by RR 7 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Today I was reading the Feb 15, 2003 Watchtower, they quote volume 6 of "Studies in the scriptures", "The New Creation" written by C.T. Russell in 1904. There was an asterisk next to the "Studies in the Scriptures", know what the footnote said?
"Published by Jehovah's Witnesses but now out of print."
My question is .... When did the Jehovah's Witnesses EVER publish these volumes? And I know for a fact they are NOT out of print!
They should have said "published by the Watchtower Society" rather than by Jehovah's Witnesses. Why would they leave such an obvious error in the magazine? Is it just a stupid oversight??
And as far as it being out of print, we all know why they won't admit that it's still in print. Why would they publicize the work of apostates? They wouldn't OBFUSCATE the truth of the matter now, would they??
The WTS says that Jehovah's witnesses have been on earth since Abel.
Insight Volume 1
Paul includes Abel among the "cloud of witnesses" of pre-Christian times.—Heb 11:4; 12:1.
Sacrifice has been a part of pure worship since the first faithful witness, Abel, offered "some firstlings of his flock" in sacrifice to God. (Genesis 4:4)
Also the WTS would feel that anyone else's printing of the Studies would be suspect of being manipulated.
The Studies were updated in places. Do the Bible Students use those versions or what printing date do they have?
Hi, RR.
Blondie(who finds the Studies more fascinating than current WTs)
Hi Blondie,
The Bible Students use the last edition that Russell published in 1916, since the society mae chnages ro his volumes in later years after his death.
RR
Hi RR
I was just looking through the 1928 Watch Tower, thinking that it was that year when the WTS stopped supplying the Studies. Didn't find anything yet...is that the right time-line?
However, I did just happen to come across this little glitch. Watch Tower June 1, 1928, p. 162 ("announcements" page):
A letter was recently sent out from the Service Department of the Society under date of January 28, the last part of which contains an erroneous statement. It is found that the copy of this letter was written some five years ago and that inadvertently one of the office force got hold of it and, thinking it was a more recent composition, used it. The brethren everywhere will please ignore any statement in letters or anything else fixing dates as to when the Lord will perform some part of his great work. All our times are in the Lord's hands. The efforts of the consecrated should be devoted to doing with their might what their hands find to do and not be concerned about just when the Lord is going to finish his work.
What?? Somebody in the SD wrote a letter in 1923 "fixing dates?" And 5 years later somebody in the SD thought it still made sense and sent it out??
Wonders never cease.
Craig
PS: Sorry to post "off-topic." (Somehow I'm confident you won't mind)
The bretheren everywhere will please ignore any statement in letters or anything else fixing dates as to when the lord will perform some part of his great work. All our times are in the lords hands
Why did'nt they listen to their own advice? Obviously they really didnt mean it.
Hello RR,
thanks for the topic and the logic development.
As you are well aware, the part of the "Studies..."
quoted, does not exactly say what the partial and
very small quote on "The Watchtower" writes.
Those who read one /two pages - before - and
after the quoted page, will see the real difference.
Again, deception and lies, as usual, from the WTBS Inc.
Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
From the article, Volume 6 of The New Creation series, we have below the original words written by Russell, and in the context of his extended discussion of The New Creation.
Who May Celebrate?
We answer, first of all, that none should commune who do not trust in the precious blood of Christ as the sacrifice for sins. None should commune except by faith he have on the doorposts and lintel of his earthly tabernacle the blood of sprinkling that speaketh peace for us, instead of calling for vengeance, as did the blood of Abel. (`Heb. 12:24`) None should celebrate the symbolical feast unless in his heart he <473> has the true feast, and has accepted Christ as his Life-giver. Further, none should commune unless he is a member of the one body, the one loaf, and unless he has reckoned his life, his blood, sacrificed with the Lord's in the same chalice, or cup. There is here a clearly drawn line of distinction, not only between the believers and unbelievers, but also between the consecrated and the unconsecrated. However, the line is to be drawn by each individual for himself--so long as his professions are good and reasonably attested by his outward conduct. It is not for one member to be the judge of another, nor even for the Church to judge, unless, as already pointed out, the matter has come before it in some definite form, according to the prescribed regulations. Otherwise the elders, or representatives of the Church, should set before those who assemble themselves these terms and conditions--(1) faith in the blood; and (2) consecration to the Lord and his service, even unto death. They should then invite all who are thus minded and thus consecrated to join in celebrating the Lord's death and their own. This, and all invitations connected with this celebration, should be so comprehensively stated as to leave no thought of sectarianism. All should be welcomed to participate, regardless of their faith and harmony on other subjects, if they are in full accord in respect to these foundation truths--the redemption through the precious blood, and a full consecration unto death, giving them justification.
It is appropriate here to consider the words of the Apostle:
"Whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh condemnation to himself, if he discern not the Lord's body." `1 Cor. 11:27-29`
The Apostle's warning here seems to be against a careless celebration of this Memorial, which would make of it a feast, and against inviting persons to it in a promiscuous manner. It is not such a feast. It is a solemn Memorial, intended only for the members of the Lord's "body"; and <474> whoever does not discern this, whoever does not discern that the loaf represents the flesh of Jesus, and that the cup represents his blood, would, in partaking of it, properly come under condemnation--not "damnation" as in the common version, but a condemnation in the Lord's sight, and a condemnation also in his own conscience. Before partaking of these emblems each individual, therefore, should decide for himself whether or not he believes and trusts in the broken body and shed blood of our Lord as being his ransom price; and secondly, whether or not he has made the consecration of his all that he may thus be counted in as a member of that "one body."
Having noted who are excluded, and who properly have access to the Lord's table, we see that every true member of the Ecclesia has the right to participate, unless that right has been debarred by a public action of the whole Church, according to the rule therefor laid down by the Lord. (`Matt. 18:15-17`) All such may celebrate; all such will surely desire to celebrate--will surely desire to conform to the Master's dying admonition, "Eat ye all of it; drink ye all of it." They will realize that unless we eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, we have no life in us; and that if they have in heart and mind partaken of the merits of the Lord's sacrifice really, and of his life, that it is both a privilege and a pleasure to memorialize this, and to confess it before each other and before the Lord.
****************************************************************************************************************************************************************
The Watchtower writer, as usual, makes a selective quotation of words frozen in print, amde immortal by history unalterable. The bad faith of the writer is clear. He misinforms Jehovah's Witnesses that the article is out of print, and throws dust in their eyes by deliberately attemting a revision of history. More than 6 million worshippers of Jehovah, many of them innocent as doves, will believe this writer. Who willl rescue rank and file Jehovah's Witnesses from the iron grip of their devilish captors? Why does the writer selectively quote Russell? He wrote:
All should be welcomed to participate, regardless of their faith and harmony on other subjects, if they are in full accord in respect to these foundation truths--the redemption through the precious blood, and a full consecration unto death, giving them justification.
That was before the invention of disfellowshipping, and the addition of several other pharasiacal conditions, not so? Do Jehovah's Witnesses still teach that the Memorial is a celebration of the death of the Lord and of the participants?
