Posts by moggy lover

11

Who Is The Agency that fulfills the Lord's will upon the earth

by descmh in

i am speaking with a wonderful person about the jehovah's witnesses and she has asked myself and my wife who we think the "agency" that fulfills the lord's will upon the earth is.

my question is, do the jehovah's witnesses think that their watchtower organization is this "agency" or is it christ's church on the earth.

furthermore, where is the scripture reference that this is taken from.

moggy lover

Hi, Descmh and welcome to the board. Your question can be posed in another way: When Jesus died who did He put in charge? The WTS? or Someone else? What did Jesus Himself say?

The clearest statement that Jesus made regarding this is found in His Upper Room Discourse [which takes up chs 13-17 in John] when He assured that with His departure He would not leave them orphans.

In Jo 16:7, He tells them that when He is gone He will "send Him to You" He identifies this "Him" as the "Helper" or the Holy Spirit. The one who now believes in the Christ and the work He has laid out must then acknowledge that it is this Holy Spirit who now is in '' charge" or "directs" this work

Interestingly, it now becomes a matter of interpretation as to how the Holy Spirit discharges this reponsibility. That He does so directly is plain by Jesus' further words when He says: "He will guide you, teach you..etc''

The WTS, on the other hand, implies, that since they are god's "spirit directed" organisation they are the ones in charge, thus, almost imperceptably, causing a shift in emphasis from the Holy Spirit directly, to themselves - thus making the Holy Spirit an indirect source of authority. This mutation of the words of Scripture is a well publicised trait of their's.

So... in answer to your question, you may gracefully, and tactfully point out to you your WT follower friend, that when Christ died He left no man, or body of men acting as a man in charge. That is the exclusive domain of the Helper. One of the traits that will identify the authority of the Holy Spirit is that He glorifies neither Himself nor someone that the WTS calls "jehover" He will glorify Jesus. Personally. Not as representing anyone, "jehoover" or otherwise. [Jo 16:14]

Now all your friend needs to do is look.

Cheers

85

Did any Man Asend to Heaven Before Jesus?

by gumby in

as all faithful witnesses to jehovah the most high god well knowjohn 3:13 ).

does anyone have any idea where enoch went.....since he never died?.

the author of the letter to the hebrews says "by faith enoch was transferred, that he should not see death, and was not found, because god had transferred him; for before his transference he had the witness that he had pleased god well.

moggy lover

Sorry, Gumby, the fault is entirely mine. I did not make myself clear. I was not implying that there was some sort of esotertic meaning to the word "ascend" beyond that which is clearly recognized in a dictionary. My intention, rather, was to stress the voluntary nature of Christ's going up to heaven in contrast to others who may have gone before.

Whereas Enoch and Elijah were "taken" to heaven even guided there, they did not proceed on their own steam, as it were. That is why the Biblical text does not use the word "ascend" in their case. I feel that is what Christ was indicating at Jo 3:13. He was the first indeed to ascend under His own steam, under his own volution.

As to the part about His having been the first to go both ways, this may not of course be inherently implied in the meaning of "ascend" but notice Jesus' words at this text: "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven, [even] the Son of Man" [NASV]

The uniqueness of Christ is that His ascension to heaven was voluntary, in His own iherent power, implied in the word "ascend" - and that it is a two-way process, as indicated by His own words.

Cheers

85

Did any Man Asend to Heaven Before Jesus?

by gumby in

as all faithful witnesses to jehovah the most high god well knowjohn 3:13 ).

does anyone have any idea where enoch went.....since he never died?.

the author of the letter to the hebrews says "by faith enoch was transferred, that he should not see death, and was not found, because god had transferred him; for before his transference he had the witness that he had pleased god well.

moggy lover

There is another possible explanation that sits quite comfortably with the idea that Enoch was indeed "taken" [or "translated"] to heaven. It lies in divining the meaning of "ascending".

At Jo 3:13 the word does not just mean "going up" but "going up while once being up there" No one, according to the claim made by Jesus, has been in heaven and come down here and gone back up there having completed His task. I suppose in this sense we can call Jesus the "ladder" between heaven and earth with access to both realms. He descended at the Incarnation. And "ascended" at the Ascension.

So, most evangelicals believe that while Enoch may have been the first to be "taken" to heaven, Christ was the first and only one to go both ways voluntarily.

Cheers

25

If YOU Were One Of The 24 Elders, What Would You Tell The Anointed???

by minimus in

jw
friends

now this could be fun.

moggy lover

You that bit you guys wrote about hell being a place with no burning fires?

Well...... Just make sure you bring plenty of water .....when you get down here

Cheers

21

Do the FDS use Spiritism to contact the '24 Elders' and the 144000?

by Gill in

the watchtower has always, in its publications, talks etc warned against contact with spirit creatures!.

jws are notoriously terrified of anything that might even remotely be to do with spiritism.. however, i find it totally bizarre that they can accept 'spirit guidance from the 24 elders' as an explanation to how the holy spirit guides the fds!.

i would, in simple terms call this a form of spiritism.

moggy lover

<Ahem>... erm... OK ...OK I'll 'fess. Yeah I know how its done.

You heard that the FDS are god's "channel"?

And you heard about "channelling"? right?

All these guys need to do is go into this whirly kinda trance and voila! You channel up an "elder/demon"

Stick that in yer pipe Ted

Cheers

27

Has the Watchtower changed its mind or did I miss something?

by Gill in

in all my years as a jw, my understanding had been of wtbts belief, was that the 144 000 were resurrected in a 'twinkling of an eye' and never actually experienced death.. did i understand wrongly or has the watchtower changed its mind......again?.

january 1st watchtower, page 27 .

when does the first resurrection occur?

moggy lover

Another question: Is it true that Freddy Franz had this special room at Bethel HQ where he repaired for daily "prayer"? I seem to remember someone telling me, years ago, that there was this area of Bethel that was inaccesable to everyone else except FF. Evidently he would spend hours therin communing with goodness knows who. The rumour mill had it that Knorr only spoke to Franz and Franz spoke only to god!!

Maybe that is where and how the elders communed with Freddy. Maybe that roon had special wave-length facilities piped directly into "heaven"

Cheers

72

Astonishing Publisher Peak in Britain for August 2006

by slimboyfat in

well i just got the new kingdom ministry for december and it has the publisher peak for august: 129,482!.

that is quite an amazing total when you compare it to the trend of recent years:.

2006 - 129,482. i wish i could produce a graph, but you get the picture - there has been a dramatic increase in the publisher peak number this year compared with the recent downward trend after the 1995 "generation" change and subsequent stagnation.

moggy lover

By the way: Has anyone got the Jan 1 Wt for 2007?

The first issue of each year publishes a census report of WT followers worldwide. This should give us a more rounded figure.

Cheers

19

Life Everlasting--in Freedom Of The Sons Of God--PDF!

by Atlantis in

this old book is a little weather-beaten but may still serve for some information purposes.

many researchers wanted this book for the "charts" as well as other important quotes, that could be used in helping jehovah's witnesses to become free from the watchtower.

by the mid-1960s the society had apparently forgotten much of what it had learned about the hazards of setting dates.

moggy lover

Thank you once again for the trouble you take in providing gems such as this book for us.

Sure I remember the 1966 Dist Assy at which tis book was released. The chart at the back listing the coutdown to 1975 was itself worth the wait in the long queue. I remember going home with a crowd of other brothers and sisters chattering away excitedly about our prospects of going into the "new system" in our lifetimes. We even got to the stage of saying in passing a particularly beautiful house, "OOOH, I bags that home!!"

Now, like a broken doll or a shattered dream it all seems so empty, and rotten to the core. In my disgust at the WTS, this was one of the first publications I destroyed. I much regretted my rashness, because I have never been able to replace it.

Till now.

Thanks once again, and keep turning on the light

Cheers

36

"The Calendar of Jehovah God"

by cabasilas in

1935 saw the brief attempt by jehovah's witnesses to adopt a new calendar freed from any connection to other religions or with names derived from paganism.

the 1935 yearbook published without much explanation a chart showing "jehovah's year of ransom 1903.

" the yearbook said: "a series of articles in explanation will appear in the golden age.

moggy lover

Thanks for revealing this well concealed piece of WT nonsense. Like fokyc, I too was in the borg since the mid 50s and was not made aware of this.

Cheers

41

"This Generation"

by Jeffro in

i know the witnesses changed their 'generation' definition in 1995 to get away from being tied down to the literal generation of people who saw 1914.. but applying their definition of the word to matthew 24:34 makes the verse meaningless, regardless of whether the original text grammatically allows for their interpretation.

there is no point in saying "this generation will by no means pass away" if 'generation' merely refers to an attitude of people which may remain the same for any ongoing period of time.. there is simply no point in saying it unless it was intended to refer specifically to a literal generation of people who were alive at the time.

of course, there is no validity to their 1914 doctrine anyway, but nevertheless, they are inextricably stuck with it..

moggy lover

The Nov 1995 Watchtower, detailing the latest interpretation of Matt 24:34 to come out of the WTS thought control headquaters in Bethel, NY must surely be one of the seminal issues they have published in all the years of their otherwise sordid history.

Like most charlatans, they applied theological legerdemain and intellectual sleight-of-hand to craft a scenario that diverted attention from their own previous failings and created a position that now seems unassailable.Conjuring, rather than revealing the meaning behind what may have been a solid biblical revelation, they ended up with tickling the ears of their R&F.

The 1995 interpretation of Matt 24:34 is the latest culmination of a process that has undergone several mutations over the years of WTS existence. We will have the grace not to mention the utterly absurd prophetic utterances of Russell and Rutherford, utterances which were evidently made with divine sanction, because these have long since been embarrasingly discarded by their less than loyal sucessors. But suffice it to say that in recent years these changes have been well documented by observers of the WTS. Ray Franz, in his book "In Search of Christian Freedom" pgs 477-480] details these:

1 Oct 8, 68 Awake: [pgs 13, 14] The comment was made that Jesus was "obviously" referring to those at least 15 years and over.

2 Oct 1, 78 WT: [pg 31] What was "obvious" in 68, evidently became less than "obvious" ten years later.It now appeared, again under the sanction of a mutable god, that those "Old enough to observe" those things were being the ones being referred to. At the same time, they emphatically ruled out those born on that date of 1914, because this was thought to be a logical conclusion.

3 Oct 15, 80 WT: [pg 31] Two years later, evidently under pressure to reveal what "Old enough to observe" meant, they suggested an age of at least 10 years.

4 May 15 84 WT [pgs 4-7] Six years later from the statement made in 78, what appeared "logical" then mysteriously transmuted into "illogical" and those who were in fact born in 1914 became acceptable.

Now, with nimble ambiguity, and misplaced rhetoric, they have settled on an "explanation" that satisfies neither scriptural nor personal concerns. Arrogantly insensitive to those who have tirelessly given their devotion to the WT leadership, and who now have suffered disappointment, this latest clarification of a troublesome issue has put to rest any further need for discussion.

I feel that it is necessary to know that the evolution of WTS theology comes not as result of concern for biblical fidelity, but rather for gaining the best practical benefit to the WT leadership. WT theology coexists comfortably with their financial greed, and adjustments such as this satisfies this gratification, not biblical revelation. That such tactics violate even the most basic grounds of disciplined Bible exposition, is something that is of no concern to the WTS leadership. What is important is that they must be seen to be operating under divine fiat.

How long the WTS can continue with this charade depends on their ability to obfuscate this matter sucessfully. The usual method employed is to create other certainties that can absorb the attention of the R&F. The displacement of the latest tract seems to be one such means.

Cheers