Ozzie's Weekend Poll #7

by ozziepost 40 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  TheStar

  Man, while most of you were already out or on your way out I was just getting sucked in!!

  I started studying about Sep-Oct of 1995 so when that whole "New light on The Generation" thing came out I was clueless, definately #1. No one cared to really explain it to me so I never really understood it or the implications of the change until just a few months ago when I started doing all my research and started finding all the discrepancies etc. I think XJWs understand it and can explain it much better than many JWs, it's truely sad.

  Edited by - TheStar on 16 June 2002 16:13:6
• 

  LDH

  #14....didn't realize the import of said "new Light" until a few years later...when I was well on my way out.

  Lisa
• 

  drloss

  #5 Ozzie. I had been out for 8 years at that time and had been waiting for the change - it had to happen.
• 

  patio34

  1. Didn't understand it.

  The conductor, who was a friend, stated after the meeting that he'd been counting on my "comments" to help get thru the WT "study." (I hate to use JW buzz words!) I just remember feeling irritated at the article and subconsciously refused to publicly say anything about it. I realize now that it was a subtle way of disagreeing. I've moved on to very vocal ways of disagreeing and voted with my feet.

  Pat
• 

  Perry

  I remember exactly where I was sitting when I read the change....kinda like what people say about the JFK assisination.

  I connected the dots very quickly:

  1. It meant they were wrong about the parousia time table

  2. That meant Christ wasn't enthroned yet

  3 That meat the Christ hadn't inspected his belongings yet

  4That meant that the "dragnet" parable was still in effect

  5That meant that the Fand D Slave hadn't been appointed.

  6That meat that all baptismisms from all denominations were still valid (Fred Franz once told my uncle that his previous baptism from another church was valid because it was prior to the selection of the Fand D Slave Class.

  Freddie built an entire house of cards on that doctrine. That article brought the whole theology down in my opinion.To this day it amazes me why people don't see the falsehood and deception.

  My best friend was helping with some renovation in my house at the time. When I explained it to him, he simply asked me to write the society for clarification. He was my fishing buddy, confidant, and true friend. Within 2 months, we had a falling out over the authority of the Fand D Slave. We have never spoken again. I miss him very, very much. I truly loved Greg Cheek.

  I hope to one day gain mastery over my anger.

  Edited by - Perry on 17 June 2002 3:14:3
• 

  ozziepost

  G'day all,

  Thanks for your very interesting comments.

  Perry, I've gotta hand it to you, you're so right! Guess someone turned on the light for you, eh?

  Cheers,

  Ozzie

  Freedom means not having to wear a tie.
• 

  comment

  I remember being at a circuit assembly not long after the "generation change" and discussing the morning program with a relative of mine during the lunch hour. He commented about how the circuit overseer's "Giving Attention to the Needs of the Circuit" part had placed such great emphasis on meeting attendance, which has been generally falling off in my country since the 1980's. He wondered what the cause of this might be. I said: "Do you think perhaps some of the brothers are disturbed about the 'generation change'?" He looked shocked and started shaking his head as if to rid himself of the idea: "Oh, no...no...I don't think it could be that...no...we now have a better understanding of Jehovah's purposes."

  At the time, I was still trying to be a good Witness and had done my best to assimilate the idea. It did occur to me then, though, that if the "generation" was not to be tied to the lifespan of those alive in 1914, then this system sure could hypothetically drag on for a long time. Even if you tried to factor in the sealing of the 144,000 in heaven as a time marker, the number of Memorial partakers was mysteriously holding steady!

  So I feel retrospectively that when I raised that question to my relative, I was questioning the new doctrine myself at some level. I might feel very clever and pleased with myself for being able to give a thumbnail sketch of it when I answered at the Watchtower Study, but it didn't sit right with me.

  What seems particularly crude to me now is how they changed the doctrine 81 years after 1914--not coincidentally, I believe, one year after what the Psalms describe as the typical outer limit of the human life span: "Our years are seventy or eighty."

  Where is the guidance of the holy spirit if it just comes down to saying, "Oh well, we're past 80 years now, so I guess we should discard our old teaching before the brothers start questioning"?

  If they were God's organization, why couldn't they have gotten it right in 1975? Or 1955? Or even (wait with bated breath) right THE FIRST TIME?

  comment
• 

  mustang

  Having been almost 30 years "out of it", I was struck with the thought that things must have changed by now. Although avoiding the Dub minions as much as possible, I thought an interesting thing to ask would be "what has changed in the last twenty years"?

  Things are too hectic with family battles when I talk to old acquaintances, so other matters are discussed.

  In fact, I have the policy of "I don't do DOCTRINE" in those instances.

  I got the chance to ask this in Asia when I met a JW that I knew I would never see again and who didn't have a clue who I was. Unfortunately, it was before the "generation" bombshell.

  Overall, I like Perry's thoughts on this and I prefer reading about it here.

  Mustang
• 

  dobby

  Didn't understand it, but accepted it.

  However a nagging doubt that never went away - 1914 plus 80 years is 1994. If a generation is 70 or 80 years according to Psalms, the generation should have ended in 1994. One year after it doesn't end we change our belief. Coincidence? I think not! New Light? I think not. A cover up and smoke screen? I think SO!
• 

  ozziepost

  Thanks for extra comments.

  I find the thought about the 80 years = one generation being an interesting one. Thx to those who raised it.

  Cheers, Ozzie