Evacuated

8 hours ago, Witness said:

Since serving God with our mind is now removed in the new song, what does this tell us?  Is it more important to serve God with our money, as if that is part of whole-souled worship?

I can understand how someone completely ignorant of the content Gods's Word might draw this erroneous conclusion on the strength of comparing these lines from one of the 151 songs in the book, “Sing Out Joyfully” to Jehovah.

However, for the benefit of those genuinely making this error, Proverbs 3:9 shows the thought to be completely in harmony with the encouragement provided in God's word to contribute materially to the advancement of true worship. It reads there, (in context), 

"Honor Jehovah with your valuable things, with the firstfruits of all your produce; 

Then your storehouses will be completely filled, And your vats will overflow with new wine."

Thanks @JWInsider and @ThePraeceptor for very helpful input.

For me, the expression by no means, and it's context, seems to imply a condition.

For example, either the generation may look as if it will pass away, hence the emphatic reassurance it will by no means pass away... or,

the generation will by no means pass away in that, at the time of reference, the generation will be so evidently present that it will be ummistakeable, i.e. not a dwindling remnant.

4 hours ago, ThePraeceptor said:

you want to overthink things and use some fantasy

I don't think I want to do that at all. But, point taken, and your reassurance that the Greek is a mere emphasis without further implication is useful and I shall bear it in mind when considering the context of the many other instances of this device.  

"That day and hour", of course, remains...... unknown. 

2 hours ago, ThePraeceptor said:

Just to be clear.

Getting there.

Now is this construction just for the sake of emphasis? Or could it be construed in an additional sense? The English expression, by no means, seems to convey more than just an emphasis that something will or will not take place. Would that be true of the Greek expression?

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

why not a "four-stage relay"?

That's a bit too loose because you are introducing a new concept here. You can have as many stages as you like in your race, but that's not the one I am looking at.

Actually, there are at least 10 teams in this race. But for the purpose of the illustration, (which is to illustrate the proposition we have been presented with), only 2 count because only 2 teams can span the full course with one interchange.

Since 2009 there has been a great deal of discussion around the concept of an "overlapping generation" in connection with Jesus words at Matt. 24:34.

I don't see anything particularly difficult about the idea myself. 

I mean, you have a two stage relay. Start point: 1914 CE on one end. Finish point: the "great tribulation" on the other end. The track between is the stream of time.

As it is impossible for one team of runners to span the distance from the start, 1914 CE, to the finish, the "great tribulation", there are two teams of "anointed" Christians. Starting the race, those who saw the year 1914 eventually meet up with those (born later) who will see the outbreak of the great tribulation. The baton is passed and the race completed by the second group.

The entire group are seen as the (anointed) generation of the last days in Jesus prophecy. Not really rocket science is it?

But, in all the discussion around this, I see a phrase in Jesus words at Matt 24:34 I find intriguing. He said that "this generation will by no means pass away"  (NWT)

Other translations render this differently, many saying simply "will not pass" or words to that effect. Why does the NWT render it in this particular manner?

3 hours ago, Jay Witness said:

next time you drink a glass of water with Triclorethelyne, trace elements of arsenic and fecal matter

Who knows what we all eat, drink, breathe, and whatever else in this rumor-ridden, pathetic excuse for a civilised society?

3 hours ago, Jay Witness said:

How exactly did they "clean up" decades worth of pollution to the land and aquifers?

Surely with your talent for digging you could find some information on this interesting topic? I know it would be a bit different from your usual area of expertise but your skills are presumably transferable?

3 hours ago, Jay Witness said:

"Thank you Lord for the crap I am about to ingest"....

...and I've ingested a fair bit from some of the posts on this site, but thanks still for the immunity from it's toxic effects that you have apparently granted me!"

C'mon @JayWitness, this is not up to your usual standard. Let's have some real news!

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

If you are arguing that wrong beliefs don't separate a true and sincere believer from God's love, then surely the same standard would apply to other Christian churches and their mistaken beliefs, would it not?

4 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

No argument here. Don't be ridiculous, of course sincere believers aren't separated from God's love. John 14:31;John 16:13.

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

What evidence do you have that this occurred in 1914?

Everything happening then and since.

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Alternative explanations

10 a penny.  I've seen some on this forum. Another one is at 2Pet.3:4. Anyway, We'll all be here if I'm wrong. 

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

How do you know what Satan thinks about publicity or if it aligns with Oscar Wilde's view? 

Oscar Wilde was a lot of things, but a mind-blinder he wasn't.

http://www.recordonline.com/article/20150608/NEWS/150609481

http://www.recordonline.com/article/20151214/NEWS/151219671

This seems to be fairly "old" news? Surely there has been an adequate clean up as mentioned in the second report which says:

" Watchtower is seeking unspecified reimbursement for the cost it has incurred in the cleanup and remediation. "

And wouldn't the planning authorities have had some input in verifying the site as fit for human occupation? 

On another note, regarding the dubious suggestions in the original post regarding spirit-direction on the project.:

Isn't Jehovah providing at least a part "ruined" earth (Rev.11:18) as an inheritance for the "meek" survivors of Armageddon? (Ps.37:10-11). And what about the billions of resurrected ones?(Acts 24:15) Surely an adequate clean-up of the environment will take place in order to safely accomdate the inhabitants of what will eventually be a paradise earth?(Ez.39:14; Is.35:1) And on that basis, is there any doubt that this future project will be spirit-directed?(Is.55:11).

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

@Eoin Joyce  The apostrophe in People's Pulpit [sic] was not the fault of Running Elk. I believe this was elderly Sister Kramer who, I think, was the last person at Bethel to proofread this book before its last printing.

WHITE MAN'S HEAD (STILL) ON FIRE

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

So far your certainty is based on wafer thin reasoning. Have you anything more substantial to present?

Your assessment of my certainty is rather presumptous, however, your choice of metaphor is rather unfortunate given your apparent intent. I am flattered by it.

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

2 Tim. 2:19 doesn't help answer the question 'how do you know Rev. 12:7-12 'actually' started its fulfillment in 1914?'

2 Tim 2:19 was cited in answer to your warning about "false Christs" and  is to reassure you that Jehovah knows those on His side in these issues of dispute as to who represents Him in the "last days" (as He has also known on occasions past).

Regarding the attempts of these "false Christs" to mislead His people, which are referenced  in your quoting of Matt. 24:23-27. Whilst the intensity of those attempts to mislead is duly noted, so also is the statement "if possible". I can only echo Paul's words at Romans 8:38-39 and conclude from those that it is not actually possible for the false Christs to succeed in their attempts to "separate us from God's love that is in Christ Jesus our Lord", regardless of the intensity and ingenuity of their arguments.   

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Satan, the ruler of the world, is present.................. What changed in 1914?

Looking back at the verses at Rev 12:7-17,  after the hurling of Satan and his demons "down to the earth", verse 12 pronounces "woe for the earth" due to the Devil's frustrated anger at his impending defeat. Then the final verse 17 describes Satan's focus of attention on his waging of "war with the remaining ones of her offspring, who observe the commandments of God and have the work of bearing witness concerning Jesus".

Satan's defeat in the heavens at Michael's hand took place in 1914. The dire events, conditions and trends in all sorts of walks of life on this planet since that year are well reported on by all disciplines daily, so there is no need to reiterate a list of quotes that are already in the public domain and for that matter, appearing extensively on this very website.. (This includes for me the growing body of revisionist-type attempts to paint a picture of hope of better things that appears to be gathering momentum at the same time). These various reports in their entirety are (to me) a clear indicator of the intensified presence of Satan the Devil on, at, or, in the earth since the year 1914. 

This view is not shared by everyone I know, although many who oppose the idea of a super-human cause for mans' current woes are at a loss to provide an alternative explanation or solution.

However, for me this just emphasizes the skill Satan demonstrates in that he is able still  to successfully "blind the minds" of unbelievers in the face of (what I consider to be) reality. No wonder at the same time he has also intensified his waging of war with those "who observe the commandments of God and have the work of bearing witness concerning Jesus" Rev.12:17, which includes a thorough expose of Satan the Devil and all his works.

Satan certainly does not share Oscar Wilde's feeling on publicity.

1 hour ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Matt. 24:23-27

2Tim  2:19

Satan

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

How do you know Rev. 12:7-12 'actually' started its fulfillment in 1914?

The ruler of the world is present.

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

And if they were wrong about the date of Christ's invisible presence and wrong about discerning the sign of it, how are you sure they are right about it today?

1Cor.13:7

Or 1910 Advert from the Washington Post!

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

This is a perfectly slippery position to hold

???

Oh come on, please! If they could get the date of Christs presence wrong then they could get the date of discerning it wrong at the same time couldn't they? It makes no difference to the actual event and the fact that Rev.12:7-12 started its fulfillment in 1914. 

"WHITE MAN'S HEAD ON FIRE"

Here's a good read: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Private-Future-Martin-Pawley/dp/0500011060

15 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The supposed "event" about exercising his kingship was still assigned to 1878

Yes I know that, but as discussed at length, the reality of the situation is what counts for me.

Whilst the Bible Students' acknowledgement of Jehovah's expression of rulership through Christ's kingdom was mistimed, the reality of that expression of rulership was not. So although they were prematurely aware of an event, for those who did not give up, that awareness, no matter how vaguely focused, was still present when the event became a reality. And under the guidance of God's spirit, that awareness came into focus with the facts.

The opening 9 paragraphs in chapter 5 of the kr book (previously cited actually) cover it for me.

Of course, it all becomes rather pointless if you don't believe that Rev 12:7-12 took place in 1914 (as demonstrated by @HollyW) because that would mean there was no real event for their misplaced awareness to be directed to.

But that's not my view. I believe that starting end of our 1914CE, this announcement is relevant  “The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever.” Rev.11:18.

And that announcement, with ever increasing volume, is being broadcast throught the earth by the organisation now known as Jehovah's Witnesses.

7 hours ago, HollyW said:

Why have JWs rejected most of what Russell taught as "the truth" and yet thank him for showing them the truth?

Well, I'm not sure of the specific context of your quote, but someone else is reported as saying to him “I am glad to see you turn the hose on hell and put out the fire.”

22 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

They did see the evidence of things coming to pass which mark a fulfilment of Revelation, but they did not discern the meaning thereof

Thats the best quote I have seen on this subject and I would be surprised to see something in Society publications that captures the situation more succinctly.

47 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I think that's fair enough. You are being a bit more flexible than I am. But it's that faint, vague possibility of that flexible interpretation that makes me think that this isn't really a "lie."

I am happy with that statement as well. I suppose it is the "conspiracy theory " slant that so many try to sustain when discussing this type of subject that makes me want to lean as far as possible the other way.

51 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Because I've seen this process up close and personal.

Well, I will have to take your word for that, but I have no reason to doubt your first hand experience of the "sleight of hand" employed by writers, especially when trying to maintain interest in a subject that might appear repetitive in nature. I have noted the "massaging" techniques applied to life experiences in this regard, both in written and oral form, where they are used to support a particular theme. Selective quoting is another technique (appearing quite frequently on this forum). These methods have their place, but one needs to be aware of their limitations when submitted as "proof".

I know people are often impressionable and easily lead, so this places a great responsibility on those writing, particularly in this field of all places, to ensure integrity is never sacrificed for the making of an impression.

However, I was introduced to a principle almost at the outset of my association with Jehovah's Witnesses and this has stood me in good stead in evaluating all information I have come across since. It is a piece of advice available to everyone studying the Bible and it is currrently rendered:

Proverbs 14:15: "The naive person believes every word, But the shrewd one ponders each step."
 

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Bye for now.  

35 minutes ago, HollyW said:

Nor do I believe Christ's second advent happened in 1914

Thanks for being frank @HollyW,  and for indicating your group to include @JWInsider and @Anna along with @AnnOMaly, something I was not aware of.

I understand where you are coming from now.

I have already expressed my understanding of  what "present in kingly power" means to me in connection with Christ on other threads, probably with participation of others in your group, so I will not repeat here.

I can see there's no way we can actually reconcile our viewpoints on this particular thread, as the relationship of Christ's Kingdom to the year 1914 is a fundamental element. I have to tell you that my interest in this matter actually preceded, and was a factor leading to, my association with Jehovah's Witnesses.

I note the subject regarding Christ and the year 1914 is the subject of other discussions on this forum so I will be tracking them with interest. 

Anyway, our exchange was interesting and illuminating, and gave me an impetus to look through every issue of ZWT 1879 to 1914, which was a long overdue excercise for me.

Bye for now.  

53 minutes ago, Anna said:

Can I put an end to this argument (discussion)?

A wee bit presumptuous, but thankyou for the quote. 

1 hour ago, HollyW said:

several of us

Who are the us?

1 hour ago, HollyW said:

You're absolutely correct that they could not have discerned something that was not there, yet that is exactly what they said they were doing from 1876 to long after 1914.

Do you beleive that Christ became present in kingly power in 1914?

Are there any Christians that do not look forward to the rapture?

55 minutes ago, HollyW said:

It was NOT in 1914 that they "began to discern"

This is getting a bit unreasonable.

To me, they could not have discerned something that was not there, regardless of whenever they said Jesus presence began. So that rules out anything they said prior to 1914 as having any relevance.

Now they clearly acknowledged that Jesus would excercise his kingship in 1914 and related any events subsequent to the end of the Gentile Times as evidence of that.

As Jesus' excercise of kingship took place in 1914 and was not a reality before, then acknowledging the event in 1914 is for me the beginning of discerning that fact. Anything prior to that date was purely speculation.That is the way I view it and I have not yet heard anything convincing otherwise.

BUT answer this if you would. Do you believe that the Gentile Times ended in 1914? Do you believe that Jesus excercised his kingly authority and cast Satan and his demons out of heaven and to the vicinity of the earth in 1914? 

I think the answer to those questions is the key to unlocking this puzzle. 

1 hour ago, HollyW said:

Notice that it is saying "long before 1914" -- it's a bit of a stretch, don't you think, that they mean 10 years is "long before 1914"?

That is a matter of opinion really.  Also, I haven't exhaustively searched earlier publications outside of the WT as I felt these quotes were sufficient to establish the point for me. (2 or 3 witnesses as AnnOMaly said).

I do not know the basis the writer had for the statement in the Kingdom Rules book, but I am satisfied by what I have read that a time of trouble was expected starting in 1914 in addition to what they had stated about the 1874-1914 period. I think the point in the paragraph under question is about the fact that their expectation was dwarfed by what did occur in and since 1914CE.

1 hour ago, HollyW said:

You seem to indicate that you do know it isn't an accurate statement yet you continue to try to uphold it.

I am happy with the statement because it says they  "began to discern". Their belief that the presence as such started in 1874 was erroneous. They could not have discerned something which was not there. The fact that Jesus became King in a special way in 1914 was recognised despite the erroneous elements of their views. So I am quite happy with the term "began" in connection with that discernment. It was imagination up to 1914, but then they began to get it right and if AnnOMaly's research is accurate, they did make a clearer statement in 1930. Which is 16 years later. So, it "began" in 1914 when the event took place.

1 hour ago, HollyW said:

Also, do you see how you are characterizing the very publications Jehovah and Jesus would have been inspecting and evidently approving as "food in due season"?

As for food in due season, there is a lot more in those publications than speculation on end times. From what I have read and observed, those Bible Students were far better cared for spiritually than any other group in that period of time. And despite their small numbers, and the opposition they received, they lifted the roof off as far and wide as they possibly could throughout as much of the world as they could reach with the Bible's message. And this their successors continue to do.

I am happy to let Jehovah and Jesus indicate their judgement as to who is providing  "food in due season".