Evacuated

5 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Bro. Anthony Morris Jr. (TPT) and Bro. Geoffery Jackson (ARC) ... (left to right, front row) do not look very happy about what they are singing.

Perhaps the sound of their own voices is driving them craaaazeee................

There are a number of terms which although fairly neutral in themselves, have come to have quite emotive, and often negative,  association, particularly in the field of religious discussion.

These include dogma; doctorine; teaching; tradition; belief; interpretation; opinion. You might think of others, such as decree.

For example, the word "dogma" is quite innocently defined as above by @Srecko Sostar, but when one brings in a definition such as below, one can see the controversial possibilities and the potential for the clouding of rational discussion.

Catholic Encyclopedia:

"In Catholicism a dogma, unlike a simple belief, is said to be a truth solemnly formulated either by an ecumenical council or by the pope’s “infallible magisterium.” 

"When, therefore, the Church explains the meaning of a dogma this interpretation is to be maintained in all future time, and it can never be deviated from under pretence of a more profound investigation.” 

It often appears that when discussion on whether an understanding of an aspect of the Bible fits a particular category of the list given takes place, it is carried out from the standpoint of seeking to avoid the negative connotations of those formerly, purely descriptive terms.

Also, one cannot leave out of the scenario those "lurking bogeymen": heresy and apostasy.
 

9 minutes ago, Anna said:

Once the cat is out of the bag, you can't put it back in, no matter how hard you try.

Trying to squash a rumor is like trying to unring a bell.

2 hours ago, Anna said:

Also, there is no doubt in my mind that those of the FDS, at least Fred Franz, really believed the end would come in 1975

Don't really know first hand what F Franz believed, but I remember the talk he gave about it post '75 because I was sitting in the front row. (No notes I remember...long talk). I am sure he, like a lot of others, certainly hoped for a 1975 event.

The funny thing is there are those who were swayed about 1975 and there are those who were not. Yet both camps seem to have a problem accepting the other now. Those who were swayed seem to be a bit "once bitten, twice shy" and accuse the others of "cognitive dissonance". Those who were not swayed get a bit self-righteous and say "well I didn't fall for it, can't see how anyone else did! But then, you know what these Americans can be like....". And then there's those that weren't even there......................You know what?  "there's now't so queer as folk".

I had a shepherding call in 1973 from a couple of elders, one of whom proudly told me he had cancelled his insurances (life or endowment or something) because he was so sure the imminent end made them not worth paying for. I actually could just about afford my fare to work at the time, so his "exhortation" to simplicity rather fell on deaf ears as I actually had nothing at all left at the end of my working week as my wage at the time only covered my living expenses.

Soon after, a prominent elder from Bethel (who took my book study group) said that he was not a member of the "1975 Armageddon school of thought" because it was actually not a scriptural teaching. I had great respect for that brother at the time and was very glad to hear him say this as I was not comfortable with the view that some, (and it was only some), had over this matter. They were usually a particular type of brother (in my opinion), greeting each other at the kingdom hall, always slightly over-excitedly saying embarrassing things like "it won't be long now" as they shook my hand vigorously, often holding it with two of theirs. 

Another characteristic of some of these ones I remember was their obsessive recording of assembly talks on those little cassette recorders that many had in those days. They were always out of their seats at assemblies, fiddling with safety pins,  as they spiked the speaker wires, fighting for the plum, accessible spots on the stadium ledges, so they could get in and out in time to change tapes that often did not last long enough to get a whole talk on one side. (60 minute tapes used to get wound round the mechanism some how). Then there was the batteries running out, mid-talk! One brother, in haste, actually dropped his recorder down the side of the stadium into a narrow void where the seating structure was. He was so upset over this that it was like his Armageddon had come there and then! These brothers also indulged in swapping these recordings, often getting prized tapes of American COs giving talks at assemblies, and really stirring up the pot in a much more direct and vigorous manner than we were used to. (I think those Americans probably were responsible for the hysteria you know, apart from "Armageddon Ernie" of course).

Ah well, those were the days..."Things ain't what they used to be, and never were". (Will Rogers?)
 

On 11/30/2017 at 12:46 PM, Matthew9969 said:

a spiritual nation of Israelites which consist of only the anointed 144,000 when Jesus wept upon entering Jerusalem?

This makes no sense. Fleshly Israel was not replaced when Jesus wept on entering Jerusalem.

1 minute ago, Gone Fishing said:

1 hour ago, The Librarian said:

Some entries not related to the original topic have been split off.....

Where to?

Its OK found it. Good Librarianship.

1 hour ago, The Librarian said:

Some entries not related to the original topic have been split off.....

Where to?

@JW Insider. Thanks for all the background on this.

So, as far as I can make out with this stuff, the 1969 published section in the Aid to Bible Understanding singled out, more or less, a generally held view (although not unanimous) that porneia as a ground for divorce referred to adulterous, heterosexual intercourse only. 

Dec 15 1972 Question from Readers (QfR). Porneia was expanded to include homosexual, extra-marital intercourse as divorce grounds for the innocent.

QfR 1973 introduces the idea that a third party is not necessary, and that forced unnatural intercourse on an innocent party would be classed as porneia and a grounds for divorce. (Presumably a disfellowshipping matter as well, but the subject of the 2 witness rule or proof is not discussed).

QfR 15 Feb 1978 directs elders not to get involved in trying to identify what does or does not constitute porneia between married couples within the marriage, due to a lack of Scriptural definition. Also that using such as a grounds for divorce by an innocent party should be left to that innocent party to decide and proceed with. (Maybe the 2 witness issue was a factor in this?)

WT 15 March 1983 turns it all on it's head! Porneia can only take place with a partner, (any oriented human or otherwise), external to the marriage relationship. Individuals divorced, remarried on the basis of previous erroneous advice are to be viewed as irreprehensible. Other words (akartharsia; alselgeia) are applied to perverted sexual intercourse within a marriage, but not porneia, which dictionary authorities and scholarly commentors define as only occurring with a party outside the marriage arrangement. (Judicial issues not discussed at any length).

Interestingly 15/12/12 QfR indicates that "when fertilization involving eggs or sperm (or both) from someone not within the marital union occurs, this amounts to what the Bible terms por·neiʹa, sexual immorality. Those procedures are a gross misuse of the sexual organs."

This last reference actually divorces the whole matter away from what is usually associated with illicit sexual behaviour, namely indulgence in illicit sexual gratification. It appears to focus more on a misuse of the life transmission processes. This would seem to be a vital core element of the reasons for Jehovah legislating around the whole matter..

Is that where we are on this now?
 

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

one ruined life is too many

Which is why Jesus words at Matt 18:7 are so reassuring. There is no lasting collateral damage in Jehovah's excercise of justice.

35 minutes ago, DefenderOTT said:

The year 1975 can be calculated from the prophecies in Daniel

You'll need to be a little more explicit on what you mean by this???

6 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

JWs didn't get the 1975 theory out of thin air

Sorry mate! I do believe they did! Or do you think that those who take the lead in shepherding the flock are not JWs?

We are 42 years down the line here.

It's equivalent to brothers in 1967 still harping on about the "princes" not coming back in 1925! Oh sorry, there are still people harping on about that now and that was 92 years ago!

I was there in 1975 and I knew then a lot of people who were there in 1925. We had 11 anointed in the congregation, 5 of them dedicated prior to 1914.

I never heard one of them gripe over dates or disappointment, but all of them expected the great tribulation "tomorrow". They have all gone now, but they were faifhful to their end.

I just fail to see an issue with excitement over the slightest possibility, imagined or otherwise, that the end of this system could be upon us. In fact, surely in harmony with the topic, that is one of the things a person has to do to survive Armageddon?

Speaking of the impending time of judgement in Habbakuk's time, Jehovah clearly stated: "Keep in expectation of it!" Hab 2:3

"Shepherding the flock" ? Huh! More like "herding cats"!

 

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I'm sure there are people still alive whose marriages were broken up over the Watchtower's counsel on this topic.

Not sure what is meant here. The topic is about homesexual behaviour providing grounds for divorce. Is that not about the breaking up a marriage?

This shortlived error of interpretation did nothing to impede an innocent party's separation if desired, but it did extend unecessarily the period of non-freedom to remarry. I am sure it generated considerable discussion at the time, given the attraction of such topics, and the eagle-eyed awareness of many to adjustments and change in such matters.

True, some innocent parties may have engaged in "normal" fornication themselves, maybe due to fleshly weakness, maybe even as scheme to secure a divorce by any means, and maybe the twerpish interpretation in the Aid book article contributed. The fringe frontier of sexual morality is a dangerous place to dwell.

However, I can't see those affected as being a high number in view of both the consequences, and the short time period of error. Not that that reduces the effects for any individuals caught in the confusion of course, albeit for a few months.

Jesus sadly warned at Matt.18:7: "Of course, it is inevitable that stumbling blocks will come, but woe to the man through whom the stumbling block comes!". And James at 3:1-2 warned: "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, knowing that we will receive heavier judgment. For we all stumble many times. If anyone does not stumble in word, he is a perfect man, able to bridle also his whole body."

Looks as if at least some of those named above experienced the outcome in these warnings.

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The Bible acknowledges that injustice can have a bad effect not only on the person but even on their children and grandchildren.

Quite true. But it also indicates that Jehovah and Jesus take a special interest in those who suffer it, and who look to them:

"For he will rescue the poor who cry for help, Also the lowly one and whoever has no helper. ?He will have pity on the lowly and the poor, And the lives of the poor he will save. From oppression and from violence he will rescue them, And their blood will be precious in his eyes"
 Ps.72:12-14.

Not a happy topic.

20 minutes ago, Noble Berean said:

They knew people who sold off property and made major life adjustments.

Yes. Unfortunately, there's all sorts of fish got washed up on that beach.

I was there, but some sound thinking advice earlier meant that I didn't connive with 'seventy -five. However, there were some who actually borrowed money on the strength of it!! They were a bit miffed as well.

1 hour ago, Anna said:

reasoning in the 1972 WT was a blunder, a mistake

Probably just following the 1971 nonsense in the Aid to Bible Understanding. p460. (Who wrote that?)

The mistake appears to have been corrected in the Watchtower by 15/12/72  (page 768) when it is stated " that any married person who goes outside the marriage bond and engages in immoral sexual relations, whether with someone of the opposite sex or someone of the same sex, whether natural or unnatural and perverted, is guilty of committing por·neiʹa or “fornication” in the Bible sense."

Also, "Taking Jesus’ words for what they mean, therefore, when a mate is guilty of such serious sexual immorality the innocent mate may Scripturally divorce such a one, if he or she so desires. One who obtains a divorce on such Scriptural grounds is also Scripturally free to remarry, not thereby being subject to a charge of adultery.
This clearly marks a correction in the view expressed on previous occasions in the columns of this magazine, but faithful adherence to what the Scriptures actually say requires it. "  (Who wrote that?)

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

How many problems will come in a future if some problem of past error on translation we can see now, today

We'll probably have to stop a few people 'sodding pottage'!

4 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

"Likewise, the Greater Moses, Jesus Christ, is not the Mediator between Jehovah God and all mankind. He is the Mediator between his heavenly Father, Jehovah God, and the nation of spiritual Israel, which is limited to only 144,000 members." Worldwide Security Under the "Prince of Peace" (1986) pp.10-11

No relevance to:

21 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

Doesn't the watchtower teach that Jehovah finally gave up on the nation and replaced it with a spiritual nation of Israelites which consist of only the anointed 144,000 when Jesus wept upon entering Jerusalem?

2 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Then Catholic are not wrong at all when want to baptized newborn children. Protection and blessings comes earlier than in JWorg :))))))

Let's baptize pregnant mothers.........

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

In Russia WT have no problem with paedophilia, yet.

Moscow Times 29/11/2017

"The number of children recognized as victims of pedophilia surged by 35.6 percent last year, children's ombudsman Pavel Astakhov said late Tuesday on Twitter.

That increase far outpaced the 7.2 percent rise in the total number of crimes against children, according to Astakhov, who did not provide an explanation for the upticks.

More than 95,400 children were registered as victims of crime last year, as compared with 89,000 the year before, Astakhov wrote, citing statistics by the Interior Ministry. Of the victims last year, more than 2,500 died, he said."

On 7/25/2017 at 6:20 PM, JW Insider said:

On the second point, I can state for a fact that most disfellowshippings, on average, take place within a 190-day window after the Memorial. All disfellowshippings take place within a window of time that is either 183 days before or after a Memorial. So the average amount of time between a disfellowshipping and the time of the Memorial is less than 90 days. See what you can do with numbers?

Actually as an afterthought, how do you substantiate this?

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

we don't want to know what is in the septic tank

Do you keep yours in the roof space?

1 hour ago, Anna said:

Unfortunately it originates in the WT magazine January 1 1972 - This evidently is one of the gaffes.

Does it really matter? It is garbage wherever it comes from, grandiose claims or not. This proverb is true for everyone you know: 

"When words are many, transgression cannot be avoided, but whoever controls his lips acts discreetly. Pro.10:19

Perhaps that is another reason why we are cutting back on the amount of printed material?

It has been said that of the average 2000 - 3000 words a man speaks in a day perhaps 500 -700 or 25% of them are of any value. Let's use the lower figures and say then from 15 to 65, he speaks 9,125,000 words of any value in his life that no one remembers.

Jehovah, who knows everything of value, has chosen to record 783,137 words in the last 6000 odd years, mostly indirectly communicated, but every word 100% of value. 

I'll let someone else do the math on WT published words in the last 138 years. I think JTR has estimated 15% of it of any value, which is actually a bit under par.

Why worry about mistakes as if we didn't expect them? When we have the word of God?

47 minutes ago, Matthew9969 said:

Doesn't the watchtower teach that Jehovah finally gave up on the nation and replaced it with a spiritual nation of Israelites which consist of only the anointed 144,000 when Jesus wept upon entering Jerusalem?

No.

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

While both homosexuality and bestiality are disgusting perversions, in the case of neither one is the marriage tie broken. It is broken only by acts that make an individual “one flesh” with a person of the opposite sex other than his or her legal marriage mate.

This is just unadulterated Rubbish! It does not matter where it originates!

Jesus said: (1st Century):

Matthew 5:32: "everyone divorcing his wife, except on account of sexual immorality (porneia), makes her a subject for adultery"

Matthew 19:9: "whoever divorces his wife, except on the grounds of sexual immorality (porneia), and marries another commits adultery"

Jehovah's Witnesses said (1988):

Insight from the Scriptures (1988) v1 p642:

"Sexually immoral acts committed by a married person with someone of the same sex (homosexuality) are filthy and disgusting. Unrepentant persons of this type will not inherit God’s Kingdom. And, of course, bestiality is Scripturally condemned. (Le 18:22, 23; Ro 1:24-27; 1Co 6:9, 10) These grossly filthy acts come under the broad designation por·neiʹa. It is also noteworthy that, under the Mosaic Law, homosexuality and bestiality carried the death penalty, freeing the innocent mate for remarriage.—Le 20:13, 15, 16."

It is also worth remembering what Paul said to Timothy at 1 Timothy 1:9-10: "recognizing that law is made, not for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, ungodly and sinners, disloyal and profane, murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, manslayers, sexually immoral people, men who practice homosexuality, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and everything else that is in opposition to the wholesome teaching"

Regardless of the statistical assaults of determined mudslingers, I would venture that, for the majority of Jehovah's Witnesses, grappling with definitions of fornication and what constitutes permissable extremes of sexual deviancy has not been at the top of their list of after-party small talk topics. I would also hazard a guess that, over the years, many of those charged with spirtual guidance and shepherding responsibilities would have been fairly naive in these matters also. (This is relected in historical discussions on such subjects. See the 1970's references quoted above). 

Now, (2017), there is an ever-escalating need to re-evaluate and become educated in these matters, in a non-prurient context, within the congregation. Contributing to this are: 

• the escalation of sexual immorality in the world at large,
• the large numbers of "skinned and thrown about" sheep-like ones coming into the organisation
• the determined assault of opportunist predators on the true Christian congregation, seeing it as a victim pool
• the determined attempts of society to sexualise at a younger and younger age,
• the increasing institutional abandonment of scriptural norms of sexual behaviour,
• the institutional abandonment of traditional gender definition and roles,
• the growing preoccupation with sexual activity and experimentation,
• the saturation of all media with sexually oriented behaviour and images
• the glorification of sexual abnormality in the entertainment world
• the globalisation of uncensored pornographic media due to internet penetration......
• You can add what ever you like to this list.

As far as I can see, that re-evaluation and educational program is in place and is progressing effectively in the opposite direction, but, you had better believe it..... We are at war!

Eph.6:12: "we have a struggle, not against blood and flesh, but against the governments, against the authorities, against the world rulers of this darkness, against the wicked spirit forces in the heavenly places."

1 hour ago, Anna said:

Won't they be in heaven by then?

They are going to heaven of course, but they aren't doing an irresponsible runner like those ones who slipped off to Tartarus all those years ago.

1 hour ago, Anna said:

It raises more questions than it answers,

Oh dear..but you are right..so many questions....At least I can't see "Are we there yet? in among them................

Seriously, just because we are taking "firm hold of the robe of a Jew'" (Zech.8:23),  we must not get the idea we are going to get through Armageddon by "riding on  our parent's coat tails" as it were. This will be no "walk in the park", regardless of the admonition at 2Chr.20:17.

We need the determination of Habbakuk as recorded at Hab.3:16-19. That includes facing the possibility that "[the] flock may actually be severed from [the] pen" (NWT 1984). We may well have to rely solely on our informed relationship with Jehovah at times, but I am sure that not one of Jehovah's people will be "left in the lurch", (NWT1984), when the time comes.

It is not for now to tell the story of our salvation in detail, because it has not yet occurred. But rest assured, if we continue to follow the directions that have led us up until now, then we will echo in real time, (not only in prophecy), the words of Habbakuk who said: "Yet, as for me, I will exult in Jehovah himself; I will be joyful in the God of my salvation" Hab.3:18.

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Just my imperfect, uninspired and not unique opinion :))))

This is an honest and commendable assessment, particularly in  that your opinion is not unique.

It was clearly expressed at the time of Moses, and differs little from what was said then about Jehovah's way of guiding his people. I'll only cite the one example.

"So they gathered together against Moses and Aaron and said to them: “We have had enough of you! The whole assembly is holy, all of them, and Jehovah is in their midst. Why, then, should you exalt yourselves above the congregation of Jehovah?" Num.16:3.