Spiritual sacrifice = field service
Spiritual indigestion = that's when you eat of the sacrifice (you believe what you are telling the householder, e.g. about 1914 and the generation)
Sorry, couln't help that. That's my personal interpretation.
Posts by Vidqun
-
5Has anyone here ever heard the terms "spiritual sacrifice" or "spiritual indigestion" and if so what do these mean?
by hoser in -
-
-
75
Who Knows The Exact Current Interpretation of "Generation" Please!
by Bubblegum Apotheosis inwould someone please explain the current interpretation of the generation.
this topic is one that is causing alot of confussion and turmoil.
jwn, you.
-
-
Vidqun
Thanks, Billy. That rounds out the discussion quite nicely. What was then and what is now, which we are discussing.
Yes Djeggnog, I can see we are at cross-purposes here, so I will try and simplify. With the beast argument I tried to demonstrate scholarly dishonesty (seems like I wasn’t very successful). For one to understand this argument you have to know about the beasts, and what the Society’s interpretation of the beasts are. That’s why I gave you the summary, to save time.
1) Are you saying here that you believe the "scarlet-colored wild beast" at Revelation 17:3, the beast on whom the harlot sits, is also the beast described at Revelation 11:7?
Yes, that is what I am saying, contrary to what the Society are saying. See explanation at Rev. 17:8. That means Rev. 11:7 has nothing to do with 1914-1918, viz. the Society’s explanation. The League of Nations was only formed in 1919. And if it did not take place, then it would be referring to a future, which is a frightening thought for a JW.
2) Are you saying here that you believe the "scarlet-colored wild beast" at Revelation 17:3, the beast on whom the harlot sits, is also the beast described at Revelation 13:1?
I don’t say that. The Society says so in their publications, which is false. See quote from the Revelation-book.
The conclusion one reaches is that the Society has no qualms in twisting the meaning of the Scriptures, i.e., God’s Word, to accommodate some of their core doctrines, e.g. 1914.
In connection with translating, don’t know whether you are aware that the NWT is an English translation, i.e., it was translated into English first, an English Bible for an English audience. So all the other NWTs, in the different languages, were translated from the English version. Feel free to check this out if you don’t believe me. So the English NWT is of cardinal importance in establishing the meaning of a word or phrase. No point in going to the NWTs in the different languages. These are all based on the English NWT.
And do not underestimate Webster. It is very informative, tracing the root word back to Greek, Latin, or from where it developed from, e.g. generate – generated, generating [L. genero, generatum, to beget], etc. So for the English speaking person, it is of the utmost importance. There we can agree to disagree.
-
61
Watchtower's United Nations Association
by Celestial intemporarily, there's confusion until i get the facts straight: .
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/united-nations-association.php .
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/default.html .
-
-
Vidqun
In connection with the UN-NGO debacle. This argument I use with family and friends that are interested, based on Matt. 24:15 and Mark 13:14. The reasoning follow WT theology:
NWT Matthew 24:15 Therefore, when YOU catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation, as spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in a holy place , (let the reader use discernment)
NWT Mark 13:14 However, when YOU catch sight ofthe disgusting thing that causes desolation standing where it ought not (let the reader use discernment), then let those in Judea begin fleeing to the mountains.
First application:
The disgusting thing causing desolation = Roman army
In a holy place = in the temple area of Jerusalem’s temple
Judea = literal Judea, with Jerusalem as capital
To the mountains = the literal mountains of Israel
Second application:
When you catch sight of = notice, even for a short period of time
The disgusting thing causing desolation = The UN
Standing
In a holy place = place of true worship
Where it ought not
Judea = the beautiful land, spiritual paradise of God’s anointed remnant
Begin fleeing
To the mountains = God’s mountain and Jesus’ mountain, more specifically to the valley between the two mountains (Zech. 14:3-5)
The UN stood in the “holy place” for nine years, from 1992-2002. Now is a good time to flee.
Where do we flee to? Read: Zech. 14:3-5. And take note: JWs have joined the UN, they have become part of it. The disgusting thing causing desolation have stood "where it ought not". Prophecy (in Matt. 24:15 and Mark 13:14) has thus been fulfilled.
One cannot flee to God's organization, it has been compromised. The following places you should NOT flee to: The "mountains of Israel" are going to be invaded by Gog (Ezek. 38:8). The "beautiful land" (= the land of the Decoration) is going to be invaded by the King of the North (Dan. 11:41, 45). Jerusalem (= spiritual Jerusalem) is going to be captured (Zech. 13:7, 8; 14:1, 2). The two witnesses are going to be killed by the "beast from the abyss" (= the UN) (Rev. 11:7). Paul said: "Therefore get out from among them, and separate yourselves, says Jehovah, and quit touching the unclean thing" (cf. Is. 52:11). By consorting with the beast, JWs have placed them on the same level as Babylon the Great (Rev. 18:4). The only place one can flee to is mentioned at Zech. 14:3-5 (for additional reading: Dan. 8:11-14).
-
36
Was Jesus racist ? mP: YES with scriptures
by mP ini am starting a new thread, as i have had several posts with tec regarding this very matter.
in answer he said: i was not sent forth to any but to the lost sheep of the house of israel.
in answer he said: it is not right to take the bread of the children and throw it to little dogs.
-
-
Vidqun
PM, the fact that parts of the Bible was written 2000 years ago seem to escape your notice (some of it is much, much older). Those were the days of slavery, the Roman Empire, and a multitude of militant nations that wanted to destroy each other. I can assure you racism was not foremost in their thoughts (actually the term did not exist in their vocabulary), survival was. Now you take Jesus and what happened there and compare it to the situation in the 20th century. Those terms were highlighted by Martin Luther King and his quest for equality. Certainly, things very far removed from the time of Jesus and his apostles. Things that happened in the Bible would be totally unacceptable today. Think of Lot offering his daughters to the mob, to protect his guests. But in those days things were different and people reasoned differently.
-
268
Is Biblical Morality Situational, Based Upon the Arbitrary Whims of Yahweh?
by leavingwt inis biblical morality situational, based upon the arbitrary whims of yahweh?
murder is wrong... if god orders it however, then murder is right, and failing to murder is a sin.. .
exodus 20:13 versus 1 samuel 15:1, 7-11. .
-
-
Vidqun
Matt. 23:35 mentions: "that there may come upon you all the righteous blood spilled on earth from Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly I say to you, All these tings will come upon this generation." Here I think he is referring to 2 Chron. 24:20-22. As far as I know, a lot of the prophets were persecuted, some killed. In those days the work of a prophet was not easy. So much for their morality.
Ps 104 is compared to the Song of Aten. I see the Psalm is not accredited to anybody. So, they might have borrowed some of the information from the Egyptians, who knows? Solomon again, was definitely involved in sun worship. He was married to an Egyptian princess, amongst others. He also collected horses and women, both against Jewish law. I guess he thought of himself as above the law (as king) and he could do whatever he wanted. Later Israelites also worshipped the sun (Ez. 8:16). There is an illusion to sun worship at 2 Kings 23:11. One book, Israelite Religions, mentioned: "The sun deity was subsumed by Yahweh, who took on its characteristics. The actual symbol of the sun disk became a later symbol in the Judean monarchy." So Biblical morality would not be established overnight. It would develop slowly over the years.
-
75
Who Knows The Exact Current Interpretation of "Generation" Please!
by Bubblegum Apotheosis inwould someone please explain the current interpretation of the generation.
this topic is one that is causing alot of confussion and turmoil.
jwn, you.
-
-
Vidqun
Good example Freeof1914. That explanation should warrant a new dictionary write-up.
And Niolau, I love it.
-
268
Is Biblical Morality Situational, Based Upon the Arbitrary Whims of Yahweh?
by leavingwt inis biblical morality situational, based upon the arbitrary whims of yahweh?
murder is wrong... if god orders it however, then murder is right, and failing to murder is a sin.. .
exodus 20:13 versus 1 samuel 15:1, 7-11. .
-
-
Vidqun
MP, earlier the thread touched upon genetics (see Sebastious, p. 3). This is a continuation thereof, my opinion of course. The thread also touched on David (p. 2 of the thread). Better late than never. Psalm 139 is a Psalm of David, touching on genetics, with David as its author, believe it or not. The Egyptian angle is new to me.
By the way, my opinion of Solomon, he had it all and he blew it big time. Where was I? Now we get to Abraham and the covenant. Jacob and Esau, again the genetic angle, comes in here. God chose Jacob even before he was born, and concluded the covenant with him (see my comment on this page, i.e., p. 13).
Where does the Bible say God rejected the Jews? Try these, no lesser authority than Jesus himself: Matt. 21:42-44; 23:37, 38; Luk. 13:34, 35. There’s an interesting one in Zechariah (11:10, 14). The covenant with the Jews will be annulled (CSBO, ESV, NET). Daniel (9:27a) is also a good one if you believe in the Messianic fulfilment of Dan. 9.
Sorry if I confused you.
-
75
Who Knows The Exact Current Interpretation of "Generation" Please!
by Bubblegum Apotheosis inwould someone please explain the current interpretation of the generation.
this topic is one that is causing alot of confussion and turmoil.
jwn, you.
-
-
Vidqun
Djeggnog, I am glad you are proficient in languages. Not all of us are. When there is doubt or misunderstanding of a word, then it is time to bring in the dictionaries, like in this case. Etymology would be handy in the case of the Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek word, not so much the English equivalent. In addition, the NWT is an American Bible, translated in the US of A, thus my use of Webster. I would say it is very relevant, or did they use the wrong English word for Greek genea? You be the judge. I know for a fact that the new "generation" interpretation of the Society is unique and unparallelled in the literature. That means they have created a novel and new interpretation that should be added to the list of standard English interpretations (e.g., those by Webster) or even those used by the Oxford dictionary, if you prefer to use that one. If it is as straight forward as you say, why is it so difficult to understand?
Quick lesson on the beasts according to JW theology. Notice "the beast that ascends out of the abyss" cannot bet the same as "the beast out of the sea", two different beasts altogether. According to the Society these are the same (see my quotes and footnote from the Revelation Climax-book):
Beast that ascends out of the abyss
This is the beast that “was, but is not, and yet is destined to ascend out of the abyss” (of inactivity). After World War I it would start off as the League of Nations, disappearing in the clouds of World War II. Afterwards it would be resurrected as the United Nations (cf. Rev. 17:8, 11). This is the beast that would kill the two witnesses (Rev. 11:7-10). In the book of Daniel it would be given the title “the [ultimate] abomination causing desolation” (Dan. 8:13; 11:31). This beast stands in the place of God’s kingdom, therefore an abomination in God’s eyes (cf. Ps. 46:8, 9; 72:3, 7, 8; Is. 2:4; Mic. 4:3).
Beast that ascends out of the earth
This beast out of the earth, is called “the false prophet”, i.e., the Anglo-American world power (Rev. 13:11), the seventh head of the beast, as well as the seventh mountain or kingdom, according to Rev. 17:9. It misleads, enslaves, and “performs great signs, so that it should even make fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the sight of mankind”. Eventually it would be destroyed (cf. Rev. 13:13, 14, 16; 19:20; 20:10). See False prophet.
Beast that ascends out of the sea
This composite beast stands on the sand of the sea, meaning it originates from the sea of humankind, similar to Daniels’ four beasts. It has seven heads and ten horns. The seven heads point to Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, and the British Empire. It looks like a leopard, has the feet of a bear, and mouth of a lion. The dragon gives it its throne, power, and great authority. One of the heads, i.e., the British Empire, had a death-stroke, yet revived. Two World Wars would devastate its economy. Only after joining forces with the Americans, would it survive the onslaught of the King of the North (cf. Is. 57:20, 21; Dan. 7:2, 3; Rev. 13:1, 2; 17:15). See Beast that had the death-stroke.
Beast that had the death-stroke
In Daniel (7:8, 20) we read of a small horn unseating three horns. It would become big and speak “grandiose things”. The British Empire would humiliate Spain, France, and the Netherlands to become the dominant world power. Its Royal Navy would rule the waves. In Revelation it is part of a beast with seven heads and ten horns. One of the heads had a “death-stroke and yet revived”. The beast spoke “great things and blasphemies”. People followed it in admiration. Authority was given it by the Dragon, Satan the Devil (cf. Rev. 13:3, 4, 12, 14). Its economy would be devastated by two World Wars. However, it would be bailed out by the Americans, becoming part of the seventh mountain or kingdom, the Anglo-American Empire of Rev. 17:9.
False prophet
This beast from the earth is the Anglo-American world power (Rev. 13:11), the seventh head of the beast, as well as the seventh mountain or kingdom, according to Rev. 17:9. It misleads, enslaves, and “performs great signs, so that it should even make fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the sight of mankind” (cf. Rev. 13:13, 14, 16). See Beast out of the earth.
-
268
Is Biblical Morality Situational, Based Upon the Arbitrary Whims of Yahweh?
by leavingwt inis biblical morality situational, based upon the arbitrary whims of yahweh?
murder is wrong... if god orders it however, then murder is right, and failing to murder is a sin.. .
exodus 20:13 versus 1 samuel 15:1, 7-11. .
-
-
Vidqun
Here I have to come in and defend the Jews, even though not being one myself. Individual Jews did stand out, and still stand out as special. Here specifically Albert Einstein comes to mind. The Nazis were so busy stiring up hatred agaist the Jews, they missed out on some important Jewish discoveries. According to Encyclopaedia Brittanica t he rising Nazi movement found a convenient target in relativity, branding it “Jewish physics” and sponsoring conferences and book burnings to denounce Einstein and his theories. If one studies the events that lead to the development of the atomic bomb, one notices that quite a few Jewish scientists contributed. Here J.R. Oppenheimer comes to mind. Just as well, if the Nazis produced the bomb first, it would have changed the course of history for the worse.
If God is indeed all-powerful (= the Almighty) he would have steered events in a certain direction. And yes, as the Creator, God could have utilized genetics to some extent for his will to take place. He did choose Jacob above Esau even before they were born (cf. Gen. 29:3). Also Ps. 139:13-16 makes for some interesting reading in that regard. As seen God did choose the Jews. They were entrusted with His sacred pronouncements (Rom. 3:1, 2). Later he rejected them because of their disobedience.
As the Creator, God's morality would be different from ours. Ps. 139:17 says: "So to me how difficult your thoughts are! O God, how much do the grand sum of them amount to?" A similar thought is contained at Rom. 11:33.
-
75
Who Knows The Exact Current Interpretation of "Generation" Please!
by Bubblegum Apotheosis inwould someone please explain the current interpretation of the generation.
this topic is one that is causing alot of confussion and turmoil.
jwn, you.
-
-
Vidqun
Djeggnog, I have news for you. The NWT has been translated into English. So, to understand a word, or the use of a word, one first and foremost needs to consult an English dictionary. Then one looks up the context, then one looks at the same word in other parts of the Bible. To make sure one’s interpretation of a word or phrase is correct, one must then consult original language dictionaries and commentaries. In the case of “generation” of Matt. 24:34 it has been established that the Society’s interpretation of the word has resulted in a new meaning. It is amalgamation of two separate and independent definitions given by a lexicon. The lexicon gives it as “either/or”, but the Society uses “and”. They merge two definitions to establish a brand new meaning of the word. As I have remarked earlier, this is not what the editors of the lexicon intended, therefore it is dishonest and misleading on the Society’s part.
I believe the computer and the Internet signalled the demise of the Society. Who could check the information and quotes in the publications in the past? Only a handful of brave souls with certain means at their disposal. These were ridiculed and villified for their trouble. Now everyone with a mind of his (or her) own can check their credentials and sources. And I’m afraid that a great deal of the information cannot stand up to the intense scrutiny. It does not make the grade. Dishonest scholarship is picked up immediately.
Another telling example is the Society’s identity of the beast “ascending out of the abyss” of Revelation 11:7. At Rev. 17 it is clearly identified with the League of Nations and the United Nations (Revelation Climax-book, Chapter 34, p. 248).
6 The scarlet-colored wild beast did indeed climb out of the abyss. On June 26, 1945, with noisy fanfare in San Francisco, U.S.A., 50 nations voted to accept the Charter of the United Nations organization. This body was “to maintain international peace and security.” There were many similarities between the League and the UN. TheWorldBookEncyclopedia notes: “In some ways, the UN resembles the League of Nations, which was organized after World War I . . . Many of the nations that founded the UN had also founded the League. Like the League, the UN was established to help keep peace between nations. The main organs of the UN are much like those of the League.” The UN, then, is actually a revival of the scarlet-colored wild beast. Its membership of some 190 nations far exceeds that of the League’s 63; it has also taken on broader responsibilities than its predecessor.
But at Rev. 11:7 it is identified as the great political beast of Revelation 13:1 “ascending out of the sea” (Revelation Climax-book, Chapter 25, pp. 167, 168).
21 From 1914 to 1918 the nations were occupied with the first world war. Nationalistic feelings ran high, and in the spring of 1918, the religious enemies of the two witnesses took advantage of the situation. They maneuvered the State’s legal apparatus so that responsible ministers of the Bible Students were imprisoned on false charges of sedition. Faithful coworkers were stunned. Kingdom activity almost ceased. It was as though the preaching work were dead.
Notice the footnote (p. 167):
The “abyss” (Greek, a′bys·sos; Hebrew, tehohm′) refers symbolically to a place of inactivity. (See Revelation 9:2.) In a literal sense,
however, it can also refer to the vast sea. The Hebrew word is often translated “watery deep.” (Psalm 71:20; 106:9; Jonah 2:5) Thus, “the
wild beast that ascends out of the abyss” can be identified with the “wild beast ascending out of the sea.”—Revelation 11:7; 13:1.
Why would they do it? To defend their 1914-1918 doctrine at all costs, even at the expense of honest scholarship. I am sure that you are sincere in your beliefs, but it is sad that you defend their dishonesty. You are defending the indefensible. That is sad, very sad.