Your comments on this Memorial Bible reference (1 Cor. 11:26)

by OnTheWayOut 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Superslave

  Yes I agree completely. I looked this scripture up last year on the WT CD-ROM & apparently, the borg in their wisdom say its talking about a completely different arrival.

  So lets look back shall we. Jesus arrived in 1914....then again in 1918-19 to release that TRUE brothers from their spiritual bondage....then he is going to return again some time in the future (not sure when & the same word for arrival is used but what the hell it must fit in with current Borg time lines)

  The elders read it out at last years memorial as part of the talks and my little ears were pricked & I thought -what? Why am I here? He already arrived so why the memorial?

  Poor old Jesus back & forth between heaven & earth he must be a bit tierd after all those invisable arrivals. :)
• 

  AlphaOmega

  I agree that in isolation is says nothing except what it says.

  If you have a desire to commemorate the death of Jesus for whatever it means to you, then you should be partaking.
• 

  willyloman

  This is why we go to the Episcopal church every Easter and "partake." It makes me feel a connection and even if it's only historical/cultural, if feels spiritual. And that's not bad.
• 

  Leolaia

  *** g72 3/22 p. 32 Observe the Memorial of the Death of Jesus Christ ***

  The commemorating of his death is the only observance that the Bible commands Christians to keep. After showing his disciples how to do it by means of a special evening meal, Jesus said: "Keep doing this in remembrance of me." (1 Cor. 11:24) It is proper to do it on the anniversary of that night....

  If you desire to be counted among Jesus' friends and to receive the benefits of his ransom sacrifice, you will want to obey Jesus' command to observe the memorial of his death.

  Yet what did Jesus tell his disciples to do in remembrance of him? Just getting together to listen to talks about the anointed and just pass around a plate or bread and cups of wine? What were the disciples supposed to do? What were they supposed to "keep doing"? "For as often as YOU eat this loaf and drink this cup, YOU keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he arrive".

  What is the point of large gatherings in which hardly anyone -- if anyone at all -- actually does this?
• 

  potentialJWconvertswife

  Good points all. This is precisely the problem I have with the Memorial. It seems pointless to have this "memorial" when most congregations won't have ANYONE who's actually partaking. WT says only the "anointed" are to partake, but where does the BIBLE say that? I've heard it explained that the disciples were anointed, so that's where the idea comes from. It seems the WT teaches many ideas that are not spelled out in the Bible.
• 

  dust

  Also, the Lord arrived already, so the Memorial should be cancelled.

  According to Jehovah's Witnesses--Proclaimers of God's Kingdom p. 137, Jesus' invisible presence since 1914 does not involve his being present, not even invisibly:

  They also came to understand that it was in the year 1914 that Christ’s invisible presence had begun and that this was, not by his personally returning (even invisibly) to the vicinity of the earth, but by his directing his attention toward the earth as ruling King.

  But of course, if he didn't arrive in 1914, and if that's why the Memorial is still practiced, then neither was anyone appointed over his belongings in 1919 (Matthew 24:45-47).
• 

  Leolaia

  "...his directing his attention toward the earth as ruling King"

  So where was his attention turned to in the intervening nineteen centuries? Towards some other alien planet?
• 

  Pahpa

  We have to understand that this partaking of the Memorial emblems evolved with the changing doctrine of the Watchtower Society. Russell taught that the "great multitude" were a secondary heavenly group. All were invited to partake. But Rutherford created the two class system, earthly and heavenly, that excluded those who claimed to have an earthly hope from even attending at first. Later, they were invited to become observers to the celebration but denied partaking.

  So, as we can see, it was not based upon any scriptural foundation. Rather, it was a feeble attempt to explain away the influx of interested persons when it had been decided that the "heavenly calling" had stopped. In contrast to all of this, Paul seems to indicate in his letter to the Corinthians that members were expected to partake unless they were "unworthy" for some unspecified reason...perhaps because of not discerning the significance of the celebration. (1 Co. 11) In any case, there is no mention of two classes of Christians.
• 

  bob1999

  "In any case, there is no mention of two classes of Christians. "
  
  There is no mention of two classes of Christians anywhere in the Bible.
• 

  StAnn

  The real point is this, IMO:

  1. Only the "anointed" can partake so the WT can impose this class structure to keep most JWs down;

  2. Many of the converts came from christianity and were used to partaking of communion. This is a little concession the WT makes so the converts can feel that they're still in a bonafide christian religion where communion is offered, even if they only pass around the bread and wine and don't partake.