by Heartofaboy 34 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Seem's odd that 144,000 mentioned in verse 1 is taken as literal & then 'in FACT they are virgins' is taken as symbolic..............
Well, you have given me an idea. Maybe some "new light" could suggest that this virgin thing IS LITERAL AFTER ALL for the 144,000...
This would easily expand available new positions as it would reduce prior membership in the annointed by about 99% or more.
Well, no - forgot about the current governing body...
As Heaven says, apart from the implications for Watchtower doctrine, doesn't it seem a moronic idea that sex with a women 'defiles' a man? (No mention of whether the woman is also 'defiled' by the act) I thought Christianity was supposed to teach that sex between a husband and wife is normal and proper, yet this verse suggests hang-ups about even such 'normal' traditional sex.
As Heaven says, apart from the implications for Watchtower doctrine, doesn't it seem a moronic idea that sex with a women 'defiles' a man? (No mention of whether the woman is also 'defiled' by the act)
It is just one more example of New Testament mysoginy as per Apostle Paul.
If you think about it, this also implies that the 144,000 MUST BE MEN (or potential Lesbians, maybe).
The WTS teaches that the 144,000 of Rev 7:4 and Rev 14:3 is to be taken literally. If these passages in scripture are to be taken literally, then the 144,000 are all literally male (Rev 14:4), Jewish (Rev 7:4-8), virgins (Rev 14:4). Was Charles Taze Russell a Jewish virgin? Are all women excluded from this number? Are any of the other 144,000 people included in this number Jewish virgins? If not, then how can this passage, including the number 144,000, be taken literally? What justification is there for switching methods of interpretation from literal, in the case of Rev 7:4 and 14:3, to figurative in the very next verse(s)?
Every time I read that I wonder, "defiled by women"?
Is that how the bible writers viewed women? As nasty and dirty?
Seriously???
Is that how the bible writers viewed women? As nasty and dirty?
You just have to know where to look.
I'm having dejavu! I had this same conversation with my hubby the other night! Of course, he looked at me with his "I'm so righteous and you don't know the bible" look and said, "There are other verses that explain it". He would not concede to the obsurdity of taking the 144,000 literally then the "virgin" symbolically. UGH, SO FRUSTRATING!!
I think some of the guys in headquarters there took this literally and maybe this is why they seemed a bit 'odd'.
LHG
I actually had two elders explain that the 144,000 was a literal number because the "ONE" talking about Christ was literal.
And yet it says that he was a LAMB.
The deal is, the JWs just picked and chose what they wanted from all this nonsense and made up their doctrine from whole cloth.
I always feel so sorry for all the women sat in the memorial audience when this scripture is read each year.....................imagine being there for the first time & hearing your gender defiles these anointed ones & then no explanation is given.
