by stevieb1 52 Replies latest watchtower bible
If we assune that they are the same group of people then we must use the same reasonings to assume that every time the term great crowd (or as the AV says great multitude) they must also reder to the same thing.
Yep.
Cheers,
Ozzie
Those who have been JWs know that the WT answer to Rev. 7:15 is to cross-reference it with texts such as Isa. 66:1 which tell us that the earth is Jehovah's footstool. The problem is, when Rev. 7:15 is read contextually, this is really not an option. In the book of Revelation, earth and heaven are separate and distinct places. That's why, in Rev. 4:1, in order to receive the remainder of his visions, John is called upon to leave the earth (in vision) and enter heaven. In heaven he sees the throne of God. He also sees the four living creatures and the 24 elders. At Rev. 4:10 John says that the 24 elders fall down "before" (enopion) the throne. Does that mean that they were on the earth and merely "in the sight of" the throne? Also, the Lamb is in heaven where the throne is. So, in John's vision, to be "before" or "in the sight of" the throne is to be in heaven. This is also why the original understanding of the WT, before Rutherford changed it, was that the "great crowd" ("great multitude") was a heavenly class.
This, by the way, is a good illustration of how using "scripture to explain scripture" - the prooftext method - is invalid if by using such a method we arrive at a meaning which is contrary to the context of a particular verse.
Does this mean that the earth is not God's footstool? No. It merely means that such an idea has no bearing on the understanding of John's vision. To understand the vision, we have to look at it through John's eyes, as best we can with the language he uses.
Justin
First for Ozzie
Have a look in anny concordance under great crowd or great multitude.
It is used many times and referef to different groups of people in different circumsatnces, so the terms as used in Revelaetion can rightly be said to be different groups of people if context allows. And it does. They are n\mentioned in different visions John had to apply to different groups of "people"
Second for Justin
I fully agree with you that context is imortant. Does the context allow for Rev 7 to refere to the earth. You suggest it does not because of chapter 4 In Rev.4 You are correct, John is transported from the earth (in vision)to get a magnificent view of the heavenly throne of Jehovah God.
In Rev 7, John is having another vision, the setting is different. Herer john gets a vision of the time of the end when the Angels hold back the winds of destruction upon unfaithfull mankind certain events have been finalised. 1st, the sealing of spiritual Israel had to have been completed. 2nd, A great crowd out of all nations attribute salvation to God and Christ and are gathered for survival through the great tribulation.
This different setting allows for the great crowd to be on earth in Gods precence. The context relates to the earth, the destuction (Armagedon), spritual Israel coming from, great crowd to remain on.
3rd Crownboy
The illustration about doctors was to show that we continue to learn and progress. I agree that in some respects (when taken beyond the context of what I was sayiong) the illustraion does not fit.
There are and have ben doctors that do not want to change their ways and techniques that they learned in times past. The WTS is always willing to learn and change. There are things they they say I do not agree with, but if I beleive them or not is not going to affect where I stand before my creator.
When I do not agree, I have no problem talking about it. And I know of many that do not agree with or understand why some things are said and openly say so. But I have seen otheres that have had issues and will get on their hobby hores and try to change the world (well at least some close to them) and these ones have been Dfd or left.
There is the difference. We can have our own views according to our conscience and remain in "the organisation".
I have experienced "pushing" my thoughts (and consequences) and just tralking about them.
I was asked to step down as an MS (over 10 years as MS) and my pride was damaged for a while because of it. It was considered what I was doing might stumble some and I understand that. I did not want to be the cause of upsetting anyone. I still think the elderes in my cong. acted hastely, but the overall theology of JWs I agree with. I do not blame them or hold it against them (even though I at times find it hard to trust those men). I appreciate that no one on earth is perfect, all men are liars, and such ones have the resonsability of "teaching" and "leading" the congregations, so I do not expect perfection just as in the first centry there were many "leaders" that made terrible mistakes, I understand that in moderen times all of us GB down to RF make mistakes. and each one will be accountable for them. If those with greater responsability make mistakes their accountabibnlty will be greater.
I mention that to show that the Org. does not demand strict obedience to them. We can think for ourselves, but it is our personal attitude that usually determins the outcome.
JW Ben
