The great crowd has no mediator. Jesus is only the mediator for the 144K

by blond-moment 45 Replies latest jw friends

  • Old Goat
    Old Goat

    I know Ray Franz is hero to many here. I knew him and his uncle. Fred was nuts, Ray I never liked. Both could present themselves in a pleasing way. Fred knew my mother and other relatives. My first memory of him is from when I was a little boy. His version of interacting with children was to poke at them and make stupid noises. Neither man was without flaws. Ray picked what he saw as a "hot button" issue and ran with it. He knew as well as I what the Watchtower teaches on the New Covenant and why.

    The fact remains, within Watchtower teaching, and within the plain meaning of Mesites, the Greek word, a mediator mediates. The New Testament presents Christ as Mediator of the New Covenant. He is covenant mediator in the same sense Moses was, though of a New Covenant and not of a restatement of the old covenant. If there is a sin covering element, then it is between the parties to the covenant. Witnesses see the New Covenant as limited to 144,000. I doubt this. But within their narrow view, Jesus is mediator between that small number of humans and God. It is an organizational covenant such as the law covenant was. The salvation of all men is dependent not on the New Covenant, but on Christ's ransom. Christ's ransom, according to the Witness view, is a sacrifice for sins. He is both sacrafice and high priest. For Witnesses this is a different function than mediator. They fall within what 19th Century German Evangelical writers taught on this issue. I suspect who ever first formulated this read Lang's Commentary in English translation, and elaborated Witness doctrine from a few scattered comments found therein.

    Christ as "propitiator" and High Priest applies it to all. How long were you a Witness so that you do not know this?

  • Disillusioned Lost-Lamb
    Disillusioned Lost-Lamb

    If you believe this nonsense then you must admit that the WTBT$ and the GB are usurpers.

  • sabastious
    The misrepresentation lies in the assumption that without a mediator, the great crowd are without the covering of christ's ransom. Jehovah's Witnesses do not teach that. You confuse their teachings on mediator and propitiator. Damn it. I'm not supporting their teaching. I'm saying that their teaching is misrepresented.

    The Watchtower purports to hold the key to salvation through baptism. The end of Matthew shows baptism as the final ends of what their preaching work, which they believe to be a commission from Christ to them, was purposed for. That's why they put the "Organized to do Jehovah's Will" book and it's organizational questions inbetween all publishers and their offical membership through baptism. They have clearly positioned themselves as the mediator between God and the "Great Crowd" when that is clearly not what the Bible teaches. "They don't have a mediator" pretty much sums it up. But that's against Bible doctrine where it states that there is one God, one flock. There may be distinctions within that one flock and that's where one could logically place the "kings and priests" but what are kings and priests in that context? The Watchtower will have to create more mumbo jumbo defintions and then keep having to add those beliefs to their approved doctrine. It's a cluster you know what.

    You are forgetting a simple fact, Old Goat, and that's that you cannot misrepresent the Watchtower's doctrine because even they cannot fully explain it. They just need it confusing and comprensive enough so they can get people to make commitments that they don't really want to make. Arguing for Watchtower doctrine is like arguing for the magical powers of Tony the Tiger.


  • mind blown
    mind blown

    that is crazy talk...becasue the GB would not be considered faithful until they die, completely faithful. GB is still considered questionable well as the 144000 who are still alive.......

    So if they are still under scrutiny....the GB are claiming a prize before finishing the race.......

  • mind blown
  • snowbird

    Talk about a hot mess!

    Do we have some surprises ahead of us!

  • mind blown
    mind blown

    If they are not inspired of God, how they hell can they claim to be the only ones Jesus mediates?

    "The Governing Body consists of a group of anointed Christian men These preside over the worldwide activities of Jehovah's Witnesses. They are not inspired by God and hence are not infallible, but they rely on God's infallible Word as the highest authority on earth." Jehovah's Witnesses - Unitedly Doing God's Will Worldwide p.26 "The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers." Awake! 1993 Mar 22 p.4 "Jehovah's people confess no powers of inspiration today" Watchtower 1952 Apr 15 p.253

  • Old Goat
    Old Goat

    Dear Sabastious,

    You made one excellent point. Watchtower doctrine is a hodge podge of things taught over the last century and a half. They're afraid of clearly stating that they've dropped some views. Notice that in the recent books on the prophecies that they dropped pages and pages of previous explanations? But they never say, "all that was crap. We know it. You know it." If they're to remain a vital religion they need a sort of Statement of Theology Secundum.

    They won't do that, of course. They aren't brave enough to put issues that openly. They are reactionary.

    We're witnessing a theological shift among Watchtower writers. There seems to be at least two parties. It would serve them well if they wrote their own verse by verse or chapter by chapter commentary on the bible. They would have to rethink a lot of things if they were to do a good, solid job. I doubt they'd ever do it. Fear and a very narrow view will keep them from it, that and the certainty that the end is weeks, months at most from accomplishment.

    I was around for the wild 1954 speculation. Bet you never heard of that one. You're all whippersnappers! The end is always near. I consider myself a Christian, and I believe we are in the last days. I also believe it is fruitless to put too much credit in my own personal beliefs and God will do what he wants and when he wants to do it. The Watchtower has always tried to force God's hand. Today a significant number who hold some sort of authority believe the Governing Body is nearly God. For them the GB is a collective pope. If I believed something like that, I'd become a Catholic and get all the interesting and colorful things that the Mass produces.

    The fact remains, on this issue the Watchtower is misrepresented on boards like this. That sort of thing turned me off for years. Back in the early 50s an ex-witness wrote an anti-watchtower book. It didn't see wide circulation and I've forgotten the title. It was reprinted in the 1970s with updates. He quoted from a more recent publication, ending a sentence in the middle with a period. It changed the whole character of the quotation. I do not find that helpful or honest. There's always someone with a mind out there who will check on what we say. I did that for decades. "Famous Apostates" from the 1950s sent out drivel in the form of little magazines, pamphlets and books. None of it was persuasive to me because it was full of stupidity, misrepresentation, or a bitter spirit that covered over any valid arguments. Schnell, Goodrich, and Reid (from Canada) were a nasty bunch who did more harm than good. We do not need to repeat their mistakes.

    Watchtower doctrine - more accurately, Watchtower focus - has shifted in the last few years. Until they clean house, the spiritual paradise, a hyper-allegorical approach (essentially medieval in nature) and years of pseudo-scholarship sit in the background like a pile of stinking garbage.

  • Old Goat
    Old Goat

    dear mind,

    I'm in the uncomfortable position of explaining a doctrine many aspects of which I question. Mediation of a covenant, agreement to the terms of the New Covenant, does not make anyone perfect. Read the actual verses in Jeremiah. A covenant is merely an agreement between parties. You're really asking a question about the meaning of Paul's phrase, "declared righteous." If you want to see what the Watchtower teaches, look in the Insight book.

    Jeremiah's prophecy about the New Covenant is about puting Israel on a new footing, creating a new relationship to God. New Testament theology redefines who the Israel of God is. The Body of Christ is the Israel of God. Witnesses believe that number is limited. The entire issue hangs on identifying who Jesus meant by "other sheep." Many commentators point to the Gentiles. This view has flaws. Not all of Israel were God's sheep. Jesus said as much. So if he meant the gentiles, he did not mean all gentiles.

    I'm caught between to inclinations. I think some who come here never grasped witness doctrine in the first place, except in the most basic way. Do I send you back to Watchtower books that contain things I don't believe so you can look again? Or do i say, "what does it matter if you've decided that the life of a witness is not for you?" If one becomes a controversialist, then one should know the subject well. If you've only decided that you do not like being a Witnesses and want to follow a different path then let it go.

  • snowbird
    I think some who come here never grasped witness doctrine in the first place, except in the most basic way.

    How can anyone grasp "witness doctrine" when it keeps changing?

    Whatever and however, the WT taught that Jesus Christ is not the Mediator for all, whereas, the Bible teaches that He is.

    For my part, I'm going with the Bible, "witness doctrine" be double damned.

Share this