Evacuated

1 hour ago, Witness said:

will not “pass away” until the last of the generation receive either a reward or punishment

"by no means" doesn't sit well with this.

1 hour ago, Witness said:

“this generation” as already being fulfilled

???not yet I think???

1 hour ago, Witness said:

Surely, their grappling over this concept should help us to discern which “seed” they may belong to.

Now this is definitely getting...dodgy??

Compare 2Cor. 8:2

4 hours ago, Reo Raifha said:

This weeks mid-week meeting mentions the "two families" in Jeremiah

and this is quite clearly explained in the Watchtower with reference to the context:

*** w07 3/15 p. 11 par. 4 Highlights From the Book of Jeremiah ***
What are “the two families” spoken of here? One is the royal family through the line of King David, and the other, the priestly family of the descendants of Aaron. With the destruction of Jerusalem and Jehovah’s temple, it appeared that Jehovah had rejected these two families and would no longer have a kingdom over the earth or have his worship revived.

Paralleling this scripture with the discussion in Ezekiel regarding the "two sticks" seems to be mostly inappropriate, save the general principle regarding the unity enjoyed by those who serve Jehovah, regardless of family, status, role in service etc.

What you have highlighted however, is the vitally important need to use the most up to date tools available to us at this time. I had noticed adjustments to these cross-references but not really considered the significance of this in a doctorinal setting. Thanks for doing this. Someone may be inclined to research the changes in cross references at some time and hopefully publish them. It won't be me, but I would definitely review a such a list of these with interest.

I am giving a positive reputation to your post for this one fact alone.

With regard to doctorinal ripples due to the adjustment in understanding the "Babylonish captivity", I am confident any adjustments to our understanding will be clarified in due time, and will make complete sense once that is done. 

11 minutes ago, Micah Ong said:

@Eoin Joyce  Yes the Governing Body

11 minutes ago, Micah Ong said:

Ok thanks for the clarification

Wow! Whatever happened to you? These are the only relevant parts of your response. I can understand your withdrawal. Sorry to have touched such a raw nerve! 

1 hour ago, Micah Ong said:

I really can't understand what your saying

??? You are saying that the Governing Body (presumably? or did you mean all JWs that get things wrong? Including yourself obviously) doesn't list all it's previous failings in the Kingdom Rule book. (Did I get that right?). I was responding to that statement.

http://www.snopes.com/jehovahs-witness-russia-trump-asylum/

http://www.snopes.com/jehovahs-witness-russia-trump-asylum/

2 hours ago, Micah Ong said:

you don't hear about it in the God's Kingdom Rules book.

Yeah. They're just like that apostle Peter they keep banging on about! Birds of a feather!

2 hours ago, Jay Witness said:

what, exactly, is the difference between a "leader" vs. "one who is taking the lead"?.

In terms of the Christian congregation, compare 2Cor.5:20.

Or: 

deputy (noun): a person who is appointed to undertake the duties of a superior in the superior's absence

55 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

They are surely examples that show there is no total control.

56 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

questions that came in from brothers and sisters afraid to mention their belief to the local elders.

I am amazed to hear these stories. I shudder to think how these people would survive if they didn't have the truth. Surely reasoning and extending on Ps 4:4 and James 1:15 shows we have freedom of thought but are accountable for actions. That seem's like ABC to me???

But then, maybe I shouldn't be surprised. Hearing the recent Gilead graduate relate how they endeavoured to go through baptism questions with 30+ candidates at a time in Russia.................................

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

• Is it OK to believe that all the creative days were not exactly 7,000 years long?
• Is it OK to believe in 587 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem?
• And, my favorite, "Is it OK to believe in evolution, at least while I'm still in school?" 

Did these come just from the US?

My favourite is:

*** w62 5/15 p. 320 Questions From Readers ***
● Is there any objection to a dedicated Christian minister’s belonging to a nudist group or living at a nudist camp or resort?—M. D., United States.
 

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I know a regular pioneer who believes in evolution. She has admitted it to my daughter and another JW friend, who are her best friends. (It was also obvious from schoolwork they did in high school together.) ...[edited to remove second example]...

What's the purpose of these examples?

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

persons on the Governing Body even recommended that beliefs we keep to ourselves should also be grounds for disfellowshipping.

Minority Report precogs needed to make this work.

14 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

obeservations

Did I say that?? obviously a lack of control there!

Given to me recently. Ex. 6:2-3. This is taken from the Bible in the Welsh language (prob.William Morgan ver.) and is useful in Wales, (or anywhere that Welsh is spoken), for the May 2017 special campaign in the Welsh language. It impresses non-Welsh speakers as well.

3 hours ago, Anna said:

I think she means would he now, as a 10 year old, understand the implications if at some point in the future he decided to disassociate.

Got it, but I mean, who on dedication and baptism is considering disassociation and disfellowshipping? Maybe those who get married while planning their separation and divorce???

3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

It is a marked difference between leadership in the JW congregation versus leadership in the outside religious world.

Agree entirely. The video stream on the situation in the Russian courtroom was quite revealing in that aspect. The general atmosphere amongst the brothers there and, markedly, the treatment accorded to Bro Sanderson was notable. Compare visually the pompous rigmarole carried out on visits from Christendom "dignitaries" to the friendly and unpretentious camraderie demonstrated. Even with the sound turned off, the difference was stark.

I think there is confusion about this term and what it implies.

Risking accusations of semantic quibbling, I have to say that disassociation is just not the same as non-association (or formerly associated).

The term disassociate, or more commonly, dissociate, when applied to one's former affiliation to a group, seems to imply a formal separating or severing of a relationship formerly held, rather like a divorce. This might include publicly severing one's former connection with that group, perhaps going as far as formally renouncing aims and objectives once held in common. Or, perhaps, engaging in a practice so diametrically opposed to those aims and objectives as to indicate what may not have been verbally stated.

To drift away from association with a group, for whatever reason, be it cooling of common interest, personal preference, time contraints, or a particular unresolved grievance involving other group members, carries a far less antagonistic stance toward the group as a whole.

In any event, the former action, that of disassociation, whilst possibly preceded by the latter action, drifting away, has far more consideration and deliberation involved, a rejection of fundemental tenets perhaps once held dear, perhaps a militant stand against activity once zealously engaged in, an awareness of the dramatic change in relationship to the group subject to this action, and a recognition of consequences effecting the relationship the disassociatee might have formely enjoyed with those who choose to remain group members.

The latter, drifting away, is more focussed on one's personal preferences or activity schedule, and whilst there may be personality issues involved, the group as a whole is not "tarred with the same brush" as it were. Also, a denial of the groups validity does not take place. In fact, there may sometimes be expressions like " It just wasn't for me, I couldn't keep up with such and such (requirement or activity)", or "I know it is a good organisation on the whole but I just couldn't accept this or that (practice or person or experience)"

Thus it can be seen that the deliberate action of "disassociation" carries far more weighty and considered commitment than the shifting of goals and interests accompanying the process of "drifting away". Although both result in state of separation from former associates, the relationship resulting from either is entirely dissimilar. 

Looks like the topic is already under discussion as well here:

8 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

But would a naive, true-believer 10-year old really absorb the implications of how the 'disassociation rules' would affect them personally once they were dunked?

Would a naive, true-believer 10-year old  'disassociate' themselves? At what age would  someone be likely to "disassociate" themselves? It's not a rubber stamping excercise you know.

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Just who are the officials? In Russia, they are the Russian Orthodox Church. In America, they are the Evangelicals. Post something about the faith in their hearing and you will be flooded with outcries of "cult" due to rejection of their favorite doctrines. Yet, unless I am very much mistaken, the two official versions would not get along. In fact, I suspect they would hate each others' guts, though for the purpose of maligning Jehovah's Witnesses they might form a temporary 'best buddy' relationship.

Love it 

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

depends on which parts of the Bible Christians are able to live by

I don't understand what this means.

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

your observations in your own congregation may not be representative of other people's personal experiences.

Quite true. Although this goes for everyone in every congregation (and everyone else) unless some kind of controlled survey is done.

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

anyone who doesn't formally leave, and still maintains relationships with JW relatives and friends, has the congregation's judicial 'sword of Damocles' suspended above their head.

There is an element of truth in this because "once a JW always a JW" is a reality of life. However, there is nothing particular sinister or unusual about someone who enjoyed a privilege receiving a sanction from the community that bestowed it, if they behave in a way that demonstrates disrespect (in the eyes of that community) for that privilege. For some examples see here: Lost privilege 

"Having cake and eating it" is an unfortunate metaphor that is echoed here. At least John Lennon had integrity, even if you don't agree with all he stood for. (Notice a hook here).

On another note, I have even known of unbelieving partners or parents to suffer discriminatory treatment because of the association a relative may have or have had with Jehovah's Witnesses. And that not just under a Nazi type regime.

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

I don't see the connection between allowing one's kids to attend college and poorly 'presiding over one's household.' It's the opposite.

You haven't thought about this statement although I understand what you mean by it. There could very well be an issue of poor family management in connection with college attendance. It will depend entirely on the circumstances. What is wrong is to say that college attendance and poor family management are synonymous in all cases.

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

But the Org disapproves of him doing that and may call into question his qualifications for eldership - even though there is no scriptural basis to do so.

This is rubbish regardless of missapplied Soc letters to elders. All elders qualifications should be reviewed regularly. A negative review where "children" are seeking higher education will depend on the attitude and conduct of those "children", and the same as regards the father.

My son-in-law went to college and gained a BA in an academic disciplne with absolutely no problems depite severe dyslexia. He then pioneered, and got married to my daughter. Then able to gain reasonable employment, he sought further vocational qualifications with success

He now is able to provide well for his family and serves as an elder. There were no sanctions imposed on any part of his family during this period.

But then, my observations may not be representative of other people's personal experiences.

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Jesus' earthly ministry was over in a flash. Christians generally have to spend their many decades of life making a living, raising families, paying the rent/mortgage, etc.

Perfectly valid pont here. I mean it's pretty clear that following in Jesus footseps just does not mean doing what he did. Otherwise there would be literally millions of people hanging on stakes everywhere if they wanted to be true Christians.

I think @Anna just meant that there are sacrifices involved if want wishes to follow a dedicated Christian course. This may well include the pursuit of a secular vocation and the academic path to that goal. Paul's estimation of such things as " refuse" was all very well for one who "wore the T-shirt" as it were, it is true. But, nevertheless, many have made that sacrifice willingly and have not regretted it. Likewise there are many (like my son-in-law) who have done otherwise, not regretted it, and more importantly, have not been sanctioned for it.

However, in respect of the original post, and given that my view may well be unrepresentative, personal obeservations, I still feel that to say that Jehovah's Witnesses are subjected to ‘total control’ is......."total baloney"!

12 hours ago, JW Insider said:

They also claimed that the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses is indeed a prophet -- and not just a "prophet-like" organization. There has not yet been a direct retraction of this claim. However it has not been repeated since the 1980's as far as I remember. 

I think this has been discussed elsewhere but anyway, to repeat, the role of a prophet along with their prophesying served more in ancient times than to provide messages from Jehovah in the form of statements in advance of his intentions or requirements.

True prophets also stood as rallying points for Jehovah's worship as currently practiced and all that included, in the face of trends to dilute, pollute, or abandon true worship.

In that way the prophet-like comparison can still be made. With the Scripture complete and available for the present, there is no need for "prophets" serving in the manner of ancient times, or for that matter in the way of those in the 1st Century with the gift of prophecy. (1Cor 13:8). However, the Governing Body serves in a prophet-like role in upholding Jehovah's standards and in proclaimimg his revealed will and judgements in the midst of an ungodly world. How far that analogy can be extended to include those who support them in that God-assigned activity is a matter for future discussion.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

increase of at least 3% in worldwide activity in a specific country due to a campaign to encourage more publishers to join the rank of pioneers in that country is not a Bible-based prediction.

That's where we disagree. The detail is immaterial to me. This is Jehovah's people doing their conscientous best to obey the command to preach the good news, and make (and keep) disciples. The fact that myriads would respond in a godless world is indeed a Bible-based prediction and in part forms the drive for engaging in that work with such vigour. 

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Saying that the end of this system of things is expected within a few short years or even months after 1975...and the rest..(my italics)

Now you are just banging a very old and tuneless drum. We have long established that predictions without inspiration are just guesswork. The detail will always be subject to correction and real prophecy is only apparent as or after it is fulfilled. The key element here is to recognise we are at the dawn of the new order and to "keep close in mind" (speed up) Jehovah's day.

For those were captivated by this '75 speculation (including some at the highest levels) some 45 years ago (not me I can say thanks to mature assistance at the time), let them bleat. Any maintaining a real focus on being 'the sort of people they ought to be' have suffered no real loss in missing out a bit on some of what the apostle Paul called "refuse".

I think we are still muddling prophecy and prediction.

43 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I'm not considering these types of mundane predictions to be part of the Watch Tower's track record on Bible-based prediction

Well now, that's where we'll part company. I view the preaching work as the ALL important activity at this time and any plans, forecasts, developments, arrangements, in fact, the whole 9 yards, related to it as being inseparable from Bible prophecy. As the angel puts it at Revelation 19:10 :   "For the witness concerning Jesus is what inspires prophecy.”

As an example to affirm what I mean by the application of the term prediction according to the common definition as discussed above, there is a reference in the Feb 15 1943 Watchtower, p63-4. Quoting from Bro.N.Knorr's opening address to the first class of the Watchtower Bible (then called) College of Gilead, the following was said:

"There are many places where the witness concerning the Kingdom has not been given to a great extent. The people living in these places are in darkness, held there by religion. In some of these countries, where there are a few witnesses, it is noted that the people of good-will hear readily and would associate themselves with the Lord’s organization, if instructed properly. There must be hundreds and thousands more that could be reached if there were more laborers in the field. By the Lord’s grace, there will be more......................We believe that, true to it's name,a "heap of wltness" will go forth from this place to all parts of the world and that such witness will stand as a monument to the glory of God and that can never be destroyed."

Bro Knorr's use of the expression "hundreds and thousands" might be seized upon by critics as a gross underestimate of the effect of the Gilead missionary program over the years, but it has to be taken in context. This rather archaic idiom,used today mainly for cake decoration, was seemingly of more common usage in the 19th and the earlier part of the 20th Centuries, and would be entirely appropriate to Bro Knorr's vocabulary, (b.1905) and aged about 37 when delivering this discourse. It simply means: "an indefinite but emphatically large number". This is quite in harmony with the idea of an "estimate" or "prediction" being "a rough calculation".

So, if one considers the facts. At the time of the first Gilead missionary class, there was a war raging across much of the world. Despite this 109,794 were able to report their field service. These included the 100 initial students of the Gilead College, now graduated and in the field. Compare the number of publishers for 1943 to the most recent world figure of average number of publishers for 2016 - 8,132,358. More interestingly, 260 publishers were reporting field service from 22 congregations located in a number of countries reporting directly to the US Branch in Brooklyn in 1943. The number of publishers in those same countries combined in 2016 was at least 467,000 reporting on average.

Just one more example is Japan. When, in 1951, 40 Gilead missionaries and 200 local publishers attended a convention in Tokyo, Bro Knorr then said that he looked forward to the time when there would be so many native Japanese proclaimers of the Kingdom that it would be hard to search out the missionaries among them. The last count in Japan of the averagie of those publishing in 2016 was 213,818 .

Even without an exhaustive analysis on these figures, it is patently clear to me that the expectation of increase in those responding to the Kingdom message as expressed by Bro.Knorr in representing the Governing Body, adequately fits the definition of the word "predict" and has, unmistakably, been fulfilled.

57 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

A prediction, in reference to the Watch Tower Society, would be any time that the WTS has published a statement or estimate about a specific thing (or consequence of something) that would happen during a specified range of time in the future. Whenever such a prediction has been made, has it ever happened as predicted? In other words, have the Watch Tower publications ever yet made a prediction that came true?

There is a danger of become too rigorous in our expectation of detail here. The common definition of "predict" uses the term "estimate", so with this in mind, would we not expect the Governing Body to "roughly calculate or judge the value, number, quantity, or extent of" "a specified thing" or "consequence of something" in connection with an aspect of Biblical teaching?

Also, I think from a doctrinal perspective and in spite of past views to the contrary, we can now safely dispense with the idea that the Governing Body serves as a prophet in the same sense as the inspired prophets of old. And that the application (including estimates) they approve at present would in any way be comparable to the prophets' inspired utterances.

6 hours ago, Queen Esther said:

Are  we  JW  or  world  people ?  sometimes  I  am  really  wondering

I understood this to be an open forum which means that anyone, Witness or otherwise, has access to read and comment if abiding by the protocols. Is that not so?

That might explain the necessity to engage with some of the statements made in a rationally argued and impersonal manner. In the context of "fake news", which Witness and non-Witness alike are prone to picking up on and sharing without crtical caution, I deem it a duty to "debunk" these myths in as thorough manner as reasonably possible, if  I become aware of such matters.

I welcome the opportunity to engage in exchanges of this nature. This forum serves as a stimulus for research, and a good training ground for sound reasoning.

Of course, it is always necessary to bear in mind Scriptural counsel such as:

(2 Timothy 2:23) Further, reject foolish and ignorant debates, knowing that they produce fights.

(1 Peter 3:15) But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect.

(Colossians 4:6) Let your words always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should answer each person.

On 4/27/2017 at 2:58 AM, bruceq said:

175,000 PRISONERS OF CONSCIENCE

Too true for the Russian Federation. BUT the WT Aug 2017 says:

Today, there are over 400,000 publishers in the countries that were once part of the Soviet Union! 

What Jehovah has accomplished already through Jesus in that window of freedom since 1991!