New light from GB member David Splane!

by Island Man 60 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • blondie

    This is one of the WTS both sides of the mouth teachings: does life start in the womb or outside the womb. This comes under the topic of miscarriage. While the WTS says that a baby in the womb is alive, it is not eligible for a resurrection. This changed in 2009, suddenly resurrection for a child who died in the womb might be resurrected.

    *** w84 3/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***

    Would it be reasonable to think that if a “hidden miscarriage” had occurred in Job’s case, in the New Order that microscopic embryo would be restored to his mother’s womb to continue a pregnancy of which she might have been unaware? That does not conform to what the Bible shows about the resurrection, which always involved persons who had been born and existed as separate individuals before God.—John 5:28, 29; Acts 24:15.

    But what if the embryo was more developed, had become a fetus or even was close to full term? There are many possible situations. However, there is no point in speculating, for there are countless sad consequences of imperfection suffered today. In the restored Paradise our loving heavenly Father will reverse man’s sinful condition and bring marvelous blessings. Many people will be resurrected. The decision as to how the resurrection will be carried out, and to what extent, rests with Jehovah and Jesus. We can be sure that the decision will reflect Jehovah’s perfect wisdom and justice.

    *** w09 4/15 p. 13 Questions From Readers ***

    To summarize, then, the Bible clearly teaches that life begins at conception and that Jehovah sees the unborn child as a unique and valued individual. In the light of those Scriptural truths, some might see it as inconsistent to argue that there is no hope for a resurrection of an unborn child that dies. Indeed, they might feel that such an argument undermines our Scriptural stand against abortion, which is largely based on those very truths.

    In the past, this journal has raised some practical questions that seem to cast doubt on the possibility of a resurrection for children who died before birth. For example, would God implant even a partially developed embryo in the womb of a woman in Paradise? However, further study and prayerful meditation has led the Governing Body to conclude that such considerations do not really have a bearing on the resurrection hope. Jesus said: “All things are possible with God.” (Mark 10:27) Jesus’ own experience demonstrated the truth of that statement; his life was transferred from heaven to the womb of a young virgin—surely an utter impossibility from a human standpoint.

    Does all of this mean, then, that the Bible teaches that children who perish before birth will be resurrected? We must emphasize that the Bible does not directly answer that question, so there is no basis for humans to be dogmatic on the matter. This subject may give rise to an almost endless variety of questions. Really, though, it seems best to avoid speculation. What we know is this: The matter rests with Jehovah God, who is abundant in loving-kindness and mercy. (Ps. 86:15) Unquestionably, it is his heartfelt desire to undo death by means of the resurrection. (Job 14:14, 15) We can be confident that he always does what is right. He will provide healing for the many wounds inflicted upon us by life in this wicked system of things as he lovingly directs his Son to “break up the works of the Devil.”—1 John 3:8.

  • prologos

    Splane's illustration is interesting for there are two stages to natural life, in gestation and the documented, listed named recognized person in life. In WT's generation there is the natural birth, the later anointing, and the inscription as GB member that seems to count to be included in the overlapping groups. (not partakers, but prominence in Brooklyn)

    parallels indeed, you are not really counted until you are baptised. anointed. or at least become spiritually alive, a publisher, a contributor. "let the dead bury their dead" kind of thinking.

    BSW it would have been so much easier to overlap the natural physical generations: 240 years in only two groups. 2154. For it will come to that.

  • Dagney
    Oh he is brilliant. Taking a simple concept, "generation," and complicating it so people will believe they have some special knowledge. I can hear the "ooohs and aaaahs" now about this "special" insight.
  • Lieu
    Well that was really stupid.
  • The Marvster
    The Marvster

    Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel...

    does the term 'Joseph's Generation' mean that 'the generation' actually 'belonged to Joseph'? and what if Joseph had only lived as a child and died at 5 years old, would that mean that a generation can be only 5 years long? Also is he saying that if joseph lived to 100 and a person was born 0.5 seconds before Joseph died, then that person was part of Joseph's generation and so, if THAT person lived to 100, a generation would be 200 years? and since when does someone, when talking about their generation actaully expect anyone to think they could mean up to 200 years?... I mean, my parents are in their 70's now, so when I speak of my parents' generation would you really think I'm talking about people going back as far as perhaps more than 70 years before their birth, because people older than 70 when my parents were born were part of their generation? That would mean that people who lived perhaps before 1875 are part of my parents' generation? what if someone was 100 years old and still alive when my parents were born? 1845? So we're in the same generation as people living in 1845? come on.. is that what Jesus really meant by THIS GENERATION? I mean, how long was the generation Jesus spoke about in the first century? and why would he tell them to 'keep awake' if he meant 150+ years by a generation?....

    this is the problem I have with these ideas, upon questioning them so many more questions come up... of course the G.O.D have an answer for everything and would be able to wriggle their way out of any apparent holes in the reasoning..

  • notsurewheretogo
    I think you are nitpicking his words here...he obviously means "live" in the sense of living an actual life by growing up and being an adult etc rather than just being alive...
  • The Searcher
    The Searcher

    Mr. Splane, please address the following verses - if you have the time:

    (Job 42:16) "After this Job lived for 140 years, and he saw his children and his grandchildren - four generations." (RNWT) 140 divided by 4 = 35!

    (Exodus 1:6) "Joseph eventually died, and also all his brothers and all that generation."

    (Numbers 32:13) "So Jehovah’s anger blazed against Israel and he made them wander about in the wilderness for 40 years, until all the generation that was doing evil in the eyes of Jehovah came to its end."


    (Deuteronomy 1:35) "Not one of these men of this evil generation will see the good land that I swore to give to your fathers..."


    (Deuteronomy 2:14) "The time it took us to walk from Kaʹdesh-barʹne·a until we crossed the Valley of Zeʹred was 38 years, until the entire generation of the men of war had perished from the camp, just as Jehovah had sworn to them."

    (Isaiah 53:8) "And who will concern himself with the details of his generation?"


    (Matthew 23:36) "Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation."

    (Matthew 24:34) "Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things happen."

    (& Matthew 12:38-43)

    Everything which Jesus warned the Jews about, took place between 66 - 70 C.E., approximately 33-36 years later.

    So according to all of the above scriptures, a Biblical "generation" is between 35-40 years long.

  • tiki
    It is pretty obvious that they dont know wth they are talking about. Splane can spin it any way he chooses...the fact is its all a pile of manure. Open mouth insert foot. Theyd do better if they just let their whole generation thing go quietly away. Given the aptitude of closed mind believers they'll forget it all soon enough....
  • The Marvster
    The Marvster
    I wonder if he might not have meant a 'grown up adult living a full life'.. I think he meant 'just being alive', otherwise why would he talk about someone being born only 10 minutes 'after' Joseph's death?... isn't he implying that if that person was born 11 minutes earlier, they 'would have' been part of Joseph's generation? that person wouldn't have to be a grown adult to be part of Joseph's generation by Mr Splane's reasoning, just a few minutes old...
  • Listener
    That is what he is saying Marvster which makes his interpretation of Ex 1:6 screwed up. He is defining it in minute detail whereas the scripture is just referring to him and his brothers being in that generation.

Share this