by winstonchurchill 30 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-june-2016/man-with-inkhorn/
So I guess baptism is no longer the "mark for survival".
As a matter of fact, that key aspect of the 'old light' is not even acknowledged in this article.
They are just publishing new understanding without even bothering to explain the full extent of the change, hoping nobody will remember how it was... and they may be right about that.
What do people need to do to be symbolically marked for survival? They need to react favorably to the preaching work that is taking place, put on the Christian personality, dedicate themselves to Jehovah, and loyally support Christ’s brothers. (Matt. 25:35-40)
There is nothing left to interpretation here... If you are not a baptized JW, you will be destroyed. With that paragraph in mind, Jesus' selection, or separating of the goats and sheeps will be WITHIN the JWs since those who are not baptized don't stand a chance.
I need to bookmark this crap so that if I am ever brought to a JC, I will be able to quote it.
Strange, I thought the WBTS would no longer apply the type-antitype views. I must have been wrong :-)
It is a very strange comparison. The people to be marked were not living during a tribulation. It was jut a time of great abominations. False worshipping by Israel, His chosen people. The ones marked are groaning and moaning. This has nothing to do with being judged,
Well, what can one expect from those that form the gb of the WBTS.......
@StephaneLaliberte - exactly!
I did a quick writeup of the new Sheep and goats understanding. My conclusion was that they are intentionally excluding all non-JW's from possibly being sheep, since the sheep need to support "Christ's brothers" AKA the annointed - AKA the governing body. Not everyone agrees with me but here is my writeup anyways.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5085516542246912/sheep-goats-light-gets-brighter
So basically everyone where JWs don't even scratch the surface are screwed. Or the end is a long, long way away, assuming they are going to "preach" to these areas someday....
From JWFacts:
Being a Witness is predominantly contingent on where one is born and billions of people will never hear of the name Jehovah or Jesus. Living within the following countries - Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Thailand and Turkey are around 3 billion people, nearly half the global population. Yet the 2006 Watchtower Service Report showed that combined these have less than 40,000 Witnesses, not even 1 for every 70,000 people. These countries represent many religious (Muslim, Atheist, Buddhist and Hindu) and ethnic (African, Indian, Asian and European) backgrounds, showing that no particular group is genetically disposed to be "goat-like". In Pakistan and Bangladesh virtually all will be destroyed, the ratio of Witnesses to 'worldly people' is less than 1:1,000,000. In 2006, there was not a single Witness in Afghanistan. Is it fair for people who have never even heard of Jehovah to be destroyed at Armageddon?
Thanks mmThinker, I had not seen that post back when you brought it up. Very interesting.
This is not a small difference in teaching. I see this as a big deal. Yet, I am willing to bet that most JWs barely notice it.
It's a familiar theme: Be a JW or die.
Jesus said that anyone who was not against him was for him. The WTBTS openly disagrees with that statement by:
1) Openly saying that Jesus did not mean what he said. ( Remember, these are the same guys who brought you the "Trumpet blasts" dogma.)
2) Declaring that survival depends upon being a dedicated, baptized JW.
None of it makes sense and it contradicts the Bible and the WTBTS FAQ section about non-JWs/judgement. What do you expect...
IT'S A CULT!!!!
DD
MM, you're theory makes sense if the WTBTS expects "persecution" to reduce them to a core of zealots. Why else would they paint the picture of all non-JWs being marked for death?
What happened to only the truly wicked being destroyed? Are all non-JWs truly wicked?
This is the case of the blind leading the blind.
LET'S REVIEW: .......
DD
I thought they specifically said that they were done with that when they condemned type/antitype interpretation
If you noticed they said that - but have continued on that line without stopping.
