Evacuated

4 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

so then what is the point of this article?

To encourage Christians to appreciate the need to pay what they vow. This includes more than dedication. At a age when disloyalty characterises human society (2Tim.3:2), this would seem to be "food at the proper time".

5 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

The publication, produced by the organization, it saying that a baptism is valid, even if you don't like it. 

????? Actually, the article says "There is no way to undo a dedication vow, taking back what we promised God". Ecc.5:4-6. And to my understanding, as the dedication vow is between Jehovah and the individual making the dedication, well, that's where the dedication issue remains. 

Now, if a person wants to use "invalid dedication" as an excuse for engaging in a sinful course of life, bringing reproach on both Jehovah and the Christian congregation, that's a whole different ball game. Their course will need handling as a judicial matter and a decision made accordingly. That could include a determination on the validity of their dedication as noted in the Watchtower you refer to.

If a person wants to use that same excuse as a justification for no longer engaging in preaching and disciple-making or attending Christian meetings, well, attempts would be made (as previously posted) in harmony with Gal.6:1.

Humans are free to take whatever action they choose to take with regard to Jehovah's requirements. They have to also accept the consequences of the actions that they take.

10 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

¹² So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.

This is the key to discussion on this kind of a topic. Jehovah is the one through His son Christ Jesus, who will decide on a person's capability of making a dedication, the validity of that dedication and, whether they are living up to that dedication. Pro.16:2; Pro.21:2. And this should inspire confidence as we can be certain that Jehovah, “the Judge of all the earth,” will always do what is right, “for all his ways are justice.”—Gen. 18:25; Deut. 32:4.

If an individual "changes their mind" about dedication, then that is a matter between themselves and Jehovah. No one would really know this had occurred unless the person actually told others. They might exhibit a spiritual problem in their behaviour without engaging in a serious practice of sin. Christian elders obviously have a duty to assist a person spiritually if they become aware that an individual has decided to follow the disastrous course of reneging on their dedication. Gal.6:1. But in itself, it is a matter between the individual and Jehovah. If that person becomes involved in serious sin. elders have to take action and have additional responsibilties in keeping the congregation clean in this regard, (1Cor.5:12-13) . An unrepentant practicer of serious sin must be disfellowshipped. 

However, none of this would undicate necessarily that they had "changed their mind" about dedication, or sought to "undedicated" themselves, only that they had failed to live up to the terms of that dedication. And Jehovah has provide a means through Christ's ransom for those who sin, even though dedicated, to repent and return to Him. Surely that is the thought at Gal.3:13. 

As for an age limit on baptism, this has had lengthy discussion elsewhere on the forum, for example: 

8 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

And Jesus' words "a spirit does not have flesh and bones just as you see that I have" - how would the disciples have understood this? 

Notrhing to be afraid of. The Jesus they knew and loved was alive. No confusion possible due to his appearing in a totally physical form.

8 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

That was not what I was suggesting, of course. I had in mind the term 'Mighty God' - as in Isa. 10:21 and Jer. 32:18 - applying to the 'only Potentate.' 

Quite happy with this as well, but not as applying to the 'only Potentate' of 1 Tim.6:15. Obviously both Jesus and Jehovah are 'Mighty Gods'.

8 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

It looks like your next response is one of 'throwing in the towel' 

So you see yourself as a 'boxer delivering a beating'? Poor basis for a discussion of this nature if so.

8 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

saying that holy spirit will have to reveal to me the 'truth' as you see it

I think I am saying that from your responses,  this has already taken place.

With regard to your three questions, I do not understand the term being "declared righteous" to have degrees. As for the destiny of Christians on resurrection, the subject has been "done to death" in this thread. It appears to be a take it or leave it situation Question 2: no change. Question 3: Already addressed.

22 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

it is I myself

These were Jesus words. The disciples present would have understood that it was indeed actually him, not a vision or some other type of manifestation. The form in which he presented himself was appropriate for the occasion.

22 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

To be clear on who 'only Potentate' refers to when writing my comment.

Well I certainly agree with the term "Mighty God" (Is. 9:6) applying to the 'only Potentate'.

22 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

How does Jesus' response to Peter's conclusion about Jesus being the Christ help answer my question? Or are you suggesting there was some divine revelation in post-biblical times?

Jesus words at Matt 16:17 can apply to any divinely provided insight into the true meaning of Scripture. For me, this differs from the revelation of new or additional material which has not occurred since the first Century. That is why I quoted Jesus words as a having a comparative rather than a direct application.

You obviously understand the concept of an earthy and heavenly resurrection as you are able to explain it quite adequately and with reference to the texts used to support that understanding. Whether you choose to accept or reject that understanding of the resurrections is a matter for you (or anyone else) on a  personal basis. As was the identification of Jesus as the Christ at Peter's time on earth. Peter chose to accept that identification. Others did not, although they no doubt could easily recount the events and explain the significance Christians of the time attached to them.

So what I am suggesting is that the correct understanding and application of Scripture is a divine revelation, attributable to the operation of God's Spirit. As for that matter is the resultant faith generated in those who accept the divine insight and make it their own. (Gal.5:22). However, I recognise that 'faith is not a possession of all people' (2Thess.3:2). This includes those who may well have an awareness of the knowledge, understanding and application of matters providing a basis for the excercise of faith in those so inclined, but who chose not to do so themselves.

23 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

But continuing this line of discussion will lead us too far off topic

Agreed and as I already suggested earlier.

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

How would the disciples have understood his words in Luke 24:39

That the Jesus they knew and loved had indeed been resurrected. Jesus exhibited the same spirit that he displayed at John 16:12-13. No need to subject his already buffeted disciples to terrifying manifestations such as those experienced earlier by Daniel when confronted with a spirit being (Da.10:8-9). Jesus did not find it necessary to overwhelm them with proof that he had been resurrected in the manner required to move the insolent Saul as later recorded at Acts 9:3-9.

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Jesus was a man who, by the call of God, lived again - Acts 2:22-24, 1 Tim. 2:5.

Agreed, but would qualify this with a reference to 1 Cor.15:45 which says of Jesus: "The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." This is not what Job had in mind.

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

As for all the other examples in the Bible of resurrections and the conclusions you draw from these: As you know, these people did not enjoy a resurrection like Christ's.

Agreed. That is the conclusion I draw.

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

His resurrection was something new, and Christian believers who died before his Presence would have to wait until his Presence before they could enjoy a resurrection like Christ's.

Agreed. However, pre-Christian believers will not enjoy a resurrection like Christ's.
 

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

"only Potentate" (Mighty God)

With regard to 1Tim.6:15-16, I know this is disputed. I am happy to read this as a contrast with earthly rulers and therefore as referring to the glorified Jesus in the heavens. (Not sure why you have Mighty God in parenthesis here?)

However, your proposed view does not change the understanding of 1John 3:2 where Christians who will  "see him just as he is" will of necessity be unable to do so if resurrected as humans, flesh and blood.

10 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

It is not obvious or clear to me from scripture that there are two sets of true Christian believers in this 'Gospel Age' that have different destinies

This is patently obvious. But...it is clear to me! "Funny old world" someone said to me yesterday when they realised that a lifetime of Bible reading had not led them to discern even that God had a personal name.

10 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

how did two different destinies for true Christian believers come about?

Compare Jesus words at Matt.16:17:

"flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father in the heavens did"

6 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Of course.

Well then, Jesus appearances in an apparently human form were "positive proofs" to his disciples of the fact of his resurrection and not the nature of his resurrection. There are a number of examples in scripture of spirits (angels) appearing in a tangible human form in order to carry out assignments. (And apparently unauthorised examples of the same).

The reality of a resurrection for humans in human, physical form was not a new concept to faithful worshippers of Jehovah, because of the resurrections already recorded in scripture. Even before these, Job spoke of the possibility of a man living again after "compulsory service" in the grave at the call of God. (Job 14:15). Interestingly, when Jesus resurrected Jairus' daughter, he ordered her to be given food, a very physical provision. And circumstantially, Luke the pysician's record of this miracle has no hint of a spiritual aspect to this resurrection. Martha's faith in Lazarus being resurrected on the last day was based on these examples in part, so I cannot see her as having a concept other than that of a physical, earthly resurrection of humans in human form. This would have been considerably reinforced by what she then witnesed in connection with her brother, Lazarus.

It does not seem feasable (to me) that Paul would need to discuss at length the nature of the body provided for those resurrected if the topic involved being resurrected in a fleshly human form when so much prior evidence already existed for this kind of resurrection. (And to which he did not refer). His discussion involved a resurrection to spirit life in the heavens, with an appropriately provided body and quality of life suitable for such a destiny, and for which a body of flesh and blood would be obsolete.

The description of the glorified Jesus in the heavens at 1Tim.6:16 indicates that "no man can see" him and this is appropriate for one who "is the image of the invisible God" Col.1:15. So, for those who are described, in connection with Jehovah, as destined to "see him just as he is", then their having the privilege of also seeing the glorified Jesus just as he is would seem a logical conclusion. This would not be an experience for any man of flesh and blood, resurrected or otherwise.

As stated before, 'every knee in heaven, on earth, and under the ground'  will bend in the name of the Christ eventually. Ph.2:10. So, all humans will be Christian not least in the sense that they will all have benefited from the ransom paid by Jesus and his tasting "death for everyone" Heb.2:9 and their having excercised the requisite faith in that provision. John 3:16. It is obvious from all that is discussed in the Scriptures that a heavenly resurrection hope is held out to some of those Christians. It is also clear that "the inhabited earth to come" that is subject to Jesus will be inhabited in part by humans like Job who looked forward to an end to their compulsory service in the grave (or Sheol), and this by means of a physical, earthly resurrection. 

1 hour ago, Shiwiii said:

blanket argument

Blankets are for those who sleep. And quite frankly this lack of sense is putting me to sleep, so pardon me if I turn in on this illogical argument!

2 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

why must you toe the company line?

Because I wish to? Or does personal choice not figure in your universe?

21 hours ago, Witness said:

I am sorry for appearing presumptuous over your circumstances.  It wasn’t my intention, and this is a genuine apology

Thanks. No offence taken.

21 hours ago, Witness said:

Are the use of these funds, transparent?  Or could they be lumped into one category called “preaching work”?  Could you direct me to a complete breakdown of donation use that happens at the top?

You'd need to look to the original researchers for a clear definition. I would take it as expenditure in support of the actual preaching activity, nothing else.

21 hours ago, Witness said:

Do you notice that you are comparing the Watchtower to other earthly religions?

These are not my observations. I am just providing context to the Pew survey marking JW's as predominating low income categorization. We accomplish far more for less money than those higher income denominations which accomplish very little for a lot of money.

My reference to public opinion on who is associated with proclaiming Gods name and kingdom is drawn from 45 years personal experience of gathering that public opinion from people of all religious persuasion, including many Catholics.

On 12/12/2016 at 17:44, Shiwiii said:

I believe the Catholic Church is spirit-directed in that they allow their deliberations to be guided by Jehovah's inspired word

"the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, ""does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence""  http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm

On 12/12/2016 at 17:44, Shiwiii said:

I believe the Jewish Rabbi's are spirit-directed in that they allow their deliberations to be guided by Jehovah's inspired word

"So you have made the word of God invalid because of your tradition.  You hypocrites, Isaiah aptly prophesied about you when he said:  ‘This people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far removed from me. It is in vain that they keep worshipping me, for they teach commands of men as doctrines.’” Matt.15:6-9.

On 12/12/2016 at 17:44, Shiwiii said:

I believe the Hindu's are spirit-directed in that they allow their deliberations to be guided by Jehovah's inspired word

 @JW Insider has adequately answered this claim.

On 12/12/2016 at 17:44, Shiwiii said:

I believe the Islamic Cleric's are spirit-directed in that they allow their deliberations to be guided by Jehovah's inspired word

Are these the Islamic Clerics you refer to? 

ulema - the body of Mullahs (Muslim scholars trained in Islam and Islamic law) who are theinterpreters of Islam's scien-ces and doctrines and laws and the chief guarantors of continuity in the spiritual and intellectual history of the Islamic commmunity,

Whatever, I really don't know how you work out who these are in view of this chart alone????

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#/media/File:Islam_branches_and_schools.svg

Also statements like this lead me to doubt the veracity of your claim.: "However, the Muslims, do not believe that the Bible, in its present form with all of the different books that it contains, represents the original scriptures revealed by Allah."

http://talktoislam.com/39/do-muslims-believe-in-the-bible

23 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

Why then are jws forced to believe the statements/doctrines made or face disfellowshipping?

No one is disfellowshipped for their beliefs.....as far as I know.

4 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

The Gov Body are not like Bible writers who got it right even when they didn't understand what they were writing.

I would like to add that inspired Bible writers revealed new things that had not before been mentioned. The spirit-directed Gov Body only explain or apply that which has already been wiritten. 

8 hours ago, Jay Witness said:

I believe this is their quote about themselves you are referring to

Yes that's it. It's not so much the quote, it's your question. I can't see a contradiction between being terming the Gov Body as spirit-directed, whilst they are not "inspired" (in the sense of 2Tim 3:16).

I mean if a traffic cop directs a vehicle, the driver may (or may not) follow those directions. He may not be aware of them, might misunderstand, or might even ignore them. Or he can follow them exactly. Whatever, the driver makes the choice and the outcome will confirm he made the right choice. 

I believe the Gov Body are spirit-directed in that they allow their deliberations to be guided by Jehovah's inspired word, look to Jehovah to guide their thinking where understanding needs clarification, and follow the spirit-inspired direction to preach the good news world-wide thus co working with Jehovahs angels. Their continuing good results in this indicates that they are indeed following the direction of Jehovah by means of his spirit. That seems to be the thinking behind the Feb 2017 WT quote above.

Now, if the traffic cop got into the vehicle and drove it himself, then that would be a different story. The vehicle would go the way he directs because he wiould be driving it. That illustrates being "inspired". The Gov Body are not like Bible writers who got it right even when they didn't understand what they were writing.

So for me, the wording of the baptism question remains valid.

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Dogs are never mentioned in the Bible in a positive manner either

Come on....Matt.15:26-27

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

I was thinking more of Luke 24:36-43. 

Do you think this is an example of what Luke referred to later at Acts 1:3?

@Ann O'Maly. Nice embroidery. No difference to outcome mind you.

44 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Luke 24:39

Don't be silly Ann. You know this was done for the benefit of the disciples. They were not in the heavenly realm at the time.

47 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

One can have a 'heavenly' (heaven-sourced, spirit-generated) body without having to be in the location of heaven to enjoy it.

This is interesting. Are you referring to Gen 6:2?

41 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

You meant 1 Cor. 15, of course.

Oops Yes....Thanks!  

44 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Are they contemplating a resurrection to heaven?

Yes. 1Cor 14:44;49;50;53.

47 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Or just the resurrection per se?

No. 1Cor 14:44;49;50;53.

5 hours ago, Witness said:

I feel that perhaps you need to get out more, Eoin

This has to be one of the most opinionated responses I have ever experienced on this forum although you likely don't mean to give that impression. You have absolutely no idea of what my experience of congregations has been or, for that matter, where I have had those experiences.

5 hours ago, Witness said:

Pew Research

Yes I have seen this chart. It is open to a considerable amount of skepticism. The sample was only 208 people. Most Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs) I know do not participate in surveys. What is the criteria for one's claim to affiliation? An alternative factor could be the emphasis JWs place on spiritual over secular activities. I.E. many witnesses actually choose part-time or lower paid employment to free them for spiritual activity.

On the results alone I am pleased to see that JWs are separated which is always a good thing. As for them being bottom of the table this goes to show how much we accomplish from such an apparently low income base.  For example, The Journal of Contemporary Religion (Vol. 12, No2, 1997) noted that in the year 1993, the combined efforts of the Protestant Churches of US and Canada spent in excess of $2 Billion to support the work of 41,142 overseas missionaries. JWs spent $45 Million on supporting the work of 3,279,270 in the same period. A similar story would be told every year. As for results, which religious group would first come to mind as associated with God's name "Jehovah" or the biblical term "the kingdom of God"?

And on a strategy level alone, after leaving school at 16, I have spent my life in the bottom 2 sectors of the income table, yet was never without work or income, raised 5 children, own my own home (above average standard and mortgage-free), serve in full time ministry, organised finances to not now require an earned income whilst pioneering. I consider myself to be a fairly "typical"JW. Oh, of course I don't smoke, gamble, abuse alcohol or other substances and am not locked into a trend-pursuing lifestyle or other resource-draining indulgence. So, I wonder if these factors are a consideration in drawing conclusions based on comparisons related to this table?

6 hours ago, Witness said:

Many years ago, I remember a family so poor that the couple lived in a tent with their five children.  The sister begged the elders for help, stating her family was hungry because her husband (not a ministerial servant at the time) was having trouble getting work.  This area was very depressed economically, but the elders turned her away saying it was her husband’s job to provide food.  I would not have known any of this if she had not come to my house in tears.  How many actually knew her desperate situation in the congregation?

This is an extraordinary and tragic account despite the lack of detail. Presumably, although you don't record it, you were able to provide needed assistance to this family yourself, hopefully with the help of others whom you would have surely alerted to the situation. I would like to know what happened in connection with the woefully inadequate response of the "elders" you describe in this scenario. You must have been living in a rather deprived area, or indeed country, at that time.

I am glad to say that such a situation just would not occur in the area in which I live. And indeed, not in any congregation with which I have been involved.....................ever!

I have already directed you to information describing the higher level organised response to physical need in the congregation worldwide. And I am glad that arrangements on this scale are centrally coordinated by Jehovah's Witnesses organisationally, because neither I nor my local congregation could do this effectively. I am confident that the contributions to the Worlwide work are appropriately managed with due priority given to the various areas for which material resources are required. I am sure the $236 million (2015) spent on caring for the fulltime workers worldwide represents only a fraction of centrally contributed funds, to say nothing of the time and materials freely donated by all of Jehovah's people involved in such Christian activities.

This of course does not account for money and resources that are freely given by individuals in assisting their brothers and sisters locally, should they become aware of a need in harmony with Pro.3:27. We rarely hear detail of these actions unless we are directly involved in such kind acts either as giving or receiving. And rightly so, in harmony with Jesus words at Matt.6:1-4. I could list many examples of acts of kindness to fellow Christians that I am aware of or have been a party to over the years, but these are not matters for public broadcast. And neither are the needs of those who for one reason or another fall on hard times.

Jesus said that "you always have the poor with you". And it seems he maintained a fund which included resources to be given to the poor, of which treachorous Judas availed himself. (John 12:1-8). But nowhere in scripture do we find recorded specific examples of donations of that money to any needy individuals although examples of Jesus genorous spirit abound, such as his feeding of multitudes when necessary.

Obviously, specific needs requiring a more organised response locally are sometimes required, such as that recorded at Acts 6:1-4; 1Cor.16:1-4; or 1Tim.5:9. And if today, such arrangements are warranted due to some serious incident on a local level, this is coordinated appropriately with whatever level of needed publicity as I am sure you are aware if you followed the link I supplied earlier.

However, much Christian giving will be of the type exemplified by Dorcas whose example is recorded at Acts 9:36. I have met Christians with this spirit in my years of serving Jehovah, and they are an inspiration to all who associate with them, not least those who benefit from their kindness. These ones don't need public notification to prompt their deeds of mercy as their eyes and hearts are alert to their fellow Christians well-being. And just as their deeds do not go unnoticed by their heavenly father (compare Acts 9:39-40), the plight of those serving Jehovah who experience material difficulties do not go unnoticed either. Compare Ps.37:25.

I hope you now find yourself in less spiritually impoverished surroundings that that which you described in your scenario.

11 hours ago, Witness said:

What happens in entire congregations that are poor and can barely feed their own family?

This is a strange question for one apparently aware of Scriptural principles in relation to these matters? Do you have a specific circumstance in mind? And by that I mean where?, when?, who?, etc.

On 12/5/2016 at 02:05, Queen Esther said:

I see, yes....  will remove it !

Thanks for posting the correct link. 

Link doesn't work

6 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

How does 1 Cor. 15 support the idea of two different destinies for Christians?

Don't think it does directly.?? Much of Paul's discussion in this chapter appears to be dealing with a lack of understanding and faith on the part of those who at least were contemplating the prospect of a heavenly resurrection.

This is an interesting discussion, but I think it is going off topic and seems to be veering into a debate on whether the resurrection hope includes two destinies. Whilst the distinction regarding the various statements regarding God declaring men righteous has a bearing on this, I feel the link is getting tenuous and we are venturing into @The Librarian nudge territory.

Maybe someone would formulate an appropriate topic?

7 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Is this a call/ invitation to heaven, or a call/ invitation from heaven?

I'd see it as a call from heaven to go to heaven. 1 Cor 15:48-49 etc.

7 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

When Jesus gave his Sermon on the Mount, was his believing audience composed of those who had two different destinies or just one destiny?

At that time they were all destined for the Grave I would have thought. Ecc. 9:5, 10.