by Crazyguy2 22 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
I don’t think they have backed off from this teaching but have just stopped talking about it. I have noticed over the years that WT has stopped talking about anything that can easily be proven wrong my kids don’t know the Bible says there was a dome over the earth, they don’t know about the subject of this thread. They have never been taught how long a ago Adam and Eve were created. When the flood happened etc.
it’s easy to keep people in if your vague about your teachings concerning the Bible.
I agree, Crazyguy2; I don't think they've backed off, either. They just stop talking about stuff that can cause them problems. And especially now - the new JWdom is less doctrinal and is more a lifestyle religion. They now know they'll get their behinds kicked in the doctrinal arena, so they are far less into doctrine than they were in, for example, the Fred Franz era.
It is clear we got a teaching of early purity that creation will be restored to. Along with Isaiah 11:6, Daniel 1:8-16 imply that meateating is impure. Original covenant creation with innocent Adam as head therefore ate veggies. It is just as literal as talking snake and supernatural trees. In line with this revelation 22:2 speaks of healing leaves.
*Maybe that have restated it. If any can find a reference, please post it. The latest Watchtower Library installed on my computer is from 2001.
Could they change their mind on this topic even if they wanted to? After all it's the Bible that says "For all the wild animals and for all the birds I have provided grass and leafy plants for food."— Today’s English Version, Genesis 1:30.
To acknowledge that animals have been meat eaters all along, and that they will continue to be even in the 'paradise earth' would be to say that they Bible is wrong.
I don't think they would be willing to go there.
I guess they could really reach and say it was 'symbolic,' . But, as already mentioned by others, it's more likely that they just won't mention it any more.
Interesting that this topic would be near the top, on my first day here. (It must be from Jehovah!!!) (JK!) Even when I was at my peak of compliance, I knew that this couldn't possibly be true. I'm not the only JW in my circle who noticed it, but unless everyone was hiding better than I was, no one seemed to think it was as serious of a problem as I did. Everyone just reasoned that either 1) Jehovah would help to resolve all difficulties in understanding, or 2) science is missing the necessary information to accurately convey Biblical truths.
What is most interesting is the peculiar pattern that comes up when WT teachings don't conform to established facts. No one I've ever discussed this with ever spoke of how the WT would be proven wrong, rather, they spoke of how the Bible would be vindicated. As if WT interpretation of the Bible, and what the Bible itself actually says, are somehow one-and-the-same. Until, of course, the GB changes their mind on what the Bible says.
In any case, despite very little emphasis on discussing the topic in JW publications and meetings, the plight of animals in God's purpose is one of the most persistently troubling when it comes to juggling the doublethink (triplethink?) required to believe in Bible AND the WT AND scientific discovery. From the questions of pre-Edenic/antidiluvian diet, original sin, God's supposed allowance but non-cause of suffering, the value of life, the symbolic question of blood, the mercy of God on the innocent, the temperament of animals in the new world, the fate of the animals both on and off the arc, and the abundant evidence of evolution, there is a surprising amount of starting and ending points to this topic.
What's more, you can typically, as an unbelieving but faking-it JW, tactfully bring these subjects up, with otherJ Ws without them having a knee-jerk GET BEHIND ME SATAN reaction (with the exception of evolution, of course). It amounts to a simple curiosity and some handwaving, but who knows, maybe it opens up the quiet floodgates of the ever-freed mind.
Welcome jofi_Wofo with your interesting first post,look forward to hear more from you.
You only need to take one look at a lion or tiger to see they are designed for one thing, catching and tearing warm blooded mammals to pieces. Cats have to eat meat to survive, they literally cannot eat plants long term and survive.
If this was different before the flood, then that means God changed creatures from their original designs. This would imply that God worked during his own, self- imposed sabbath, which then raises more questions.
If I ended up as a resurrected being on Paradise Earth, I would make it clear up front that I had nothing to do with the mysterious cattle mutilations and grilled meat sites by a band of unidentified worldly types. I disavow all knowledge of such despicable actions!
Scenic Viewer: "Could they change their mind on this topic even if they wanted to? After all it's the Bible that says "For all the wild animals and for all the birds I have provided grass and leafy plants for food."— Today’s English Version, Genesis 1:30."
Actually, I believe the org could change this teaching. The org often interprets passages of Scripture to say what it wants to them to say. It will wiggle around what a passage actually says to suit its purpose. For example, Psalm 102:25,26(NIV):
-------------------------------------
In the beginning you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
26 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
Like clothing you will change them
and they will be discarded.
-------------------------------------
This says that the physical heavens and earth will "wear out" and "perish". That fits exactly with science. Stars like our sun have finite lifespans. Our sun, during the course of its life, will swell and engulf the earth. The earth, moon, sun, etc. are not eternal according to science. However, JWdom makes the passage in Psalms say something else because it doesn't say what JWdom wants it to.
Likewise, JWdom could wiggle out of Ge 1:30 by saying that it means that vegetation is ultimately the source of food for all creatures since it is the base of the food chain. All animals (at least above the micro level) ultimately get their food from vegetation. Whatever carnivores and omnivores eat ultimately comes from vegetation.
Were sharks vegetarians before the supposed of fall of man? Did rattlesnakes eat grapes? I can see only two possibilities concerning the Bible:
#1 - It's wrong.
#2 - It's right and Ge 1:30 means that vegetation is the ultimate source of food for all creatures - not directly the source for all creatures.
I see a third solution; in covenant cosmotology, animals in general emulates God and the good guys and know their place in the hierachy. Like the faun and the beavers in lion, witch and wardrobe story. Man is their commander. The language of Psalm 102:25-26 is reflected in Hebrews 8:13 generally understood to speak of the old covenant
