Meanwhile in CERN........
BOE letter: New lights new changes
by pixel 85 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
KateWild
We'll that is interesting, I will have to go over the adjustments with my son, so if he can think critically about the whole new light nonsense. Kate xx
-
punkofnice
Good old God.......what a wally...can't even communicate his own name!
It's a good job the Governing Body(R) are there to help the doddering old twit!
All hail the GB...higher than god!
-
jamclark
From briefly reading it sounds like they are taking a passive voice to retain the name Jehovah.
Since more and more groups are using Yahuah (or Yahuwah), Yahwey (preferred by scholars), or similar names the JWorg could be clinging onto the convenient name Jehovah and not the more accurate name. It is odd for an organization that claims to attain to more accurate knowledge.
And if they go more electronic (and print local or use tablets) they could save on publishing for it they one day (as in very soon) use the more accurate sacred names. Alas would be a flip-flop for their rNWT of 2013 (since corrected).
-
wallsofjericho
BILLY SAID:
So, to simplify what the change really means...
Jehovah's name used to mean: I am the creator of all things, and I will do whatever is needed to accomplish my purposes.
New meaning of Jehovah's name: I constantly change. I had been saying one thing, but then I completely become something else whenever my earthly prophets realize that what I'd told them to say was wrong and needs to be totally revised ASAP. And since I just told you that I change all the time, I will now change and tell you, 'I never, ever, ever, never, ever change!'"
Am I understanding this correctly?
PRECISELY !!! you got it Billy. The GB didn't tweak Jah's name because they were actually WRONG, they changed it purely to gain some sort of personal adavantage. To be able to link organizational "tacking" to Jehovah "becoming" what ever is needed at the time is strategic positioning to gain credibility.
I see more changes on the horizon, their warming the R&F up for it already
-
sir82
So they changed "literally means" to "is understood to mean"? That's it?
That generates a letter to all congregations and a big kerfuffle?
I tend to agree with some of the sentiments above - the Society is backing away from their dogmatism on something that is demonstrably wrong.
Of course they do it a wimpily as possible, using the passive voice. Who is it, exactly, that "understands" that that is what the name means? Oh, the WTS does! But they're too timid to admit it directly now.
I feel I keep repeating myself, but here goes again: If there really were a Jehovah, he'd be so revolted by these hucksters that he'd immediately incinerate them on the spot.