Ideas for spinning the change in 'generation' for maximum impact?

bohm

The change in the definition of 'generation' is the first major doctrinal change in the time i has been involved with the jehovahs witnesses (allmost a full year!), and i personally find it pretty exciting since many hear has talked about how the other changes (like the 95 one) caused the first weak WTF moments.

What i wonder about now is how (if?) one should discuss this topic with active jehovahs witnesses for maximal effect - so to our resident mind-control gurus: What are your plans?

(just because its lame to ask these questions without providing ones own ideas: I think i would draw up the subject by asking a question on the old definition of generation and pretend i had not noticed the change. If i was not corrected that would mean the jehovahs witness has not noticed the change, and i would discuss the old generation definition even more, agreeing to all that was said.

If/when the new definition came up, i would act exited and curious, and assume the change must have been introduced with a lot of scholary details regarding translation details and deep biblical studies i would be exited to learn more about. When that turned out to be false, i would try to phrase the question if the change was motivated by the wrong definition being shown wrong because to much time has passed, or because of some genuine research)

Side question - I may be wrong, but to me it seems that this is the first time such an important change has been introduced in such a weak manner. The article does not even TRY to explain WHY they adopt this specific definition of generation. I must assume this lack-of-evidence is delibrate. Do you think this is a good or a bad thing?

OnTheWayOut

These changes are typically introduced in exactly this "weak" manner. It's a couple of paragraphs in the study article, covered in 10 minutes or less and then they move on. Everybody is expected to accept the changes. If you follow the scriptures given, they offer just support for the fringe thoughts of the change (Joseph had brothers) but nothing for the actual change.

I think such changes are a good thing. They cause members to slow down with that WTF moment.

If I ever talk such doctrine with members, I will simply ask if I am expected to believe that they know what Jesus was evidently saying when it doesn't seem to match his words and they evidently didn't know what Jesus was saying when they told us they did before. I would further drive the point home by saying, "Let's read Jesus' words the way the WTS says they read: '...this generation, which in the future will be my anointed in the beginning of the last days overlapping with the anointed toward the end of the last days, will not pass away until all these things occur.'"

bohm

OTWO: Thank you for your reply, i really like your rendering of "wt-matthew" - step by step the wt doctrine has been so complicated you can hardly even put it into one readable sentence!

OnTheWayOut

On another thread, they called it simply the "two-in-one generation." You could refer to it that way.

Simon Morley

Great!! "the Twofer Generation"

isaacaustin

OTWO, you mean like a twinity generation?

Open mind

'...this generation, which in the future will be my anointed in the beginning of the last days overlapping with the anointed toward the end of the last days, will not pass away until all these things occur.'"

Excellent nutshell OTWO!

I'm going to try committing that to memory.

BTW, to answer the original post myself, I think a great way to discuss this with JWs will be the old "Hmmm. I wonder how I could explain this to a co-worker, Bible Study, fellow student, etc." (Snicker, Snicker.)

om

Michelle365

I would be interested in thoughts on this too. I have my brother and one really good friend still "in" but kinda in a half ass way. I've been reading the other threads and contemplating how to bring it up to them without sounding too apostate for their comfort. I fear that even if they agree they'll stay "in" due to fear of being shunned.

OnTheWayOut

I am going with the "twofer" generation if it comes up. It's a way to totally mock the belief and still act like you follow it.

besty

"We used to believe the generation that saw 1914 would see Armageddon. Now we believe the generation that saw the generation that saw 1914 will see Armageddon. Have I got that right?"

Priceless.

"So does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come? These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet?...This "prophet" was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah's Christian Witnesses...Of course, it is easy to say that this group acts as a 'prophet' of God. It is another thing to prove it," (Watchtower, Apr. 1, 1972, p. 197)

"True, there have been those in times past who predicted an 'end to the world', even announcing a specific date. Yet nothing happened. The 'end' did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing?.. Missing from such people were God's truths and evidence that he was using and guiding them," (Awake, Oct. 8, 1968).

Ideas for spinning the change in 'generation' for maximum impact?

Share this