Posts by bennyk

11

Would the Watchtower have 'self destructed' if 1914 had been peaceful?

by AK - Jeff in

another thread sparked this one.. if 1914 had come and gone without the advent of wwi, would the sect of bible students have just faded into the woodwork?.

was the war [obviously heavily referenced as proof of their claims] the bouy that allowed and spurned the growth into what we see today?.

jeff .

bennyk

Would the Watchtower have 'self destructed' if 1914 had been peaceful?

I think not. In 15. December 1913 Watch Tower, Russell republished an article from 1907 entitled "KNOWLEDGE AND FAITH REGARDING CHRONOLOGY which stated:

If our chronology is not reliable we have no idea where we are nor when the morning will come. Bishop Ussher's chronology, as we have pointed out (DAWN II., p. 51) puts the end of six thousand years nearly a century future and would destroy every prophetic application as we have seen and profited by it.

But let us suppose a case far from our expectations: Suppose that A.D. 1915 should pass with the world's affairs all serene and with evidence that the "very elect" had not all been "changed" and without the restoration of natural Israel to favor under the New Covenant. (Romans 11:12,15) What then? Would not that prove our chronology wrong? Yes, surely! And would not that prove a keen disappointment? Indeed it would! It would work irreparable wreck to the Parallel dispensations and Israel's Double, and to the Jubilee calculations, and to the prophecy of the 2300 days of Daniel, and to the epoch called "Gentile Times," and to the 1260, 1290 and 1335 days, the latter of which marking the beginning of the Harvest so well fulfilled its prediction, "Oh, the blessedness of him that waiteth and cometh unto the 1335 days!"

True: the world's affairs did not remain "serene". But there was no "Rapture", nor was Israel"restored" (especially not under the New Covenant). Despite the fact that this ' worked irreparable wreck to the epoch called the "Gentile Times" ', the WTS did not collapse, and the Society to this day points to Russell's prediction regarding the Gentile Times ending in October 1914 AS THOUGH IT WERE TRUE.

68

Sorry, another 607 question? I'm confused.

by lost_light06 in

im trying to figure something out concerning the wts 607-1914 chronology that has me confused.

i thought they based the chronology on when jerusalem was destroyed.

however, the following is taken from the daniel book and it seems to base it on something else.

bennyk

That's how we arrive at 607 a the correct date, because even historians acknowledge that the exile lasted 70 years and ended in 537.

Really? What historians?

Not Josephus. The SEVENTY years of SERVITUDE (Antiquities 11:1:1) run from 609 B.C.E. (following the Assyrian Empire's crushing defeat at Haran and the subsequent vassalage of Judea to Babylon) until 539 B.C.E. (when Babylon itself was defeated). The FIFTY years of DESOLATION for the Temple (Apion 1:21) run from 587 B.C.E. (when Jerusalem and its Temple were destroyed) until 537 B.C.E. (when the foundations of the Temple were laid [second year of Cyrus]). The accounts in Josephus indicate that the temple (and Jerusalem) lay desolate FIFTY years (Apion 1:21), which fifty years were a part of the SEVENTY years of SERVITUDE (Antiquities 11:1:1). Apion 1:19 does NOT contradict this; it confirms that the fifty year's period of desolation occurred "during the interval of seventy years". The several deportations occurred at various times during the seventy years, but the SERVITUDE of Judea as a nation need not begin with any of the deportations as recorded in the Bible. The prophecies as recorded in Jeremiah do not even require deportation and exile at all: cf. Jer. 27:7,8,11-13,17; 38:17,18

The WTS' chronology is wrong not only because Jerusalem fell in 587 B.C.E., but more importantly, because Daniel chap. 4 has nothing to do with foreshadowing the Messianic Kingdom. See also Luke 21:8.

One might also add that the events predicted by Russell for 1914 (see Studies in the Scriptures, vol. II "The Time is at Hand" pp.76-78) did not occur, proving C. T. Russell a FALSE PROPHET (Deut. 18:20-22).

55

Hemoglobin-Based Oxygen Carriers - August 2006 Awake!

by AnnOMaly in

i think this is the first clear, official statement regarding hemoglobin-based products.

awake!

august 2006, front page title "blood: why so valuable?".

bennyk

However, compared with other blood fractions, the HBOC presents more challenges to conscientious Christians, who seek to obey God's law on blood. Why?

That's what I'd like to know. I fail to see why this is more of a challenge to consciencious Christians, compared to other blood fractions. After all, the other fractions are likewise "derived from blood".

One, the HBOC carries out the key function of a primary component of blood, the red cells.

Of course. That is what makes it useful as a medical therapy. Is this the old "Alternative Service" rejection theory back to haunt the WTS adherents?

Two, hemoglobin from which the HBOC is derived, makes up a significant portion of that component.

Where would one find scriptural evidence that the Biblical prohibition against EATING blood need somehow be dissected by such terms as significant/minor, whole/component, etc.? Or even that it applies to TRANSFUSIONS?

These Pharisees make me nauseous.

6

Are "annointed" denied to be such if they disagree with the status quo

by A Paduan in

if one of the annointed disagrees with current thoughts does the gb say, well, they mustnt be annointed?

is anointed status simply another matter of 'the slaves opinion' ?

how does someone get to be an "annointed" anyway ?

bennyk

When an anointed individual disagrees with the Governing Body, it is not considered proof that the person never was anointed. However, should one persist in belief contrary to the doctrines promulgated by the Governing Body, upon discovery the dissenting person will then be DF'd and categorized as a member of the "Evil Slave Class". There was a Question from Readers many years ago that expressed the opinion that a DF'd anointed person could again be viewed as anointed after "re-instatement". While DF'd, the person is considered estranged from the Body of Christ, and thus no member of the "Faithful and Discreet Slave Class".

As far as the status as "anointed" being the opinion of the "Slave" -- even Bodies of Elders who by their own admission are NOT anointed are granted the right (by the Governing Body) to pass judgement on the validity of one's profession of being anointed. So one becomes officially anointed only by being recognized as such by the local Body of Elders.

The Doctrine of the Faithful and Discreet Slave is a false doctrine.

22

Time Magazine (1927) - Rutherford a Circuit Judge for 14 years!!

by VM44 in

here is an article published in the august 1, 1927 issue of time magazine.

the footnote says concerning rutherford that "he was for 14 years a circuit judge in missouri".. where the the time reporter get that information from rutherford?

more accurately it should have said, "he filled in temporarily as a missouri circuit judge for a total of four days".. this is another example of rutherford bluffing and inflating his credentials to make himself look good to the public.. --vm44.

bennyk

The change came in the late 1920's -- 1927 or 1928. I don't remember the WT article, but I do know that the 1925 edition of the "Harp of God" claims that Russell was the "Faithful and Wise Servant", whereas the 1928 edition does NOT.

14

No information for the great crowd in the bible......................

by vitty in

im not very articulate and find it hard to explain myself but here goes-------------------.

i always wondered (not too deeply).

everything was about the hope for a resurrection in heaven, nothing about an earthly paradise.

bennyk

No "New Light".

This was discussed in 1966 in the book "Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God" on a left-hand page somewhere around page 156. (The book is not found on the CD-ROM.) Also, page 374 (maybe) of the 1974 Watchtower.

24

Jesus: the mediator of the anointed (only)?

by evergreen in

jw
friends

did anyone realise that this was the case when they became a witness or just realise through time that this is the societies teaching on it?

.

each year i get annoyed at the memorial when the speaker giving the talk always refers to this point and then says how the other sheep (the great crowd) "can benefit from this arrangement".

bennyk

I never agreed with the Society on that doctrine. Not even when I was a member of the "Other Sheep". It simply was not reasonable (or Scriptural). But it is surprising how many JW's were/are unaware of that teaching...

18

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 6-18-06 WT Study (King)

by blondie in

comments you will not hear at the 6-18-06 wt study (april 15, 2006 issue date, pages 27-31)(king).

review comments will be in red.

wt material from today's wt will be in black.

bennyk

Christ's loyal "other sheep" keenly await their King's approving declaration: "Come, you who have been blessed by my Father, inherit the [earthly Paradise realm of the] kingdom prepared for you from the founding of the world." (John 10:16; Matthew 25:34)

Please compare 1 Cor. 15:50: "[F]lesh and blood cannot inherit God's kingdom..."

6