Jesus' Answer for a Sign

by Friend 34 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Friend

  Zep

  This is my problem, I don't think it as much of a leap in logic. I think its a very natural reading to conclude they are the same,,, vrse 21 and 29.I find it much easier to conclude they are the same than that they are different...that's my problem, i cant get my head around it.

  That is a possible conclusion but not the only one. If Matthew's account lacked the preface of two questions asked then your conclusion would probably be the only one. As it stands, Jesus was asked two questions for which he gave one inclusive reply. In that case then those who would want to understand the reply as answering the two questions must necessarily ponder what portion of reply amounts to an answer for each question asked. Options include:

  1. That each portion of reply applies to each question asked.

  2. That some portions of reply apply to one question while other portions of reply apply to the other question.

  3. That some portions of reply provide an answer to both questions while other portions of reply apply to either or.

  Friend
• 

  Zep

  OK presuppose that the bible is true and God is real...so what then should you believe about MAT 24 etc

  That he will come like a thief in the night and no one will know the hour.When he comes he will come in a great tumult and like a flood.I kind of find it a little strange that he says he will come like a theif and then gives a sign for it,if thats what the opening vs of mat 24 is :'NAtion against Nation' etc.But it seems his coming will be marked by great troubles and great signs from heaven...and this will spring out of nowhere and be a surprise...like a thief in the night.We can call this time Armageddon....but then again, not all will recognize it as a sign since they will be doing their worldly things etc etc.And the Gospel will be preached to the whole world...i'd take this to mean that the bible will be widely distributed in someway, like it is right now...but then again, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.The key is in the 'thief in the night' bit.So Jesus did 3 things in MAt24...he predicted Jerusalems destruction, told his coming would be like a thief in the night and that his coming would me marked by certain signs and troubles?.
  So what does 'this generation' mean...since the bible is true then he couldn't have been talking about The generation he was talking to, atleast not exclusively anyway.So, A wild stab in the dark at its meaning...how about 'this generation' as in THIS SYSTEM OF THINGS...SATANS SYSTEM....SATANS GENERATION?.So, not being concerned about the actual details of MAT24...but just paying attention to the general jist of things and applying faith, this is what i learn.Like a thief in the night.

  Next..

  The book of Revelation:

  God will kill or atleast do away with Satan which will culminate at the Battle of Armageddon and everything will be OK for the true believers.

  And there will be a resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous...for whatever reason.(taking this from the gospels somewhere)

  An there are 7 kings....5 have been, 1 is and 1 is yet to come!.Whoever this 7th king is will wage war with the holy ones...but God will intercede at Armageddon and all will be cool in the end.

  There...easy as you like! and to think it took JW's 300 odd pages in Revelation:Grand Climax to explain things?
• 

  Friend

  Zep

  OK presuppose that the bible is true and God is real...so what then should you believe about MAT 24 etc

  We should believe the main point Jesus made, that hearing the news of God’s Kingdom is important and that each of us should pay attention to our own spirituality in relation to our Creator’s will. As for identifying any sign of the end of the age and Jesus’ parousia, assuming such a sign was given, Jesus did not indicate that realizing it was necessary for salvation, which is the main issue we face.
  
  Friend
• 

  Zep

  Yep Friend, thats about it!

  Have you read COJ's 'sign of the last days' at all BTW?, what did you think of it?.I was going to order it a few days ago but i just haven't got the stomach for reading anymore Anti-dub stuff.I was interested intially in Coj's views on MAT 24 etc...since he is a Christian and quite smart, i thought he might have some really good ideas to throw around!.
• 

  Friend

  Zep

  I have not read GTR. From what I can gather Carl's work effectively dismantles the 1914 chronology based upon the faulty 607 BCE dating for the fall of Jerusalem. I also understand that he argues effectively that assertions the Society makes relevant to Jesus' answer for a sign are bogus. For example, notions that earthquakes occur today with greater frequency and intensity are not evidenced. Basically I think GTR successfully debunks the Society's arguments about Jesus' answer for a sign and their chronology. I do know how Carl feels about whether we are today witnessing any unique fulfillment of Jesus' reply or if he feels that that is possible. I have argued on this thread that I believe a unique fulfillment is possible in our day and that Jesus could have intended that his answer for a sign would have a future fulfillment way beyond the destruction of Jerusalem, a fulfillment of global proportions. Nevertheless, as I have already stated, I do not think it all-important to look for such a sign and nothing in Jesus' reply indicates otherwise.

  Friend
• 

  Zep

  GTR destroys Dub chronology, utterly.I just finished it.Carl has some rather interesting things to say about the bible, it really is a good read if you dont get bogged down in the historical evidence part of the book.I find it kind of funny that Dubs would be so paranoid of this book and label it apostate..since its really not anti-christian or anything at all.I mean, Its not a negative Atheistic gripe or anything.

  Sign of the last, i haven't read but judging from the stuff AF has done over at Osarsif...the jist of the book is that things haven't changed markedly in world events post-1914 compared to previous centuries.I think personnally, thats a given.Though someone could drop a bomb any second and that'd soon change.
• 

  waiting

  Hey Zep,

  I've done decent amount of reading on the volumes of articles written by AF and others over at Research on the Watchtower. I was slightly miffed when AF called jw's "dumb sheep" - but perhaps he has a point?

  One thing that got my attention was the way that the WTBTS takes liberties with partial quotes. Using "..." before and/or after an author - they can, and have, changed the author's thinking behind his words - sometimes completely!! Randy Watters shows actual examples of this in his writings - with photocopies of the whole quote. No "..."

  Duplicity seems to run rampant among a people who have claimed for over a century to loudly proclaim the Truth of God's Word and to expose false teachings of Christendom. Guess they kinda "missed the mark."

  waiting
• 

  Friend

  Zep

  It is not too hard to destroy a chronology that is poor. I think most chronologists would laugh that a book such as GTR was considered and published since it is so easy to demonstrate fallacies in the Society's chronological reasoning, which reasoning basically boils down to keeping what agrees and discarding what disagrees. Amazingly the Society's own publications admit the secular records are contrary to its conclusions yet so many still impute credence to those errant views. I guess that is Carl's intention, to more extensively point out the disagreement and fallacy. My feeling is that if a person cannot realize the conflicting nature of the Society's chronology from simple admissions made in their own publications, they will probably not be able to follow the detail in Carl's work.

  As for things changing over the past century, two significant changes have occurred, namely, population and communication. The refutations you described deal with assertions made by the Society on the subject of Jesus' answer for a sign. Nevertheless, those same refutations do not at all affect assertions I have made on this thread. I contend that the biblical answer for a sign attributed to Jesus could have intended global implications and that today we for the first time in human history are able to possibly witness a fulfillment, which fulfillment is due to real time communication.

  As for Osarsif's site, like the Society often does, it leaves off counter information. An example is the subject of the Society filing an amicus curiae brief regarding one issue facing Jimmy Swaggart Ministries from the early 90's. Regarding our subject of Jesus' answer for a sign, refutations found at Osarsif's site imply that any modern day fulfillment has been refuted when in fact only certain assertions of the Society have been refuted; that point is not made clear so it tends to be misleading.

  waiting

  Alan has written volumes, but that too must be read with a critical eye. Because of his profession-he is an engineer-he tends to require detail, which is good. However, he sometimes requires detail that is nonessential or irrelevant as if without it an assertion is false. For instance, Alan and I have on several occasions discussed the subject of this thread, Jesus' answer for a sign. He constantly asks for the precise beginning point of when that sign saw fulfillment. Such a question is fine as far as a curiosity, but when no specific answer can be given-such as a date or a specific and narrow point of reference-then he claims that conclusions are false because of that lack of precise detail. Therein lies a fallacy, a fallacy resulting from requiring something that Jesus' answer did not require, which is the point of the entire discussion. Basically, what I have described is someone insisting upon a nonessential, which insistence is a form of fallacy known as a false cause.

  I will point out though that Alan is very fair minded and interested in determining correctness rather than preconceived ideas. Overall you will find his research to be very reliable. My only point is that any conclusion offered should be evaluated prior to acceptance. Furthermore research should not be applied outside the boundaries that it addresses.

  Friend

  Edited by - Friend on 3 September 2000 12:54:47
• 

  waiting

  Hey Friend,

  Amazingly the Society's own publications admit the secular records are contrary to its conclusions yet so many still impute credence to those errant views.

  My feeling is that if a person cannot realize the conflicting nature of the Society's chronology from simple admissions made in their own publications, they will probably not be able to follow the detail in Carl's work.

  I would think this is one of the major implications against the WTBTS. We are dealing with people - mostly low education levels. These people are targeted, at least in our area, in field service, because they are responsive to a better living condition and are uneducated. The WTBTS has, until recently, strongly advocated staying uneducated so more time could be spent in service, placing literature, and bringing more people into the WTBTS.

  The WTBTS has omitted, several times, the error of their chronology, but if we, the dumb sheep, didn't understand the argument, timetable, history, and implications of the erroneous dates, we surely won't understand an argument against the error. We didn't catch the error in the first place - even with books.

  So, the ignorant sheep keep growing - until they start looking. Books multiply, but until the sheep read - and understand - not a lot of change.

  I believe the WTBTS has tired of the First World countries to a great degree - looking to more fertile fields of service. The Spanish congregations in our area are growing at an astounding rate, thanks to migrant workers. It may be several generations before these persons have the opportunity of access to education as we know it. Kingdom Halls can't be built fast enough for the influx of new Spanish friends.

  Books can only help those who can read (at that level of comprehension), and understand, them. An alarming number of Jehovah's Witnesses can't do either.

  waiting
• 

  Zep

  Waiting,

  One thing that got my attention was the way that the WTBTS takes liberties with partial quotes. Using "..." before and/or after an author - they can, and have, changed the author's thinking behind his words - sometimes completely!! Randy Watters shows actual examples of this in his writings - with photocopies of the whole quote. No "..."

  That happens to a large degree in respect to the 607 date.The WT takes a smorgasboard approach to evidence...They take whats useful and discard whats not unfortunately.

  I wouldn't take AF's Dumb sheep quote too personnally BTW.He's just blowing steam.

  Friend,

  I guess that is Carl's intention, to more extensively point out the disagreement and fallacy

  Yeah, he really does go into it, very indepth in fact.But its not just to point out the error of the WT, but to also propose a solution to jeremiahs 70 yr prophecy.A lot of bible critics actually quote Jeremiahs prophecy as proof that the Bible is bogus.Carl has done a good job of putting it all together in the end!

  I contend that the biblical answer for a sign attributed to Jesus could have intended global implications and that today we for the first time in human history are able to possibly witness a fulfillment, which fulfillment is due to real time communication.

  The first thing i pay attention to with Jesus sign is that he said there would 'wars and rumours of wars'.People have applied the sign so many times throughout history...it makes me rather skeptical when someone else comes up with another one.But, you never know.I really think that Jesus sign will be so marked and undeniable that there should be no need for people to debate the fact as to whether they are witnessing it or not.The 20th is/has been different from previous centuries but you still have to be careful reading into that. We do however have the ability to absolutely wipe ourselves out of existence here....that says a little to me, if anything does!

  Wars, famines & earth-quakes.We sure witness them a lot through the media(though it depends what channel your on.If your watching commerical TV your more likely to get Brad pitts wedding).But i dont know if we are witnessing these things anymore than past decades/centuries...and enough to want to make it a sign of the end, and thats the key to me, we have to be witnessing them more....ARE WE REALLY?.Why would Jesus give a Sign and yet make it so hard to discern...thats the problem, its so hard to discern....so maybe therefore it just isn't here yet.I connect the 'sign' to the Great tribulation that is supposed to follow with armaggeddon.I think we'll know it when Armageddon comes round!.