http://www.webshowplace.com/question/65quest.html
A little side note: For some reason when I transferred this piece from my word processor to the board the apostrophes don't show up. So I apologize for what appears to be incorrect grammar.
1. The WTS claims it uses the Bible as it's "supreme authority". Where in the Bible does anyone count their time in preaching on a slip of paper and are assigned record cards of activity, determining this as a "gauge to their spirituality"? Where in the Bible are Pioneers, Auxiliary Pioneers, District Overseers, Circuit Overseers, Bethelites, and Kingdom Halls?
First century Christianity enjoyed certain gifts that were later done away with and are no longer part of modern Christianity. For example, the gift of prophecy is no longer a gift in operation. Also, the apostles had power to raise the dead, something that even those who claim powers of healing are unable to do. So, to make an exact across the board comparison with the restored form of Christianity today among Jehovahs Witnesses with its first century counterpart is not possible. Be that as it may, the organizational structure of the primitive congregation set a pattern for today. For example, Paul made mention of the fact that God set each one where it pleased Him, assigning some as apostles; some as prophets; some as teachers, etc. One early disciple, Phillip by name, was specifically called an evangelizer. Although all Christians had the commission to evangelize, apparently he was given that designation because he excelled at it, much like the fulltime pioneers of today who spend more time in their ministry than the average Witness. Also, the modern office of district and circuit overseer is based upon the work that Paul, Barnabas, and others did. They made several trips through the Mediterranean area visiting and revisiting the various congregations, in a circuit if you please, giving them counsel and commendation. In Pauls letter to Titus, he gave Titus authority to travel through and make appointments in "city after city" upon the island of Crete. That is part of the work of a modern-day traveling overseer.
As far as Bethelites, thats another story. First century Christians didnt have any sort of large-scale publishing operation, however, they did live in close-knit communities and work for a common goal much like Bethelites today. Given the grand scale of the commission to preach to the ends of the earth before the end of the system, and the near-impossibility of a relatively small group of preachers accomplishing that without using modern means of communication, it would seem that Christ had in mind an eventual large-scale publishing operation just as we see in the present-day Watchtower Society.
As far as keeping an exact record, that is obviously something our early Christian forerunners didnt do. For one thing, they didnt have a modern means of instant communications, so, getting reports from the field took months. But, the apostolic governing body did have authority over the preaching work, to give directions and assignments. The Governing Body of Jehovahs Witnesses also has similar authority to give direction, make appointments, and to monitor the field activity of those who are ministers.
2. To what was Jesus referring to by the term "this temple" in Jn 2:18-19? In Jn 2:21 John clearly states that when Jesus used the term "this temple", he was referring to his body. If what the WTS teaches about Jesus' body after his death is correct, then how do you explain these verses?
Jesus frequently used fleshly, physical, earthly ideas to get across deep spiritual truths. For instance, he once told a crowd of his disciples that they must eat his flesh and drink his blood if they wanted life. Some of his disciples expressed disgust at such a thought, but Jesus, of course, was not advocating that his disciples perform some cannibalistic ritual upon his corpse. He merely was talking about how the sacrifice of his own flesh and blood was going to provide the basis for granting them everlasting life, provided that they "fed" upon him by exercising faith in his sacrificial death. With that in mind, then, we can better appreciate what Jesus was referring to when he spoke about the temple of his body.
First, Gods temple is his official place of worship, the centerpiece, as it were, around which all other things revolve. Prior to the coming of Christ Gods temple was a block and mortar structure located on a hill in Jerusalem. But Jesus changed all of that, and has himself become the central figure in Gods unfolding purpose.
Does that mean his literal fleshly body is presently Gods holy temple? No. Thats not what the Scriptures say. Jesus physical body did however provide the basis for Gods spiritual temple, of which Jesus is referred to as the foundational cornerstone. If we are not careful we can fall into the same pitfall as did Jesus Jewish disciples who took him literally when he spoke of eating his flesh and drinking his blood. So, what actually is Gods temple if it is not Jesus literal body? It is a spiritual organization with Christ as its head. Paul explained it at Ephesians 2:20-22, where he wrote to the holy ones, saying: "You have been built up upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while Christ Jesus himself is the foundation cornerstone. In union with him the whole building, being harmoniously joined together, is growing into a holy temple for Jehovah." And to the Corinthians Paul wrote: "Do you not know that you people are Gods temple, and that the holy spirit dwells in you?"
3. If the Holy Spirit is God's impersonal "active force", why does he speak directly and refer to himself as "I" and "me" in Acts 13:2?
It is what is known as a personification. For example, in Romans sin and death are personified as kings that have ruled over mankind. Nations at times are personified, like "The virgin Daughter of Zion," for example. Elsewhere the scriptures alternatively speak of the spirit as a thing and as "it." However, you will never find God and Christ referred to in that sense. Thats because they are persons, whereas the holy spirit is a force that is merely frequently referred to as if it were a person. It is reasonable to personify Gods impersonal force and imbue it with Gods character because the holy spirit is ultimately controlled by a person---God. Which is why it is frequently called Gods holy spirit, because it belongs to him and emanates from him.
4. Col 1:16, in talking about Jesus, says that"... All [other] things have been created through him and FOR HIM". If Jesus were Michael the Archangel at the time of creation, would an angel have created all things for himself? Isa 43:7 says God created "everyone ... for my OWN glory ..."
Jehovah and His Only-begotten Son have a very special and unique relationship. The Father, Jehovah, created the spirit that eventually became Jesus as the very first creature of all creation. And as such, Jehovah conferred upon his first-born Son the privilege of sharing with him in creation. Thats why Jesus is called the Only-begotten because he bears the distinction of being the only creature in existence that Jehovah God personally, directly, brought into being. All other creatures came into existence through Jesus, whom Jehovah imparted creative powers to after his creation. Even so, Jesus never referred to himself as a Creator. In fact, when he once referred to creation he humbly omitted himself and referred only to God, saying: "Did you not read that he who created them in the beginning And, even though Genesis reveals that God graciously included his Son, where he said, "let US make man in OUR image," Jesus personally never sought to take Gods glory in that respect.So, indeed, Jesus has had unspoken privilege beyond what any one else has ever or will ever experience, but, the glory goes to Jehovah God who so generously and magnanimously shared himself with others, especially his Firstborn.
5. The WTS claims that Ezekial's prophecy of the Jews returning to their land is fulfilled in their organization. Ezek 36:24, 28 says "and I will take you out of the nations and collect you together out of all the lands and bring you in upon your own soil" and "You will certainly dwell in the land that I gave to your forefathers, and you must become my people and I myself shall become your God." If this is fulfilled in the Watchtower organization, then how are they returning to the land of CANAAN as promised to the forefathers? Ps 105:8-11
The prophecies speak to us in different ways. In the book of Daniel, for example, the imperial lineage of the present day Anglo-American power is laid out in symbols. At other times, though, the prophets speak to us by establishing patterns. For example, after referring to Sodom and Gomorrah and Noahs Flood, Peter said of such events in the past: "Setting a pattern for ungodly persons of things to come." So, what we have in Ezekiel is a pattern of how Jehovah is able to redeem and restore his people to their rightful place. In the case of Christians we are not talking about a physical place of residence but a spiritual inheritance. Just as the Jews had their Promised Land, spiritual Jews have a spiritual paradise that God has promised them.
6. Consider also what is said concerning those who fulfill this prophecy. Ezek 36:22 says, "Therefore, say to the house of Israel, this is what the sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: 'not for your sakes I am doing [it] 0 house of Israel but for my holy name, which you have PROFANED among the nations where you have come in." Since the WTS claims that it is spiritual Israel and fulfils these prophecies in Ezekial, how do Jehovah's Witnesses believe they have profaned God's name among the nations?
Jehovahs Witnesses recognize that prophecy cant really be appreciated fully until it comes true. And human nature being what it is, we rarely recognize our own faults, much less admit to them without being forced to in some way. Since God is yet to make his judgments known, it is probable that Ezekile, as well as a broad range of various other prophecies, have a future application upon us once the judgment commences.
7. Since the WTS prohibits the use of blood transfusions, why does it permit the infusion of albumin, clotting factors, and gamma globulins, all of which are derived from human blood? Since Acts 15:29 clearly refers to the old Jewish law of not EATING blood (Gen 9:4, Lev 3:17, Deut 12:16), and since the WTS has changed its teachings so many times on major issues like organ transplantation, the definition of "generation", the year of Armageddon, etc, etc, and simply calls these changes "New Light", how can you be sure they won't some day change their teachings on blood transfusions and refer to the change as "New Light" also?
You are in error in assuming that Gods law to Noah, in the 9 th chapter of Genesis, was part of the Jewish law that was done away with. Noah was not a Jew. He is, however, a secondary father for all humanity. The covenant Jehovah made with Noah is therefore binding upon all of Noahs descendants. Furthermore, it is wrong to characterize our teachings as constantly changing. What is constantly changing is the field of medicine and the challenges that the modern world can at times present to Christians who are concerned about following Gods law. In the days of the apostles abstaining from blood was fairly simple. Just dont eat an animal that has not been bled properly. Its not so easy today. Blood and blood components have come to play an increasingly large role in medicine. Thus, it has required us to confront each aspect in order to make a determination as to whether this or that is appropriate. Just as the apostles and older men had the responsibility to make a ruling on the circumcision issue that was binding upon the entire organization, the Governing Body has the responsibility to try and set these complex issues in order for Jehovahs Witnesses. Their ruling, in my opinion, is reasonable, whereby the spirit of Gods law to abstain from blood is observed and they have avoided the pitfall of deciding the minute details for every Christian conscience.
8. Does Prov 4:18 really justify an organization replacing doctrines and failed prophecies with new doctrines and prophecies, or does it simply contrast the benefit to the "righteous" of obeying a wise father (Prov 4:10-19)? False teachings can be called "false words" and Prov 13:5 says, "A false word is what the righteous hates..." When the WTS changes a teaching to something that is totally different, is it like a light that is getting brighter and brighter or more like having one false light (word) completely turned off and a totally different light turned on? Do you think the WTS would be critical of any other organization that changed its teachings as many times on as many different issues over the last 100 years as the WTS has?
Changing a teaching is not necessarily a bad thing. All fields of learning are constantly being revised, and what was once thought to be the last word, in time, can be found to be no longer suitable and discarded. Proverbs 4:18 is not the only verse that we might draw upon that explains how this works. 1 Corinthians 13: 9 says: "For we have a partial knowledge and we prophesy partially." It stands to reason that such partial knowledge will in time give way to greater knowledge. The course of true Christianity demands that we grow in knowledge, and that at time means that we discard what proves to be in error. Paul used an illustration, likening the maturation of a human from a babe to an adult, in order to explain the growth process of the Christian congregation. Childhood is characterized by learning through trial and error; by impetuousness; by a lack of depth of reasoning. Our organization has similarly gone through an adolescent period, and even to the present moment we are still looking at Christ by means of a hazy metal mirror, and dont have the full undiminished knowledge of him, as Paul further illustrated. Only when Jesus arrives: "then I shall know accurately even as I am accurately known."
9. Regarding Jesus' return to earth, Jehovah's Witnesses believe that it occurred in l914 as an invisible return. That event is described in Zechariah 14:4, which states, "... and his feet will actually stand in that day upon the mountain of the olive trees which is in front of Jerusalem on the east." If Jesus has no body and if his return was invisible, how do you explain this verse?
You are in error in this respect: The presence of Christ and the arrival of Christ are two separate events. I will explain this in greater detail as I come to some of your other questions. But, as regards the prophecy in Zechariah that describes God coming down to earth, the thing to keep in mind is that men will never literally see Jehovah or Christ. So when we read of such things, such as God standing upon the Mount of Olives, it is not to be taken literally. For example, when Moses went up to the top of Mount Sinai the scripture says that he had a face-to-face encounter with God and that Jehovah came down on the mountain itself. It was apparently an awesome spectacle that terrified the Hebrews. Yet, was Jehovah literally visible? No. In fact, later in the book of Acts Stephen said that angels transmitted the Law. So, even though the account says that God literally came down and spoke with Moses, the reality is that Jehovahs angelic representatives came in place of God and that even they were invisible. But, obviously God made his presence felt, and thats the point. When Jehovah intervenes in human affairs, it will be as though he literally came down and stood upon the earth. The 10 th chapter of Revelation has a similar prophecy where a strong angel comes down and stands astride the earth and sea, as if to declare his ownership. But, as Revelation says, such things are merely signs and not literal.
10. Paul said, "... for as often as you eat this loaf and drink this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he arrives." (1Cor 11:26). If Christ arrived in 1914, why do Jehovah's Witnesses continue to partake of the bread and wine? Shouldn't they have stopped in 1914?
Jesus presence takes place unnoticed by the world. The parousia of Christ is what initiates the last days of this system of things. This is verified at 2 Peter 3:3, which, for your convenience reads: For you know this first, that in the last days there will come ridiculers with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires and saying: "Where is this promised PRESENCE of his?" That prophecy establishes the connection between the last days and the invisible presence of Christ Jesus. The last days are a period of years during which Jesus true disciples preach the good news about his presence, which meets with ridicule on the part of those who claim to see no evidence that the world situation is any different. However, Christs arrival occurs at the conclusion of the last days when he makes his presence known so that the ridiculers are forced to come to terms with him. So, thats why we continue to proclaim the death of the Lord because he hasnt arrived to judge mankind yet.
/ You Know
Edited by - You Know on 22 June 2002 14:11:14