Broken Promises, I agree. No where has the society changed the 144,000 from literal to figurative. If that is what Randy is claiming, I don't know of any evidence. However, the 144,000 limit does not match with history and the Society's own numbers -- and they were forced to acknowledge this in the 2007 QFR. So, they are shifting attention from the fact that the number has been and will continue to be exceeded. It no longer matters to them anymore.
Ultimate Reality
JoinedPosts by Ultimate Reality
-
39
Randy Watters -- WT admits 144,000 may not be the limit
by FatFreek 2005 ini, along with many others, received our latest freeminds email.
i was shocked at the following underlined statement.. the second thing they are emphasizing is that those who claim to be of the "anointed" (now that they have admitted the number may not be limited to 144,000) not only have no say into what goes into the watchtower magazine, and have no special knowledge or place in jehovah's organization, so don't look to them for answers.
the governing body is the faithful and discreet slave as far as the jws are to be concerned.
-
-
-
39
Randy Watters -- WT admits 144,000 may not be the limit
by FatFreek 2005 ini, along with many others, received our latest freeminds email.
i was shocked at the following underlined statement.. the second thing they are emphasizing is that those who claim to be of the "anointed" (now that they have admitted the number may not be limited to 144,000) not only have no say into what goes into the watchtower magazine, and have no special knowledge or place in jehovah's organization, so don't look to them for answers.
the governing body is the faithful and discreet slave as far as the jws are to be concerned.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
Randy's conclusion appears to be accurate.
The Society is typically passive-agressive in how they address their own sensitive 'issues'. Further, I think it's obvious we are in the midst of a transition in certain teachings, largely because of failed dates and other numbers. Questions of the anointed and the GB's authority (and credibility) are at stake, so they have been making some changes over the last few years. So, we have to read between the lines over a period of time to see what has really happened.
First, in 1984, the Society was still defending the 1935 anointed-to-great crowd cutoff / transition 'calling' date:
5 The countdown that has proceeded for some six millenniums now nears its zero hour. So close is it that people who were alive in 1914, and who are now well along in years, will not all pass off the scene before the thrilling events marking the vindication of Jehovah’s sovereignty come to pass.—Mark 13:30.
6 Other loyal servants of God, too, will be on hand to witness the events of that great day. Especially beginning in 1935, when the identity of the “great multitude,” or “great crowd,” was clearly understood, large numbers of these began to manifest themselves. At first there were hundreds, then thousands, later hundreds of thousands, and now there are millions spread around the globe. God’s infallible Word depicts this group as ‘coming out of the great tribulation,’ being survivors of it, living right on into God’s New Order without ever having to die. (Revelation 7:9, 10, 14; John 11:26) The early members of this group are now in their 60’s or 70’s or older. Jehovah did not allow the ingathering of this group to begin too soon. The “great crowd,” including many of the earliest members thereof, will survive into the “new earth.” - Survival, p. 185
In 2007, they addressed the issue of the obvious 'continued' calling of new anointed members and said that the calling, evidently, did not stop in 1935. But gave the following qualification on the matter of those claiming to be anointed (note, there are also now genuine anointed):
How should a person be viewed who has determined in his heart that he is now anointed and begins to partake of the emblems at the Memorial? He should not be judged. The matter is between him and Jehovah. (Romans 14:12) However, genuine anointed Christians do not demand special attention. They do not believe that their being of the anointed gives them special “insights,” beyond what even some experienced members of the great crowd may have. They do not believe that they necessarily have more holy spirit than their companions of the other sheep have; nor do they expect special treatment or claim that their partaking of the emblems places them above the appointed elders in the congregation. They humbly remember that some anointed men in the first century did not qualify to serve as elders or ministerial servants. (1 Timothy 3:1-10, 12, 13; Titus 1:5-9; James 3:1) Some anointed Christians were even spiritually weak. (1 Thessalonians 5:14) And sisters, although anointed, did not teach in the congregation.—1 Timothy 2:11, 12. - w07 5/1 p.31
A major article that gives evidence of a transition is the June 2009 study article on the Faithful Steward and its Governing Body. It seems they are transitioning from the slave/steward is a group to the slave/steward is the GB with the 'claimed' anointed as the 'domestics' and the great crowd covering everyone else. The anointed domestics and the great crowd are on the same, 'non-insightful' plane, whereas the GB is' spirit-directed':
On the other hand, how should other Christians view a person who claims to have received this anointing and begins to partake of the emblems at the Memorial? He or she should not be judged. The matter is between this person and Jehovah. (Rom. 14:12) However, Christians who have truly received this anointing do not demand special attention. They do not believe that their being of the anointed gives them special insights beyond what even some experienced members of the “great crowd” may have. (Rev. 7:9) They do not believe that they necessarily have more holy spirit than their companions of the “other sheep” have. (John 10:16) They do not expect special treatment; nor do they claim that their partaking of the emblems places them above the appointed elders in the congregation.
...today a limited number of anointed men have the responsibility of representing the slave class. They make up the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. These spirit-anointed men oversee the Kingdom work and the spiritual feeding program. As in the first century, though, the Governing Body does not consult with each individual member of the slave class before making decisions. (Read Acts 16:4, 5.) However, all anointed Witnesses are deeply involved in the vital harvest work that is now taking place. As a class, “the faithful and discreet slave” is one body, but as individuals, they have various work assignments.—1 Cor. 12:19-26.
-w09 6/15 p24
and the final paragraph...Whether we are “domestics,” who are part of the anointed remnant, or we are members of the great crowd, let it be our determination to cooperate fully with the faithful steward and its Governing Body. May each of us “keep on the watch” and prove ourselves faithful until the end.—Matt. 24:13, 42.
-w09 6/15 p23-24
Moving forward to this year, the Governing Body gets more praise. The fact that the 'anointed' 144,000 have gone beyond this limit, no longer matters:
The apostles and the elders of the Jerusalem congregation acted as a governing body. Christ used this instrument to lead the entire group of his anointed “brothers” on earth. (Heb. 2:11; Acts 16:4, 5) In this time of the end, Christ has committed “all his belongings”— all the earthly interests of the Kingdom—to his “faithful and discreet slave” and its representative Governing Body, a group of anointed Christian men. (Matt. 24:45-47) The anointed and their other sheep companions recognize that by following the lead of the modern-day Governing Body, they are in fact following their Leader, Christ. - w2010 9/15 page 23
Notice the wording in the above paragraph. BOTH the anointed AND the other sheep follow the Governing Body. The GB is really the Faithful Steward, so being anointed (genuine or non-genuine) doesn't count for anything, they are in the same boat as the great crowd. Further, the 'genuine' distinction made earlier gets them around the number issue. Witnesses will ignore this numbering failure and trust that many are partaking that are not actually anointed. Further, they can look at anyone that claims to be anointed in local congregations as the same as everyone else. All attention goes to the GB and their authority.
-
36
586/7 vs. 607 (another one) Critique my letter please....
by bigmouth insince moving back to another town i've met up with an elder i knew from way back.
(i met him coming out of a salvation army shop.).
he visited me at home a few weeks ago, and as i seem to be getting more comfortable at fading i invited him in and told him i was very concerned over the 607 bce.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
Debator claims that Josephus wrote that Jerusalem was empty for 70 years. This is NOT true. The 'secular evidence' claims it was 50 years (marked from the Temple destruction), during a 70 year period of servitude while Babylon was the world power (609 BCE to 539 BCE). So, it's either 50 or 70 years, hence the 20 year difference.
The Society marks the beginning of the countdown with the destruction of the Temple in 607 BCE (on the WT calendar). However, Josephus' understanding supports the 'secular' evidence:
“These accounts agree with the true history in our books [the Hebrew Scriptures]; for in them it is written that
Nebuchadnezzar, in the nineteenth year of his reign, laid our temple desolate, and so it lay in that state for fifty years;
but that in the second year of the reign of Cyrus, its foundations were laid and it was finished again in the second year
of Darius.” - Against Apion I, 21
-
269
Have your JW Relatives Explained about Generation/Overlap Change to You ?
by flipper inafter reading on the way out's thread about his mom explaining the generation overlap to him it kicked this idea into my head to make this thread .
i thought it would be helpful to see if anybody here has had jw relatives or friends try to explain this " generation overlap " theory to you as a faded or inactive witness and what happened in the conversations.
so please feel free to post your experiences.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
DG:
You do not understand the origin of the very teachings you believe in. I am sure you would encourage others to understand the origin of the Trinity in order to assess both the legitimacy of the teaching itself and those that promote the doctrine. However, you have no understanding regarding the prophetic interpretations of your own organization and how these impact your 'present truth'.
Your best gem yet...
"...whatever may have been the prevailing understanding of Jehovah's Witnesses pre-2010 regarding the meaning of the word "generation" as used at Matthew 24:34, we have abandoned what we have determined to have been error and now have a different understanding of what this "generation" to which Jesus referred at Matthew 24:34 is."
I hope you are prepared to repeat these sentiments for the rest of your life. This sums up the entire history of the spirit-directed, channel of God's communication, one true source of spiritual food...the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society and its spirit-anointed Governing Body.
-
62
Explanation for the generation in Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30 and Luke 21:32
by alice.in.wonderland ini see quite a bit of inquiry about the generation in matthew 24:34, mark 13:30 and luke 21:32. in every scripture in the gospels, the term generation is referring to a wicked generation except for matthew 24:34, mark 13:30 and luke 21:32. .
then as an answer to him some of the scribes and pharisees said: teacher, we want to see a sign from you.
in reply he said to them: a wicked and adulterous generation keeps on seeking for a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of jonah the prophet.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
Alice:
The 96 CE dating for Revelation originates with Christendom and is largely based on a vague statement by '2nd century Church Father' Irenaeus:
"We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign. But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: the name, however, is suppressed, because it is not worthy of being proclaimed by the Holy Spirit. For if it had been declared by Him, he (Antichrist) might perhaps continue for a long period." - Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 5, Chp. 30
What was seen towards the end of Domitian's reign is not exactly clear. What you see above is the 'evidence' used to support a 96 CE dating. It is interesting to note that Irenaeus also claimed that Jesus lived to 50 years of age (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2:22:4-6).
A far more compelling and scholarly dating for Revelation is PRE-70 CE. This dating is also in harmony with the internal scriptural evidence.
I suggest James Stewart Russell's Parousia book from 1878 and Before Jerusalem Fell by Kenneth Gentry for additional reading.
-
269
Have your JW Relatives Explained about Generation/Overlap Change to You ?
by flipper inafter reading on the way out's thread about his mom explaining the generation overlap to him it kicked this idea into my head to make this thread .
i thought it would be helpful to see if anybody here has had jw relatives or friends try to explain this " generation overlap " theory to you as a faded or inactive witness and what happened in the conversations.
so please feel free to post your experiences.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
Here we have the source of DG's problem:
"...Parallel Dispensations . Whatever this "method" or "theory" is, I have no interest in learning its origin, so you're going to need to ask someone else."
Parallel Dispensations form the foundation for the prophetic Biblical interpretation of Jehovah's Witnesses. Without understanding this or its origins (see Studies in the Scriptures) you do not know the very premise upon which the Society has interpreted the Bible. Further, you do not know if that premise is flawed and you do not know how 130 years of using this method has resulted in consistent interpretive failures.
These failures include the interpretation of the 'generation'.
-
62
Explanation for the generation in Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30 and Luke 21:32
by alice.in.wonderland ini see quite a bit of inquiry about the generation in matthew 24:34, mark 13:30 and luke 21:32. in every scripture in the gospels, the term generation is referring to a wicked generation except for matthew 24:34, mark 13:30 and luke 21:32. .
then as an answer to him some of the scribes and pharisees said: teacher, we want to see a sign from you.
in reply he said to them: a wicked and adulterous generation keeps on seeking for a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of jonah the prophet.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
I posted this elsewhere. Here we go again...
To boldly argue in favor that Exodus 1:6 proves that Jesus was taking about two overlapping groups within one 'generation' is to ignore the opposite argumentation that the same source (WT) has given for over 100 years.
Before 2010 and certainly before 2008, no one in Brooklyn thought that Exodus 1:6 and Jesus statement about a generation had anything do with each other in seeking to create a new definition of the word 'generation' as used by Jesus. As of 2010, in WT-speak, a generation no longer means 'people born around the same time' (like siblings within 15 years or less of each other) but rather people that are 'connected to each other through a common experience.'
In 2010, the generation are the 'anointed' and the common experience they share is that the lives of some post-1914 anointed 'overlapped' with those that saw the events of 1914. Therefore, Armageddon must come within the lifespan of the second group. In this way one generation (made up of two overlapping groups -- but no more than two) 'sees' 1914 and Armageddon.
The scriptural justification for this is the new interpretation of Exodus 1:6. Of course, this ignores the simple and obvious meaning and context of what is actually recored in the gospel accounts. Jesus tells BOTH his disciples and the wicked religious leaders that their generation will see what we now know to be the end of the Jewish system in 70CE. That took place in less than 40 years of his statements, or, one generation -- generation in it's classic meaning.
Now, why on earth would any JW seek to defend this non-sense when their spirit-directed source has made these statements over the years:
CURRENT LIGHT: WT April 15, 2010 p. 10:
[Generation] usually refers to people of varying ages whose lives overlap during a particular time period...(Exodus 1:6).
"[Jesus] evidently meant that the lives of the anointed who were on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation."
------------------------------
Insight Vol 1 pg. 917:
"A generation commonly refers to all persons who were born about the same time. (Exodus 1:6, Mt 11:16)"
Notice that Exodus 1:6 is used in both definitions.
-----------------------------
Watchtower, November 1, 1995 p. 30-31 Questions From Readers:
This article argues, among other things, that Jesus use of 'generation' could not be applied to the anointed. It goes on to state:
"Those men [ the apostles ], who were not yet anointed with holy spirit nor part of the Christian congregation, certainly did not constitute either a "generation" or a race of people."
------------------------------
Contrast that statement with the February 15, 2008 WT (p. 21-25) on the generation (this is also repeated in the April 15, 2010 WT article):
"Jesus said that it was his disciples, soon to be anointed with holy spirit, who should be able to
draw certain conclusions when they saw "all these things" occur. So Jesus must have been referring to
his disciples when he made the statement: "This generation will by no means pass away until all these
things occur."
------------------------------
Compare that to the Watchtower June 1, 1991 p.28:
"Many scriptures confirm that Jesus did not use "generation" with regard to some small or distinct group, meaning only the Jewish leaders or only his loyal disciples."
------------------------------
And finally, with regard to OVERLAPPING generations seeing different parts of 'the sign':
Watchtower, October 15, 1988 p.4-5
"Might it be, though, that the sign could occur over the span of many human generations? No. The sign is to occur during one particular generation. The same generation that witnessed the beginning of the sign will also witness its climax..."
------------------------------
Now, before you carried away: You CANNOT use the 'new light' excuse since this a bogus concept. Proverbs 4 has nothing to do with a progressive revealing of 'Bible truth'.
Second, where is the scriptural evidence that we should apply a secondary meaning to Jesus' words? Where is the evidence for a 'parallel dispensation' with a secondary, larger fulfillment of the prophecy?
The whole reason these convoluted interpretations are being created is that time ran out on all the 19th and 20th century chronological interpretations along with their supposed climaxes. New interpretations are needed to keep 1914 relevant in 21st century.
-
10
Shunning advocated and taught in 1893 Watchtower. Disfellowship and shun apostates.
by Aussie Oz ini am actually a bit shocked!
i mean, i understood that up to 1953 the watchtower was against disfellowshipping and shunning, castigating the catholic church for the practice in the 1947 awake!
no mixed message here as russell proclaims the righteousness and neccessity of shunning.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
Oz:
I think it's a good example of how language and concepts accepted by a group of believers can be extended to support an authoritarian structure that uses these same words but for a different purpose.
For example, it's one thing if you personally decide to 'disfellowship' someone from your life or, on the basis of some kind of change, either theirs or your own perspective, you personally decide to 're-instate' them...all according to your own conscience.
It's very different when someone is 'disfellowshipped' from a community on the basis of the conscience of 3 men acting in secret according to a secret (Elder's Book) law.
Thanks for the great find!
-
10
Shunning advocated and taught in 1893 Watchtower. Disfellowship and shun apostates.
by Aussie Oz ini am actually a bit shocked!
i mean, i understood that up to 1953 the watchtower was against disfellowshipping and shunning, castigating the catholic church for the practice in the 1947 awake!
no mixed message here as russell proclaims the righteousness and neccessity of shunning.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
The opening and final paragraphs of the above referenced article (which do not appear above) define such ones as those that have known the truth and been blessed by the truth but have turned away from it -- like the dog returning to its vomit. In this context 'the truth' is not the organization as is now taught -- but Biblical truth, and about the ransom in particular.
The language is very similar to what is used by the Society today. But today the language is all loaded. Russell was referring to Scriptural Apostasy rather than any sort of Organizational Apostasy.
-
10
Shunning advocated and taught in 1893 Watchtower. Disfellowship and shun apostates.
by Aussie Oz ini am actually a bit shocked!
i mean, i understood that up to 1953 the watchtower was against disfellowshipping and shunning, castigating the catholic church for the practice in the 1947 awake!
no mixed message here as russell proclaims the righteousness and neccessity of shunning.
-
-
Ultimate Reality
wannabefree:
You are correct. 'True Christians', in Russell's view, existed in all churches. Heart unity and faith in Jesus, not the belief in a certain creed (WT or other), made a person a Christian. Disagreement with the WT in his day did not make one an apostate. We do see, however, how his original teachings were morphed into what they are today. Unity of heart and faith in Jesus were replaced by unity of belief (in the WT) and unity of faith (in the WT).