by JWFreak 71 Replies latest jw friends
According to Dictionary.com, there are 14 definitions for the word "generation". Two of the relevant ones are (1) and (7):
1. the entire body of individuals born and living at about the same time.
7. the offspring of a certain parent or couple, considered as a step in natural descent.
It appears that the Society is trying to use the example of Joseph, which is number 7, to expand the definition of "generation" referenced in Matthew, which is obviously is definition number 1.
All of this has me thinking I might go back and re-read the Preterist POV
The outline illustrates how they go to great lengths to lie their way out of another lie. Now, not only do we have "a generation" meaning two different generations whose lives intersect, but there are now two different classes of "anointed". The outline says "The second group, made up of those anointed later, are for a time contemporaries of the older group." For a time? Does this mean that ultimately, we are going to have "anointed" whose lives never intersect with anyone born in 1914 or baptized by 1935, but that only intersect with those who lived during this second group? Meaning, another "string of Christmas lights".
Now, "Recent clarification of Matthew 24:34 underscores that we are living deep in the time of the end." Hardly--it does exactly the opposite! Had "a generation" been left at "those who were alive at the beginning of the end", that would cap the date around 2034 when those people turn 120. That would have underscored that we are near the end, since it is extremely rare for people to live much past 120. However, now they have opened up a way for "a generation" to run as late as 2154. If the oldest 1914-born person dies at age 120, and the oldest 2034 born person also dies at age 120 (and their lives intersect by mere fractions of a second, technically qualifying), we now run into a cap of 2154, which does not underscore how deep we are into the end. If anything, it indicates that we might only be halfway through, if that--and that assumes no more tampering with "a generation" or stringing any more generations to the string.
First, THANKS for this. It shows how totally and utterly out of touch the whole GB is. And how they insist in trying to redefine a very old and very well understood word, namely, generation. But it's like we're going back to school to learn new meanings of common words...
Is there a way of getting the other 2 pages (1 and 3) ?
I know they are/seem irrelevant but having the whole thing would help convince others of how illogical the whole thing is...
BTW only the 4shared link worked for me.
Vivalavida
why is the watchtower plogging this?
beacause when you tell 1 lie, you have to tell 1000 to cover it.
watchtower has told so many that they cannot stop now.
oz
pages 1 and 3 please please! i wonder if page 3 has a copyright symbol?
I would be satisfied with the text. Not necessarily a scan. But yes, the other pages... I mean, according to other thread from JWFreak, this is the last talk in the convention and will last about 44 minutes. It would be interesting to see how they introduce and conclude the talk
Vivalavida
A further link to this wonderful page is here:
Thanks JW Freak.
Bangalore
they're seriously starting to name gb members in videos?
that's not creature worship?
Didn't last years video on creation feature Ted Jaracz?
