation. In L. Coenen, E. Beyreuther & H. Bietenhard (Eds.), . Vol. 2: New international dictionary of New Testament theology (L. Coenen, E. Beyreuther & H. Bietenhard, Ed.) (35). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.
? the sum total of those born at the same time, expanded to include all those living at a given time and freq. defined in terms of specific characteristics, generation, contemporaries (Hom. et al.; BGU 1211, 12 [II b.c. ]; Jesus looks upon the whole contemp. generation of Israel as a uniform mass confronting him (cp. Gen 7:1; Ps 11:8) Mt 11:16; 12:41f; 23:36; 24:34; Mk 13:30; Lk 7:31; 11:29–32,50f; 17:25; 21:32 (EGraesser, ZNW Beih. 22, 2 ’60). S. also 1 above.
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed.) (191–192). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
-
smiddy
djeggnog
You never commented on my post on Matt.ch.1 vs 17 which clearly identifies a generation as 48 years long ,2 such timespans ( generations ) have already passed since 1914. { 1962 and 2010 }
I`m very hurt I`ve been overlooked
smiddy
-
djeggnog
@00DAD wrote:
The SOCIETY does not refer to this New Light as "Overlapping Generations" because, according to their obfuscated "reasoning" and willingness to capriciously change the meaning of the word "generation, it is only ONE GENERATION made up of TWO GROUPS WHOSE LIVES OVERLAP.
@djeggnog wrote:
[W]e have never taught a thing about any "overlapping generations," which is my point. A generation comprised of two groups whose lives overlap with one another, yes, but not two 'overlapping generations.'
Notice here that what you say here about us changing the meaning of the word "generation" does not in any way agree with what I say here. I don't know how it was you came to conclude what you did about the change in our interpretation of Matthew 24:34 as to what Jesus meant by "this generation."
@00DAD wrote:
Never mind the fact that there is a potential 99+ year age difference between the oldest person in the FIRST GROUP and the youngest in the SECOND GROUP.* They are "evidently" only one generation!
@djeggnog wrote:
The point you make here though is eclipsed by the fact that of the 16 visions recorded in the Bible book of Revelation, all but six of them remain to undergo fulfillment.... What is yet to occur is the scarlet-colored wild beast's turning on what this harlot, Babylon the Great, represents, namely, religion, for this vision states that this beast will hate, devastate and completely destroy this woman.
It is then that [...] the fulfillment of the 12th vision with respect to the "great tribulation" to which Jesus refers at Matthew 24:21 comes into view, which event is followed by the execution of God's judgment upon the world by Jesus Christ and his angels to which Jesus refers at Matthew 24:30-34....
Notice again that what you say here about "a potential 99+ year age difference" between the oldest in group #1 and the youngest in group #2 and their being "only one generation" makes no sense since there aren't really two groups at all, so what you are saying here does not in any way agree with what I say here, considering the fact that the article, "Holy Spirit's Role in the Outworking of Jehovah's Purpose," that appeared in the Watchtower, dated April 15, 2010, was merely illustrating hypothetically how the life of someone in group #1 could overlap the life of someone in group #2. Plus, where's the logic in concluding with the great tribulation looming that what you have referred to as "a potential 99+ year age difference" could impact the timing of the 12th vision with the 11th vision so close to fulfillment?
You argue with me for agreeing with you! What a maroon!!!
Actually, when someone says something foolish, I will tactfully try to point out to them where they are mistaken in their viewpoint. Not everyone has had a university education, not everyone has had a high school education. I know this and I don't pretend that everyone to whom I might speak is an intellectual. I've met folks of my own ilk that are wont to say some pretty ridiculous things, but I, too, have been guilty of saying some ridiculous things, so I know not to take myself too seriously. However, your view was different than my view, so we didn't exactly agree.
@Black Sheep:
Describing the WT's new attempt at redeeming their generation doctrine as 'overlapping generations' is very appropriate as their new [definition] of "this generation" includes people who cannot be described as the same generation "...whose lives overlap during a particular time period..." Spin it any way you like, these people are different generations. You're not fooling anybody.
Our new interpretation of Matthew 24:34 isn't about overlapping generations, but is about contemporaries of a particular event, and the event began with the composite sign of Christ's presence in 1914. We now understand that this event -- the composite sign -- marks the beginning of the "generation" to which Jesus refers at Matthew 24:34, so we no longer apply Jesus' use of generation to people, since these would be contemporaries of one another during the "generation of the sign." The lives of some of the older ones during this generation of the sign would overlap the lives of some of the younger ones during this generation of the sign. Again, there aren't really two groups, the "older" group and the "younger" group, but here's another hypothetical:
Imagine a three-day convention and I have two parts to give on Days 1 and 2 at the Dallas Convention and two parts to give elsewhere on Day 3. You have two parts to give elsewhere on Day 1 and two parts to give on Days 2 and 3 at the Dallas Convention. You and I are contemporaries at the Dallas Convention on Day 2 even though I was there when it began on Day 1 and you were there when it ended on Day 3. The Dallas Convention represents "the generation of the sign," so that while I was there when it began, you were there when it ended and our lives overlapped at the Convention on Day 2, making the two of us contemporaries there.
This illustrates how Jehovah's Witnesses now understand Jesus' use of the word "generation" at Matthew 24:34, for as we discerned from how the word "generation" is used at Exodus 1:6 that Joseph's generation included those whose lives overlapped with his life. Joseph's older siblings were there when Joseph's life began and Joseph's younger brother, Benjamin, who was six years younger than Joseph, as well as his sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, were there when Joseph's life ended, who might have outlived their oldest uncles, Reuben and Simeon (Reuben was seven years older than Joseph). All of these were contemporaries of Joseph's generation.
@Vidqun:
Djeggnog, remember we spoke about dishonest scholarship in an earlier thread.
Is dishonest scholarship what we were discussing "in an earlier thread"? Really?!? In that other thread, I recall pointing out to you the following:
(1) The beast at Revelation 11:7 cannot be the "scarlet-colored wild beast" at Revelation 17:3. (2) The beast at Revelation 13:1 cannot be the "scarlet-colored wild beast" at Revelation 17:3 either. And I also recall your writing the following:
(@Vidqun:)
When there is doubt or misunderstanding of a word, then it is time to bring in the dictionaries.... [T]he NWT is an American Bible, translated in the US of A, thus my use of Webster. I would say it is very relevant, or did they use the wrong English word for Greek genea?
[and]
I know for a fact that the new "generation" interpretation of the Society is unique and unparallelled in the literature. That means they have created a novel and new interpretation that should be added to the list of standard English interpretations (e.g., those by Webster) or even those used by the Oxford dictionary, if you prefer to use that one.
Do you not notice how you refer to "dictionaries" as if the discussion had been about the definition of the word "generation," and then how you begin using the word "interpretation" and go on to refer to the English language definitions of the words contained in Webster's dictionary as "English interpretations"?
Again, @Vidqun, I don't want to be hurtful, or say anything that would make you feel insulted or hurt your feelings, but like I told you in that thread, there does seem to be a question in your mind as to the scholarship of those who translated the NWT from "Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek" into its "English equivalent," and specifically as to the NWT translators word choice with respect to the Greek word genea. If you were discussing "dishonest scholarship" with me, fine, but I wasn't aware of it since I was the one that suggested to you that there seemed to be a question in your mind as the scholarship of those that translated the NWT.
There is a difference, however, between the definition of a word and the interpretation of a word. You seem to not know that these two words -- "definition" and "interpretation" -- are not synonyms of one another, but have very different meanings. I'm really not comfortable discussing this with you, because you don't seem to be in possession of a sufficient knowledge of the English language and your inability to comprehend fundamental concepts compels me to beg off from discussing this topic further with you.
@smiddy:
You never commented on my post on Matt.ch.1 vs 17 which clearly identifies a generation as 48 years long ,2 such timespans ( generations ) have already passed since 1914. { 1962 and 2010 }
I didn't comment, because I couldn't take what you posted seriously. You wrote the following:
So from Abraham to jesus their were 3 lots of 14 generations,which = 42 generations
Abraham was born about 2018 BC
Jesus was born about 2 BC
a difference of 2016 years
2016 years divided by 42 generations =48 years
Which incidentally coincides with what jesus stated in prophecy concerning the destruction of jerusalem in 70 AD , well within a generation timespan of 48 years.
You arbitrarily decided to divide the number of years between Abraham's birth and Jesus' birth, or 2016 years, by the 42 generations mentioned in Matthew's gospel at Matthew 1:17 averaging 48 years for each generation, when Luke's gospel at Luke 3:23-28 indicates that there are 76 generations from Adam's creation to Jesus' birth, which when these 4,024 years are divided by 76 averaging roughly 53 years per generation, except the lives of those in the first ten generations had pretty long lifespan greatly exceeding 53 years. No one would do what you did here.
@djeggnog
-
Black Sheep
... so we no longer apply Jesus' use of generation to people...
Yup. That Jesus character is irrelevent. Never mind what he said .... "dah dah dah" is what is meant, and if you still want to have a family, you had better give lip service to believing it.