what scriptural support is there for believing in second/greater fulfillments of bible prophecy?.
this is a genuine equiry into where the idea of second/greater fulfillments of bible prophecy originated.
does it have definite scriptural support or is it simply an extra-biblical religious device thought up to try to make prophecies appear relevant to the modern age?
Vanderhoven7 >> I'd like to pick up on tornapart thoughts:
What about all the scriptures that speak of a 'new heavens' and a 'new earth', Satan being bound for a thousand years, then coming to his end. The end of death.. these things haven't happened yet so they must be future.
Jesus and the prophetic fulfillmants in the first century I do understand - what about the Peter/Revelation scriptures?
what scriptural support is there for believing in second/greater fulfillments of bible prophecy?.
this is a genuine equiry into where the idea of second/greater fulfillments of bible prophecy originated.
does it have definite scriptural support or is it simply an extra-biblical religious device thought up to try to make prophecies appear relevant to the modern age?
The reasoning for this goes back to the 1800s, perhaps even earlier.
A Dictionary of the Bible (1863), by William Smith
A fanatic adherent / proponent of the above theory was Franz
who were the anointed between 100 and 1879 ad?
*** kingdom approached chap.
17 p. 344 par.
What - that's it?
Naming just those few people throughout the centuries doesn't cut it. Let me guess: They were the one-man committee "Governing Body" of the time, feeding their followers, the "domestics".
This clear identity of the “faithful and discreet slave” class was not to continue all through the centuries until the return of the Master with his kingly power.
w81 3/1 p. 26 / Do You Appreciate the “Faithful and Discreet Slave”?
For centuries the clear identity of the “wheat,” or true “sons of the kingdom,” had been obscured by the proliferous “weeds,” or apostate Christians, who claimed to have the heavenly hope as heirs to the Kingdom. Only after 1919, when the truly spirit-begotten Christians were delivered from Babylon the Great, the Devil’s world empire of false religion, did a clear difference become visible between the “wheat” and the “weeds.”
w81 8/1 pp. 23-24 par. 10 Harvesting in the “Time of the End”
In the 19th century, though, the religious climate led to stirrings of Christian watchfulness. As a result of Bible research on the part of some clergymen and Bible scholars, such teachings as the immortal soul, eternal torment after death, predestination, and the Trinity were restudied. In addition, some students of the Bible were closely examining Bible prophecies pertaining to the last days. Consequently, various groups of persons began thinking seriously about the Lord’s promised return.—Matt. 24:3.
In the United States, William Miller predicted the return of Christ in visible form in 1843 or 1844. The German theologian J. A. Bengel set the date for 1836; the Irvingites in England looked first to 1835, then 1838, 1864, and 1866. There was a Mennonite group in Russia that looked first to 1889, then to 1891.
Such efforts to keep on the watch served to awaken many to the prospect of our Lord’s return. However, these efforts at Christian watchfulness ended up in disappointment. Why? For the most part, because they relied too much on men and not enough on the Scriptures. After a few decades, most of those groups faded out of existence.
jv chap. 4 p. 40
Inevitably, with their current teachings the WTBTS is going the same way as those before them, who relied too much on men and not enough on the Scriptures.
who is the governing body?.
put simply, the governing body purports to be a small group of anointed men (currently numbering 7) who represent a much larger group (numbering the thousands) of anointed individuals living on earth today.
in nearly every reference to their position of oversight over the worldwide brotherhood, the governing body refer to themselves as being representatives.... .
Sorry, I couln't resist - GB representing FDS: Yo, we all represent the hood, the only difference between us is that we make this shit look good. - Keith Murray
i know that there is no mention of any birthday celebrations in the bible besides the two which were celebrated by non-believers.
and it just so happened that on each of these events, someone died (one non-believer and one believer).
but does it mean that just because the bible mentions these two events, that all birthday celebrations are forbidden?
Amelia Ashton >> Job 1:1-4 (...) This sounds to me like a Birthday Party!
When they have no explanation / clue in justifying it biblically, then the festivity supposedly was just a happening. Evidently and unquestionably the week-long birthday celebration is a type of partying the geriatrics of the GB would never understand. Nor would they ever fathom each son having a birthday party, inviting each other over to celebrate. Remember: They are doomsday oriented! No fun.
Persons who think so sometimes point to Job 1:4 and Hosea 7:5. The first of these texts mentions Job’s seven sons holding “a banquet at the house of each one on his own day.” The second tells of Israelite princes ‘sickening themselves because of wine’ at a festival “on the day of our king.” Were these festive occasions birthday parties? Evidently not. Professor G. Margoliouth writes in Hastings’ Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics: “The occasion of the feasting referred to in Job 14f. is not clear. As the seven days appear to have been consecutive, they could hardly have been birthdays.” “The mention of the ‘day of our king’ in Hos 7:5 may quite naturally be taken to refer to the anniversary of the king’s accession to the throne.”
g76 7/8 p. 27 - What About Celebrating Birthdays?
When Job’s sons “held a banquet at the house of each one on his own day” it should not be supposed that they were celebrating their birthdays. (Job 1:4) “Day” in this verse translates the Hebrew word yohm and refers to a period of time from sunrise to sunset. On the other hand, “birthday” is a compound of the two Hebrew words yohm (day) and hul·le′dheth. The distinction between “day” and one’s birthday may be noted in Genesis 40:20, where both expressions appear: “Now on the third day [yohm] it turned out to be Pharaoh’s birthday [literally, “the day (yohm) of the birth (hul·le′dheth) of Pharaoh”].” So it is certain that Job 1:4 does not refer to a birthday, as is unquestionably the case at Genesis 40:20. It would seem that Job’s seven sons held a family gathering (possibly a spring or harvest festival) and as the feasting made the week-long circuit, each son hosted the banquet in his own house “on his own day.”
it-1 p. 319 - Birthday
i know that there is no mention of any birthday celebrations in the bible besides the two which were celebrated by non-believers.
and it just so happened that on each of these events, someone died (one non-believer and one believer).
but does it mean that just because the bible mentions these two events, that all birthday celebrations are forbidden?
stillstuckcruz >> "glorify an individual instead of God"
...well, so is taking pictures with GB members. Now what?
i know that there is no mention of any birthday celebrations in the bible besides the two which were celebrated by non-believers.
and it just so happened that on each of these events, someone died (one non-believer and one believer).
but does it mean that just because the bible mentions these two events, that all birthday celebrations are forbidden?
... to answer your question: NO.
Only by insinuation you will get a warped idea about God either favors or disfavors it.
i know that there is no mention of any birthday celebrations in the bible besides the two which were celebrated by non-believers.
and it just so happened that on each of these events, someone died (one non-believer and one believer).
but does it mean that just because the bible mentions these two events, that all birthday celebrations are forbidden?
Does your conscience need prodding? ... or do you feel strong enough to decide for yourself?
When a Christian must decide whether or not to follow a certain custom, his main concern should be, What is God’s viewpoint as expressed in the Bible? In the past God condemned certain practices that may have been tolerated in some communities. These included child sacrifice, the misuse of blood, and various sexual practices. (Leviticus 17:13, 14; 18:1-30; Deuteronomy 18:10) Likewise, certain customs that are common today are clearly not in harmony with Bible principles. Among these are non-Biblical traditions connected with religious holidays such as Christmas and Easter or with superstitious practices related to spiritism.
But what about customs that may once have been linked to questionable practices but that today are primarily viewed as social etiquette? For example, many popular wedding customs—including the exchanging of rings and the eating of cake—may have pagan origins. Does this mean that Christians are forbidden to observe such customs? Are Christians required to scrutinize meticulously each custom of the community to see whether somewhere or at some time it had negative connotations?
Paul points out that “where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom.” (2 Corinthians 3:17; James 1:25) God wants us to use this freedom, not as an inducement for selfish cravings, but to train our perceptive powers to distinguish right from wrong. (Galatians 5:13; Hebrews 5:14; 1 Peter 2:16) Hence, in a matter where there is no clear violation of Bible principles, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not create a hard-and-fast rule. Instead, each Christian must weigh the circumstances at hand and make a personal decision.
g00 1/8 p. 27 - A Balanced View of Popular Customs
i remember a lot of witnesses working throughout the country for trim-line when i was younger.
i think it was started by a jw at the time.
i worked for the trim-line in indiana when i was younger.
Seconding what blondie said:
Never ever go into business with JWs. It will run you into deep shit, with the added difficulty to sue them (1. Corinthians 6:7,8). In the end they will slander you by telling everyone you were stealing materials off them.
yes, the latest watchtower is upon us.
it opens with a typically outlandish article on marriage.
here are a few of the headlines:.
A Christian who marries an unbeliever is not exemplary and lacks real appreciation for God’s gift of marriage.
was given independent of any religious affiliations (Genesis 2:22) and had nothing to do with a real or imagined appreciation. A gift is defined as something that is bestowed voluntarily and without compensation.
"This gift and blessing of marriage is also an evidence of God’s impartiality and of his justice. How so? In that these joys of marriage, when God is in it, do not depend upon such mundane things as material wealth, a higher education, great physical strength or beauty of form and feature. Neither are marital blessings limited to any race or nationality, nor are they dependent upon any climate. Whether couples live in the polar regions or in the tropics makes no difference."
w81 7/1 pp. 12-13 par. 4 / Let God Be in Your Marriage
Also, their belief system is that successful marriages and united families are only achieved by pecking order:
“Family comes from L[atin] familia, orig[inally] the servants and slaves of a great house, then the house itself with master, mistress, children—and the staff.” — Origins — A Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English, by Eric Partridge.
w93 9/1 p. 15 / The Christian Family Does Things Together
