"they know not what they do"

by Schizm 11 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Schizm

  I just read the following statement at this URL: http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050219/NEWS10/502190317/0/NEWS13

  Mr. Dunn said Jehovah's Witnesses take their gospel message door to door because Jesus commanded his disciples to take the gospel to all the Earth.

  "One isn't really a Jehovah's Witness unless they are an active door-to-door evangelizer, in obedience to Jesus' command that true Christians will share their beliefs with others," he said.

  As a rule that's no doubt true. However, what's a person to do who knows full well that the 1914 doctrine is false? Should he go door-to-door sharing something that is false with people? Apparently, this is a case of the WTS not knowing what they're doing ("they know not what they do"). BTW, a number of years ago I actually had a Circuit Overseer tell me that if I no longer accepted the 1914 bit then I should go preach what I do believe is true. Instead of appreciating the dilemma that's been created for me due to the WTS's mistaken concept, I think his sole intent was to challenge me to go preach, even as he was having to. To this day I still see him as a haughty person. To him, what I now believed was false, so how unreasonable it was for him to suggest that I go peddle a falsehood? Are you listening, Brooklyn? Schizm .
• 

  garybuss

  *** w84 12/1 p. 18 Keep Ready! ***
  14 True, some expectations that appeared to be backed up by Bible chronology did not materialize at the anticipated time. But is it not far preferable to make some mistakes because of overeagerness to see God's purposes accomplished than to be spiritually asleep as to the fulfillment of Bible prophecy?
• 

  Leolaia

  I remember well this dilemma. Considering that I was raised in the faith and expected to believe what was taught, I was not very public with my feelings except with a friend who had studied for a while and then left for the same reasons I was leaving.

  So if you had done what he advised you, and you were disfellowshipped for apostasy, would he be an accessory to your "crime"?
• 

  Poztate

  BTW, a number of years ago I actually had a Circuit Overseer tell me that if I no longer accepted the 1914 bit then I should go preach what I do believe is true. Instead of appreciating the dilemma that's been created for me due to the WTS's mistaken concept, I think his sole intent was to challenge me to go preach, even as he was having to.

  I got the same argument from a CO years ago. I would not accept the then new DF'ing rules in 1982. I was encouraged to "wait on jehovah" and put all doubts out of my mind.They said I should continue to "preach" but just not in the areas that troubled me. Instead I QUIT...B.S. Since Garybuss did not say this in his post I will .They are BOOK PUBLISHERS. They make their money selling books!!! They don't really give a s*it what you believe as long as the money rolls in. Do you doubt this...LURKER ALERT Go to your PO and tell him you no longer feel right about asking for donations at the door..."received free give free". Tell him you have talked to others about this issue. Come back here with your results..
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  They are BOOK PUBLISHERS

  LOL. Yeah that's true. I remember on a Saturday or Sunday morning my mother used to say 'right we are all off on the field service cos we need to get rid of all these mags. You can't give the bloody things away'. If we didn't place any we used to say that we had taken our mags out for a walk. What we said or believed seemed irrelevant as long as the figures on the report card were ok.
• 

  Schizm

  *** w84 12/1 p. 18 Keep Ready! ***
  14 True, some expectations that appeared to be backed up by Bible chronology did not materialize at the anticipated time. But is it not far preferable to make some mistakes because of overeagerness to see God's purposes accomplished than to be spiritually asleep as to the fulfillment of Bible prophecy?

  Actually, for the most part there hasn't been any "fulfillment of Bible prophecy". For example, the prophecy of Matthew 24:7 certainly hasn't undergone fulfillment yet. In fact, the only prophecy I know of that's been fulfilled is that the reign of the 6th king (which = Rome) has given way to the reign of the 7th king (which = all of today's nations who share in ruling over earth's masses).

  The problem which Brooklyn has is that they're "asleep as to the non-fulfillment of Bible prophecy". They need to wake up, in order to see that they've been mistaken about Jesus' sign already having been fulfilled. Jesus "presence" did NOT begin in 1914! World War 1 did NOT fulfill Matthew 24:7.

  Are you listening, Brooklyn? How much longer will I have to wait before you wake up?

  .
• 

  LittleToe

  "Brooklyn is in the Restroom, right now. Please come back later... MUCH later!"

  Good topic, Schizm.
  Out of interest, have you looked at the Preterist view of Matt.24, Revelation, etc.?
• 

  Schizm

  Out of interest, have you looked at the Preterist view of Matt.24, Revelation, etc.?

  I just read that t he "preterist point of view is that New Testament prophecies of the future
  were fulfilled in the destruction of the Jewish nation in AD 70." I don't agree with their point of view. I think the preterists stood out in the sun too long, and it baked their brains. They aren't an enlightened people.

  .
• 

  LittleToe

  Gah, can you stop using contentious language for even a moment???

  Given that Revelation was written after 70AD, and that mass persecution of Christians continued for quite some time, I think you'll find that the Preterist viewpoint extends beyond that "date".
  Did you really examine it, or just have a casual glance before blowing it off?

  That having been said, I really have no personal axe to grind. It's just one perspective in the midst of many.
• 

  Schizm

  Gah, can you stop using contentious language for even a moment???

  I could, but I probably won't.

  Given that Revelation was written after 70AD, and that mass persecution of Christians continued for quite some time, I think you'll find that the Preterist viewpoint extends beyond that "date".

  As I said up above, which included a quote: "The preterist point of view is that New Testament prophecies of the future were fulfilled in the destruction of the Jewish nation in AD 70."

  Those are their words, not mine. Is that not saying that they consider all the prophecies were fulfilled by the time Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70? If that's the case, and it looks to me like it is, then what more is there to examine? Like I said, I don't agree with their point of view. For example, I believe that Matthew 24:7 has yet to be fulfilled. They, however, believe that it's already been fulfilled--which is why I say they aren't an enlightened people.

  .