John 12.24to28

What will happen to the sheep who follow those who are part of the world?

Who was Jesus really talking to when he said to be "no part of the world"? 

He was talking to the apostles. They had been arguing with one another over who was the greatest. Jesus warned them not to lord it over one another, like the Benefactors of the nations do. He wasn't warning them not to get involved in politics.

What has happened in the organization today? Is Jesus really pleased with the prominent ones? With the exaltation of a certain group? Are they really "no part of the world"?

When the Devil showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world and their glory, was it just about politics? 

The world is based on "showy display" "the desire of the eyes and the desire of the flesh" and desire for prominence and self-glory.

If a person refrains from getting involved in politics and yet embraces showy display, the desires of the flesh, prominence and self-glorification while remaining in the organization, are they really "no part of the world"?

17 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

You make your point based on rejection of 1914 as the beginning of the "parousia" and Jesus reign as king. I also can't see how that idea fits the Biblical references to the parousia. But I believe Jesus was already enthroned much earlier, so it doesn't matter what happened specifically in 1914. Jesus WAS king in 1914 because he had already been raised up much earlier as the Davidic Messiah.

I noticed an earlier comment you made elsewhere where you reject the idea that Jesus became king when he sat down at the right hand of majesty. I understand that there are different ways to interpret "kingship" and "authority." But it's still a legitimate interpretation that Jesus already held his position as "king of kings and lord of lords" because he was given a name and authority at that time which was above all rulers and principalities whether they be in heaven or on earth. Hebrews says that he had a crown at this time, a sceptre at this time, a throne at this time, and that he was already of the order of Melchizedek who was both king and priest at the same time.

Revelation calls Jesus the "ruler of the kings of the earth." Paul shows that when Psalm 110 used the expression "sit at my right hand" that one should interpret that phrase as "rule as king." 

For Christ must reign [as King] until He has put all His enemies under His feet.

The examples of Jewish persons who worked for and supported gentile governments is not necessarily seen again in Christian times, where Christians owed their citizenship to the heavens and believed they were just temporary residents in this world.

Thank you for being willing to share that, @JW Insider🙂

Regardless of when the king begins his reign, the context of John's words regarding "the world" help us to see that "being no part of the world" is not just about refraining from political issues. 

The entire first letter of John is contrasting two things:

Light and Dark

Jehovah and Satan

Love and the World

Politics or refraining from politics isn't even mentioned in there.

Certainly we do not want to get involved in political stuff, it's never a good idea. But the point is that by misapplying that phrase "no part of the world" and encasing it in the word "neutrality", the whole point is missed of what Jesus was saying.

32 minutes ago, boyle said:

45 minutes ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

Why is it important? Well, if you've watched the new movie that just came out for this year's convention, you will understand.

Realistically or you're in your head?

There's a BIG difference!

Was the safety of the congregation the concern of the branch back with the political party cards decision?

If the direction is in harmony with scripture, great - follow it. 

But if it is based on flawed reasoning and misapplication, then we must obey God as ruler rather than man.

Jesus said we must worship Jehovah with our Whole Mind which means We Each Have the Responsibility and Obligation to Think and Reason on the scriptural principles involved. We are not relieved of that scriptural responsibility just because some other people want to tell us what to do. We are accountable to God for our choices and if we follow men, even the men on the GB or branch, and those men are giving unscriptural direction, well, "you reap what you sow" regardless of who gave you the direction. There's no way out of that.

The context of that verse "your strength will be in keeping calm and showing trust" implies "showing trust in Jehovah." The application in the film is "showing trust in the branch is the same as showing trust in Jehovah" but that's not right. That's not what the Bible says. "Each one must carry his own load."

In the days ahead, we will need, more than ever, to trust Jehovah's Direction. His Direction is in His Word. 

When anyone in any position of authority, whether it be in the organization or outside the organization, gives us direction, we Have To Obey God as Ruler Rather Than Men if that direction is in opposition to God's Word. It means our life, and the lives of those we love.

Jehovah has to come first. Even before the branch or the GB. Jehovah comes First. He's the only One who can save us.

3 minutes ago, boyle said:

If you come across a survivor, let them know how their faith in God and their sacrifice meant nothing to you.

@boyle That's not what I said and you know it, stop being so naughty!😝

Jehovah didn't need animal sacrifices in ancient Israel. But He accepted them. They were precious to Him, because that's what the people had to give, and that's what they knew. That's what the nations around them did, so Jehovah regulated it and incorporated it into the Mosaic Law.

Certainly Jehovah values something about all right-hearted sacrifices made in His name, even if they were not necessary.

2 minutes ago, boyle said:

Okay, Because Jesus felt the same way about the political powers of Rome. That's why I asked how far you wanted to go.

Doing an act of worship to the emperor is not the same thing, just like getting a drivers license is not the same thing as saying "Heil Hitler". 

"you must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind and with your whole strength"

If the branch wants the people to not use their mind, then aren't they asking people to not be complete for Jehovah?

There is talk about being "whole-hearted" in worship, but what about being "whole-minded" in worship?

If half of the mind is devoted to the branch or the GB or the organization and half to God's Word, how would Jehovah be pleased with that kind of divided worship?

If you cannot serve for two masters, then why is the branch asking the sheep to serve two masters?

When troubles come, the counsel in the movie is to obey the branch direction even if you don't understand.

They say that Jehovah will save you if you obey the branch no matter what, and there is fear instilled by certain scenes in the movie, to motivate by means of fear rather than love, that if you don't obey the branch direction, you will probably die.

The truth is that we need to obey Jehovah. Jehovah's direction is what will save us.

When people obey the branch without thinking and meditating on God's Word and comparing the direction of men with Jehovah's direction, well, it doesn't always work out well. Like what happened in Malawi.

It's easy to look back and say, "oh, it's not the Watchtower's fault the Malawi government was so mean."

But what if it's your kids next week when the branch sends direction that is in opposition to God's Word. Or when the branch sends direction that is based on a flawed understanding of scripture. Or a misapplication of scripture. Now what?

Jehovah has allowed kings in the past to make mistakes. He has allowed the people to follow those kings. Sometimes there were individuals who clung to Jehovah even when the leaders were not obeying Jehovah. 

Jehovah is looking for those who will worship Him in spirit and truth.

Why is it important? Well, if you've watched the new movie that just came out for this year's convention, you will understand.

2 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I would say that (in my opinion) there was nothing wrong with the Watchtower's policy about not purchasing the political party card in Malawi. It was not the fault of the Watchtower that the government in Malawi pushed an agenda of extreme and vicious persecution upon good citizens of Malawi just because they had sound religious reasons not to purchase a political party card.

Oh, I would agree with you that it's not the Watchtower's fault that the Malawi government was so mean.

It's just the misapplication of scripture I am highlighting, and that it led to some people getting hurt on their watch.

7 minutes ago, boyle said:

You sure are making up a lot of definitions for the word neutral that are meaningless to the structure it's intended to.

Maybe you could explain what you mean about the word "neutral" a little more.

5 minutes ago, boyle said:

Well, I thought this was going to be a good debate. What a disappointment.

😆I'm not a debater, @boyle, you know that!

1 hour ago, boyle said:

1 hour ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

Another thing, the Kingdom didn't start ruling in 1914. So even if someone had a political party card, that wouldn't be a conflict of interest since the Kingdom wasn't reigning yet anyway.

How far back do you want to go?

However, I have no idea what 1914 has to do with voter rights.

1 hour ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

(It'll be a different story once Jesus takes the throne in heaven, but there is no evidence that's happened yet.)

Yes! You keep telling yourself this without showing a shred of proof to the contrary.

Since the Kingdom didn't start ruling in 1914, there was no need for those brothers to feel they were not keeping integrity if they were to get a political party card in nations that required it. 

Did you see Jesus come down from heaven in 1914, @boyle? Did anybody? Nope.

Getting a political party card was not an act of worship, it was not rejecting Jesus' kingdom rule, because Jesus still hadn't taken the throne yet. People have free will, and they can choose to get a card or not, there are other principles involved to weigh out, but to misapply the phrase "be no part of the world" the way the GB does is unscriptural and goes beyond what is written.

3 minutes ago, boyle said:

6 minutes ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

The point is that being "no part of the world" doesn't mean "no part of the governments".

In some cases, that's exactly what it means. Are you up for the challenge of disproving the Bible?

@boyle, I'm not saying that anyone should go be part of the government or that anyone should get involved in social issues, I'm just saying that the specific phrase "no part of the world" is misapplied to neutrality issues when that's not what Jesus meant at all with that specific phrase.

4 minutes ago, boyle said:

What happened in Malawi?

Well, it looks like he's around, maybe @JW Insider would be willing to give a summary of the political party card issue that happened in Malawi? 😃

Daniel was not neutral according to the present definition in the organization. He petitioned the king to save the lives of the wise men. That was a social issue.

Mordecai and Esther were definitely not neutral. They petitioned the king on social issues and desired to get someone else out of office.

Joseph was involved in issues dealing with hunger, you could say it was his campaign against hunger.

Being "no part of the world" doesn't mean "being neutral to social issues."

2 minutes ago, boyle said:

9 minutes ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

Daniel worked in a government office. He remained no part of the world. In what way? Daniel did not corrupt his heart or his body with the false religious practices of the day, and he remained in God's love.

What happened to Daniel when he refused to eat the king's food? What are we to take from your illustrations? That people worked for the government, or the faith those people carried, thus receiving God's spirit and blessing? Why do you want to continue to confuse the issues with no proof?

The point is that being "no part of the world" doesn't mean "no part of the governments". 

5 minutes ago, boyle said:

accept his words written in scripture. ... substance.

56 minutes ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

"Happy are the people who know the joyful shouting. O Jehovah, they walk in the light of your face."  God is Love and Light.

 

"“You heard that it was said: ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’  However, I say to you: Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you,  so that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise on both the wicked and the good and makes it rain on both the righteous and the unrighteous.  For if you love those loving you, what reward do you have? Are not also the tax collectors doing the same thing?  And if you greet your brothers only, what extraordinary thing are you doing? Are not also the people of the nations doing the same thing?  You must accordingly be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

1 hour ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

"Do not love either the world or the things in the world"

 

"the world is passing away and so is its desire, but the one who does the will of God remains forever"

 

"See what sort of love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are. That is why the world does not know us, because it has not come to know him.  Beloved ones, we are now children of God, but it has not yet been made manifest what we will be. We do know that when he is made manifest we will be like him, because we will see him just as he is.  And everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as that one is pure."

The world does not understand this love of Jehovah, this love from Jehovah. 

"No part of the world" means "Make sure you do things with love" or "Make sure your motives are love". That's what the scriptures show.

9 minutes ago, boyle said:

Be specific with bible knowledge, not your own words.

“Do not go beyond the things that are written,” ...Have you begun ruling as kings without us?"

(1 Corinthians 4:6-8)

7 minutes ago, boyle said:

Can you explain this turn of events? Which rules lead to torture and death?

Like what happened in Malawi.

1 hour ago, boyle said:

2 hours ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

"If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own. Now because you are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, for this reason the world hates you."

Wait, Wait! Paul had political aspirations, which followers of Christ weren't tied to political offices like the TAX COLLECTOR office.

Daniel worked in a government office. He remained no part of the world. In what way? Daniel did not corrupt his heart or his body with the false religious practices of the day, and he remained in God's love.

Esther and Mordecai worked in government office. They remained no part of the world. In what way? In obedience to Jehovah's Word, they did not bow down to Haman the Agagite. They loved Jehovah and they used their authority to help people.

Nehemiah worked in government office. He was no part of the world. He loved Jehovah and did not become spoiled by a desire for prominence over others. He loved Jehovah and helped people out of love.

Joseph worked in government office. He was no part of the world. Love motivated him to help all those people, including his brothers who initially were going to murder him and lied to their father all those years about Joseph's whereabouts. Joseph was no part of the world because his Love conquered the world. 

5 minutes ago, boyle said:

you keep challenging God's word. 

In what way?

14 minutes ago, boyle said:

My eyes are wide open. I just appreciate what I'm seeing, deceit.

Yes, the GB is being deceitful. "We love you very much!" They know they're not being loving.  

1 minute ago, boyle said:

12 minutes ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

The Watchtower makes rules about political party cards, tells people not to get involved in social issues, and not to vote in elections. 

I'm at a loss. Are they wrong or right?

What kind of political empowerment do you want to have? Were you part of the women's liberation movement? 

What makes your activism so important to you?

Do you think it's right for them to make rules about stuff beyond what the Bible says, especially if following those rules leads to torture and death?

I have never been part of a women's liberation movement, that is distasteful to me.

When I was at UMass Boston, for a short time I was the president of the campus PIRG, and went to trainings and workshops on activism. We did multi-campus rallies on topics like hunger and homelessness and environmental issues, also contacted politicians and the media. During one campaign, we were trying to increase voter awareness and I experienced firsthand the backstabbing that goes on in politics. After that, rather than take any classes in political science, I opted for anthropology and archaeology. Dead people were less trouble to work with than politicians.

I am not an "activist" in the sense that I used to be. I am not interested in that kind of "activism". I am, however, interested in Jehovah and His Will. I am interested in being "active" in doing whatever His Will is for us. It is His Will that we bear witness. A witness is one who speaks. 

"Now because we have the same spirit of faith as that of which it is written: “I exercised faith, therefore I spoke”; we too exercise faith and therefore we speak."