Anna

Leaven can be bad or good? Enduring suffering? Cyrus as Jehovah's "servant" for releasing the Jews from Babylon? Nebuchadnezzar as Jehovah's "servant" for punishing wicked Jerusalem? The angel of death? Blood on a doorpost? Birth pangs? The sword of the superior authorities? Jehovah's discipline? The goat of Azazel? The vicious she-bears that apparently did Elisha's bidding in mauling some children to death for making fun of his bald head?
I don't think that you would have that much trouble finding various and sundry things in the Bible that could be rationalized as "bad" but ultimately represent something "good." More to the point, Cyrus and Nebuchadnezzar were both "tools" in Jehovah's hand as he allowed them to advance their beastly rule for their own motives, but their beastly motives served Jehovah's purpose at the time.
But this particular dream about a tree had created a special problem for Witnesses because of the difficulties in making Nebuchadnezzar picture Jesus. For a few years Nebuchadnezzar was allowed to be a type of the antitype Jesus, and then that was changed so that Nebuchadnezzar was explicitly no longer considered a type or picture of Jesus.
Now, as of 2015, we even have a more general "rule" that we should never apply types and antitypes to Biblical narratives, and parables, unless the Bible tells us explicitly to do so.
The tree dream is most definitely a "parable" but we make an exception to the rule for it, and of course, we must make an exception for the rule about the parable of the "faithful and discreet slave and the wicked slave."
 
But there are some special glitches in this parable that have caused trouble for the WTS publications. Most of the glitches have been discussed on this forum. But there is one serious one that has barely been touched upon. And it pretty much ruins the whole use of this parable as a prophecy about the Messianic Kingdom.
And it's the . . . . . (next post)

These are so much better than the early dramas. Maxwell Friend would do a great Shakespearean, sentorian voice of God, which was always amazing. Daniel Sydlik would do a voice of God, too, but people detected the Brooklyn accent sometimes, and our CO would make fun of it with "Hey youze guys down there!." When the actors prepared, we were given instructions to exaggerate the gestures so that people up in the baseball stadium's highest bleachers could see them.
One of the brothers I worked with did a routine where he would exaggerate a groveling servant leaning nearly to the ground, while repeating this huge rolling gesture that looked like he was using both hands to wrap invisible ropes around an imaginary barrel in front of him, and he would say things like:  MAY YOUR BEARD GROW EVER LONGER, GEHAZI!!

I'm not sure if you are referring to me, or generally. I should have been clearer and said this does not seem good enough for some. It seems good enough to me. However, I am open to learning the viewpoint of those who think differently. This is why this topic was created, to hopefully get a:
Although I do understand that a completely concise answer may not be possible because there are a number of intertwining factors involved, I am hoping that at the end of this discussion, every Tom, Dick, and Harry will be able to understand both sides of the coin.

I though the same, if only for the simple reason that it's irrelevant to the topic. I was wondering whether I should copy and paste here just the relevant portions so that people don't have to keep referring to the website. Although you probably already mean that you will paste the relevant section and then comment on that. I wish we could find some method that would keep things orderly....that probably won't happen, so perhaps towards the end when it seems that everything has been exhausted, one could have a summary...

They’re not all that hot at writing dialogue, nor are the modern videos, despite clever film technique and historically accurate artifacts, ..um....well, they wouldn’t win the Best Picture Academy Award.
The brothers are in a bind. They don’t want to go beyond what’s written but what’s written is pretty sparse, so they compensate by staying thoroughly “safe” with the result of characters who appear to eat Bible sandwiches.
Counsel is generally laid on with a trowel. I was very pleased at the little quip in the Jonah video of he explaining to a traveler just what was his mission—not so much the line, but his facial expression afterwards, because it displayed a light touch not often seen. Let’s face it—not many of the brothers are actors. 
Lower your dramatic expectations just a little, and the Jonah and Hezekiah videos went tolerably well, with some fine moments.  I thought the Nehemiah video was a step backwards, and I had a hard time with the video of the Witness kid who leaves his happy construction-business home to take a job in the big city and immediately comes to ruin, because it fulfills every Witness stereotype to the tee.
Ah, well. They are what they are. They’re teaching videos for ones who like that means of learning—in short, most people. Do people in the greater world flock to the critically acclaimed movies? Nah. They like schlock, so don’t say it is an attribute just of the brothers. I just came across the factoid that Moby Dick pretty much sank Herman Melville’s career. It was too esoteric for anyone to get their heads around. He had been a well-liked author up that time, but afterwards he fell out of favor and didn’t resurface till much later with a few offerings like Billy Budd.
Besides, the brothers don’t want to go the Hollywood route in which you swoon over the sensitive performance of the leading man, only to learn later that in real life he is some lowlife narcissistic scumbag who beats his wife, snorts heroin, and beds every other man on the planet. 
Jehovah’s people are nothing if not upright and real.

Cameron and Jon would be crushed.

I literally only added that, not for your benefit of course, but because I assumed that persons like CC or "scholar JW" would accuse me of trying to change the subject. Looks like CC took the bait anyway. So predictable.
But I'll go ahead and start the new topic right now. And we might even discuss hidden text below the surface.
And it's also predictable that CC will now create a post in which he accuses me of being predictable. So predictable

Under another recent topic, still actively ongoing, Anna brought up how most Witnesses don't study the issue for themselves and rely on articles such as the following one she mentioned.
I'll give it a try. Here's part one (in my next post). Anyone really interested should check the link on JW.ORG, because I will be skipping some of the less interesting dialogue between Cameron [JW Bible study conductor] and Jon [the person being studied with].

Oh my!
Let no one think, not for a moment, that I understand not a small part of what is said, although I see it very interesting.

Thanks. I started following this thread and then was away for a few days and got so behind that I stopped. As you probably realise, I have yet to properly research this whole topic, it's been on the back burner for a few years now and every time I intend to start something pops up and then I don't get back around to it. Then when I'm ready once more, so much time has passed that I have to start all over again and so round and round it goes. I saw you mention to someone that the whole thing could be figured out in less than a day. This is proof that I must be dumb and need an"explanation for dummies" like the type they do on YouTube, with diagrams and cute pictures 😂
I would not expect something like that from you since you are well above that. Perhaps if you viewed me as your 6 year old grandchild it might work 😁
As you say, most Witnesses haven't personally researched the 1914 topic, and rely on WT articles such as this one: 
https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/wp20141001/gods-kingdom-prophecy-1/
Which is supposed to illustrate a "typical" conversation someone might have with a householder, NOT! Not anyone I know.
When one reads both part one and two it makes sense, (to me) so perhaps in another topic one could use these two articles and insert critiques? (In another color). 
 
 

Is all of this supposed to be proving something about 1914 ? 
If so what exactly please ? 
We already know that the Kingdom existed whilst Jesus Christ was here on earth and we already know that HE had been given all Authority after His resurrection in 33 C .E. 
So what exactly is the point of this  43 page discussion ? 

It was already answered, by AlanF, and I will go ahead and answer it again in my next post. But you need to understand why "scholar JW" will always claim that it wasn't really answered. This type of question is a kind of game with "scholar JW." He has about 4 of these types of questions from what I can see.
If you have looked up his former behavior on all forums where he brings such things up, you'll see that "scholar JW" believes this must be a trick question. It's easy to answer correctly, and it's easy to answer in perfect agreement with the INSIGHT book. But "scholar JW" thinks he can be sneaky (slippery) by taking advantage of the fact that the INSIGHT book "waffles" on this point. The INSIGHT book is not as definitive as it could be, and "scholar JW" will use the indecision in the INSIGHT book against the person who answers.
Of course, if a person tries to answer in the same way the INSIGHT book answers it, "scholar JW" can point out that the person answering is being INDECISIVE, and is therefore weak and wrong. If you answer decisively according to the best choice offered in the INSIGHT book, "scholar JW" will simply point out that you did not take the other possible choice into account.
This game played by "scholar JW" works only because he counts on the idea that he thinks almost all JWs who watch these discussions are stupid. But JWs are not so stupid as "scholar JW" thinks. What really happens is that most JWs just won't look into it themselves out of their "fear for their comfort:" that they will have to deal with something they weren't prepared for. Another reason, seen in some Witnesses, is the preferred haughtiness of "knowing" they are always right and anyone who challenges that haughtiness, even another one of Jehovah's Witnesses, can be considered automatically wrong. But most JWs aren't stupid about these matters, they just have their reasons for not wanting to look into it.
In the congregation the reason not to look into such questions is "fear for their comfort." But discussion forums tend to attract people who want to show off their knowledge or their discoveries, along with a lot more people who think that they can feel superior by dismissing knowledge and discoveries, usually with something as simple as "That doesn't fit my religion or my ideology. Therefore, you are wrong, I am right, and I am therefore smarter and superior -- without even trying!"
This must be a great trick to feed someone's ego. And on a forum like this, "scholar JW" (and CC, too, for that matter) will have discovered a great secret. No matter what they say, no matter how stupid or how wrong, it will always be considered correct (and "smart") in front of several other forum-visiting Witnesses. On this topic, other Witnesses only have to think about whether it supports the 1914 doctrine (e.g. 607 for NEB18). If anyone can point out that what "scholar JW" claims happens to be inconsistent with the evidence or even with the WTS publications, it won't ever matter. Automatically, someone like "scholar JW" can be right, even though "scholar JW" doesn't even have to be familiar with the evidence. What could be simpler? One can "win" all arguments without even knowing anything. They can run away from evidence, simply deny it, create a diversion, make completely false counter-claims, and yet, even when they tell lies, they can still be considered almost like little "gods" at least to themselves.
And this now becomes a vicarious ego boost to all Witnesses who do not want to look up the information for themselves. The "smarter" that the person with evidence appears to a person like "scholar JW," the better the "win" against them by the "scholar JW's" of the world." (To this end "scholar JW" will make sure that the person with the most evidence is not just called "supposedly intelligent" but is also called an actual "expert" or "the one with the most information" or "the one who should be able to answer this question." After all, "they" (Witness discussion observers) have just vicariously "stood up" against people who thought they could explain supposedly "complex" secular evidence. The more familiar one seems with the secular evidence, the more the ego boost to the Witness who thinks they are siding with the Bible chronology versus secular chronology. The more complex and unexplainable the secular evidence seems, the better and smarter and haughtier they feel for being able to "win" over "complex" evidence without even needing to bother to look into it. 
That's because the Witness can now think: "Aha! We who support 1914 in the face of "complex" evidence are supporting the Watchtower Society, and therefore the Bible, and therefore Jehovah. And look how the Bible evidence that we Witnesses support is so much better and stronger than the evidence of so the called worldly intellectual. This makes us smarter than people with PhD's, smarter than all secular experts."
Later, when I come back, I'll go ahead and answer that question from "scholar JW."

Seeing that a lot of peeps here are from around the world, just wanna know how you guys are holding up? I was always on lurk mode because I am busy, so I was bored today.
For me I am busy with virtual classes now, which are dreadful. The brothers and sisters are doing fine, as well as family. Some of our friends and the people we preach too are doing good.
With the vaccines out there is a lot of fear in the black and latino communities, even outside of it. 2 of my professors are against it, but like all others, they say it is personal choice.
Anyways.... How about you guys?
The pandemic is taking a toll on some peeps directly and indirectly. 
To my Latinos and Latinas
Viendo que mucha gente aquí es de todo el mundo, ¿solo quieren saber cómo les está yendo?  Siempre estuve al acecho porque estoy ocupado, así que hoy estaba aburrido.
Para mí ahora estoy ocupado con clases virtuales, que son espantosas.  Los hermanos y hermanas están bien, al igual que la familia.  Algunos de nuestros amigos y las personas a las que predicamos también lo están haciendo bien.
Con las Covid-19 vaccine, hay mucho miedo en las comunidades black y Latin communities, fuera de ellas.  2 de mis profesores están en contra, pero como todos los demás, dicen que es una elección personal.
 De todos modos .... ¿Qué hay de ustedes?

The cutest snowman! 
I hope you built another one, this time with the grandchildren 👍😄

Alas, it is too late for the mask. The poor guy already has Covid.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/churches-fears-for-conversion-bill-are-unfounded-20201215-p56no3.html
I think this article puts a bit of balance on things. 
 
The Victorian government’s bill to ban LGBTQ+ conversion practices has raised confusion and disquiet in some religious communities about potential threats to their religious freedoms.
These fears are quickly assuaged by a plain reading of the bill and the statement of compatibility with the Charter of Human Rights.
The Victorian bill carefully weighs the protection of religious freedom against the protection of the rights of LGBTQ+ people and is the product of significant consultation. It does not ban prayer, preaching or pastoral support about gender and sexuality in general. But it does prevent these spiritual practices being misused in attempts to change or suppress a person’s sexuality or gender identity and thereby causing them harm. It has been found to be consistent with Victorian human rights law and does not constitute an overreach.
Placing limits on religious practices, as proposed in this bill, is not new. Both Australian law and international human rights law provide guidance on when it is appropriate to place limitations on religious practices.
There are numerous examples where we do this already in Australian law. Jehovah’s Witnesses hold religious objections to blood transfusions, but Australian law overrides the practice of that belief in circumstances where a blood transfusion is necessary to save the life of a child. Several religious communities have traditions of female genital cutting. Yet Australian law overrides that religious practice, making it both illegal to perform in Australia or to remove someone overseas for the practice. And more recently, several Australian jurisdictions have followed the recommendations of the child abuse royal commission to limit the seal of confession in order to protect children from sexual abuse.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So. we know from scripture that the Superior Authorities are placed or are allowed to be in their position by Almighty God. 
And we can see some good here that this government is trying to stop female genital cutting and to protect children from sexual abuse. 
The position concerning blood transfusions is a difficult one. A secular government has to make secular decisions completely separate from religious bias. 
So at this moment in time it does not look as if they are trying to wipe out Christianity, as some people pretend they are.  
 

Ever since they reported Fred Flintstone’s lower facial discoloration as evidence of masking during a prehistoric pandemic my faith in them has been shaken.
 
 
 

This is an open club, there are some ex-witnesses on here. If you want to join a JW only club then I suggest:
www.jwtalk.net 
You will like it 🙂

I must admit I have not heard anyone express themselves about the collective brothers on the GB as if they were one person.. Usually the brothers will say: "the brothers at HQ", or "the brothers who are taking the lead", when referring to the GB. I am sure Shirley meant each individual, as she later qualified her statement by saying she met some of the members individually.
The GB view themselves individually as the "domestics" just like all brothers and sisters are the "domestics" when it comes to spiritual nourishment. Collectively though, they do apply to themselves the term the slave or GB. None one of them can act independently, but only as a body. There has to be majority vote for any any organizational or doctrinal  decission to pass. But I am sure you already know this

Dear sister, I don't think anyone here was questioning Jehovah.

Dear sister, I don't think anyone here was questioning Jehovah.

I think the idea IS to have plans. But personally I don't think we should need plans as God can save anyone anywhere at any time regardless where they are.
Only the ones who "worship" the organization might panic.
I think at that time supernatural things WILL happen, because after all, Armageddon will be from a supernatural source, and to survive it, will have to involve miracles.

I think the idea IS to have plans. But personally I don't think we should need plans as God can save anyone anywhere at any time regardless where they are.
Only the ones who "worship" the organization might panic.
I think at that time supernatural things WILL happen, because after all, Armageddon will be from a supernatural source, and to survive it, will have to involve miracles.

I think the idea IS to have plans. But personally I don't think we should need plans as God can save anyone anywhere at any time regardless where they are.
Only the ones who "worship" the organization might panic.
I think at that time supernatural things WILL happen, because after all, Armageddon will be from a supernatural source, and to survive it, will have to involve miracles.

The reason I included the kings from the Uruk King List going back a bit further is because our next "witness" is easier to understand if one goes back before Nabopolassar, into the time of the Assyrian kings.
This next one is the Adad-Guppi’ inscription, also known as Nabon. No. 24 (Nabon H 1, B.). It was for a kind of funeral/grave inscription for Nabonidus' mother (Queen Adad-guppi) who lived to be about 102. So part of this inscription includes various events from her long life, and it includes a list of all the kings she lived through. You can find a translation here: https://www.academia.edu/38585121/MOTHER_OF_HER_SON_THE_LITERARY_SCHEME_OF_THE_ADAD_GUPPI_STELE
From the 20th year of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, that I was born (in), until the 42nd year of Ashurbanipal, the 3rd year of Aššur-etilu-ili, his son, the 21st year of Nabopolassar, the 43rd year of Nebuchadnezzar, the 2nd year of EvilMerodach, the 4th year of Neriglissar – for 95 years, Sîn, king of the gods of heaven and earth, (in) which I sought after the shrines of his great godhead, (for) my good doings he looked upon me with a smile, he heard my prayers (Adadguppi Stele I:29–36) (Note that there are no differences in the Uruk King List, Adad-Guppi, and Royal "Ptolemy" King List in any of the Neo-Babylonian kings. But the Assyrian Kings are not listed in the Babylonian records except where they were simultaneously kings of Babylon.)
Another part (of the Adad-guppi' inscription) says she died in the 9th year of Nabonidus, which would indicate at least an age of 102, and the Nabonidus Chronicle (B.M. 35382) confirms the same information.
So here's what this new piece of evidence gives us. And remember it's a "stone witness" that is both contemporary and independent of the others.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 Nabopo-lassar N E B U C H A D N E Z Z A R II (reigned for 43 years) E-M Nerig- lissar N A B O N I D U S C Y R U S 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Timeline above confirmed by Berossus Timeline above confirmed by Royal Canon ("Ptolemy's") Nabopo-lassar N E B U C H A D N E Z Z A R II (reigned for 43 years) E-M Nerig- lissar N A B O N I D U S C Y R U S 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Timeline above exactly confirmed by the Uruk King List Nabopo-lassar N E B U C H A D N E Z Z A R II (reigned for 43 years) E-M Nerig- lissar N A B O N I D U S   16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9                                   Timeline above exactly confirmed by the Adad-Guppi' inscription (although it only goes to Nabonidus 9)