Noble Berean

By the way is the kind of comment that lands people who make it, out of the truth. May you never be stumbled.
 I hope one day the faithful slave is not going to change their understanding of 1914, to one similar to what is presented here by JWI. If they do, it won't make me think any less of them. What is it going to do to you though? And don't say it will never happen, because it HAS happened on many occasions where they taught one thing, and then "refined" their understanding. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against refining our understanding, or even changing our understanding. We should never dogmatically insist on something, and as far as I can see, change is proof that the FDS have not dogmatically insisted on something when further evidence came to light. So why should WE be dogmatic? Is it wrong to say that there are some interesting scriptural arguments being brought forward? Why insist on something "just" because for the present this is what the FDS teach? At least THAT should NOT be the argument. The argument should be a well presented scriptural counter argument. So far I have not really seen this on this thread, or on the other one. The majority has just been diversions, and attacks on the person and their motive.
What if I was to call into question your person and motive? Are you perhaps scared if 1914 is wrong, where will that leave a lot of our beliefs? Where would that leave you? Are you afraid this could delay the end?  Is that why you are sidestepping the issue and diverting attention from the "message" to the person? What are you afraid of?
So, how did that feel.

[sarcasm] It's too bad there was no pure worship during the time of Jesus and during the lives of the apostles. Otherwise the true Christian faith could have been built upon the foundation of Jesus and the apostles. [/sarcasm]

Well, Jehovah's Witnesses are not young earth creationists. JWs believe that animals could have lived on the earth for millions of years before humans ever came onto the scene. It is entirely possible that humans and dinosaurs never coexisted and weren't meant to coexist by the Creator. Dinosaurs performed a necessary function in keeping the ecosystem stable when the earth was tropical and covered in plants. We benefit now from that era of tropical plant cover with oil deposits in the earth.

Yes, I believe the true faith is a minority too. The scriptures tell us so. We don't believe in the trinity, immortality of the soul and no Jehovah in NT do we?  Why include that in the mix with visible parousia and king in 33 C.E. though? Does that make it wrong just because the majority believe that? The majority also believe other things that we as JWs believe also.
Just as a side issue, I noticed that in the new 2013 NWT there are several instances where we changed the wording to be more in line  with other (Christendom's) translations.  You know the saying,  truth is truth no matter who says it

Why are you bringing this into the discussion?

I'm assuming they didn't live where they were easily found in the desert?
Or maybe they didn't have the tools to exhume the fossils correctly?

UPDATE!:
One of the two victims was a Jehovah's Witness passing out leaflets, the newspaper Ila-Sanomat reported.
Security was being stepped up across the Nordic country, Interior Minister Paula Risikko said at a press conference, where investigators did not say whether the attack was being looked at as terrorism.
Video taken at the scene appears to show someone yelling "Allahu Akbar," but many people believe it is just a bystander imploring people in the Finnish language to get away from the scene.
 

Its  okay  your  opinion,  @Witness   but  we're  all  different  JW's !   Many  of  us  want  to  wear  a  jw.org  sign,  button  or  similar  pin...   maybe  to  show,   "I'm  a  JW" !    Some  people  already  start  a  little  talk  about  that,  thats  nice    It  does  give  ties  for  men,  bag's  for  our  children  and  adult  JW  and  still more !   Many  sister's  making  special,  beautiful  jw.org  cakes  for  our  pioneers  or  other  especially  JW !   That  are  all  nice  idea's  and  I  like  that  very  much.  Thats  MY  opinion  to  that.   Perhaps  some  of  us  want  tell  us  their  special  opinion ?
THANK  YOU  DEAR  BROTHERS  AND  SISTERS !

I think, its very simple  @kaijafon....many of us like this or that pin I read here, so I found today very nice different jw.org  pins /  labels   Thats it !  Greetings from Germany?

WARWICK  BETHEL  REASONS BEGIN TO APPEAR  -
A  new  PIN  is  coming
FROM  THAT  PIN  I  STILL  SAW  ONE  IN  THE  INTERNET... 

Yes, I fully agree with you, one should expect that
 
Actually JWs in Italy are one of the largest religions after the Catholics

Possibly they are overstating matters a bit

JWI,
I would not want you at my side in field service. You do not preach the same message of the Kingdom that Jehovah's Witnesses teach. Your last post shows me that you are a preterist. Your message that you preach here does not cohere with the Scriptures. You say that you are one of Jehovah's Witnesses? No, you are not; in your heart you are not one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Tiago.
 

I know what you are trying to say, but YOU are actually the one who is misunderstanding. The argument is quite easy to settle. If what you said above really was the case, then why would the study edition of the February 2017 WT direct readers to:  " ..... Watch Tower Publications Index  “Beliefs Clarified,” which lists adjustments in our Scriptural understanding"?  There, under the caption 1975 you will find a reference to "Jehovah's Witnesses - Proclaimers of God's Kingdom" book, which subsequently directs you to the WT and the quotes from it we have been discussing (WT 76 & 80). Just check it out for yourself. Go to ONLINE LIBRARY -> Publications Index -> Subject Index -> Beliefs clarified -> dates ->1975
So it is not an argument conjured up by ex-witnesses, it is what the writers of the WT are saying. The writers are the ones who have had to adjust their understanding too, not just the readers.
 

Love  that,  oh  yes,   DANKESCHOEN..... ❤

And since when was it OK to clasp one's hands when praying? That is very similar to Christendom's actions.....
 

The small problem with this statement is easy to detect, and I'm sure you saw it, too.
It appears to claim that if "some" direction was given that was not in harmony with God's word, then "all of Jehovah's Witnesses" would notice. This has never, ever been true! Every time "some" change is made to a doctrine (and there have been literally hundreds of such changes) then the GB made this change because it was important to be in more complete harmony with God's word. In other words, if the change was made for the new teaching to be in harmony with God's word, then the previous teaching was not in complete harmony with God's word.
Yet, there has never been a case where more than a very few Jehovah's Witnesses spoke up, often none at all, as far as anyone knew. Back in the days when we were more attuned to anxiously await the latest "new light" from the yearly convention, the comments were always about how pleasantly surprised everyone was. No Witnesses are ever asked by the Governing Body what they think of a new doctrine and almost no Witnesses would dare say anything except that they agree completely, and that it was surely "food at the proper time." This is true, even though many of those items of "new truth" that we learned at all the assemblies in my formative years have been nearly scrapped, from "Your Will Be Done on Earth" [King of North/South, antimatter, fear of Sputnik] "Let Your Name Be Sanctified" [type-antitype Elijah as "Rutherford" and Elisha as "Knorr"] to "Babylon the Great Has Fallen" [Revelation "commentary" where almost half the paragraphs are already out of date].
I remember some of the adjustments, and wrong ideas over the years have been explained as "the right thing at the wrong time" or even once as "the wrong thing at the right time." [e.g., "superior authorities" of Romans 13]. Yet, it is always "food at the proper time" as far as perhaps 99% of us are concerned. 
But that's not the biggest problem with the claim. If it were true that even "some" wrong direction were easily detected by "all" then there is no need for a special "slave class" to present doctrines. If Brother Jackson is right, then it would be better to start from scratch and vote on each doctrine democratically.
This is not a complaint about the spiritual food we receive, and it's true that the specific menu of doctrines we enjoy is fulfilling and satisfies our spiritual needs. Over the years, however, much of it has proven to have been served at the wrong time, or it was the wrong thing. Some has even been toxic and resulted in spiritual death and loss of spiritual health for many. And we now have evidence that some of it has been kept toxic on purpose for many years because the servers didn't want to admit that it was bad food, even though the GB knew it was. (For example: The directions given on handing pedophilia cases for many years, corporal punishment of children, how a sister should respond to a physically abusive husband, chronological end-times speculation.)
I think most of these things have been corrected, or are in the process of further correction. But I don't blame the bad food on the "faithful and discreet slave" because I don't believe that this parable was a prophecy in the first place. For the most part the "spiritual food" served is wonderful. Where it is wrong it is usually corrected with something that is obviously better. But where someone digs in their heels and holds to false doctrine because of a tradition or inability to admit that it might have been wrong, this is not about an appointed "slave" proving themselves to be an "evil" slave, it's just the common human tendency of people who are looked up to as leaders to become like the Pharisees, and see themselves as more important or righteous. Teachers receive heavier judgment.
That's really the reason for the parable, anyway, as far as I can tell. It's so that a person who takes on the leadership position of Brother Jackson, for example, doesn't forget that he should be in subjection to you, Anna, and that he should be willing to give a literal drink of water to you or visit you when you are physically sick, or give you some actual physical food to eat if you are hungry.  And the parable was also meant to remind you, Anna, not to forget that you should be in subjection to Brother Jackson, and not be quick to judge him harshly even if you see that he has taken a false step. We should try to build each other up with patience and discretion and faithfulness, picking each other up as best we can, and trying to understand each others' mental, emotional, physical and spiritual needs so that we can be an encouragement to each other. As the "day" continues to draw near, we want to show love toward one another, so that all of us continue awaiting Jesus "parousia" without unnecessary distraction from the world and its desires. The point of the parable is that if the Master is away it's easy to lose faith, but by building our congregations up into a family of brothers and sisters who look out for each other with love, we will not be tempted to lose faith in the promise, which can result in disobendience to the Master, and being overly concerned about who is right and who isn't, or finding opportunities to "lord it over" our fellow servants.

Hi Anna. I too was concerned by this quote in a recent WT. It really jumped out at me. What authority does the GB have to claim definitive interpretation of scripture? Especially after they've established that they are fallible, imperfect, and have erred in the past. The GB can't have its cake and eat it too.

The JW's in the auditorium wouldn't have applauded if they knew the entire world was watching. This is video taken inside a JW only world.
Of course the rest of humanity cannot be expected to understand.
The perception is that we are a cold, cruel and heartless people. Perception is a tricky thing.

I completely understand why a Christian would refuse a blood transfusion, but I can also understand why a Christian would take one in an emergency life-or-death scenario. We are only human and weak, and it seems very unloving to disfellowship someone if they take a transfusion out of fear for their life. At the end of the day, isn't this choice between a Christian and Jehovah God? Is it really necessary for the organization to meddle in this private medical choice? I can understand why the organization wouldn't endorse transfusions, but I have always felt it should be a conscience matter.
Furthermore, isn't there some scriptural precedent for one law trumping another? I have always felt like Jehovah God was balanced about the law, but the organization's stance on transfusions is very extreme. The Bible accounts that come to mind are when David ate the loaves in the temple or when Jesus Christ healed a man on the Sabbath. Shouldn't love for our brothers trump rule following?

And yet there have been mistakes. This cannot be because GOD gave wrong insight can it? So it must be that GOD gives holy spirit, but it is up to the individual whether he actually follows it or not to get the correct insight!

What does "light getting brighter' even mean? Would Jehovah God send inaccurate or incomplete information to his slave ? Or is it just an attempt to shift away accountability for mistakes? 
 
The Governing Body is not just some politician. It holds itself on a moral pedestal as God's channel. So when they make major mistakes they should apologize. It's the very least they could do.
 
But how can you have it both ways? How can you clearly state a message is fallible but demand unquestioned obedience to that same message?

Well, I believe the organization could move toward a more balanced and less dogmatic direction. I feel like there's a lot more gray area in the Bible than the organization wants to let on. I don't think it would hurt for the GB to apologize for some of its missteps. I can't give a clear answer on how to make the organization better. I can only point out the things that aren't working right now.

I agree with you wholeheartedly and that is why I find reasoning such as this one from the Nov. 2016 study WT a little disconcerting p.16, par. 9:
"Some may feel that they can interpret the Bible on their own. However, Jesus has appointed the ‘faithful slave’ to be the only channel for dispensing spiritual food. Since 1919, the glorified Jesus Christ has been using that slave to help his followers understand God’s own Book and heed its directives. By obeying the instructions found in the Bible, we promote cleanness, peace, and unity in the congregation. Each one of us does well to ask himself, ‘Am I loyal to the channel that Jesus is using today?’ "
I am misunderstanding what it's saying there? Anyone care to analyze this as they understand it?  And sorry, I know it's a little off topic.

Brother Russell died in 1916