JW Insider

60 years in 8 different congregations in 3 states can offer up a few anomalies. My sister's experience was actually not so uncommon in the mid-west (Missouri) congregations I grew up in (1964-1976). But I've never personally heard of such things being covered up in the last 20 years. At the time, 1981, the elders seemed more concerned that my sister was going to tell the truth to the hospital staff, and this seemed to be their greatest fear. (Small towns revel in gossip and judgmentalism, so fears of public reproach on the congregation were very real.) The only truly "weird" disfellowshipping I ever got involved with (and on the "wrong" side, at that) was that of a 90-year old brother because his friends asked me if I could do something about it, and maybe even help to initiate an appeal. It was the kind of travesty that directly resulted in the loss of several other members of this old brother's congregation, including the couple who asked me if I could get involved. Yet, I have never directly seen a pedophile case or child abuse case in all my years and congregations. I have not seen an apostasy case since 1984. Immorality, divorce issues, smoking and other youthful indiscretions are the only types of cases I've seen in 30 years, and these have been relatively rare, only one every few years. And, of course, the joyful side of each of these has been the return to normalcy after spiritual encouragement. What I really hoped to get to in this conversation was to just go ahead and admit that I don't believe we shun properly, most of us anyway. That probably won't surprise anyone. I have no doubt at all, personally, that we overdo it, especially with family-based shunning. I think that shunning should be defined as not inviting disfellowshipped persons into congregation activities (platform teaching, audience comments, public prayer, congregation outings, etc). It has nothing to do with whether we should continue to do good things for any and all persons: enemies, friends, neighbors. We should be able to encourage them, talk to them, hire them, visit them when they are sick, etc., etc. That won't work for every single person in the congregation, especially someone who may have been wronged, but it will work for most. (I think I ignored the previous conversation on shunning.)

Just noticed that if the angels who sinned were to be bound for 70 generations in Tartarus until their judgment, then this could have triggered a lot of discussion about genealogies (chronology) in the first century congregations and evidently even into Tertullian's generation, when many Christians still treated Enoch as inspired. If the check of the Bible genealogies let them see that Noah's flood had been about 2,400 years before Christ, then imagine the discussions about how long a generation would have been. We currently date the Flood to about 2,370 years before Jesus was born, which is 2,440 years before Jerusalem was destroyed in 70. (But it was possible to get dates anywhere from 2000 to 3000 BCE for the Flood.) So imagine the possible speculation if each generation was considered to be 40 years long, then 70 generations could be 2,800 years. (40x70=2,800). If they used 37 years as the length of a generation (from the time of Jesus prophecy until Jerusalem was destroyed) then the angels were to be imprisoned for 2,590 years, possibly fueling speculation of an imminent Armageddon. Even if they thought there should be an entire 1000-year millennium before the judgment of the angels then a generation of 49 to 50 years (Jubilee) would also mean that Armageddon was possibly just a few short years away. This could have been part of the reason that the Bible includes the following admonition: (Titus 3:9) But have nothing to do with foolish arguments and genealogies and disputes and fights over the Law, for they are unprofitable and futile. . . (1 Timothy 1:4) 4 nor to pay attention to false stories and to genealogies. Such things end up in nothing useful but merely give rise to speculations rather than providing anything from God in connection with faith. (2 Peter 3:8) However, do not let this escape your notice, beloved ones, that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.

Enoch had already been brought up into this context before Eoin mentioned him, and the prior implication had been that Enoch had provided a warning about a pending judgment due to unrighteousness. No one had specifically tied this warning to the Flood, however. I thought that these facts from the Bible might have a bearing on whether this could qualify as a "flood warning." It was just an opening to the discussion if someone wanted to follow up. I don't personally see it as a flood warning, but this was just some info to see if others might have already considered it in their own conclusions. I agree that Jude uses the quotation from the Book of Enoch (or at least the equivalent quotation from another source) without specifying the time frame. What you call the "past tense" here is just the common way of translating the Greek aorist and second aorist tenses. In fact, note the following about the Aorist tense from http://www.franknelte.net/article.php?article_id=183 AORIST TENSE: This tense is characterized by its emphasis on precise accordance with details, WITHOUT consideration for past, present or future time. THERE IS NO CLEAR EQUIVALENT FOR THIS TENSE IN ENGLISH! The Ethiopic version of Enoch says: Behold, he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnal for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him. If Jude could be shown to have purposefully moved the tense from present to past, then this could have become evidence that Jude recognized a previous fulfillment of the judgment event. But we don't have enough information, and the context of Jude appears to move the meaning to a still near-future judgement day, especially since he added nothing to the context to force the aorist tense into a past tense equivalent. (Therefore, it need not have been translated as past tense in any modern language, anyway.) It's just as accurate to translate Jude 14,15 the way the NKJV translates: “. . . Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.” On the side of tying Enoch's prophesies to Noah, David Guzik's Bible commentary quotes Trapp as saying: “Tertullian tells us that the book of Enoch’s prophecies were preserved by Noah in the ark, and that they continued and were read until the times of the apostles. But because they contained many famous testimonies concerning Jesus Christ, the Jews out of malice suppressed and abolished the whole book.” (Trapp) Also, even if possibly anachronistic, the book of Enoch also discusses the Nephilim and pre-flood conditions with the idea of prophetic warning in some of the contexts. I don't treat the Book of Enoch as inspired, but here is an example from Chapter 10: ( http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe013.htm ) The language of Genesis 6-8 is alluded to several times, and also the abyss of Tartarus for the angels who sinned (2 Peter), and some ideas also found in Isaiah and Revelation and elsewhere. 1. Then said the Most High, the Holy and Great One spake, and sent Uriel to the son of Lamech, and said to him: 2. '〈Go to Noah〉 and tell him in my name "Hide thyself!" and reveal to him the end that is approaching: that the whole earth will be destroyed, and a deluge is about to come upon the whole earth, and will destroy all that is on it. 3. And now instruct him that he may escape and his seed may be preserved for all the generations of the world.' . . . And heal the earth which the angels have corrupted, and proclaim the healing of the earth, that they may heal the plague, and that all the children of men may not perish through all the secret things that the Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. 8. And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azâzêl: to him ascribe all sin.' . . . 11. And the Lord said unto Michael: 'Go, bind Semjâzâ and his associates who have united themselves with women so as to have defiled themselves with them in all their uncleanness. 12. And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, till the day of their judgement and of their consummation, till the judgement that is for ever and ever is consummated. 13. In those days they shall be led off to the abyss of fire: 〈and〉 to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined for ever. And whosoever shall be condemned and destroyed will from thenceforth be bound together with them to the end of all generations. 15. And destroy all the spirits of the reprobate and the children of the Watchers, because they have wronged mankind. Destroy all wrong from the face of the earth and let every evil work come to an end: and let the plant of righteousness and truth appear: . . . 18 And then shall the whole earth be tilled in righteousness, and shall all be planted with trees and be full of blessing. 19. And all desirable trees shall be planted on it, and they shall plant vines on it: and the vine which they plant thereon shall yield wine in abundance, and as for all the seed which is sown thereon each measure (of it) shall bear a thousand, and each measure of olives shall yield ten presses of oil. 20. And cleanse thou the earth from all oppression, and from all unrighteousness, and from all sin, and from all godlessness: and all the uncleanness that is wrought upon the earth destroy from off the earth. 21. ⌈And all the children of men shall become righteous⌉, and all nations shall offer adoration and shall praise Me, and all shall worship Me. And the earth shall be cleansed from all defilement, and from all sin, and from all punishment, and from all torment, and I will never again send (them) upon it from generation to generation and for ever.

There were no Dead Sea Scrolls in any of the fragments you showed.

Yes, "War is hell!" which makes the above quote only a little bit off topic. Still, fwiw, it might be fun to take up this idea you just made and see how much of it holds up to common sense.

Just thought I'd point out that this is wrong, imo. I would think the following is more accurate: Torture is ALWAYS torture, whether there was intent to torture or not. A person tortured through an accidental one-minute dip in carbolic acid is just as tortured as the one who was purposefully dipped for one minute in carbolic acid. The person who was purposefully tortured prior to a bombing because he might have information about it, can be tortured just the same as the one who goes through the ordeal after exploding the bomb. Also, torture is still torture no matter what the intent, just like homicide is still homicide, even if one is accidental and the other is first-degree premeditated. Torture is also wrong. God has allowed it, but my God, who is slow to anger and merciful, would not allow something he cannot completely reverse the effects of.

Sorry you thought you offended me. I wasn't offended in the least. Just pointing out something I see about once a day on this site, and it's something that reduces the credibility of the site as a discussion forum. I've even seen complaints from authors on this site, for not getting permission or crediting sources. Not picking on you, either. Many have done it. I've left off a source, now and then, too. Only bringing it up for the sake of the reputation of the site overall.

This is a shame because I have relied on the BBC as an excellent source of information on the abuse scandals within the Catholic Church and have usually found their religion section to be reliable. 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? On the first point about leaving an abusive relationship, I would have to admit that this has happened. A few months ago I told the example of my own sister under a different thread. I'll copy it here: But this was about 35 years ago, and this person in the BBC article is saying that something like this happened much more recently. I have not seen the type of thinking that produced such disfellowshippings in the last couple of decades. I have serious doubts about it. More seriously, however, a person who leaves the Witnesses for doctrinal reasons is considered very differently from a person who decides not to return to the Witnesses after immorality, improper divorce, or simply drifting farther away from association with the congregation. I have been personally involved in a discussion of a person who decided not to associate for doctrinal reasons, and a discussion of going after him for disfellowshipping came up. The conversation went something like this: First Elder: "His father says he called us a cult" Second Elder: "At least he came to the Memorial." First Elder: "So he probably isn't really that antagonistic." Second Elder: "Or he's just trying to make his parents think he might come back some day, that he still has a chance." The conclusion was not to go after him, but watch if he causes any commotion. But if a person really is causing divisions and contentions as an ex-JW or apostate, I'd be just as concerned whether he showed up for Memorial or not. I agree that it has nothing to do with disfellowshipping.

@Bible Speaks These items you post are often very nice, but it is considered very rude to plagiarize. It would not hurt anything to just post the source. In many cases, depending on the purpose, you also should get permission, in addition to posting the source. The closest I found is here. http://ezinearticles.com/?Do-You-Have-Difficulty-Making-Decisions?&id=1246563 Perhaps you got it from somewhere else: Do You Have Difficulty Making Decisions? By Ruel V Hinaloc | Submitted On June 13, 2008 Do you like it? Should I buy it?" asked Flora, displaying the finely tailored black coat she was trying on. "I like it," said her friend Anna, "but it's your choice to make." Weakened by indecision, Flora placed the coat back on the rack and left the store. They were home not 15 minutes when Flora exclaimed, "I should have bought that coat!" They returned to the store the next morning, but it was too late. The coat was gone-sold to someone else. WHEN you are confronted with a personal decision, do you struggle painfully, procrastinate, and finally ask someone else to decide for you? And after the decision is made, do you keep wondering if a different choice would have been better? If so, you can probably identify with Flora's experience above. You know how difficult decision-making can be. Nevertheless, you can learn to make decisions with greater ease and pleasure. ... If making a final choice is hard, remember that decision-making almost always involves taking risks. If you are afraid to make a choice until you are absolutely certain of success, you will remain indecisive, for many decisions involve uncertainty and must be made on the basis of probability. (Ecclesiastes 11:4) In most cases, no one option has every advantage. No matter what choice you make, there will be something to sacrifice. So make the choice that is most likely the best, and . . . Support Your Decision! Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1246563 ------------------------- The only difference I see is that you spelled out the scripture that the author cited. Meme-style and graphics-based quotations are more difficult to find original sources for because it's so easy to just use Photoshop or other image-editing tools to make minor adjustments:

Enoch was born 1,164 years before the Flood (according to Hebrew Masoretic Text, and the number would be similar from the LXX). So any preaching of a warning during his 365 year life would have been nearly 1,100 to 800 years prior to the Flood. Jehovah's purpose to destroy mankind appears to have been "decided" about 120 years prior to the Flood. (Genesis 6:2-8) . . .. 3 Then Jehovah said: “My spirit will not tolerate man indefinitely, because he is only flesh. Accordingly, his days will amount to 120 years.” 4 The Nephʹi·lim were on the earth in those days and afterward. During that time the sons of the true God continued to have relations with the daughters of men, and these bore sons to them. They were the mighty ones of old times, the men of fame. 5 Consequently, Jehovah saw that man’s wickedness was great on the earth and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only bad all the time. 6 Jehovah regretted that he had made men on the earth, and his heart was saddened. 7 So Jehovah said: “I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground, man together with domestic animals, creeping animals, and flying creatures of the heavens, for I regret that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of Jehovah.

???

No problem. Perhaps another thread on Matthew 24 would be better than taking this subject up again under this one. In my experience, that topic can produce a lifetime of commentary.

These are excellent points. The reason I included what was written in Genesis 6 was because we absolutely need to include Jehovah in this discussion. In Genesis 6, it appears that Jehovah had already judged the world as wicked and only mentioned finding one righteous person, Noah. The way a person is known to be righteous to others is by standing up for what is right in their conduct, speech and of course, the important part that Jehovah sees, the right motivation. I have no doubt that Noah had distinguished himself not only in front of Jehovah, but also in front of others. As Romans 10:10 and Luke 12:34,35 shows, this would have included his speech. Therefore both his example and his speech apparently made him a preacher of righteousness. (Matthew 12:34, 35) . . .For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 The good man out of his good treasure sends out good things. . . @b4ucuhear pointed out that Hebrews 11:7 shows that Noah showed godly fear and constructed an ark and through Noah's faith he condemned the world. It's not that much of a logical stretch to surmise that this was the way in which he "preached" but, as b4ucuhear also said, we don't know for sure whether this meant that he actually preached a divine warning. The point from Ezekiel 33 is about a person commissioned as a watchman to preach a warning to Israel. (Ezekiel 33:2-6) . . .“‘Suppose that I bring a sword upon a land, and all the people of that land take a man and make him their watchman, 3 and he sees the sword coming upon the land and blows the horn and warns the people. . . . 6 “‘But if the watchman sees the sword coming and he does not blow the horn and the people receive no warning and a sword comes and takes the life of one of them, that person will die for his own error, but I will ask his blood back from the watchman.’ The others that Jehovah had condemned in Noah's day were not in the same situation as this, so we can't claim that Jehovah was required to do the same thing in Noah's day as he did for Israel when he commissioned Ezekiel to be a watchman. It was Jehovah who made the warning, but only to Noah. We don't really even know if Noah's family helped him or believed him. They were not said to be part of a band of preachers, nor does the Bible even say that they lifted a finger to help Noah with the ark-building project. We can only guess. I would guess the same as you have, but we can't claim that it must be true just because it's a good guess. Also, when you read about the judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 18 and 19, you notice that the warning came from Jehovah only to the people he wanted to save. Similar to what happened to Noah, the angels only asked Lot to get his relatives out of the city. We read of no warning to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, themselves. Jehovah had told Abraham that he (Jehovah) had already judged that there were not even 10 righteous people in Lot. Why else could Jesus say the following? (Matthew 10:14, 15) . . .. 15 Truly I say to you, it will be more endurable for the land of Sodʹom and Go·morʹrah on Judgment Day . . . (Matthew 11:23, 24) . . .if the powerful works that took place in you had taken place in Sodʹom, it would have remained until this very day. 24 But I say to you, it will be more endurable for the land of Sodʹom on Judgment Day than for you.” My point is that it is a tendency of "human thinking" and "human reasoning" to add to the scriptures. It is always better to remember what you said: "Our reasoning imperfect and flawed, should always include Jehovah God, not human thinking and such."

The scriptures do NOT say that they laughed and scoffed at him. (This is the very kind of thing I was trying to address by pointing out. Just because something makes sense, and it might even be true, it's still just speculation.)

I know a lot of Witnesses who, deep down, believe that you can't really die from lack of a blood transfusion. Some Witnesses can't even bring themselves to admit that blood transfusions save thousands of lives every year. So there is this idea that doctors didn't do all they could, and that the doctors' representatives are only claiming that the patient died explicitly from the lack of a blood transfusion. Of course, there really is a lot of incompetence and malpractice and mismanagement and who knows what all the factors were in this case. But it's sad situation made even sadder if the reason were primarily based on the family's misunderstanding of the risks.

It's my guess that talk of how the "torment" works would still be on point. I wasn't sure how aware you were of the different definitions we (JWs) give to Hades, Gehenna and Tartarus. Second death is the lake of fire which would then be the same as Gehenna. Those were the only terms to which we would have applied the meaning of "Destruction." Death and the Grave (Hell) would be pretty much the same thing, and therefore the Grave (Hell) is NOT "destruction." That's why there can be a resurrection, whether of righteous or unrighteous. The Grave is not final destruction, second death or Gehenna is.

It makes sense, but the Bible never says that he became a preacher after being given divine warning. From the time Noah was given the divine warning, all we know, for sure, is that Noah built an ark and got it ready. And he apparently got his wife, three sons and three daughters-in-law to join him. Perhaps these are the only ones he preached to. Perhaps he only preached about righteousness, and never preached anything about a warning. Perhaps he had only been a preacher of righteousness BEFORE he was given the divine warning. We just don't know. What we DO KNOW is that Jesus said that the Flood came, in effect, without a warning. Even the expression "they took no note" -- even if this had been a proper way to translate the Greek -- still does not say that Noah warned anyone. Perhaps they "took no note" of the fact that Noah was building an ark. The idea of a warning is what WE WANT to read into the idea of "they took no note." Undoubtedly, it was also the reason to "translate" it this way. Perhaps there was no reason for a warning, because Jehovah had already made the decision before he picked Noah and his family as the only ones chosen for survival. In fact, that way of reading Genesis 6 is just as likely as the assumption that Noah decided to go preaching when Jehovah told him to build an ark. Perhaps it's even a more likely reading. Consider: (Genesis 6:7-14) . . .So Jehovah said: “I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground, man together with domestic animals, creeping animals, and flying creatures of the heavens, for I regret that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of Jehovah. 9 This is the history of Noah. Noah was a righteous man. He proved himself faultless among his contemporaries. Noah walked with the true God. 10 In time Noah became father to three sons, Shem, Ham, and Jaʹpheth. 11 But the earth had become ruined in the sight of the true God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 Yes, God looked upon the earth, and it was ruined; all flesh had ruined its way on the earth. 13 After that God said to Noah: “I have decided to put an end to all flesh, because the earth is full of violence on account of them, so I am bringing them to ruin together with the earth. 14 Make for yourself an ark from resinous wood. . . . Notice that Noah was already a man who was righteous, and faultless, and walking with God. Notice that there was no reason to warn anyone as Jehovah had already decided to wipe mankind off the earth, to bring an end to all flesh. Noah didn't necessarily even try to convince the other 7 people in his household. He is only told to take them into the ark, not because they are righteous, too, but because Noah was righteous: (Genesis 7:1) . . .“Go into the ark, you and all your household, because you are the one I have found to be righteous before me among this generation. So your same point from Romans 10:10 would have produced the "preaching" from Noah long before the divine warning was ever given, and we know nothing about Noah preaching after he was given the divine warning. And whether he preached before or after given the divine warning, we don't know that he himself ever preached about a warning to others. Perhaps that would have been cruel and self-righteous, since they had already been condemned to drown, and Noah was not told that they could do anything if they wanted to.

A full explanation (aka, a REALLY long post) would probably appear like a pendulum swinging between the extremes of never reporting and reporting everything we are asked to report and then some. (Matthew 23:3) "Therefore, all the things they tell you, do and observe. . ." Similar to what @PeterR said, my opinions are expressed here as a "thought experiment" for anyone to consider and respond to. Yes, it's possible for "legalism" to exist side-by-side with proper motivation. Jesus dealt with this situation as a necessity during his own ministry when the legalism had not yet been nailed to the stake. Jesus put it this way: (Matthew 23:23) 23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you give the tenth of the mint and the dill and the cumin, but you have disregarded the weightier matters of the Law, namely, justice and mercy and faithfulness. These things it was necessary to do, yet not to disregard the other things. Of course, when the Law is written on your hearts, this refers to the total primacy of the heart-felt motivation: "Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." But all of us need a bit of tutoring in our motivation, just as the Law was a tutor. But the Law showed us where we came up short, and therefore took away most of the joy. (Galatians 3:19) Why, then, the Law? It was added to make transgressions manifest, until the offspring should arrive. . . This is quite true, but counting hours is not the only motivation in keeping up the "status" of being a pioneer. It's the accolades from men that go with the title. The same could also be said of appointed elders, and ministerial servants, and the various types of overseers in the organization, and yet the terms are Biblical -- and these are privileges to be reached out for. Paul spoke of various thresholds of qualification for those "titles." But one of the legalistic problems with the various pioneer titles is that when considering something to be "full-time" service, there is no such thing as saying one person is in full-time service and another is not. 400 hours a month might not be full-time to one person, and yet 5 hours a month might be full-time for another. (Remember the widow's "mite.") In truth, all Christians must be full-time; that's what whole-souled means. (Matthew 22:37-40) . . .“‘You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’ 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this: ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, . . .

If both terms can mean destruction, I can't tell if you distinguish in the same way between Hades and Gehenna. Naturally, I think it makes a lot of sense that Revelation shows Death and Hades thrown into a "Gehenna" (lake of fire), which is a fitting symbolism for the final destruction of Death and the Grave, through resurrection and the potential of eternal life, where the only type of death that remains is total destruction, a second death. When I first noticed that the 2013 Revised NWT was going to begin translating "Ha'des" as "Grave," I quickly rushed over to Matthew 10:28 to see if Gehenna might appear as "Destruction" with a capital "D." With this in mind, some have translated Matt 23:15 with “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel land and sea to win one proselyte, and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves. -- NKJV If this term "Gehenna" had become "Destruction" the verse could have read: "you make him twice as much a son of Destruction as yourselves" and then it would match the idea of persons like Judas and a person like the Antichrist. (John 17:12) 12 When I was with them, I used to watch over them on account of your own name, which you have given me; and I have protected them, and not one of them is destroyed except the son of destruction, so that the scripture might be fulfilled. (2 Thessalonians 2:3) 3 Let no one lead you astray in any way, because it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction. It would mesh well with other Biblical references. (Revelation 9:11) 11 They have over them a king, the angel of the abyss. In Hebrew his name is A·badʹdon [Destruction], but in Greek he has the name A·polʹlyon [Destroyer]. (Matthew 10:28) . . .fear him who can destroy both soul and body in Ge·henʹna. Do you believe that the "torment" is only at the time of facing destruction? You mention 2 Peter where the word is Tartarus a word known from Greek mythology, and already used in the OT LXX (e.g., Job) a prison of darkness for the lesser gods/spirits. These spirit creatures are said to be alive and waiting in prison for the judgment. Do you believe that the "spirit" of humans who await resurrection also include those who will be resurrected to judgment? If so, do you think those spirits can be in a kind of "torment" while waiting, or do they possibly feel the "torment" after Hades is destroyed?

Makes sense. I was able to edit it out.

Which could just as likely have been supposed by working backwards from the sentiment found in John and Colossians, etc. The wording in John 1 might also allude to some Jewish "Wisdom" poetry we no longer have access to. Or even an outgrowth of the poetry that already exists, such as in the way Jeremiah appears to allude to Genesis 1:1 poetically: Jeremiah 10:12-16New American Standard Bible (NASB) 12 It is He who made the earth by His power, Who established the world by His wisdom; And by His understanding He has stretched out the heavens. 13 When He utters His voice, there is a tumult of waters in the heavens, And He causes the clouds to ascend from the end of the earth; (Proverbs 3:19, 20) 19 Jehovah founded the earth in wisdom. He solidly established the heavens in discernment. 20 By his knowledge the watery deeps were split apart And the cloudy skies dripped with dew. (Proverbs 8:22-31) 22 Jehovah produced me [Wisdom] as the beginning of his way, The earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23 From ancient times I was installed, From the start, from times earlier than the earth. 24 When there were no deep waters, I was brought forth, When there were no springs overflowing with water. 25 Before the mountains were set in place, Before the hills, I was brought forth, 26 When he had not yet made the earth and its fields Or the first clods of earth’s soil. 27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there; When he marked out the horizon on the surface of the waters, 28 When he established the clouds above, When he founded the fountains of the deep, 29 When he set a decree for the sea That its waters should not pass beyond his order, When he established the foundations of the earth, 30 Then I was beside him as a master worker. I was the one he was especially fond of day by day; I rejoiced before him all the time; 31 I rejoiced over his habitable earth, And I was especially fond of the sons of men. Then again, the multiple references to a personified wisdom in these allusions to Genesis 1:1 might be evidence of a one-time reference to a Logos/Word/Wisdom. But the fact that it could also be referenced without any such reference may be evidence that what we have is exactly what was originally written: (Isaiah 45:18) . . .For this is what Jehovah says, The Creator of the heavens, the true God, The One who formed the earth, its Maker who firmly established it, Who did not create it simply for nothing, but formed it to be inhabited: “I am Jehovah, and there is no one else.

In fact, this is going the way of the sentiments of Carl Olof Jonsson, (and others) whose ideas are very similar to the rest of Christendom, and are a cop out contrary to Paul's admonition to Timothy and by extension any Christian: "Preach the word; be at it urgently in favorable times and difficult times; reprove, reprimand, exhort, with all patience and art of teaching. For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled. They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories. You, though, keep your senses in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelizer, fully accomplish your ministry"- 2Tim.4:2-5 I couldn't know what motivations @PeterR or you or anyone else might have. But I can say that what I said is (to me) merely a truism about legalism, and has nothing to do with taking it easy as you state. Also, I don't recommend that people stop reporting the types of service that help others prepare useful and appropriate publications, convention material, encouragement from circuit overseers, talks about local needs, etc. If you think you'll need 100 magazines next month in service, you should order 100 magazines; if you think you will need 10, order 10. Even in the days when we paid directly in advance for all the publications, I'd still see some Witnesses with rooms stacked with unused magazines and books. The specific need for printed material is no longer a big factor, as we are encouraged to make more use of electronic formats. (In some countries, more than others.) Obviously, we could also take it too far and forbid the reporting of our service to others, too, but this could end up being just another form of legalism. Our motivation for reporting our time and experiences might be purely meant as an encouragement for others who have trouble finding the time, or our motivation for reporting could be out of the pure joy of reporting on experiences in our ministry that make our sacrifice of time worthwhile. (Remember the joy that Jesus expressed when the 70 evangelizers returned to tell about what kinds of experiences they had just had. Giving a good report can be a matter of encouragement or just a matter of the mouth speaking out of the "abundance of the heart" -- not just preaching, but telling fellow Christians about our experiences in preaching.) However, the methods by which a "placement" or even a "return visit" can be counted have now made some of these reports mean less because people would be comparing Apple iPads to oranges. The differences in what some elders or family heads might count as a "Bible Study" might also be quite different from what the average pioneer will count. TTH is right that these numbers are not used in such a way that each congregation member knows who is more active than others, except by actual observation while working with others in the ministry, and by a couple of different level pioneer titles. Neither are they used at levels higher than a circuit overseer, in any form other than the aggregate. Other forms of "full-time" service might come with little or no field service, although there is overlap in the use of the "title." My brother, for example, was on a project at Bethel where Brother Wisegarver asked him if he could work 6 days a week for at least 4 months, and skip all his meetings except Sunday. I know several elders whose work on regional building committees kept them from almost anything else for several months at a time, and some have preferred it that way. My point is that the Law included measurements and even certain threshold requirements to meet the Law correctly. We SHOULD be working purely from proper motivation, but this will not be true of everyone. This is why the Law was necessary as a tutor. But our ministry that is pure from the standpoint of 'our God and Father' MUST include a lot of ministry that is not currently counted as "sacred" service, even if Jesus counts it as "sacred" service. (Looking after orphans and widows, for example.) I do think that if proper motivation is what is explained and encouraged at all meetings, then most of us would rebalance our ministries toward the other forms of service that Jesus counts as sacred. But we would also be looking for more opportunities to buy out more effective time in all our ministries, making time count rather than looking for ways to count time. My comments about the legalism behind the reports and titles might have sounded discouraging, but it's not so that anyone would do less, or lose their motivation. It's so that whatever we do is a JOY because of the motivation. The points about legalism include the confusion that most immature Christians have about being rewarded for "works." These legalistic ideas are really more obvious when we look at the history of the ways quotas and counting time and placements has worked since Rutherford's time. A quick reading of old Bulletins, Informants, Messengers, Kingdom Ministrys, Convention reports, etc., will make it clear what I mean by legalism in the sense that the apostle Paul spoke out so strongly against. I won't try to prove it here. But I would agree that we have also moved toward a more sensible and balanced view of time to remove the common "burdensome" nature of counting time and placements.

That idea in some commentaries could be very valid. But, as you have already said, a commentary is not the same as a translation -- at least it shouldn't be. There is a tendency in commentaries to conflate their interpretations of ALL the scriptures on a topic into a single coherent idea, in spite of the fact that Jesus may have used this illustration or circumstance to highlight a different idea. I think it gets back to the idea of the "heart" wanting to think that Noah must have warned everyone, so we want to understood "preacher of righteousness" to mean Noah gave everyone a warning. And he very well might have, but we are speculating if we decide that our favorite definition of "preacher" must fit this particular situation. Whether Noah gave a warning or not, Jesus' point seems more likely to highlight the fact that they acted as if they had had no warning -- as if there had not been a warning. So it's not a key point of the verse to point out that a warning must have taken place. It changes the sense of the verse and the context to try to add this point. Doesn't mean that there is no truth to the idea of a warning in another context. I think it's the same way in which many people think that Jesus' purpose (in Matthew 24) was to let the disciples know that there would be advance warning signs. This is what many commentaries WANT the whole chapter to be saying. There are one or two places that sound like something could be taken as a warning, and about 10 places where Jesus sounds like he was trying to say it would come as a thief, suddenly, without warning. It doesn't seem fair that it would be without warning at least to the faithful or at least to the angels, so we overthrow 10 clear verses in favor of one or two that could partially suggest otherwise. I think that some have looked at this idea and think I'm trying to say that we should not be giving a warning about the end of this system. This is not the point at all. We can always warn people about how deep we must be into the time of the end. The only thing we should NOT be doing is saying "The Time is at Hand!" That's the way in which Matthew 24 (Mark 13, Luke 21) would be misinterpreted, and why Jesus started out with a warning about how easy it would be to get misled. English Standard Version - Luke 21:8And he said, “See that you are not led astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he!’ and, ‘The time is at hand!’ Do not go after them."

This is true. And it's convincing up to a point. After all, Jesus had just given them a command under the highest "authority" in the universe. Who would have heard such a command in those very words and then disobeyed it by even one "jot and tittle"? But neither do Witnesses take it as a "formula" but only as a true statement, even if slightly expanded in meaning from the exact words Jesus used. Matthew also is the only gospel to use the term "parousia" in the question asked of Jesus by the disciples leading up to the "Olivet" sermon. This doesn't mean that it wasn't used at all in the context of the question, but it can also mean that Matthew himself was inspired to use ideas that the disciples had in mind even if not expressed literally. (Matthew himself could have been one of those disciples and would have known what they had in mind.) We know by comparing the gospels that what appears to be exact quotes are only quotes of "meaning" not verbatim quotes. So even though it's still possible that Jesus used the words or at least the meaning as they now appear, I agree that it makes more sense that the subsequent actions and statements of the disciples give evidence that Eusebius used the more accurate version.