It is probable that if the domestics include the great crowd (other sheep) and the belief is that no FDS can be proven to have existed from the death of the last apostle until the reestablished FDS in 1918, that most believers from the death of the last apostle or the "dawn" of the 2nd century as the article puts it, will soon be considered other sheep. The Wheat and the Weeds articles makes it a point to use a particular expression. It uses "overgrown" where the parable uses oversown. It may well have been a purposeful slip. To imply that no collective organization of believers, "anointed", existed for over 2000 years until the establishment of the modern day organization may well be the means by which the number of modern anointed can be justified, afterall, all those believers were still believers, just not heaven bound believers.
We just love this new idea
by Separation of Powers 10 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Ding
That would be an interesting flip-flop.
Not that long ago, they taught that the heavenly class closed in 1935.
This would mean that it wasn't open until 1919.
Doesn't the "new light" mean that no legitimate Memorial took place for all those centuries... only the communion partaking of Christendom?
-
DATA-DOG
The reason most Jw's are buying this nu-light are:
1) ignorance of historical Jw doctrine
2) The last explanation was so stupid that this makes sense by comparison.
Ding,
Good point, But.... current doctrine allows for annointed ones to partake, even though they are not of the FDS. So CTR, could partake even though he was not of the FDS. Yeah, it's retarded.
-
leaving_quietly
Somebody close to the top had to question the doctrine to begin with, thus this "idea". Therefore, somebody close to the top must have independent thinking. Therefore... well, you get my point.
-
james_woods
I actually think that this notion (no annointed except for the very early first followers all the way to 1919) may in fact be eventually proclaimed.
As was noted - it would be a quick (but temporary) fix for the increasing numbers of partakers.
On the other hand - it is just another bumbling action to paint themselves into a corner:
Christians over the 19 centuries were "Other Sheep" - but they just did not know it! Because, of course, the earthly hope and the other sheep were not invented until the 1930s.
Ludicrous.
-
frankiespeakin
We just love this new idea
These words as expressed by David Splane teaches the idea that if the Governing Body love a teaching that is different from an old one printed in their publication it is not apostacy but it is apostacy if somebody else comes up with a different idea from the official teachings in the WT publication and according to GB policy he is an evil apostate.
-
problemaddict
I think you may be confusing a part of this, but it probably isn't your fault. The FDS are not the only annointed. There were annointed in the first Century (all who were Christian?), and there were 10's of thousands of them in the early 20th century. So they cannot state anyone was or WAS NOT annointed during the time in between. They have long since abandon the "line of truth" theology that required a representative of the heavenly class to always be on earth in between.
-
Separation of Powers
@frankiespeakin- I agree, I have always wondered why it is ok to question standing doctrine when one rises to the upper echelon of the hieracrchy but it is considered an offense for anyone else. I guess it depends more on your proven loyalty based on your current position.
@problemaddict- I appreciate your response. The belief that there are more anointed than those who comprise the FDS is understood. If, however, there is "no line of truth" as noted in your comment, or no actual succession of FDS representation, that would imply that there was no collective group of Christians. This could easily be argued based on the premise that if there was no FDS than there were no domestics to feed. Otherwise, how to you justify that there was indeed a group of Christians, if there was no one to feed them. The reasoning is circular, that is realized, but it is not difficult to see how readily the idea of no annointed after the death of the last apostle and only anointed after the foundation of the modern day FDS. This is not much different than Mormon theology, i.e. all real biblical interpretation depends on the modern mormon movement from Joseph Smith to present.
-
Crazyguy
there newest understanding is a joke and its obvious. The parable about the wheat and the weeds is about all Christians (which are the anointed) and Jesus does not harvest them until right before or at Armageddon,scriptures prove this. Also the first fruits are the 144k and all you have to-do is read chapter 14 of revelation and right there as plain as day the first fruits are already in heaven singing a new song before the harvest. Their crap is getting so bad they cant even keep it biblicaly strait any more
-
BluesBrother
I see what you are saying "Seperation of Powers" and it is true that they slipped "overgrown" for "oversown" and they were not collected together..but their whole explanation of the "wheat & weeds" parable depends on the anointed being present all the time since the 1st cent. The WT (July 15) says :
"4 Speaking about the wheat and the weeds, Jesus said: “Let both grow together until the harvest.” This command reveals that from the first century until today, there have always been some anointed wheatlike Christians on earth. That conclusion is confirmed by what Jesus later told his disciples: “I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.” ( Matt. 28:20 ) So anointed Christians would be protected by Jesus all the days leading up to the time of the end. However, since they were overgrown by weedlike Christians, we do not know for certain who belonged to the wheat class during that long period of time. However, some decades before the start of the harvest season, the wheat class became discernible. How did that come about?"
Knowing this Org., there is nothing that I would guarantee they will never say, but we seem to be not there yet.