why didn't jesus ever write anything?
why are there no letters to jesus?
no painting of jesus from that time?
The most important question to ask first, is this:
How many documents do we have today that still exist from around 29 AD to 33 AD when Jesus was supposed to be doing His ministry?
That's the only time period we would expect to find anything contemporary from Jesus.
is the governing body's methods and practices all that much different from the way scientists work?.
some prominent scientists and big media in the 1970's were pushing imminent disaster from global cooling.
now its global warming and they all sweep the global cooling fiasco under the rug and act like it was just one or two rogue individuals.. other examples can be given: scientists being wrong on the eternal universe, black holes, whether eggs or coffee are healthy or harmful, presenting fake fossils, etc.
Is the Governing Body's methods and practices all that much different from the way scientists work?
Some prominent scientists and big media in the 1970's were pushing imminent disaster from Global Cooling. Now its Global Warming and they all sweep the Global Cooling fiasco under the rug and act like it was just one or two rogue individuals.
Other examples can be given: Scientists being wrong on the eternal universe, black holes, whether eggs or coffee are healthy or harmful, presenting fake fossils, etc. etc.
How is this really much different from The Watchtower Society?
they just posted the simplified august study watchtower on jw.org.. paragraph 11 of the "expectation!
" article says this:.
"so even if we feel that we have been waiting a long time, this does not mean that the end is far away or that it is not coming in our lifetime.".
They just posted the Simplified August Study Watchtower on JW.org.
Paragraph 11 of the "Expectation!" Article says this:
"So even if we feel that we have been waiting a long time, this does not mean that the end is far away or that it is not coming in our lifetime."Whose lifetime? An 80-year-old Witness' lifetime or a 40-year-old's? 10-year-old's?
How do they know?
Seems like I heard this before?
"Millions now living will never die!" (circa 1925)
a whole new watchtower society (governing body 3.0 / simplified society).
i'm not here to attack the governing body, watchtower society, or the jehovah's witnesses (jw) organization.
the bible says there is just "one hope" for christians (ephesians 4:4).
Azor,
I've been "out" or "awakened" as you call it on here for 12+ years.
I am a deep, critical thinking skeptic, and yes, that has STILL led me to Jesus and the New Testament.
All thinking roads absolutely do not lead to atheism or to anti-theism.
Just look at Francis Collins, Barack Obama, and Martin Luther King, Jr.
do you ever think that this one will be dropped as a old view?
Magnum is right.
The Society (as far as I can tell) is doing away with all Types and Antitypes not mentioned in the Bible, UNLESS the Society views the account as a prophecy.
Then it can still have an antitypical fulfillment.
a whole new watchtower society (governing body 3.0 / simplified society).
i'm not here to attack the governing body, watchtower society, or the jehovah's witnesses (jw) organization.
the bible says there is just "one hope" for christians (ephesians 4:4).
One other thing to consider:
What good has being "an apostate" (in the sense of rabidly opposing and hating the Governing Body) done in the past 60 years to bring about any changes or downfall of the Society?
As President Obama likes to say, "If an approach hasn't worked in 50 years, it's time to try something new."
a whole new watchtower society (governing body 3.0 / simplified society).
i'm not here to attack the governing body, watchtower society, or the jehovah's witnesses (jw) organization.
the bible says there is just "one hope" for christians (ephesians 4:4).
oppostate,
Yes, a true "leader" is one who serves other and leads by example, not by lording it over others.
With that said, the writings of Paul and the book of Acts absolutely show that the Congregations are supposed to have Elders taking the lead.
a whole new watchtower society (governing body 3.0 / simplified society).
i'm not here to attack the governing body, watchtower society, or the jehovah's witnesses (jw) organization.
the bible says there is just "one hope" for christians (ephesians 4:4).
Steve2,
Good point. Very soon I will be writing a condensed version of this (in the form of questions) to the Governing Body/Society just to see what their response (if any) will be.
Should be interesting to see.
a whole new watchtower society (governing body 3.0 / simplified society).
i'm not here to attack the governing body, watchtower society, or the jehovah's witnesses (jw) organization.
the bible says there is just "one hope" for christians (ephesians 4:4).
A Whole New Watchtower Society (Governing Body 3.0 / Simplified Society)
I'm not here to attack the Governing Body, Watchtower Society, or the Jehovah's Witnesses (JW) Organization. Absolutely not. On the contrary, there are many things they teach and do which I agree with, which are based on the holy inspired Scriptures, the Word of God. I am merely here to respectfully offer suggestions for improved simplified understandings of the Bible, in harmony with the Governing Body's new focus on simplicity, clarity, and not going beyond what is written.
Things I 100% Agree With the Governing Body On
Realistic Improvements the Governing Body can (and should) make very soon:
The Faithful And Discreet Slave (Matthew 24:45-51, Luke 12:40-48):
It's really just a simple parable showing that Jesus will reward the leaders of each Congregation / Church who remain faithful and discreet in caring for their flocks, and that He will punish the wicked leaders. Nothing more, nothing less.
This parable is exactly like the messages Jesus gave to John to deliver to the 7 Congregations in Revelation 2:1 through 3:22.
There is nothing in the Bible that links the Faithful and Discreet Slave to anything else besides the leaders of Congregations. Plus, the principle or moral lesson can definitely apply to any individual Christian.
Plus, since this is definitely a parable/illustration, the Governing Body now says we should not be looking for any special complicated antitypical fulfillments or giving explanations for every detail of the parable.
The Identity of the 144,000 (Revelation 7:4-8, Revelation 14:1-5)
Revelation 1:1 declares that Jesus sent His angel to present the message "in signs," which means that the messages and visions are symbolic, not literal.
144,000 is 12 multiplied by 12,000. The emphasis is on two "Twelves" just like in Revelation 21:14, with the 12 Tribe-Leaders of Israel and the 12 Apostles being the foundation of the Heavenly Temple. So this is simply symbolizing all those who take the lead in worshipping God in this new arrangement of Gentiles together with Jews. No literal number intended.
The Governing Body already acknowledges that most numbers in Revelation are symbolic, including the "12,000 from each tribe," therefore, this is simply the next logical step in clarified, simplified Bible understanding.
The Society should announce that we don't know for sure whether the number 144,000 is literal or not. Tell the Congregation members to listen to their spirit to see whether they desire heaven or earth. Don't discourage anyone from partaking of the Emblems at the Memorial.
The Heavenly Hope and the Earthly Hope (Little Flock and Other Sheep / Great Crowd)
The Bible says there is just "one hope" for Christians (Ephesians 4:4). Revelation says God will come down and bring Heaven down to Earth. (Revelation 21:2-3)
The Hebrew Scriptures focus more on the hope of the earth being a paradise and the Christian-Greek Scriptures focus more on going to Heaven, because that's where Jesus is now. But
as we can see in Revelation and Ephesians, there is only "one hope," and
we will get to experience both the paradise earth and heaven in the future. It's not an either/or situation. There will likely be different positions of authority and rewards, but not different destinations.
If you look at the context of the Scriptures,
you'll see that the "little flock" Jesus was going to give the Kingdom
to (Luke 12:32) are the leaders in the Congregations, the ones who
faithfully serve his sheep, especially the Apostles and original
Jewish believers, who were referred to as "the firstfruits". (Matthew 19:28; Luke 22:30; James 1:18; Ephesians 1:11-12)
In addition, the "other sheep" who would be brought into the Congregation later, given the context in the Gospel of John, would be the Gentile (non-Jewish) Christians. (See John 12:20-32) Nothing in these Scriptures says anything about an earthly hope for the other sheep and a heavenly hope for the little flock. That would be going beyond what is written.
One more thing on this: The Scriptures don't link the "other sheep" to the "great crowd" of Revelation. The "great crowd" in Revelation are shown to be located in the same place as the angels-- Heaven. Here are those verses:
Revelation 19:1 (Revised NWT): After this I heard what seemed to be a loud voice of a great crowd in heaven. They said: “Praise Jah! The salvation and the glory and the power belong to our God,
Revelation 19:4-6 (Revised NWT): And the 24 elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshipped God who sits on the throne and said: “Amen! Praise Jah!” Also, a voice came from the throne and said: “Be praising our God, all you his slaves, who fear him, the small ones and the great.” And
I heard what sounded like a voice of a great crowd and like the sound
of many waters and like the sound of heavy thunders. They said: “Praise
Jah, because Jehovah our God, the Almighty, has begun to rule as king
The traditional Watchtower Society interpretation of Matthew 11:11-15 is that it means John the Baptist (and all those who died before the resurrection of Jesus) were not going to be "in" the Kingdom of Heaven, but instead they are going to be resurrected to a Paradise Earth.
Matthew 11:11-15 (Revised NWT): "Truly I say to you, among those born of women, there has not been raised up anyone greater than John the Baptist, but a lesser person in the Kingdom of the heavens is greater than he is. From the days of John the Baptist until now, the Kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it. For all, the Prophets and the Law, prophesied until John; and if you are willing to accept it, he is ‘E·liʹjah who is to come.’ Let the one who has ears listen."
A much more simplified explanation which fits the context, would be that John was not as great as Jesus' followers because John knew and lived under the Law of Moses instead of the Law of the Spirit and the teachings of Christ.
Luke 16:16 (Revised NWT): “The Law and the Prophets were until John. From then on, the Kingdom of God is being declared as good news, and every sort of person is pressing forward toward it."
Matthew 13:16-17 (Revised NWT): “However, happy are your eyes because they see and your ears because they hear. For truly I say to you, many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things you are observing but did not see them, and to hear the things you are hearing but did not hear them."
The context really doesn't say anything about an earthly hope and a heavenly hope held out for two different groups.
Jesus' Prophecy of the End (Matthew 24, Luke 21, Mark 13)
First off, let's look and see that the 2015 Insight Book definitely acknowledges that the primary or main fulfillment of Jesus' words here applied to 70 C.E. when the Romans destroyed the Jewish Temple:
Insight Book (2015), Volume 1, Page 918:
Jesus Christ, when denouncing the Jewish religious leaders, concluded by saying: “Truly I say to you, All these things will come upon this generation.” History recounts that about 37 years later (in 70 C.E.) that contemporary generation personally experienced the destruction of Jerusalem, as foretold.—Mt 23:36. Later that same day, Jesus again used practically the same words, saying: “Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Mt 24:34) In this instance, Jesus was answering a question regarding the desolation of Jerusalem and its temple as well as regarding the sign of his presence and of the conclusion of the system of things. So his comment about “this generation” logically had an application down to 70 C.E.
Insight Book (2015), Volume 2, Page 1127:
When answering the question of his disciples concerning the sign of his presence and the conclusion of the system of things, Jesus mentioned a “great tribulation such as has not occurred since the world’s beginning until now, no, nor will occur again.” (Mt 24:3, 21) As a comparison of Matthew 24:15-22 with Luke 21:20-24 reveals, this had initial reference to a tribulation to come upon Jerusalem. The fulfillment came in 70 C.E., when the city was besieged by the Roman armies under General Titus.
The Governing Body should just take it one logical step further, in harmony with their new stance on clarity and elimination of unnecessary doctrinal details and confusing double-fulfillments, is to say that Christ's words only applied to 70 C.E. and do not have an antitypical second fulfillment today. This would be in perfect agreement with Luke 21:5-7 (Revised New World Translation), which reads:
Later, when some were speaking about the temple, how it was adorned with fine stones and dedicated things, he said: “As for these things that you now see, the days will come when not a stone will be left upon a stone and not be thrown down.” Then they questioned him, saying: “Teacher, when will these things actually be, and what will be the sign when these things are to occur?”
This context clearly shows that Luke 21 (the parallel account of Matthew 24 and Mark 13) is Jesus and the disciples focusing only on the destruction of the Jewish Temple which they were looking at, not an antitypical future second fulfillment 2,000 years later.
Continue down and look at Luke 21:20-28, Jesus explicitly says that these things will occur when the armies surround the city of Jerusalem, which the Society admits was fulfilled in 66-70 C.E., concluding when General Titus destroyed the Temple.
Luke 21:20 (Revised NWT): "However, when you see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then you know that the desolating of her has drawn near."
Earlier Christ had prophesied this same judgment and condemnation as a punishment on the Jews in Jerusalem for rejecting the Messiah during the time of the inspection/visitation.
This is found in Luke 19:41-44 (Revised NWT):
And when he got nearby, he viewed the city and wept over it, saying: “If you, even you, had discerned on this day the things having to do with peace—but now they have been hidden from your eyes. Because the days will come upon you when your enemies will build around you a fortification of pointed stakes and will encircle you and besiege you from every side. They will dash you and your children within you to the ground, and they will not leave a stone upon a stone in you, because you did not discern the time of your being inspected.”
Jesus continued to warn about this same event, the destruction of the Jewish Temple, in Luke 23:27-31. Jesus once again warned Jerusalem about its destruction. All of this has nothing to do with some secondary antitypical fulfillment 2,000 years later.
Jesus just used hyperbole and symbolism to describe this event of the Romans destroying the Temple in 70 C.E., by saying they would see Jesus in the clouds and at the right hand of God. This symbolizes Christ's power and authority as King.
Matthew 26:64 (Revised NWT): Jesus said to him: “You yourself said it. But I say to you: From now on you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
The Signs of the Last Days
There is nothing I can see in the Bible that says we should find a greater antitypical fulfillment of the Great Tree Prophecy of Daniel 4, therefore, if that's the case, there would be no Biblical reason for arriving at the date of 1914 as having any explicit significance spelled out in the Scriptures.
With that being said, a much simpler approach (which appears to be used in the new Jesus Book) would be to just say that you think we have been witnessing the Signs which Jesus spoke about in Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, and that World War I is just one of those many Signs.
The problem with that approach, is that it is still relying on an interpretation of those chapters using the Type/Antitype Method, which the Governing Body now says shouldn't be used without a clear Biblical basis for doing so. Plus, if the claim is made that these Signs (earthquakes, disease, famine, war) are getting worse in modern times than in any other time in history, the Governing Body would need to provide evidence of this claim.
So, in actuality, the most simple explanation is that all of those Signs were fulfilled with the Jewish Temple being destroyed by the Romans in 70 C.E. (A.D.), and that Jesus was using some hyperbolic "Judgment Day" language from the Old Testament to describe this event.
This Generation Shall Not Pass Away
The three best, simplest choices regarding what Jesus meant by "This generation shall not pass away," are:
I see no basis in the Bible for any "overlapping groups of generations."
The Kingdom of God / Kingdom of Heaven
Depending on the context, the phrase "Kingdom of God" can have a few different simplified meanings:
1: The authority of God manifesting itself through miracles, love, or judgment.
2: The authority of God in people's lives.
3: The Lord Jesus, the 12 Apostles, and others who will sit on Thrones and wear Crowns in the New Heavens and the New Earth.
4: The 1,000 Year Reign of Christ on Earth (if that is literal instead of symbolic).
5: (In the Old Testament) The nation of Israel under godly kings such as David or Josiah.
6: The phrase "Kingdom of Heaven" was also sometimes used by Jews as a substitution for saying "God."
As always, the immediate context of a passage, and the context of that particular book as a whole, helps determine the meaning of the phrase.
Disfellowshipping and Shunning Practices
Jesus said to treat people who unrepentantly harm you and don't apologize, as people of the nations or as tax collectors.Jesus set the example by still being kind and friendly to tax collectors and Gentiles, even though He may not have had them as His closest friends. Jesus also made a big point of being kind and eating with prostitutes and many other sinners.
In this case, it would be the individual Christian choosing not to closely associate with people who intentionally callously harm them, which is wise. This is not a mandatory shunning enforced by the Congregation.
In Christ's parable of the Prodigal Son, He shows the attitude we should have toward those who leave the Congregation and say they don't want to have anything to do with it anymore. We should respect their choice, and be ready to welcome them wholeheartedly when, or if, they return.
Jesus' other parable of the Lost Sheep shows how we should act toward those who may have been stumbled or have doubts: We should lovingly seek them out to help them return.
The Apostle Paul said people in the Congregation who flagrantly commit sexual sins such as incest, should be excommunicated. The Congregation should not allow them any privileges or have close friendship with them, or make it look like they approve of the sins.
In addition, Paul also taught that people who openly contradicted the Congregation leaders, stirring up divisions, and causing doubts, should be given two warnings, then they should be marked by the Congregation, but they should still be viewed as brothers and sisters.
The Apostle John said that a person who contradicts the main Good News about Jesus and what He did, should be totally shunned, to the point of not saying a greeting to him or showing support for him.
I would say that none of these commands in the New Testament would support cutting off family relationships, except perhaps John's command about not speaking to those who are anti-christ.
My suggestion: Lighten up on the shunning. This is the 21st Century. There are many legitimate alternative interpretations of those shunning Scriptures. There's no need to make mandatory severe shunning unless it's someone practicing something severely dangerous to the Congregation, such as child molestation, rape, murder, physical abuse, etc.
Stop your severe shunning practices. It's okay to avoid association with people you dislike or whom you believe are not a good influence on you. It's even okay for elders to rebuke or even excommunicate someone for gross, flagrant sin. But don't try to cut off communication among family members, and don't disfellowship someone just for disagreeing with the way you interpret the Bible.
Blood Transfusions
If you look at the context of Acts 15, the commands given, are given to Gentiles BECAUSE Jews with weak consciences would be stumbled if they saw Gentiles doing these things.
These were not eternal, absolute moral commands from the Almighty. They were temporary, cultural, ethnic instructions to help the Jews and Gentiles get along together when they were brought into the same Congregation.
For example, one of the commands given is that Gentiles must not eat any meat sacrificed to idols. Yet, the Apostle Paul wrote many times telling Christians that it is "up to your conscience" whether to eat such meat or not. Therefore, we can clearly see that the commands in Acts 15 were not designed to be eternal moral commandments.
In addition, the command against eating blood is referring to animals that have been killed by humans-- the same prohibition that was found in the Old Testament. The Law of Moses made a clear distinction between eating blood from animals that were killed by humans and animals that died of other causes.
The purpose of this is to show that if humans take a life, even the life of an animal, they must honor and show thankfulness to God by demonstrating that this animal's blood (life) actually belongs to God.
There was absolutely no severe punishment in the Bible if a Jew ate the blood of an animal that was NOT killed by a human.
One more point to consider: Jesus made it clear that God prefers mercy over sacrifice, and that King David eating the Holy Showbread to save his life was more important than following the technical written laws of the Old Testament. So why should blood be any different? If someone can save their life by taking in medical blood, shouldn't that be more important than following the technical written rules?
Finally, in blood transfusions, no one's life is taken, instead people's lives can be saved. If no life is taken, then the Bible commands about showing respect and demonstrating that God owned the life you just took, would not even apply to this situation.
Bottom line: Using medical blood should be up to each person's conscience, not a mandatory Law.
if you look at the context of acts 15, the commands given, are given to gentiles because jews with weak consciences would be stumbled if they saw gentiles doing these things.. these were not eternal, absolute moral commands from the almighty.
they were temporary, cultural, ethnic instructions to help the jews and gentiles get along together when they were brought into the same congregation.. for example, one of the commands given is that gentiles must not eat any meat sacrificed to idols.
yet, the apostle paul wrote many times telling christians that it is "up to your conscience" whether to eat such meat or not.
If you look at the context of Acts 15, the commands given, are given to Gentiles BECAUSE Jews with weak consciences would be stumbled if they saw Gentiles doing these things.
These were not eternal, absolute moral commands from the Almighty. They were temporary, cultural, ethnic instructions to help the Jews and Gentiles get along together when they were brought into the same Congregation.
For example, one of the commands given is that Gentiles must not eat any meat sacrificed to idols. Yet, the Apostle Paul wrote many times telling Christians that it is "up to your conscience" whether to eat such meat or not. Therefore, we can clearly see that the commands in Acts 15 were not designed to be eternal moral commandments.
In addition, the command against eating blood is referring to animals that have been killed by humans-- the same prohibition that was found in the Old Testament. The Law of Moses made a clear distinction between eating blood from animals that were killed by humans and animals that died of other causes.
The purpose of this is to show that if humans take a life, even the life of an animal, they must honor and show thankfulness to God by demonstrating that this animal's blood (life) actually belongs to God.
There was absolutely no severe punishment in the Bible if a Jew ate the blood of an animal that was NOT killed by a human.
One more point to consider: Jesus made it clear that God prefers mercy over sacrifice, and that King David eating the Holy Showbread to save his life was more important than following the technical written laws of the Old Testament. So why should blood be any different? If someone can save their life by taking in medical blood, shouldn't that be more important than following the technical written rules?
Finally, in blood transfusions, no one's life is taken, instead people's lives can be saved. If no life is taken, then the Bible commands about showing respect and demonstrating that God owned the life you just took, would not even apply to this situation.
Bottom line: Using medical blood should be up to each person's conscience, not a mandatory Law.
