Upon looking at the site further, I note that under the "Booklets" section at least one of Rutherford's booklets has already been entered besides several booklets from the post-Rutherford era.
Justin
JoinedPosts by Justin
-
11
We are deep into the "last days" - since 1799! (warning long)
by Tashawaa infound the ?thy kingdom come?
book on the net (
http://www.mychris.tk/
-
-
-
11
We are deep into the "last days" - since 1799! (warning long)
by Tashawaa infound the ?thy kingdom come?
book on the net (
http://www.mychris.tk/
-
-
Justin
You've found an interesting site. The person responsible for these reproductions is currently an active JW and wants to reproduce the older publications so JW's won't have to visit non-JW sites. They are currently reproducing Russell's writings, similar to Bible Student sites, but I suppose eventually Rutherford's publications may be included. So there will eventually be quite an on-line library with no intention of discrediting the organization!
-
6
Another Flip-Flop?
by Justin ini recently bought "the kingdom is at hand" from a used bookstore.
this book was published in 1944 by the society and was one of the first publications of the post-rutherford era (jfr had died in 1942).
i found an explanation of the prophecy of daniel, chapter 2 of which i was totally unaware.
-
-
Justin
catchthis,
Thanks for copying!
-
6
Another Flip-Flop?
by Justin ini recently bought "the kingdom is at hand" from a used bookstore.
this book was published in 1944 by the society and was one of the first publications of the post-rutherford era (jfr had died in 1942).
i found an explanation of the prophecy of daniel, chapter 2 of which i was totally unaware.
-
-
Justin
I recently bought "The Kingdom is at Hand" from a used bookstore. This book was published in 1944 by the Society and was one of the first publications of the post-Rutherford era (JFR had died in 1942). I found an explanation of the prophecy of Daniel, chapter 2 of which I was totally unaware.
The explanation with which I am familiar, and which was held even by Russell (see The Divine Plan of the Ages, Study XIII, "The Kingdoms of This World" under the heading "Nebuchandezzar's Vision of Earth's Governments - http://agsconsulting.com/htdbnon/htdb0080.htm ), is that various parts of the image seen by Nebuchadnezzar represent empires or "world powers" beginning with Babylon and running through Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome until the establishment of God's kingdom. But "The Kingdom is at Hand" book blames this interpretation on the clergy and proceeds to give a different one! In Chapter XII, "Rise and Fall of Satan's Kingdom" it is stated: "Religious clergymen have attempted an interpretation of this dream, making it refer to the rise and fall of the four successive world powers, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and the Roman empire." (p. 179) ". . . such religious interpretation becomes more and more untenable and manifest as wrong. It is an interpretation of demon origin to hide the truth . . ." (p. 180) The writer states that Satan the Devil is the head of gold on the image. Under him are the "demon princelings" who form the breast and arms of silver. The religious clergy are the belly and thighs of copper. The legs of iron are the kings of the north and south, respectively. The feet of iron and clay picture the religious and political elements mingled together.
Yet, it seems to me that they have since returned to Russell's basic interpretation that the parts of the image are successive political powers. If the "Your Will Be Done on Earth" book (1958) restored the former understanding (and if that is the understanding in the current Daniel book), then at least from 1944 to 1958 (14 years) they had a different understanding of the prophecy.
I don't have the technology to reproduce the relevant pages of "The Kingdom is at Hand," but perhaps someone else could do so. Does anyone have further information on this subject?
-
9
faithful & discreet slave
by bavman ina recent watchtower made this point about matt.
24:45-7 to prove this does apply to a collective group, not individuals scattered about.
'how could indivduals be appointed over all christ's belongings?
-
-
Justin
Even if we grant that this is a parable, if we want to play in the same ballpark as the WT we could ask what the "belongings" are. If we do that, then certainly the belongings would be the Lord's people however this is conceived. The governing body doesn't think it has been appointed over the earth itself, does it? Over the mountains, valleys, animal species, etc.? No, people are what the governing body governs.
So the older idea, that a person such as Russell, was the "servant" was not so far fetched. Wasn't Russell, for all intents and purposes, the leader of the Bible Students? True, he did not impose the rigid control that the governing body does, but he was a charismatic leader who strongly influenced the Bible Students, and they were considered to be the Lord's people, his "belongings."
I personally think the parable applies to anyone, such as an elder, who has a responsiblity to feed the Christian congregation. The final appointment over the "belongings" is simply the reward of reigning with Christ in the kingdom, and is handed out at his final coming to bring an end to the old order of things. In that case, the "belongings" would have a universal significance and not simply refer to a small group of people here and now.
-
5
JWs & Thological Books by Non-JWs
by Spotlight inhaven't posted here for ages but thought this would be a great place to get some help with this one.. i have noticed a current trend among some jws who are in the habit of reading theological works by non-jws.
as far as i can see, the wt would certainly, at best, discourage this pass time, and at worst forbid it.
a jw apologist who reads such books is telling me that jws do this and are free to do carry on without hinderence from the wt in this area.
-
-
Justin
There are various kinds of reference works. Those that are more traditional, and take an inerrant view of the Bible, would of course be considered safer than those which take a critical view. There are 19th century commentaries which are "safer" in this regard.
But, as pointed out, when the WTS publishes its own resources (such as the Aid book), it then becomes "unnecessary" to consult even conservative Bible dictionaries. Why do so, when the "slave" has provided its own material? Why even bother to use Strong's concordance to look up a verse when the Society has its own concordance to the NWT?
A Witness apologist, however, may have taken it upon himself to defend the organization using the organization's own tactics of selectively consulting outside sources. The WT writers must of necessity quote scholars whose isolated statements seem to agree with WT teachings - whether regarding historical matters or questions of Bible translation, scientific theories, etc.
There has always been a temptation for gifted, intelligent people to assume the role of another Russell or Rutherford and attempt to defend the "truth" on their own, even though they are discouraged from doing so. (Unless, of course, they have worked out some secret agreement to provide the organization with "outside help" - but this would only provide a bad example for the R&F.)
The average JW might see an outside source quoted in a WT publication and would be encouraged to use this quote to support a teaching, but that same person would be discouraged from reading the actual source from which the quote was taken in order to get the larger context. So the apologist cannot be viewed as someone who exemplifies what the organization expects of its members.
-
6
Russell stole Barbour's Mailing List!
by VM44 insomeone recently (i think?
) posted a message stating that charles t. russell stole barbour's magazine subscription list!!!.
where was that posted?
-
-
Justin
I believe that the post in question (which crashes) is a statement by Farkel to the effect that Russell stole the mailing list, and when asked about this Farkel said he would do further research to substantiate it.
In my own research I have come across a supplement to the first issue of Zion's Watch Tower (that of July, 1879). See http://reslight.addr.com/supplement.html . The supplement was sent only to readers of Herald of the Morning, which indicates that Russell must have had use of the mailing list. It was used to explain Russell's falling out with Barbour. But does this mean that Russell "stole" the list?
Russell claimed to have been co-editor of The Herald, based both on his financial contributions and also the fact that his name for a time appeared with Barbour's as editors on the front page. If Russell was, in fact, the co-editor, then his use of the mailing list would not seem to represent a stealing of intellectual property. Did Russell remove the original list, so that the names were no longer available for Barbour to use - did he actually physically steal a list of names? There is no indication of this.
In the absence of any information representing Barbour's side of the story, this supplement to the original Watch Tower seems to be all we have to rely upon for historical information.
-
23
Interpreting the Bible in it's cultural context
by logansrun ini have often engaged in debate on this forum in which i have taken the position that the only logical way of interpreting the bible -- and in being a genuine christian -- is to view it as being verbally inspired and binding in all it's details upon all christians down through the centuries.
this is, generally speaking, the way that fundamentalists and jehovahs witnesses view the scriptures; the bible "says what it means, and means what it says" case closed, no if's and's or but's!
i do not believe this and consider myself to be an agnostic, a point which i do not find necessary to elaborate on here.
-
-
Justin
I think as people whose beliefs were originally formed in fundamentalism/JWism, we tend to look at statements made by so-called progressive or liberal theologians without considering the context in which their statements are made (let alone the context of the Bible writers). They may claim, for example, that certain Biblical standards no longer apply because their cultural context is outdated. But they also have definitions of inspiration and even of God with which we may be unfamiliar. In short, they have a completely different paradigm from the fundamentlist one.
Some may think that God is not even personal, but is the Ground of Being which may be experienced in different ways at different times. Any communcation from this Ultimate Reality would then amount to someone's subjective experience, and that in turn is influenced by cultural standards. So the "inspiration" is centered more on the receiving end than the transmitting end.
It's all very fuzzy, and these progressive concepts probably have their own inconsistencies. But it's important to realize that certain theological or ethical statements are not simply changing one aspect of the old paradigm - they are actually involving an entire paradigm shift.
-
9
Heaven and Hell?
by Blueblades in.
the teaching about heaven and hell is one of the main doctrines of mainstream christianity.yet to this day it is not a clear scriptural teaching among those scholars teaching it..the bible itself is in question as to it's being inspired of god.therefore, the whole concept about rewards and punishments, heaven and hell that is written in this book on this one doctrine alone cannot be verified as truth.one must believe it on a leap of faith,faith that what is written in the bible about rewards and punishments, heaven and hell actually comes from the mouth of god.. even so,an eternity in hell for being bad would not be just.nor could you earn an eternity in heaven for being good.fear would be the overriding motive to avoid hell.love would have nothing to do with it.. i know that many do put faith in the bible and it's teaching about the doctrine of heaven and hell.and many don't.i am one who does not base what i believe on what the bible is reported to have said comes from the mouth of god.. blueblades,of the doubting thomas class.
-
-
Justin
These questions should be asked of people who believe in traditional Christianity. JWs believe that only 144,000 go to heaven, the vast majority of others who are "saved" will live on a restored paradise earth, and the Bible "hell" is simply the grave. It is true that these beliefs, if the actual teachings of the Bible, are also dependent on revelation. But to ask JWs or ex-JWs about traditional Christian beliefs merely confuses the issues with which you wish to deal.
-
20
Predestination and Dubs
by Farkel indubs are one of a few unique religions that sprung up from the second adventist movement in the 1800's.
they are unique in that they believe in "greater fulfillments" of prophecies recorded in the bible.
they believe that bible characters and bible groups foreshadowed their equivalent "classes" of people in modern days.
-
-
Justin
I wonder, though, just for the sake of argument, if God could have allowed for several possible futures that would have still fulfilled his purpose. For all we know, perhaps N.H. Barbour was supposed to have filled the role that Russell did, but because Barbour used his free will to thwart God's purpose, Russell was allowed to replace him. What do you think, Farkel?