Posts by Bobcat

17

Who get baptized in holy spirit, and when?

by The Searcher in

my wife asked me a very simple, but profound question; "when does someone who claims to be anointed, get baptized in holy spirit?"..

i'd never thought of it before, but it quickly dawned on me that in general, anyone who claims to have the heavenly hope, never had it at their baptism.

they almost always received their 'calling' after several years as a christian.

Bobcat

Searcher:

Some insight can be obtained by comparing two accounts that are seperated by about three years of time. I'll paste them here first for easy reference:

(John 3:1-17) 3 ... Nic·o·de′mus ... 2 ... came to him [Jesus] in the night ... 3 ... Jesus said to him: "Most truly I say to you, Unless anyone is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." 4 Nic·o·de′mus said to him: "How ... ? ... 5 Jesus answered: "Most truly I say to you, Unless anyone is born from water and spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 What has been born from the flesh is flesh, and what has been born from the spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel because I told you, YOU people must be born again. 8 ... 9 In answer Nic·o·de′mus said to him: "How can these things come about?" 10 In answer Jesus said to him: "Are you a teacher of Israel and yet do not know these things? 11 Most truly I say to you, What we know we speak and what we have seen we bear witness of, but YOU people do not receive the witness we give. 12 ... 13 ... 14 And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so the Son of man must be lifted up, 15 that everyone believing in him may have everlasting life. 16 "For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent forth his Son into the world, not for him to judge the world, but for the world to be saved through him.

(Much was edited out of Jn 3:1-17 to get to the main points)

(Matthew 19:16-29) 16 Now, look! a certain one came up to him and said: "Teacher, what good must I do in order to get everlasting life?" 17 He said to him: ... 18 ... Jesus said: "Why, You must not murder, ... 20 The young man said to him: "I have kept all these ... what yet am I lacking?" 21 Jesus said to him: "If you want to be perfect, go sell your belongings ... and you will have treasure in heaven ... 22 ... the young man ... went away grieved ... 23 But Jesus said to his disciples: "Truly I say to YOU that it will be a difficult thing for a rich man to get into the kingdom of the heavens. 24 Again I say to YOU, It is easier for a camel to get through a needle's eye than for a rich man to get into the kingdom of God." 25 When the disciples heard that, they expressed very great surprise, saying: "Who really can be saved?" 26 Looking them in the face, Jesus said to them: "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." 27 Then Peter said to him in reply: "Look! We have left all things and followed you; what actually will there be for us?" 28 Jesus said to them: "Truly I say to YOU, In the re-creation, when the Son of man sits down upon his glorious throne, YOU who have followed me will also yourselves sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And everyone that has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for the sake of my name will receive many times more and will inherit everlasting life.

(Much edited to get to the main points)

Now for some comparisons:

The section in John occurs near Passover of 30. The section from Matthew occurs near Passover of 33. Three years apart. (I'm using the Society's dating here.) Timewise, the main difference is the three years.

Now notice in John: Being "born again," 'seeing the Kingdom of God,' being "born from water and spirit," being "born from the spirit," "believing in him [Jesus]," 'having everlasting life,' 'that everyone exercising faith in him might have everlasting life,' and "for the world to be saved through him." are all part of the same discussion. (Some commentators says that Jesus' words end at verse 15 and John adds his comments starting in verse 16. Most, though, say Jesus' words extend to about verse 21.)

Moreover, Jesus chides Nicodemus for not knowing these things despite his being a "teacher in Israel." The implication of this is that these things were taught in the OT. Most probably Jesus has Jer 31:31-33 and possibly other similar verses in mind. Thus, Jesus could not have been referring to going to heaven - that was a surprise, even for the disciples.

Notice also, in the discussion with Nicodemus, Jesus says in verse 11: " ... What we know we speak and what we have seen we bear witness of, but YOU people do not receive the witness we give." In other words, what Jesus said is not just what "HE" was saying, but was what "WE" [Jesus and his disciples, based on the context also which stretches back to 2:13] were preaching about. Thus, what Jesus was describing to Nicodemus was also understood by his disciples.

Now, three years later in the discussion with the rich ruler: 'Getting everlasting life,' 'having treasure in heaven,' 'getting into the kingdom of the heavens,' and 'getting into the kingdom of God' are all tied together by Jesus as being the same thing. Then the disciples asked, "Who really can be saved?" They understood Jesus' references to life and the Kingdom to 'being saved.'

They then ask Jesus, 'what will there be for us?' [his then present disciples]. Jesus goes on to explain about sitting on thrones and judging.

The conclusion: What Jesus was talking about to Nicodemus, with reference to being 'born from water and spirit' was not referring to sitting on thrones and judging, nor to going to heaven. It was what all possible disciples of Jesus would have to experience.

In Romans 6:1-7, baptism is equated with dying and coming to life again.

I hope an analysis of these thoughts will help.

Take Care

36

What's so mysterious about "generation" (genea) in Matthew?

by kepler in

thanks to a number of notices about a website titled www.jwfacts.com, i took a quick tour and found some very informative pages and charts about the organization's positions and history.

thanks also to a number of posters for their reminders.

i can't summarize the whole site in a topic, but it did include a history of the interpretation of the phrase "this generation", appearing in matthew 24:34.. "truly i say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.".

Bobcat

OGD and Kepler:

Thank you both for your research and views!

36

What's so mysterious about "generation" (genea) in Matthew?

by kepler in

thanks to a number of notices about a website titled www.jwfacts.com, i took a quick tour and found some very informative pages and charts about the organization's positions and history.

thanks also to a number of posters for their reminders.

i can't summarize the whole site in a topic, but it did include a history of the interpretation of the phrase "this generation", appearing in matthew 24:34.. "truly i say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.".

Bobcat

Just some thoughts on "generation" from a bookworm:

Greek dictionaries (related to 1st century Greek) recognize several different uses of the term "generation." Here is how Bauer's Lexicon (BDAG or 3rd edition) has the listings broken down. Each item has: Definition, [Rendering], (Example Verses):

1. Those exhibiting common characteristics or interests [race, kind] (e.g. Lk 16:8)

2. The sum total of those born at the same time, expanded to include all those living at a given time and frequently defined in terms of specific characteristics [generation, contemporaries] (e.g. Mt 11:16; 12:41f; 23:36; 24:34; Mk 13:30; Lk 21:32)

3. The time of a generation [age]

A. Of periods of time defined in terms of a generation [age, generation] (e.g. Mt 1:17)

(BDAG actually has two more, but they are unrelated to this thread.)

A couple of points can be drawn from how this Lexicon has the uses broken down:

Not all uses of the term are the same. Thus, it would be misleading to expect the same meaning in one use as in all other uses. For example, in Mt 1:17 "generation" is used for successive descendants in a family line. Each child is described as a generation. In this usage the average length in years between generations can be calculated, as was done above.

But the usage in Mt 24:34 (and other examples) is different. So trying to calculate or compare a time period to cover this usage, based on a different usage (such as Mt 1:17) would actually be a bit like comparing apples with oranges. The Society's 'overlapping generations' idea would seem to be somewhat of a mixing of different usages.

In connection with Mt 24:34, "this generation" is linked with "all these things," and 'these things occurring.' (The things fortold to take place that would indicate that "he [Jesus] is near at the doors." - Verses 32-34)

The Society's attempt to pin the beginning of "this generation" to 1914 is faulty on several fronts. It is based on faulty chronology for one. Also, "these things" that were fortold did not simply switch on in 1914. (Using 1914 as an example) It would take time for the amalgamation of events to both happen and be recognized as such. So, trying to say that, in 1914 (or any other specific year) "this generation" suddenly began, is false reasoning. It is trying to make exact that which can only be generalized.

(For example: Preaching the good news was one of the events foretold. But it did not begin in 1914 (again, using that year as an example). One cannot say that the preaching of the good news suddenly began in that year so as to differentiate it from the year before or the year after.)

It appears to me that many of the ideas about "this generation" are basically trying to calculate the length of "this generation" so as to determine when "these things" will have run their course. This is actually backwards. "This generation" does not determine the length of "these things" (the events), rather, it is "these things" (the events leading up to the end) that determine the length of "this generation."

Thus, both the Society's position, and many of the arguments against the Society's position, seem to be based on a false premise.

Another point of note is the immediately following staement by Jesus in Mt 24:36: "Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father."

Based on this statement, in theory at least, if one knew everything the Father knew, then, that one would also know "the day and hour." By extension, the more one knows, the closer he should be able to get to knowing that "day and hour." In effect, by means of Jesus' discourse, the Father intentionally revealed only enough information to calculate 'nearness,' but not enough to calculate "the day and hour." Attempts to get around this could only be futile.

3

Josephus says the temple lay desolate for 50 years

by JWB in

josephus says the temple lay desolate for 50 years.

"these accounts agree with the true history in our books; for in them it is written that nebuchadnezzar, in the eighteenth year of his reign, laid our temple desolate, and so it lay in that state of obscurity 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.

" - extract from "flavius josephus against apion" 1.21. .

Bobcat

Thanks. I was looking for that reference in Josephus just a few days ago.

As a side note in connection with the land paying its Sabbaths, there is an interesting footnote in GTR4 that links 587 (date of destruction of Jerusalem) with 930 (date of split in the kingdom). Its on page 223, footnote 37.

8

Caleb's Airplane

by Calebs Airplane in

hello caleb fans.... my name is ole yella... i am a distinctive yellow airplane based on a wwii dive-bomber and i happen to be one of calebs favorite toys.

his parents dont know this yet, but in my former life, i was used quite extensively as a special pioneer throughout europe where massive bombing of airfields and military installations was required.

i am also proud to say that i have caused the deaths of thousands upon thousands of innocent women and children in the late 1930s and early 1940s in various other theatres of operation (isaiah 18:6; luke 21:25).

Bobcat

Maybe you have in mind the Stuka dive bomber?

Edited: My bad. You already have Ju-87.

36

What's so mysterious about "generation" (genea) in Matthew?

by kepler in

thanks to a number of notices about a website titled www.jwfacts.com, i took a quick tour and found some very informative pages and charts about the organization's positions and history.

thanks also to a number of posters for their reminders.

i can't summarize the whole site in a topic, but it did include a history of the interpretation of the phrase "this generation", appearing in matthew 24:34.. "truly i say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.".

Bobcat

Concerning the length of "this generation":

It is most notable that in both Matthew's and Mark's account, Jesus immediately follows the discussion about 'this generation' with this statement:

(Matthew 24:36) . . .Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father. . .

(Mark 13:32) . . .Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father. . .

It almost seems like Jesus was anticipating that attempts would be made to calculate a detailed time schedule. The Society (but others also) have regularly done this. The overlapping generation idea is simply more of the same. Perhaps on a less obvious level than outright calculating of years, but still an attempt to describe when 'that day and hour' will come.

Maybe one of their main problems is that they simply write too much. As Proverbs 10:19 says: "In the abundance of words there does not fail to be transgression, but the one keeping his lips in check is acting discreetly."

36

What's so mysterious about "generation" (genea) in Matthew?

by kepler in

thanks to a number of notices about a website titled www.jwfacts.com, i took a quick tour and found some very informative pages and charts about the organization's positions and history.

thanks also to a number of posters for their reminders.

i can't summarize the whole site in a topic, but it did include a history of the interpretation of the phrase "this generation", appearing in matthew 24:34.. "truly i say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.".

Bobcat

OldGenerationDude: (appropriate for this thread)

Sorry if I implied that these were your thoughts. I wasn't meaning to say that.

For the most part, all my ranting is aimed at the Society.

Take Care

36

What's so mysterious about "generation" (genea) in Matthew?

by kepler in

thanks to a number of notices about a website titled www.jwfacts.com, i took a quick tour and found some very informative pages and charts about the organization's positions and history.

thanks also to a number of posters for their reminders.

i can't summarize the whole site in a topic, but it did include a history of the interpretation of the phrase "this generation", appearing in matthew 24:34.. "truly i say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.".

Bobcat

While it is true that one can find commentators who ascribe the generation of Mt 24:34 to Christ's disciples, the context, on several levels makes this a non-viable conclusion.

The term "this generation" is used in Mt 23:36, mere hours before its use in Mt 24:34. Or, from the readers point of view, only 10 or 15 minutes reading time apart. Yet, there is no explanation or hint in Matthew that there is a change in meaning for the exact same term. In Mt 23:36 the meaning is clearly Jesus' contemporaries. One has to assume that Matthew wrote for the purpose of helping his readers to understand. Changing the meaning of terms so quckly, without any hint of explanation, just doesn't make sense. Not if you want your readers to understand.

In the immediate context of Mt 24:34, the disciples are addressed as "you" ("YOU" in the NWT to show plurality). Here is the context:

(Matthew 24:32-35 NWT) 32 "Now learn from the fig tree as an illustration this point: Just as soon as its young branch grows tender and it puts forth leaves, YOU know that summer is near. 33 Likewise also YOU, when YOU see all these things, know that he is near at the doors. 34 Truly I say to YOU that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will by no means pass away.

If Jesus meant that his disciples would not pass away until these things take place, wouldn't it have made better sense to say, "You will by no means pass away until all these things occur." Changing suddenly to the third person ("this generation") only creates confusion if he is trying to refer to the same ones he calls "you" (second person).

This becomes even more apparent in Luke. Immediately following the statement about 'this generation passing away' and 'heaven and earth passing away,' Luke has Jesus saying in 21:34, "But pay attention to yourselves ...". Here, Jesus switches back to the second person and begins the statement with the adversative "but." As if to say, ' This generation will pass away ... but don't let this happen to you.'

Moreover, there is the term "passing away." (This is one word/verb in Greek.) This is what happens to "this generation." The context itself helps define it: "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away." AMG's Greek dictionary defines this verb (in its metaphorical sense) as "to pass away, to perish." BDAG defines it to mean, "to come to an end and no longer be there." Also, "to lose force, become invalid." (With reference to "Jesus' words.") Louw/Nida defines it: "to go out of existence, to cease to exist."

This is the opposite of what jesus wanted for his disciples. In Luke 21, after saying 'this genneration would pass away,' in verses 34-36 Jesus says, "But pay attention to yourselves ... that YOU may succeed in escaping all these things that are destined to occur, and in standing before the Son of man." This is the opposite of what happens to "this generation." In fact, Jesus is definite about "this generation." It "will pass away." But in Luke 21:34-36 he is tentative about the outcome for "you," his disciples.

Finally, there is the question of how his disciples understood Jesus. The account says that Peter, Andrew, James, and John were discussing this with Jesus. (Mark 13:3) Of these, only Peter and John were Bible writers. So who did they understand were going to "pass away"?

(2 Peter 3:10) . . .Yet Jehovah's day will come as a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a hissing noise, but the elements being intensely hot will be dissolved, and earth and the works in it will be discovered.

(1 John 2:17) 17 Furthermore, the world is passing away and so is its desire, but he that does the will of God remains forever.

(Revelation 21:1) . . .And I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the former heaven and the former earth had passed away, and the sea is no more.

I have my own ideas about why the Society is taking this route. But that aside, they are completely wrong about who "this generation" is referring to.

Take Care

6

Attention all brothers in the Ministry School

by The Searcher in

the ministry school beginning the week july 23rd, has for the 3rd talk, "what is the meaning of matthew 21:43?"..

.

Bobcat

Greetings Searcher:

Analysis mode ON

w87 3/15 pp. 11-12 - "The Bible directs our attention first to those who make up spiritual Israel. These are the 144,000 who have been chosen by God to share heavenly life with Jesus Christ".

Underlined part = Unsupported assertion

"John's vision of those standing on the heavenly Mount Zion with the Lamb (whom natural Israel had rejected) revealed the number of this spiritual Israel of God to be 144,000 "bought from among mankind." (it-1 p. 1234)

Underlined part = Failure to read context. 144,000 is "out of" twelve tribes (as you pointed out). Great Crowd and priests are "out of" nations, tribes, etc. The group "out of" is smaller than the group(s) they come out of. (Rev 5:9; 7:9) It would be more accurate to say that Revelation revealed the number taken out of spiritual Israel to be 144,000.

it-2 pp. 1125-1126 Tribe - "Judging the Twelve Tribes of Israel." Jesus told the apostles that in "the re-creation" they would "sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (Mt 19:28) And he expressed a similar thought when he made a covenant with his faithful apostles for a Kingdom. (Lu 22:28-30) ...

... It is not reasonable that Jesus meant that they would judge the 12 tribes of spiritual Israel later mentioned in Revelation, for the apostles were to be part of that group. (Eph 2:19-22; Re 3:21) ...

1st Underlined part = Logical fallacy - Appeal to Ridicule

2nd Underlined part = Failure of logic. Why would the apostles (the judges) being part of that group, rule out the idea that those being judged were also part of that group? When Israel had judges (in the book of judges), did that mean that the rest of the Jews were not really Jews?

... Those "called to be holy ones" are said to judge, not themselves, but "the world." (1Co 1:1, 2; 6:2) ...

The context of 1 Corinthians 6:1-6 says that the holy ones are expected to be judges of themselves. So this statement fails to make a logical point. In fact, that they are judges of the world is used as proof by Paul that they should also judge among themselves. So 1Cor 6:2 is being used contrary to the context it comes from.

Those reigning with Christ form a kingdom of priests. (1Pe 2:9; Re 5:10) Consequently, "the twelve tribes of Israel" mentioned at Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:30 evidently represent "the world" of mankind who are outside that royal priestly class and whom those sitting on heavenly thrones will judge".-Re 20:4.

Fails to take into account the usage of the term "kingdom." Does the term "God's Kingdom" mean that no one besides Him is part of it? The 'ten horns receive a kingdom for one hour.' (Rev 17:12) Does that mean that their constituents are not part of that kingdom? David had a kingdom. Did that mean that the rest of the Jews were no longer part of it?

Those ruling can be described as a kingdom or having a kingdom without implying that those ruled over are not part of it. The Society's false logic here appears to be a fallacy of composition.

There is that word "evidently" again. If the point being made is so obviously true, why hedge it with "evidently"?

And then there is what you said: If all the above is true, why would Jesus have made such a simplistic error of statement? Why does the Watchtower have to go behind Jesus to correct him? They treat Jesus like he was some politician who is always making unwise statements that they have to go behind and clean up. It says something about the quality of faith the WT has in Jesus.

Take Care Searcher

6

August KM

by mann377 in

jw
friends

i just finished reading the insert in the august kingdom ministry and had to vent my disdain over the pompous & arrogant attitude the wtbs takes in criminalizing expressing ones ideas.

see the last sentence in par.

7, p.4 of the insert.

Bobcat

You can use this thread in connection with the August OKM.