For JW lurkers - After Hamburg.................

by BoogerMan 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • blondie
    blondie

    @ Blondie - Thanks for the Pure Worship book quote. That's a "new scrolls" reference not available on the CD ROM. Actually that was hard find, the scripture Isaiah 65:20 was hard to find, did not pop up on the CD. but I used the scrolls scripture and then it popped up when I did that. The WTS has buried scripture applications before in the past. Or the statement about the 1975 fiasco, 1st one in 1976 put the blame on the members, 1980 the WTS took some grudging responsibility for "part" of it. 1980 comments from 1980 where it refers back to the 1976 WT comments. WT 3/15/1980 pp. 17-18 " I had to take a phrase from the 1976 quote here with "" marks around it to find it at WT 7/15/1976 p. 441

    5. (a) How did strong expectation develop regarding the year 1975? (b) Why did cautionary statements published not accomplish a curbing of such concern over a date?

    5 In modern times such eagerness, commendable in itself, has led to attempts at setting dates for the desired liberation from the suffering and troubles that are the lot of persons throughout the earth. With the appearance of the book Life Everlasting​—in Freedom of the Sons of God, and its comments as to how appropriate it would be for the millennial reign of Christ to parallel the seventh millennium of man’s existence, considerable expectation was aroused regarding the year 1975. There were statements made then, and thereafter, stressing that this was only a possibility. Unfortunately, however, along with such cautionary information, there were other statements published that implied that such realization of hopes by that year was more of a probability than a mere possibility. It is to be regretted that these latter statements apparently overshadowed the cautionary ones and contributed to a buildup of the expectation already initiated.

    6. Did the information in the July 15, 1976, Watchtower endeavor to lay the responsibility for such expectation solely or primarily on its readers? Explain.

    6 In its issue of July 15, 1976, The Watchtower, commenting on the inadvisability of setting our sights on a certain date, stated: “If anyone has been disappointed through not following this line of thought, he should now concentrate on adjusting his viewpoint, seeing that it was not the word of God that failed or deceived him and brought disappointment, but that his own understanding was based on wrong premises.” In saying “anyone,” The Watchtower included all disappointed ones of Jehovah’s Witnesses, hence including persons having to do with the publication of the information that contributed to the buildup of hopes centered on that date.

    7. (a) What effect should such human errors have on our faith in what God himself promises? (b) In actuality, what does God’s Word stress as the important factor?

    7 Nevertheless, there is no reason for us to be shaken in faith in God’s promises. Rather, as a consequence, we are all moved to make a closer examination of the Scriptures regarding this matter of a day of judgment. In doing so, we find that the important thing is not the date. What is important is our keeping ever in mind that there is such a day​—and it is getting closer and it will require an accounting on the part of all of us. Peter said that Christians should rightly be “awaiting and keeping close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah.” (2 Pet. 3:12) It is not a certain date ahead; it is day-to-day living on the part of the Christian that is important. He must not live a single day without having in mind that he is under Jehovah’s loving care and direction and must submit himself thereto, keeping also in mind that he must account for his acts."

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    If Romans 6: 7 in context:

    * we are buried with him in baptism
    * we are dead to the law

    * being made free of sin we are now servants of righteousness


  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    More:

    * Our "old man" is crucified with him v. 6
    * We are dead to sin v. 2

    * recon yourselves to be dead v. 11
    * we are freed from sin v. 7

    All of these verses are about what happens to a person when they completely surrender to Chist and accept the New Covenant.

    The WT would be the first to state that the NT scriptures only applies to those born again (annointed).... Except of course for Romans 6: 7 which they take out of context and claim you can get your sins forgiven without being borrn again and without needing to be part of the NC. (See Mt. 26: 27-28) The NC is specifically "for the forgiveness of sins".

    The WT is a perfect religion for unsaved people. You get to do it all yourself and if you get it wrong you'll simply wake up in paradise surrounded by panda bears and fruit.

    Of course neither Jesus or any other prophet taught this nonsense.

    "it is appointed unto man once to die and then judgement. - Hebrews 9: 27

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Paul is using an illustration that has confused readers since he wrote it. but the context seems to make clear that "death" is used as a metaphor for baptism. A key concept is that in Roman era slave's debt ends with his death. Describing sin as a slaveholder (v. 6), Paul states: "For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin, because anyone who has died has been freed from sin" (Romans 6:6-7).

    The most confusing line is "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (v. 23). Slaveowners did pay their slaves a meager subsistence wage. Sin, as a cruel master. however only offered death as a wage.

    To interpret Romans 6 as suggesting sins are erased at death is to negate the purpose/s of the Christ sacrifice. Mind you there were very many opinions regarding the latter, but Paul never elsewhere suggested that at death a person's sins were erased.

    Confusing, even in context, but the surrounding text does make clear he was referring to baptism as death.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit