JW Insider

On 12/7/2016 at 4:30 PM, Nicole said:

At that point she told her mother, who could not act because of a Jehovah's Witness rule that allegations of sexual abuse would only be acted on if two elders witnessed it, she said.

If two "persons" [claimed to have] witnessed it, not two "elders." A second witness can even be a non-JW child.

Witnessing the same crime perpetrated against another person on another occasion can now be considered as evidence even if it is not strictly a second witness to the same particular instance of the crime.

On 12/9/2016 at 5:13 AM, Michel Vromen said:

It is not meant to be used to calculate. It does not say 1 day IS EQUAL TO 1000 years. It gives the idea the time for humans is something completely different than for the Lord. In other words, not to be used to calculate.

True. Note also that there is a fact that seems to keep escaping our notice: the verse, in fact, states two ideas, adding an idea that is not in the original Psalm being quoted.

• Idea #1: one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years
• Idea #2: "and a thousand years as one day."

(2 Peter 3:8) 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.

We tend to look only at Idea #2. But "Idea #1" says that what is one day to us is 365,242 days.

Therefore the "infographic" at the top could just have well have said:

One Day to Us is

as 1,000 years to Jehovah.

______________________

2,191,452,000 years ago

Adam and Eve appeared on the scene

and sinned .... etc....etc

_______________

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Dogs are never mentioned in the Bible in a positive manner either. Do JWs avoid dogs?

There are a couple of at least neutral examples of dogs, although the vast majority are very negative. Pigs fare a little worse.

Another example is the fact that an indoor bathroom is only mentioned as being used by a pagan, and the one time it was mentioned, someone was murdered there.

(Judges 3:20-25) 20 And Eʹhud came to him as he was sitting in his cool roof chamber that he had to himself. And Eʹhud went on to say: “A word of God I have for you.” At that he rose up from his throne. 21 Then Eʹhud thrust in his left hand and took the sword off his right thigh and plunged it into his belly. 22 And the handle kept going in also after the blade so that the fat closed in over the blade, for he did not draw the sword out of his belly, and the fecal matter began to come out. 23 And Eʹhud proceeded to go out through the air hole, but he closed the doors of the roof chamber behind him and locked them. 24 And he himself went out. And his servants came and began looking, and there the doors of the roof chamber were locked. So they said: “He is just easing nature in the cool interior room.” 25 And they kept waiting until they were ashamed, and, look! there was no one opening the doors of the roof chamber. At this they took the key and opened them, and, look! their lord was fallen to the earth dead!

Christians should therefore avoid indoor bathrooms.

(Colossians 2:16) 16 Therefore, do not let anyone judge you about what you eat and drink or about the observance of a festival or of the new moon or of a sabbath.

I think that this would mean that even a Christian, at least in the first century, should not feel too badly about celebrating Chanukkah with their family, assuming their family is steeped in Jewish tradition and they do not wish to offend them, or actually believe themselves that there was still some value to the Jewish tradition that should be respected.

I don't apply this to Christmas in any way, but at least I don't think it means we need to harshly judge those persons who believe Christmas is wonderful time to enjoy family, food and gifts, etc.

On 12/9/2016 at 9:04 AM, David Normand said:

Also, there is no mention of birthday celebrations among the ancient Hebrews or even the first century Christians.

My previous comments, above, focused on the idea that celebrations were expensive and therefore considered extravagant for those without means. But there are a couple other examples to think about -- not just the example of Job's children.

A baby shower would also have been considered an extravagance by most first-century Jews and Christians. Yet, nothing is condemned about rich persons showering Joseph and Mary with gifts over the birth of Jesus:

(Matthew 2:10-12) On seeing the star, they rejoiced with great joy. And when they went into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and falling down, they did obeisance to him. They also opened their treasures and presented him with gifts—gold and frankincense and myrrh. However, because they were given divine warning in a dream not to return to Herod, they departed for their country by another way.

In that last verse you can see that Jehovah directed the actions of the astrologers who celebrated Jesus' birth with a shower of gifts. Later this dream is shown to have helped the gift-givers "outwit" Herod. And of course, Luke's account focuses on the celebration of the actual birth day of Jesus by angels in heaven and the sharing of that joy with shepherds who would spread the joyful word of this particular birth.

So although we have no accounts of baby showers celebrated by Christians, we can see that it too was likely based on a general lack of wealth. Where such wealth existed, there was nothing noted as wrong with giving and accepting such gifts.

Also, some Jewish holidays were somber memorials and some were more festive celebrations. There is one that was particularly festive, and probably had more influence on Christmas than many in Christendom ever wanted to admit. Christendom's prejudice against Jews throughout the centuries has probably made this particular source of Christmas more embarrassing than the "pagan" influences.

Of course, I am speaking about a holiday that Jesus once participated in. It was a holiday held on the 25th day of the mid-winter month of the Jewish calendar. The 25th of Kislev. It was a festival of lights. And it wasn't held as a more common new moon celebration, or full moon celebration, as the full moon of Nisan celebrated their freedom from bondage in Egypt:

(Leviticus 23:5, 6) In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, between the two evenings is the passover to Jehovah. “‘And on the fifteenth day of this month is the festival of unfermented cakes to Jehovah.. . .

(Leviticus 23:34-39) “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘On the fifteenth day of this seventh month is the festival of booths. . . However, on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when YOU have gathered the produce of the land, YOU should celebrate the festival of Jehovah . . .

(Esther 9:21, 22) . . .to be regularly holding the fourteenth day of the month Aʹdar and the fifteenth day of it in each and every year, according to the days on which the Jews had rested from their enemies and the month that was changed for them . . .to rejoicing and . . . to a good day, to hold them as days of banqueting and rejoicing and sending of portions to one another and of gifts to the poor people.

The last one was a celebration that was not part of the original set of festivals that Jehovah had given Moses, but which became another day of gift-giving and banqueting under a full moon. [Purim]

And another day of this type had developed a couple hundred years after Esther, and a couple hundred years before Jesus. And for some reason this new "festival of lights" always started on the 25th of the winter month, not more typically, during a full moon as most other happy celebrations would have been. This meant a little more expenditure on burning lights (oil) rather than the free extra light that always was available on the 14th and 15th of the month.

And this one is mentioned by name in the NWT, too. Although only in the footnote:

*** Rbi8 John 10:22 ***
“The festival of dedication (Hanukkah).” J22(Heb.), chagh ha·chanuk·kahʹ.

*** Rbi8 p. 1555 Footnote Words Indexed ***
HANUKKAH, Joh 10:22.

(John 10:22, 23) 22 At that time the festival of dedication [footnote: Hanukkah, NWT] took place in Jerusalem. It was wintertime, 23 and Jesus was walking in the temple in the colonnade of Solʹo·mon.

So Jesus himself did not condemn or even avoid going to Jerusalem during the winter festival of lights held on the 25th of the month.

Here's a quick review of the Jewish festival of Chahukkah, found online:

Hanukkah is the Jewish Festival of Lights and it remembers the rededication of the second Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. This happened in the 160s BCE/BC (before Jesus was born). (Hanukkah is the Jewish word for 'dedication'.) Hanukkah last for eight days and starts on the 25th of Kislev, the month in the Jewish calendar that occurs at about the same time as December. Because the Jewish calendar is lunar (it uses the moon for its dates), Kislev can happen from late November to late December.

In 2016, Hanukkah is from in the evening of Saturday, 24 December until the evening of Sunday, 1st January.

During Hanukkah, on each of the eight nights, a candle is lit in a special menorah (candelabra) called a 'hanukkiyah'. 

On 12/9/2016 at 9:04 AM, David Normand said:

In fact, in the first century the Christians of that era considered birthday celebrations as pagan. 

Don't take this in the wrong way, because I also think that Christmas is corrupt and has almost nothing to do with bringing people any closer to thinking about Christ. But we can't necessarily take the practices of Christians in the early centuries as an indication of what the Bible itself intended for us to think about holidays and celebrations.

Just because Christians of the first centuries also avoided pork doesn't mean that this is right for all Christians. Some "Christians" of the first century also began believing in hell-fire, the immortal soul, and within a couple centuries had developed the Trinity doctrine to the point of being ready to agree with the majority on a pro-Trinitarian creed. "Christians" developed gnostic ideas, too. Evidently it had become a common enough practice for "circuit overseers" of the second century to take advantage of lonely widows, so that one of the first popular "Christian" novellas of the time commented upon it. There were several fairly well-defined "factions" of Christians within the first two centuries, just as there had been of Jews and some other religions of the time.

What I am saying is, is that just because we read, outside the Bible, that "Christians" practiced a certain thing, or avoided practicing a certain thing, it doesn't mean we should accept it as authoritative just because it agrees with our own beliefs. We might merely be seeing a reflection of their prejudices and narrow-minded attitudes that would be corrected over time.

In the social context of the first century, only the very rich had the ability to throw extravagant parties every year, whereas poorer folks, who made up much of early Christianity could only save only for parties for weddings, and celebrations during harvest-times and some of the happy holidays. There was a well-deserved prejudice against the rich in these times.

(Matthew 19:24) 24 Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to get through a needle’s eye than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God.”

(Luke 16:25, 26) 25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you had your fill of good things in your lifetime, . . .  26 And besides all these things, a great chasm has been fixed between us and you, so that those who want to go over from here to you cannot, neither may people cross over from there to us.’

(1 Corinthians 4:8) 8 Are you already satisfied? Are you already rich? Have you begun ruling as kings without us? . . .

(James 2:6, 7) . . .Is it not the rich who oppress you and drag you before law courts? 7 Do they not blaspheme the fine name by which you were called?

But this didn't mean that the prejudice against those with wealth would last forever. Second-century Clement of Alexandria spent a good portion of his writing trying to hash out what the attitude should be toward the many wealthy Alexandrian Christians who made up a good portion of the congregations he presided over. Over time, the rich and the poor got along better, with less distrust:

(1 Timothy 6:17, 18) 17 Instruct those who are rich in the present system of things not to be arrogant, and to place their hope, not on uncertain riches, but on God, who richly provides us with all the things we enjoy. 18 Tell them to work at good, to be rich in fine works, to be generous, ready to share,

Job himself was a wealthy man, and yet he countenanced a party for each of his children. The parties were of the type that he was concerned that they might over-eat or over-drink, yet he did not say they should not have them.

(Job 1:4, 5) 4 Each of his sons would hold a banquet at his house on his own set day. They would invite their three sisters to eat and drink with them. 5 After a series of banquet days was complete, Job would send for them in order to sanctify them. Then he would get up early in the morning and offer up burnt sacrifices for each of them.. . .

21 hours ago, Witness said:

JW Insider, you appear to be somewhat of a rogue within the organization, a fish who on occasion, swims against the current, but then turns quickly back around.   I feel you endeavor to detach the congregation from the organization, but we both know this can’t happen.

Witness, I hope it works to answer in this way. I'm just quickly interspersing my comments between your paragraphs, and will just turn your comments grey, so that you can tell where mine start and end.

With your statement you inspire me to defend my beliefs a little better. I would assume that there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, like me. It was easy to find persons like me at Bethel, especially among the Writing Department, but not at all limited to there. In every congregation I have been in, there were always a few, who understand that it "goes against the grain" to question too much too loudly. However, I have seen big improvements in the organization in the past few years, and expect to see more in the future. 

While I see you grasp the proper mindset in serving God, unless we break free of the concept that the Watchtower is “Jehovah’s organization”, which is the greatest form of idolatry against God; as you say, the “perfect” congregation remains unreachable.

No JW who knows the actual teaching will claim that the Watchtower is "Jehovah's organization." Jehovah's organization refers to his overall organization of things in the heaven and things on the earth, specifically, Jehovah along with his Son, and all the myriads and myriads of heavenly angels in their proper assignments, and an administration that includes faithful followers on earth and a way to deal with and eliminate evil in both heaven and earth. With respect to humans, it includes those alive now and those in Jehovah's memory who are "in the Book of Life." Those chosen from earth to take their station in the heavenly part of that organization have been chosen over the past 2000 years, and the majority were likely chosen, therefore, before the Watchtower organization even existed. When the Watchtower speaks of the earthly part, or visible part of Jehovah's organization, it still does not specifically refer to the Watchtower itself, but to those who associate with and live their lives as sincere Christians. JWs do not officially believe that only JWs will be counted as Christians, although the hope is that we have found a way that attracts more people to a Christian way of life.

Although 1 Corinthians 12:14-13:1; Matt 7:20-23; 25:34-40  can be applied to all in the congregation in a sense, these scriptures specifically refer to the anointed ones. Paul, part of the foundation of the Body of Christ, was speaking to the Chosen ones who were part of that Body.  Today, we may not see apostles, but we see anointed ones, who are also part of Christ’s Body. Matt 16:18; Eph 2:20; 1 Pet 2:5,9; Rom 12:1; Eph 2:21,22; 1 Cor 3:16,17

There is nothing in principle about the anointed that cannot be equally applied to all Christians.

They have become so obscured through Watchtower admonitions to remain anonymous, that they are forgotten.

They have been asked to take a step back and allow themselves to be represented by a smaller group of anointed.

As far as prophets - “‘In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams.”  Acts 2:17 And I will appoint my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.” Rev 11:3

This began to be true "in the last days" which, according to Peter, began around 33 C.E. Revelation 11:3 seems to confirm that this referred to the first century. I have seen no forms of prophecy or powerful works in my lifetime of the type mentioned in the Bible. This leads me to believe that those particular forms were necessary until the Christian Scriptures took shape after the death of the apostles.

If we both agree that this Body is not perfect, how will it reach the point of perfection?  Certainly, not under any influence of a GB that rules over them, or obedience to elders who do not allow each anointed individual to proclaim Christ as their Head, and their only judge. Matt 24:48; 24:15; Dan 9:27; Rom 14:4,10   God’s anointed ones must shun any form of idolatry; ironically when they do so in the organization, they are then shunned. 

I don't expect the Body to reach perfection while on earth. (1 John 1:8) "If we make the statement, 'We have no sin,' we are misleading ourselves and the truth is not in us." Being declared righteous is not the same as being perfect. Also, I don't believe anyone who is truly anointed is confused about whether Christ is their Head and Judge.

Matt 7:20-23 is also related to the teachings of anointed ones, (John 21:17; Mal 2:7; Heb 13:15) that each one of us must scrutinize.  Matt 25:34-40, which is recognizing these “little ones”, is impossible to do under required obedience to false shepherds.  Luke 17:2; Matt 23:13 They are each, a member of the Body of Christ, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

Not impossible at all to recognize these "little ones." The teaching about the "little ones" is that they are the same as "Christ's brothers" which are often considered to be limited to 144,000. But there is no distinction as to how the rest of the flock are treated. The entire flock, including "other sheep" are to be "one flock" under one shepherd. Notice how the "other sheep" will also come in through the door, that they may have life and have it in abundance. This is for "everyone having faith in him" not just a small remnant.

(John 10:7-16) . . .“Most truly I say to you, I am the door for the sheep. . . . I am the door; whoever enters through me will be saved, and that one will go in and out and find pasturage. . . .  I have come that they may have life and have it in abundance. 11 I am the fine shepherd; the fine shepherd surrenders his life in behalf of the sheep. . . . 14 I am the fine shepherd. I know my sheep and my sheep know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I surrender my life in behalf of the sheep. 16 “And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those too I must bring in, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.

Just because some feel they will be sons of God and therefore Christ's brothers in heaven does not discount the scriptures that speak of everyone who has faith being sons of God and therefore Christ's brothers. Heaven and earth do not constitute two different hopes. It is the same hope to have a place in Kingdom of God, for His will to be done in heaven and on earth:

(Matthew 5:3,5,9) 3 “Happy are those conscious of their spiritual need, since the Kingdom of the heavens belongs to them. . . .  “Happy are the mild-tempered, since they will inherit the earth. . . “Happy are the peacemakers, since they will be called sons of God.

(Matthew 23:8-10) . . .for one is your Teacher, and all of you are brothers. 9 Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One. 10 Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ.

Do you see?  In the organization, all of this is impossible since a theocratic authority rules. The road to  perfection begins for each Chosen one when leaving the teachings of bad fruit, oppression, “trampling”, and turning directly to Christ.  It is then that they find other brothers in Christ -  those who are also members of the Body.  This is where love is nurtured, through the blessing of Holy Spirit. In Christ's light, is where the Temple/sanctuary will be restored and finished – outside of “earthly things” which equates to idolatry. Phil 3:19; Isa 58; Zech 4:7

I understand what you are saying. In our heart, if we dwell on spiritual things, then the earthly things do not get in the way. We can work with them and use our opportunities to learn from all things, and improve things where we see opportunity too. But we cannot expect to escape earthly things. The wheat and the weeds grow together until judgment day. (1 Corinthians 5:10) "Otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world. "

(1 Corinthians 12:12, 13) 12 For just as the body is one but has many members, and all the members of that body, although many, are one body, so too is the Christ. 13 For by one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink one spirit.

If you feel you have found a better way, then I hope this is good for you and your relationship with God and Christ. I have not been the kind person who believes it is my place to "jump ship" just because I see some problems on board or icebergs on the horizon. We are free in Christ, and free to be Christian, even if some doctrinal issues are not agreeable. It's possible to feel trapped, I suppose, if one gives too much attention to the imperfections of a human organization. But I think the principle in Paul's words give a perspective that is useful:

(1 Corinthians 7:20-24) . . .. 21 Were you called when a slave? Do not let it worry you; . . .  22 For anyone in [the] Lord that was called when a slave is the Lord’s freedman; likewise he that was called when a freeman is a slave of Christ. 23 YOU were bought with a price; stop becoming slaves of men. 24 In whatever condition each one was called, brothers, let him remain in it associated with God.

Thanks for your thoughts on the subject.

 

12 hours ago, Witness said:

If the word had been made known to all in the congregation, surely her family would have received the needed food, possibly even a place to live. 

As far as I am concerned we are responsible to make such things known in the congregation, just as much as we are responsible for preaching the good news. As far as I am concerned, this is the real way in which we preach the good news: not by teaching doctrines, but by supporting one another in a way that is as loving as possible. The real way that the true religion is known is not by doctrine but by how we show love to one another.

• (John 13:34, 35) 34 I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are my disciples—if you have love among yourselves.”

Various situations of the type you area speaking of will happen almost continuously in most congregations, but, in my experience, they are usually taken care of. Whose responsibility is it to make something as important as this known in the congregation? You admit that surely her family would have received what was needed if the word had been made known. That's the point, isn't it? We have the desire to do the right thing, and when we pitch in together, the right thing gets done. But each person plays a part in such service. Many will be willing to give, but not everyone has the skills to lead and organize and prioritize such giving. Some persons are better at "seeing" the needs, some are better at providing helpful services, some are better with the ability to direct.

Note what Paul says of the ideal congregation:

(1 Corinthians 12:14-13:1) 14 For, indeed, the body is made up not of one member but of many. 15 If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am no part of the body,” that does not make it no part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am no part of the body,” that does not make it no part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If it were all hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But now God has arranged each of the body members just as he pleased. 19 If they were all the same member, where would the body be? 20 But now they are many members, yet one body. 21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I do not need you,” or again, the head cannot say to the feet, “I do not need you.” 22 On the contrary, the members of the body that seem to be weaker are necessary, 23 and the parts of the body that we think to be less honorable we surround with greater honor, so our unseemly parts are treated with greater modesty, 24 whereas our attractive parts do not need anything. Nevertheless, God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that had a lack, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but its members should have mutual concern for one another. 26 If one member suffers, all the other members suffer with it; or if a member is glorified, all the other members rejoice with it. 27 Now you are Christ’s body, and each of you individually is a member. 28 And God has assigned the respective ones in the congregation: first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then powerful works; then gifts of healings; helpful services; abilities to direct; different tongues. 29 Not all are apostles, are they? Not all are prophets, are they? Not all are teachers, are they? Not all perform powerful works, do they? 30 Not all have gifts of healings, do they? Not all speak in tongues, do they? Not all are interpreters, are they? 31 But keep striving for the greater gifts. And yet I will show you a surpassing way. 13 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love, I have become a clanging gong or a clashing cymbal.

The ideal congregation has thus been defined. Yet, we no longer see apostles and prophets, and powerful works, and gifts of healing, and tongues in the way that the first century congregation saw them. Even the "teaching" is essentially complete with the completion of the spirit-directed Christian Greek Scriptures. This means that the most necessary part of the current ideal congregation is that "its members should have mutual concern for one another." (v.25) The ideal congregation is foremost, therefore, an outlet for giving us opportunities to show our love through "helpful services" (v.28) and "abilities to direct" those helpful, loving services.

Jesus also seems to have anticipated that the primary concern of those of faith as judgment day approached would no longer be a big concern with prophesying and powerful works, but with practical love through helpful services.

(Matthew 7:20-23) 20 Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those men. 21 “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’

(Matthew 25:34-40) 34 “Then the King will say to those on his right: ‘Come, you who have been blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the founding of the world. 35 For I became hungry and you gave me something to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you received me hospitably; 36 naked and you clothed me. I fell sick and you looked after me. I was in prison and you visited me.’ . . . . 40 In reply the King will say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

This was always the primary focus of real Christianity. If we see that our congregation is not living up to the ideals of the kingdom in this way, then we should do what we can to make sure that these opportunities are taken advantage of. This is whether we are in a leadership position or not.

I may not have the same outlook as you, because my family has been the recipient of such kindness back in 1964 and 1965 when my father gave up a lot to move us from a comfortable place in California to a poor area of the Ozarks where there were very few in the congregation who cared that much to learn about the details of the new "Babylon" book at that time. But they could show love to strangers. They helped us find a place to stay, a small farm on 7 acres to rent, a place to work on the broken-down car, and to nearly live off the land where we raised a small number of cows and calves, a lot of chickens, and hand-tilled nearly an acre for corn, beans, peas, tomatoes, peppers, potatoes, etc. We canned food, traded for other food. Traded eggs and milk for other necessities. Even though my father was an electrical engineer his first full-time job at the university paid only a four hundred a month [edited: $388/mo] for a family of 5.

My father's job grew 'slowly but surely' so that he could soon hire brothers to work for him at the university, which helped support others in turn. But we knew each other well in the congregation, and we knew the new ones coming in. (In just over a decade the one small congregation became 4 and by the 1990's was about 8 congregations.)

Today, I'll agree that many in the congregation don't know all the others as well. Some who have financial hardships don't want the embarrassment of admitting their troubles. They might pray and cry over the situation, but the solution is already built into the congregational arrangement.

What happens at Warwick, Patterson, Wallkill, Brooklyn, London, etc, is a different story, and I'll admit that it can sometimes seem to become too much of a priority. And yes, it can even become an idol. Humans have a tendency to idolize those who take the lead at the highest leadership positions, too. To avoid such mistakes, this is why we also have a teaching ministry, to keep ourselves aligned with the scriptural principles that should guide us. Correct teaching also helps us continue to give credit, not to ourselves, or to an organization, or its human leaders, but only to Jehovah and Jesus and the right spirit that should motivate us all. 

When I saw this on JW Broadcasting, I was wondering if there was a good way to get more Russian judges to know that this will be shown to more people worldwide every time there is a case like this against JWs in Russia. Of course, I wouldn't do anything like that on my own because you never know how something can backfire. But I do think that it could do some good to try to get more people, including non-JWs, to talk about this online.

On 12/1/2016 at 2:18 PM, Ann O'Maly said:

What is the scriptural support that there are two different destinies for Christian believers?

I can't think of any specific scripture or set of scriptures stating that some will have an earthly hope while others will have a heavenly hope, but it seems a reasonable conclusion to draw from the imagery of both "a new heavens and a new earth"

(2 Peter 3:5-13) 5 For they deliberately ignore this fact, that long ago there were heavens and an earth standing firmly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; 6 and that by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was flooded with water. 7 But by the same word the heavens and the earth that now exist are reserved for fire and are being kept until the day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly people. 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. 9 Jehovah is not slow concerning his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire anyone to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance. 10 But Jehovah’s day will come as a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar, but the elements being intensely hot will be dissolved, and earth and the works in it will be exposed. 11 Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, consider what sort of people you ought to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion, 12 as you await and keep close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah, through which the heavens will be destroyed in flames and the elements will melt in the intense heat! 13 But there are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell.

Of course, this particular passage on its own would make readers think of the earthly atmosphere as the particular heavens that will be replaced - the same heavens that existed below a "water canopy" from which rain fell.

But Jesus speaks more directly of a kind of "location" for dwelling in these "heavens:"

(John 14:1-4) . . .Exercise faith in God; exercise faith also in me. 2 In the house of my Father are many dwelling places. Otherwise, I would have told you, for I am going my way to prepare a place for you. 3 Also, if I go my way and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will receive you home to myself, so that where I am you also may be. 4 And where I am going, you know the way.”

(Matthew 13:43) 43 At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father. Let the one who has ears listen.

(Matthew 6:9, 10) 9 “You must pray, then, this way: “‘Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified. 10 Let your Kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also on earth.

(Ephesians 1:9, 10) . . .his will. It is according to his good pleasure that he himself purposed 10 for an administration at the full limit of the appointed times, to gather all things together in the Christ, the things in the heavens and the things on the earth. . . . [compare with "his will" in Matthew 6:10]

(2 Corinthians 5:1, 2) 5 For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, should be torn down, we are to have a building from God, a house not made with hands, everlasting in the heavens. 2 For in this house we do indeed groan, earnestly desiring to put on the one for us from heaven,

I don't think it's our place to decide our own specific place in which we will serve Jehovah in the future. That is up to him. I think the emphasis on an earthly hope, although not completely unique to Witnesses, is a way of presenting ourselves to Jehovah in a humble, unassuming manner. And for all we know, our joy in Jehovah's service is its own reward, and all this talk about a specific difference is a distinction without a distinction as far as we should be concerned.

I am sometimes concerned that Jesus and the apostles always put the spiritual hope on a higher plane than earthly things, and there is a danger that we promote the new "system" in terms of physical rewards - no more physical hunger, no more physical pain, no more physical sorrow, along with a life that includes all the physical pleasures we know now and perhaps more that have not even come up into our minds.

This is why for myself, I  should meditate on spiritual things so that the fruitage of that spirit is the true reflection of our motivations. In context, when Galatians spoke of the "fruit of the spirit" it was, just like Romans, referring to the outcome evidenced from the true "anointing" of the spirit. So I see no contradiction in reading the Greek Scriptures as if they are written to all of us Christians, without any "hocus-pocus" about differences as to how we need to apply certain scriptures only to those with a specific hope for a destination that might be different from my earthly hope. All of us should want to let Jehovah's spirit work in our lives.

(Romans 3:22-25) .22 yes, God’s righteousness through the faith in Jesus Christ, for all those having faith. For there is no distinction. 23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and it is as a free gift that they are being declared righteous by his undeserved kindness through the release by the ransom paid by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as an offering for propitiation through faith in his blood. . . .

(Romans 8:19-25) 19 For the creation is waiting with eager expectation for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but through the one who subjected it, on the basis of hope 21 that the creation itself will also be set free from enslavement to corruption and have the glorious freedom of the children of God. 22 For we know that all creation keeps on groaning together and being in pain together until now. 23 Not only that, but we ourselves also who have the firstfruits, namely, the spirit, yes, we ourselves groan within ourselves while we are earnestly waiting for adoption as sons, the release from our bodies by ransom. 24 For we were saved in this hope; but hope that is seen is not hope, for when a man sees a thing, does he hope for it? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we keep eagerly waiting for it with endurance.

(Galatians 3:10-14) 10 All those who depend on works of law are under a curse, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not remain in all the things written in the scroll of the Law by doing them.” 11 Moreover, it is evident that by law no one is declared anyone righteous with God, because “the righteous one will live by reason of faith.” 12 Now the Law is not based on faith. Rather, “who does these things will live by means of them.” 13 Christ purchased us, releasing us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us, because it is written: “Accursed is every man hung upon a stake.” 14 This was so that the blessing of Abraham would come to the nations by means of Christ Jesus, so that we might receive the promised spirit through our faith.

Generally, no matter what we feel should be our appropriate final destiny, we all still share the same hope and eager expectation of the revealing of the sons of God.

We have a situation where we read the scriptures and accept that when it says "all have sinned" it truly means "all" of us but if the same paragraph in the Bible says that Jesus propitiation is for "all having faith" then suddenly it is specifically referring to  144,000 of those having faith, not all, even though the context was exactly the same. The examples above are not the only ones, of course.

We also then have the odd situation of saying that there were two ways in which Jesus promise was given "first" or "primarily." In fact, notice that there are TWO correct answers to this question as it appears in the Reasoning book under the same heading:

[all bracketed info and parenthetical info in the quotation below are from the original source, not added by me.]

*** rs p. 308-p. 309 Ransom ***

To whom first was the merit of Jesus’ sacrifice applied, and with what objective?

Rom. 1:16: “The good news [regarding Jesus Christ and his role in Jehovah’s purpose] . . . is, in fact, God’s power for salvation to everyone having faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” (The invitation to benefit from the provision for salvation through Christ was extended first to the Jews, then to non-Jews.) . . .

Who else in our day are experiencing benefits from Jesus’ sacrifice?

1 John 2:2: “He [Jesus Christ] is a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins [those of the apostle John and other spirit-anointed Christians], yet not for ours only but also for the whole world’s [others of mankind, those for whom the prospect of eternal life on earth is thus made possible].”

John 10:16: “I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those also I must bring, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.” (These “other sheep” come under the loving care of Jesus Christ while the remnant of the “little flock” of Kingdom heirs is still on earth; thus the “other sheep” can be associated with the Kingdom heirs as part of the “one flock.” They all enjoy many of the same benefits from Jesus’ sacrifice, but not identically so, because they have different destinies.)

Paul himself could refer to verses in the Hebrew Scriptures that mention the "nations" coming in and Paul could say that these verses indicated that the "one hope" of Christians was to be shared with the non-Jews (aka Greeks, aka Gentiles). But the Watch Tower publications have used these same Scriptural indicators to indicate a separate "hope" rather than to make the point that Paul made.  In the Watch Tower publications, we say that many of the references in the Hebrew Scriptures to anyone of goodwill among the nations is a reference to the "other sheep." I'm not comfortable with the contradiction.

On 12/2/2016 at 8:36 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

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

Good point.

Glimmers of this hope were obvious however in Abraham's faith when he was about to kill his son, along with things that Job said, Elijah's experience, Enoch's experience, etc. It was unclear in the book of Ecclesiastes but became explicit however in the book of Daniel and more than hinted at in Ezekiel and other prophetic books. In Jesus' day the [fairly popular] Pharisees believed in a resurrection, but not the [more "elite"] Sadducees, of course. The development of a an "orthodox" Jewish resurrection doctrine can be seen between the time of say Ezekiel and Jesus by looking at some of the beliefs included in the pseudepigrapha and apocryphal and other deutero-canonical works from the interim period.

Another interesting idea is that Paradise could refer to either an earthly realm or a heavenly realm in these interim books, just as it does in the Greek Scriptures:

*** w15 7/15 p. 8 par. 8 Work to Enhance the Spiritual Paradise ***
What Paul saw in a supernatural vision was referred to as a revelation. It involved a future event, not something that existed in his day. When Paul “was caught away to the third heaven,” what “paradise” did he see? The paradise that Paul spoke about would have a physical, a spiritual, and a heavenly fulfillment, all of which will coexist in the future. It can refer to the physical, earthly Paradise yet to come. (Luke 23:43) It can also refer to the spiritual paradise that will be experienced to the full in the new world. Additionally, it can refer to the blessed conditions in heaven in “the paradise of God.”—Rev. 2:7.

Some of the interim Jewish literature speaks of conditions in earthly paradise in language like Isaiah's along with the idea that some fruits and vegetation would grow to giant sizes when it was harvested. Some of the phrases similar to the one found in Revelation, below, would have been read as if they were going to be earthly, physical realities.

(Revelation 22:1, 2) And he showed me a river of water of life, clear as crystal, flowing out from the throne of God and of the Lamb  down the middle of its main street. On both sides of the river were trees of life producing 12 crops of fruit, yielding their fruit each month. And the leaves of the trees were for the healing of the nations.

6 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

So that was the point Ann O'Maly was making, then. Like you I used it and the other scriptures you mentioned referring to the earthly inheritance in my sermons as a child. And like you I would have missed it due to youth and the facilities available at the times. I don't think we had bound volumes in those days, either.

In the 1970's, we were still using blue binders with 24 "spokes" to collect the magazines, but bound volumes were being printed. 

I remember that it was long after I was baptized that I even noticed that Jesus (in Matt 5:5) was actually quoting Psalm 37 when he said the meek would inherit the earth. Today, I think there is much less emphasis on nit-picking whether a verse had to be specially applied to the anointed before we could speak about a general application to the "other sheep." I don't think anyone would say anything if you said that Jesus was speaking to people who would inherit the earth by living on it forever. I remember an article that I'm looking for now where David was originally applying the verse to the ideal situation with the Kingdom of Israel wherein they would continue to inhabit the promised land forever, and therefore inherit the earth by living on it forever if they kept up their end of the Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic covenants with Jehovah. It struck me as odd that the original idea was that they would inherit it forever by living and dying on the land, for the next generation to inherit.

This matches what Eoin said about the absence of a resurrection hope.

*** w74 6/15 pp. 377-378 pars. 13-14 Serve with Eternity in View ***
13 In Psalm 37:11, 29 David wrote: “The meek ones themselves will possess the earth, . . . The righteous themselves will possess the earth, and they will reside forever upon it.” In saying this he evidently drew upon what should have been the case with regard to the Promised Land in his days and in the following generations. According to God’s covenant with Abraham, the wicked pagans who had lived in the land should be cleared out. (Gen. 15:18-21; 17:8; Deut. 7:22; Josh. 21:43-45) Thus each successive generation of righteous worshipers making up the nation of Israel could have resided on the land, the portion of the earth that God gave to them. (Deut. 30:20) We know, however, that the majority of the Israelites proved unfaithful, and so they did not carry out God’s purpose in that regard. In fact, finally God let the Assyrians and Babylonians conquer and depopulate the land temporarily.
14 What David wrote in Psalm 37, though, was also a glimmering of the prospect that Christians today can have. That David’s words had a broader, large-scale application to the Kingdom rule of the entire earth is seen in the fact that at Matthew 5:5 Jesus quoted from Psalm 37. Did Christ say that its fulfillment was all in the past? No, for he projected it into the future, saying that the ‘mild-tempered will inherit the earth.’ Yes, those mild-tempered ones who are to be with Christ in his heavenly kingdom will rule over this earth. (Rev. 5:9, 10) Jesus knew that the Kingdom would rule the earth in righteousness forever. So, the earth itself will be populated by “righteous” ones who will “reside forever upon it.” Thus, by inspiration, David had described what the finale will be when Jehovah carries out his purpose for our earth. Christians can rejoice that the things of which David saw just glimmerings, and could personally share in only by means of a future resurrection, they can experience. Those whom the Lord puts on his right hand as “sheep” have the opportunity to “reside forever” on a paradise earth governed forever from heaven.

On 12/2/2016 at 3:27 PM, Melinda Mills said:

Matt 5:5 Meek shall inherit the earth – Jesus

I would agree that this refers to an earth-based destiny.

Earlier I made a list of some topics that were more often used during a time when the Watch Tower publications often took a special note of the differences between the spirit-anointed class and those who were not spirit-anointed. As you might recall, Matthew 5:5 was often included in this same type of discussion. I should have included it.

I became a publisher in 1962 according to my Publishers Record Card and I remember my first door-to-door sermon was always Psalm 37:10, 11 and 29. Then I'd flip over to read Matthew 5:5, make a quick comment, and finish with Revelation 21:3,4. I used it almost the same way probably 1,000 times until I started "vacation pioneering" ("auxiliary pioneering") in the summers starting in 1968, the year after I was baptized. That year, I worked with a Circuit Overseer who told me that I could still use Matthew 5:5, in "principle," but that I shouldn't say that Jesus was addressing people who would live forever on the earth. He said that Matthew 5:5 referred to the anointed who had a heavenly hope.

I was shocked. This had been published since long before I was baptized, but I had missed it. According to the Watch Tower publications he was right, of course:

*** w66 9/1 p. 538 Do You Remember? ***
Who are the mild-tempered ones referred to in Matthew 5:5, who will inherit the earth?
Jesus Christ and his 144,000 anointed followers.—P. 451.

*** w66 8/1 p. 451 “Happy Are the Mild-tempered Ones” ***
Who are the mild-tempered that will inherit the earth? Certainly they would include Jesus Christ himself, for, above all men that ever lived on this earth, he was mild-tempered. As he himself said: “Come to me, . . . for I am mild-tempered.” Concerning him and his triumphal ride into Jerusalem, it was written: “Look! Your King is coming to you, mild-tempered.”—Matt. 11:28, 29; 21:5.
That Jesus Christ, as the preeminent mild-tempered one, will inherit the earth other scriptures make clear. Jehovah God has appointed him to be “heir of all things,” including this earth. In fact, ‘the nations are to be his inheritance, and the ends of the earth his possession.’—Heb. 1:2; Ps. 2:7, 8.
This inheritance Jesus Christ shares, even as he does his Kingdom rule, with his anointed footstep followers, for they are to be “heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ.” These are the ones the apostle John saw in vision standing upon heavenly Mount Zion and who number 144,000.—Rom. 8:17; Rev. 14:1.

*** w59 8/1 p. 479 Questions From Readers ***
When Jesus said, as recorded at Matthew 5:5, “Happy are the mild-tempered ones, since they will inherit the earth,” of whom was he speaking?—H. S., U.S.A.
Jesus here applied the expression “mild-tempered” or “meek” to his disciples of that time who were in line for the heavenly kingdom.

*** w58 3/1 p. 139 “Blessed Are the Meek” ***
Inheriting the earth is part of his reward for his meek and faithful course while a man.—Matt. 5:5, AS; Ps. 2:8.
Sharing this inheritance with Jesus Christ will be his “bride,” those footstep followers of his, limited to 144,000, who will receive a heavenly reward.

1 hour ago, The Son of Man said:

I seek to enighten

Are you, in fact, the Son of Man?

3 hours ago, John Lindsay Barltrop said:

it is only what was quoted in the Watchtower

Except for a couple of points about Easter, priestly celibacy, and a few other points which are also very likely untrue, the Watchtower stopped quoting Hislop about Christmas in 1978, and the Awake! stopped referencing these points in 1973.

It's true that Alexander Hislop's book, The Two Babylons, has been almost thoroughly debunked. You can easily find this claim in Wikipedia and other sources. I think the most credible "witness" in this regard is a man who had once believed in Hislop's book, and who wrote a book of his own that piggy-backed on the ideas from Hislop. Yet, even though this man continues to believe that much of Catholicism is based on false origins, he honestly realized that he could no longer, in good conscience, make money off the falsehoods claimed by Hislop. So he pulled his book from publication and criticized his own book.

I'll quote some relevant parts his article from here, where he explains some of his reasons:

Message from Ralph Woodrow regarding the book BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION

For a number of years my book BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION was very popular, enjoyed a wide circulation, and was translated into various languages. To this day, we do not cease to receive orders and inquiries about it. Despite its popularity, several years ago we pulled it out of print and now offer a replacement book . . .

Because misinformation about this decision persists on the Internet, and in other ways, the aim of this article is to set the record straight.

According to one rumor, “the Catholics” put so much pressure on me, I had a heart attack and almost died! Consequently, I “recanted” and wrote the other book. There is no truth to this!

Another rumor is that my motives were financial—my desire was to be popular and make more money. To the contrary, BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION was extremely popular and provided more income to our ministry than all other books and offerings put together! We have faced much financial loss because of the decision to pull the book out of print.

Some letters we have received have been very warm, commending me for honesty and integrity, expressing appreciation for the clarification provided by the replacement book THE BABYLON CONNECTION? But other letters have been mean-spirited—that I am “stupid,” “scum,” “scared of the truth,” a “low down coward,” a “traitor to Christ,” following “a false god,” and am an “undercover Jesuit”! One even said, “I hope you die soon, I want you dead!”

It puzzles me how some can be so fanatical against one set of errors—or what they perceive to be errors—only to develop greater errors: becoming judgmental, hateful, and dishonest.

My original book had some valuable information in it. But it also contained certain teachings that were made popular in a book many years ago, THE TWO BABYLONS, by Alexander Hislop. This book claims that the very religion of ancient Babylon, under the leadership of Nimrod and his wife, was later disguised with Christian-sounding names, becoming the Roman Catholic Church. Thus, two “Babylons"—one ancient and one modern. Proof for this is sought by citing numerous similarities in paganism. The problem with this method is this: in many cases there is no connection.

...

So is it with the claims about pagan origins. What may seem to have a connection, upon further investigation, has no connection at all!

By this method, one could take virtually anything and do the same—even the “golden arches” at McDonald’s! The Encyclopedia Americana (article: “Arch") says the use of arches was known in Babylon as early as 2020 B.C. Since Babylon was called “the golden city” (Isa. 14:4), can there be any doubt about the origin of the golden arches? As silly as this is, this is the type of proof that has been offered over and over about pagan origins.

By this method, atheists have long sought to discredit the Bible and Christianity altogether—not just the Roman Catholic Church.

By this method, one could condemn Protestant and evangelical denominations like the Assemblies of God, Baptist, Church of Christ, Lutheran, Methodist, Nazarene, etc. Basic things like prayer, and kneeling in prayer, would have to be rejected, because pagans knelt and prayed to their gods. Water baptism would have to be rejected, for pagans had numerous rites involving water, etc.

By this method, the BIBLE itself would need to be rejected as pagan. All of the following practices or beliefs mentioned in the Bible, were also known among pagans—raising hands in worship, taking off shoes on holy ground, a holy mountain, a holy place in a temple, offering sacrifices without blemish, a sacred ark, city of refuge, bringing forth water from a rock, laws written on stone, fire appearing on a person’s head, horses of fire, the offering of first fruits, tithes, etc.

By this method, the LORD himself would be pagan. The woman called Mystery Babylon had a cup in her hand; the Lord has a cup in his hand (Psa. 75:8). Pagan kings sat on thrones and wore crowns; the Lord sits on a throne and wears a crown (Rev. 1:4; 14:14). Pagans worshipped the sun; the Lord is the “Sun of righteousness” (Mal. 4:2). Pagan gods were likened to stars; the Lord is called “the bright and morning star” (Rev. 22:16). Pagan gods had temples dedicated to them; the Lord has a temple (Rev. 7:15). Pagan gods were pictured with wings; the Lord is pictured with wings (Psa. 91:4).

Here is a list of the some of the unsubstantiated claims that are made about the religion of ancient Babylon:

• The Babylonians went to a confessional and confessed sins to priests who wore black clergy garments.

• Their king, Nimrod, was born on December 25. Round decorations on Christmas trees and round communion wafers honored him as the Sun-god.

• Sun-worshippers went to their temples weekly, on Sunday, to worship the Sun-god.

• Nimrod’s wife was Semiramis, who claimed to be the Virgin Queen of Heaven, and was the mother of Tammuz.

• Tammuz was killed by a wild boar when he was age 40; so 40 days of Lent were set aside to honor his death.

• The Babylonians wept for him on “Good Friday.” They worshipped a cross-the initial letter of his name.

It is amazing how unsubstantiated teachings like these circulate—and are believed. One can go to any library, check any history book about ancient Babylon, none of these things will be found. They are not historically accurate, but are based on an arbitrary piecing together of bits and pieces of mythology.

Hislop, for example, taught that mythological persons like Adonis, Apollo, Bacchus, Cupid, Dagon, Hercules, Janus, Mars, Mithra, Moloch, Orion, Osiris, Pluto, Saturn, Vulcan, Zoraster, and many more, were all Nimrod! He then formed his own “history” of Nimrod! He did the same thing with Nimrod’s wife. So, according to his theory, Nimrod was a big, ugly, deformed black man. His wife, Semiramis—also known as Easter, he says—was a most beautiful white woman with blond hair and blue eyes, a backslider, inventor of soprano singing, the originator of priestly celibacy, the first to whom the unbloody mass was offered! This is not factual history—it is more in the category of tabloid sensationalism.

...

The concern about not wanting anything pagan in our lives can be likened to a ship crossing a vast ocean. This concern has taken us in the right direction, but as we come to a better understanding as to what is actually pagan and what is not, a correction of the course is necessary in our journey. This is not a going back, but a correction of the course as we follow “the shining light, that shines more and more unto the perfect day” (Prov. 4:18).

---------end of quote---------

I remember when we used to tell people at the door that the cross came from Nimrod who was also Tammuz and the the first letter of Tammuz looked like a cross. Did you ever see what a "T" or the word "Tammuz" looks like in Babylonian cuneiform?

Anyway, it looks like Hislop was just another fanatical liar who hated the Catholic religion so much that he probably thought it didn't much matter whether what he wrote was true or not, and he likely just made up a lot of it himself. Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard and others seem to have come from the same ilk.

14 hours ago, Diakonos said:

Bringing someone to righteousness does not make the bringer a mediator between the person and God. If you conduct a Bible study with an individual and that individual abandons an immoral lifestyle and subsequently lives their life by God's standards you can say that you have had a part in turning or leading that person towards righteousness. However, you have not become a mediator between that person and God.

The simple Biblical fact is stated at 1 Tim 2 : 5 there is only one mediator between God and men and that is God's son, Jesus Christ.

I believe you are absolutely right.

I was referring to the idea that I was once excited to see a moderation of this clergy-laity idea, and I was also happy to see a lot of changes recently that move us away from the idea that the Greek Scriptures were only written to the "anointed" and not directly for most of us who profess an earthly hope. But when I saw your question, and the quote from the 2014 Watchtower, it reminded me that it continues to be a topic for conversation and questions.

There were about 6 specific topics, plus a couple of general ones, that drove some of these questions.

1. One was the difference between immortality and eternal life.
2. Another was a difference between washing robes and being granted white robes.
3. Another was whether Jesus was the mediator of the great crowd / other sheep.
4. Another was for whom Jesus' sacrifice was a direct "propitiatory" ransom sacrifice, and for whom it was a sacrifice with indirect benefits to the rest of the world (those who would gain life on earth).
5. Another was the topic you brought up, sometimes specified as the difference between "righteousness as a friend of God vs. righteousness as a son of God."
6. Another was an older doctrine (sometimes called the "mystery doctrine") that was supposedly dropped in the early 1960's, but which was brought up again by a president of the Watch Tower Society at a time when the "mediator" question was being questioned.

#6 is a more complicated one, which I cannot summarize into a single phrase like the others, but it is still reflected in the ideas of #3 and #4, and often leads to phrases about the "other sheep" gaining their righteousness (the benefits of Jesus' sacrifice) through the work of the "anointed."

#4 has not been pushed for many years, and #3 while rarely mentioned is still carefully worded to match the idea that has appeared explicitly in print (that Jesus is not the mediator for the "other sheep.") The term mediator is given a technical legal sense so that it is only applied to those in the new covenant, which is only considered valid for the 144,000.

On 11/29/2016 at 10:58 AM, Melinda Mills said:

Both earthly and heavenly servants are righteous, but Jehovah can do what he wants with this things.   As with household servants, some can be assigned to serve in the inner chambers, some can serve in the courtyard.

As I'm sure you are aware, the 144,000 are never spoken of as serving in the inner chambers. Only the "great crowd" are ever spoken of as serving in the inner chambers.

This should not make us confused about the fact that all of us may have different destinies as to how and where we will serve, if we are privileged to be counted among those who will gain life. Clearly, there is both a new heavens and a new earth. Yet, the New Jerusalem (per Revelation 21 & 22) appears to be a heavenly city that comes down to earth, and by that we take it to mean that the earth is blessed by the "work" and "power" of the new holy city. But who enters New Jerusalem?

(Revelation 22:14) 14 Happy are those who wash their robes, so that they may have authority to go to the trees of life and that they may gain entrance into the city through its gates.

The meaning is clear from the same verse that the NWT cross-references, here:

(1 John 1:7-10) 7 However, if we are walking in the light as he himself is in the light, we do have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 8 If we make the statement, “We have no sin,” we are misleading ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous so as to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we make the statement, “We have not sinned,” we are making him a liar, and his word is not in us.

But who are the ones who "wash their robes"? Revelation 7 says it is the "great crowd" who are, of course, the only ones spoken of as rendering their service in the inner sanctuary, the inner chambers.

(Revelation 7:9, 13-15) 9 After this I saw, and look! a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, dressed in white robes; . . . 13 In response one of the elders said to me: “These who are dressed in the white robes, who are they and where did they come from?” 14 So right away I said to him: “My lord, you are the one who knows.” And he said to me: “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 15 That is why they are before the throne of God, and they are rendering him sacred service day and night in his temple; [inner chambers, Gk: naos]

This doesn't mean that the 144,000 are not also there, of course, but to me it highlights that we need to be more humble and less dogmatic about our supposed "knowledge" of these things. I therefore agree whole-heartedly with your statements:

On 11/29/2016 at 10:58 AM, Melinda Mills said:

Understanding will increase – no need to be argumentative or dogmatic

 

(1 Corinthians 13:12, 13) ¹² For now we see in hazy outline by means of a metal mirror, but then it will be face-to-face. At present I know partially, but then I will know accurately, just as I am accurately known. ¹³ Now, however, these three remain: faith, hope, love; but the greatest of these is love.

 

 (Proverbs 4:18) But the path of the righteous is like the bright morning light That grows brighter and brighter until full daylight.

 

====================

 

Both earthly and heavenly servants are righteous, but Jehovah can do what he wants with this things.   As with household servants, some can be assigned to serve in the inner chambers, some can serve in the courtyard.

 

 (Isaiah 60:21) And all your people will be righteous; They will possess the land forever. They are the sprout that I planted, The work of my hands, for me to be beautified.

20 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

For JWInsider: Please note the article I quoted about bringing the many to righteousness since 1935 was from 2014.

Yes.

I probably hold a position similar to yours on this issue, and probably even as to how it relates to the question at hand. I believe that we should be humble and admit that we don't really know exactly how and where Jehovah wishes for us to serve him in the future. Those who have a heavenly hope may serve on earth, and those with an earthly hope may serve in heaven for all we know.

(Matthew 8:11) 11 But I tell you that many from east and west will come and recline at the table with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom of the heavens;

All we really know is that our love for Jehovah should motivate us; our faith in him and the gift of Jesus' sacrifice should motivate us to do what is right. But doing what is right is not a means of gaining righteousness in the context of Romans. In fact, we can't do anything to gain righteousness, and only Jehovah and Christ "bring" us to righteousness in the sense that Romans speaks about. It's a condition that we are freely granted (through faith) such that we can approach the righteous heavens in prayer.

This is not about a "place" where we will serve and praise Jehovah in the future. It is about the "place" we are granted before Jehovah's throne today:

(Hebrews 4:16) Let us, then, approach the throne of undeserved kindness with freeness of speech, so that we may receive mercy and find undeserved kindness to help us at the right time.

7 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

Since 1935, millions of people have allowed the remnant to ‘bring them to righteousness.’

Every now and then we harken back  to the old clergy-laity distinction (in the form of the remnant-nonremnant distinction). Care was taken not to use this type of expression for a few years. I have rarely seen it since then, and especially not since Fred Franz died. He was one who often hinted that the non-remnant are brought to righteousness through the work of the remnant since only the remnant have Jesus as mediator. In effect, as many opposers are quick to point out, only the remnant become the mediator between Jesus and the "other sheep." It's problematic and forces the idea that the Greek Scriptures were only written to the remnant, and the only parts that can apply at least indirectly to the other sheep are those portions that the remnant will clarify for them.

*** w54 3/1 p. 151 par. 7 Restoration of True Religion Today ***

Though the truths of the Bible were being restored during that “Elijah” work of God’s people, the actual name Jehovah was not freely used in the assemblies and the field ministry of his servants.

@Diakonos

I visited the Warwick property in the early summer, and I visited (and stayed at) the Patterson facilities two years ago. Warwick was still in a kind of torn up mess, and it was rainy/muddy, so it was hard to call it luxury at the time. Patterson, however, is gorgeous! I love the property, and I think it leaves a pretty good impression in the surrounding neighborhood. It both blends with and improves on the landscape. 

If all of it had been for the purpose of building up new buildings to live and work in "luxury" this might have been more questionable, but I think the point was to make a beautiful and comfortable environment for the working brothers and sisters, and also visitors and those who stay for training or temporary assignments. I believe that the basic idea is to create something that is practical but also gives "homage" to the goals of the earthly hope. It was rather incongruous to run a worldwide religious organization from an upscale urban neighborhood when that organization emphasizes the idealized pastoral setting as an eternal goal. A setting that emphasizes the beauties of Jehovah's earthly creation is more appropriate than factories in the shadow of the Manhattan skyline. (Although I think that can be beautiful in its own way, too, and I loved my 10^th floor corner apartment in the Towers Hotel.)

So I have no complaint about the appearance of "luxury," as long as the costs were kept down as low as possible by volunteer labor and volunteer donations. Quality workmanship, quality design, and constant maintenance and cleaning sometimes gives the appearance of luxury when that isn't the real goal. Also, a lot of the cost and expenditures of these new buildings was based on the anticipated sell-off of prime Brooklyn real estate, and could have been, in effect, zero cost.

I can defend it in another way, too, where I see the Organization as a practical business that operates efficiently in the world through its ability to gain economies of scale in purchasing power, and gaining respectability from governments as a legal and business entity through its size and appearance and "clout." In the world, this kind of respect is gained through sheer size, expenditures, purchasing arrangements, lawyers, property, etc.

(Luke 16:8,9) And his master commended the steward, though unrighteous, because he acted with practical wisdom; for the sons of this system of things are wiser in a practical way toward their own generation than the sons of the light are . . . 9 “Also, I say to you: Make friends for yourselves by means of the unrighteous riches. . . ."

So, it's not that I think any of this building activity is "necessary" in a Christian sense (the stones could cry out) but it is sometimes "wiser in a practical way" to use unrighteous riches in ways that will not always get all of these funds out to the poor.

(Matthew 26:8-11) 8 On seeing this, the disciples became indignant and said: “Why this waste? 9 For this could have been sold for a great deal of money and given to the poor.” 10 Aware of this, Jesus said to them: “Why do you try to make trouble for the woman? She did a fine deed toward me. 11 For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me.

I'm not one of those people who confuses the Governing Body with Jesus himself, although I've met and conversed with some who apparently do make that mistake, and you might even meet one or two of them here on this forum. The reason I bring up the verse just quoted isn't to tie it to Matthew 25:40 (‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’) It's to point out that "voluntary" giving can go to whatever projects we "volunteer" to give it to. If we volunteer it to a building project during the time that we are aware of what's going on in Warwick, we know that's where it's going. Not even Ananias would have been judged for how he contributed his money, or how much he held back from contributing:

(Acts 5:4) 4 As long as it remained with you, did it not remain yours? And after it was sold, was it not in your control?. . .

Most who are giving at this time actually want to see it used for something "almost luxurious" or jewel-like in Warwick or at various other current Branch projects in the UK, etc.

Beyond these points just made however, I have also been disappointed that there have not been more opportunities for voluntary giving to specific areas where there is hardship that needs to be alleviated. There are places where Witnesses are undergoing extreme hardship, suffering, hunger, relocation, exile, etc., and I don't like to learn how bad it was a year later in the Yearbook. There are many things we can do locally with our funds and resources, or when we travel to "third world" lands and donate directly, but we also know that an international religious society could organize this more efficiently and find ways to directly provide what's needed to the right people. (The WTS often does this, too.) If too much is given for one relief project, then what's remaining can go to the next, and less is wasted. Rather than 1,000 haphazard donations which can be hit and miss and overlapping, each relief effort can be turned into a project that efficiently cares for everyone in need (and especially those related to us in the faith, so I don't think there is anything wrong with a focus on just JWs first, if the money came from JW donations).

(Galatians 6:10) 10 So, then, as long as we have the opportunity, let us work what is good toward all, but especially toward those related to us in the faith.

I agree with the sentiment that the primary "good works" that most early Christians were involved in referred to charitable works not spriitual work. It was fine and appropriate for a specific small group to be more concerned with "doctrine" than the work of "waiting on tables."

(Acts 6:2-4) 2 So the Twelve called the multitude of the disciples together and said: “It is not right for us to leave the word of God to distribute food to tables. 3 So, brothers, select for yourselves seven reputable men from among you, full of spirit and wisdom, that we may appoint them over this necessary matter; 4 but we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.”

The work of the ministerial servants here was the physical distribution of charity, and therefore the reason we do not forsake meetings is so that we can all know where to participate in the needed "good works" of charity.

(Hebrews 10:24, 25) 24 And let us consider one another so as to incite to love and fine works, 25 not forsaking our meeting together, as some have the custom, but encouraging one another, and all the more so as you see the day drawing near.

Those taking the lead in the congregational context, the ones we "obey," are the ones who help us to prioritize and coordinate charitable relief efforts helping us to make the most of our "gifts" and our "ministry." We do better when we work together and encourage one another in this way. Our spirituality, our very religion, should be defined by love and fine works. Those "fine works" include ministering to the sick, the hungry, those who lack sufficient clothing. Naturally, not all the ministries are about charitable relief, but these are the most important ones for most of us:

(James 1:27) The form of worship that is clean and undefiled from the standpoint of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself without spot from the world.

On 11/23/2016 at 10:41 PM, Queen Esther said:

brothers die together

I was looking in the background for drums of Kool-Aid.

Too soon?

@Kurt

Nice. I just read them [McDowells' newsletters]. Hadn't seen them before. Very open and honest.

And, just for sake of completeness . . . the 337-song Song Book that came out in 1928 became the new foundation for dozens of songs that we sang for more than 50 years and a few of which we still sing today. It was reduced to small fraction of its songs in the next 1944 Song Book, but several were put back in the 1950 Song Book and many remained right up until 2009. Very few of the 1928 songs remain today, but most of us can probably still remember some of the music and lyrics, especially the ones that survived up until the 2009 song book. 

In the 1928 Song Book, the credit to Frances Havergal was dropped, and credit for the tune (that we used from 1928 until 1966) was now given to Horton.

Our 1924 Songbook, called "Kingdom Hymns" had the song without the "silver and gold" line, probably because this particular songbook was geared toward the youth in the congregation (see Preface, attached below). But in this one, the words were actually attributed directly to Frances Havergal, although the tune was just a little different based on some music from Mozart. (Actually, if you play the Mozart-based version on the piano, you can see that it was actually the basis for the version of the music that I remember singing until 1966, the year before I was baptized.)