Regarding Correct Understanding of Bible Prophecies Have JWs EVER Been Right?

by minimus 34 Replies latest jw friends

  • blondie

    W 3/1/25 p. 67

    What is here stated is not dogmatically stated. Trusting in the Lord for guidance, it is submitted for the prayerful and careful consideration of the anointed ones. If there are readers of the Watch Tower who cannot agree with what is here stated, then it is suggested that such calmly and carefully wait upon the Lord, always keeping a pure heart…It seems to be a safe rule to follow, that prophecy can not be understood by us until it is fulfilled or in the course of fulfillment

    (Repeated time and time again in jw pubs; I'll see what else I can find, but feel free to add)

  • blondie

    8/15/25 p. 246

    It has been suggested by some that the article on the twelfth chapter of Revelation in March first Watch Tower is of private interpretation. But it is not of private interpretation; it is merely applying to the Scriptures long ago written in prophetic phrase the facts as we know them now to exist. The time has come for this scripture to be understood; and the Lord promised his people, the church, to convey an understanding of it, and those who appreciate it rejoice.

    There are some who have no understanding, as the Psalmist shows, and these the Lord must treat like the horse or the mule. They must be guided by the bridle or held by the bit, since they do not recognize that the Lord is instructing his people and guiding them with his wisdom. Not being anxious to walk with the company of the Lord’s little ones, such accept what doctrines they may choose to accept and walk according to their own individual wisdom…[Psalm 32:9, 10]…This seems to apply to those who have held high places amongst the brethren, who have been privileged to have the truth, but have misused it.

  • blondie

    3/15/00 WT

    p. 13 ***Revealed—But in God’s Due Time

    12 Just as the apostles understood many prophecies concerning the Messiah only after Jesus’ death and resurrection, Christians today understand Bible prophecy in its finest detail only after it has been fulfilled. (Luke 24:15, 27; Acts 1:15-21; 4:26, 27) Revelation is a prophetic book, so we should expect to understand it most clearly as the events it describes unfold. For example, C. T. Russell could not have correctly understood the meaning of the symbolic scarlet-colored wild beast mentioned at Revelation 17:9-11, since the organizations that the beast represents, namely, the League of Nations and the United Nations, did not even exist until after his death.

  • blondie

    w04 2/1 p. 21

    Since Bible prophecies are often fully understood only after they are fulfilled or are in the process of fulfillment, we will have to wait and see.

    w11 12/1 p.12013

    “Interpretations belong to God” also in that he determines and directs when a prophecy is to be understood by his faithful servants on earth. The meaning of a prophecy can be discerned before, during, or after its fulfillment. Since God tied up the prophecies, he will unravel them at the right time—his time.

  • Finkelstein

    The WTS has used cunning tricks to confirm and validate their assertions of mankind is indeed living in the prophetic last days " End Times " such as wars, famine, earthquakes and other disasters etc. this played into the exploitation of people's ignorance about such things and to exploit the basic belief in the bible among the general population..

    We all know that people who represent the lord and his spoken word the bible are always honest and sincere, money and power has no compelling influence into these faithful devoted Christians.

  • doubtfull1799

    @blondie Intersting, That 1942 one is the one that really got me too! I was always so proud of the organisation for that one, believing it was a real modern day prophecy based on our understanding of the Bible... until of course I found out like you did, that the formation of the UN was common knowledge in political circles before Knorr gave that famous talk. It just was't common knowledge among witnesses, so easily exploited to look like a prophecy.

  • HowTheBibleWasCreated

    Yes JWs have been right.

    religion is a snare and a racket!

  • stuckinarut2

    Well said HowTheBibleWasCreated!

    Well said indeed sir!

    Perhaps we should all wear those sandwich boards and stand outside KHalls like the witnesses used to do to churches??

    Sadly though, they would not see the irony!

  • blondie

    stuckinarut. when jws wore those sandwich boards, all religion was considered false. It wasn't until the early 50's that the WTS changed that doctrine and the WTS was the only true religion, and all others were false.

    *** w51 3/15 p. 191 Questions From Readers ***

    ? In the past we regarded “religion” as anything that was against God’s will. Now many brothers are using the expressions “true religion” and “false religion” to make a distinction. Is this advisable?—D. D., California.The brothers are correct in using the qualifying adjectives “true” and “false” respecting religion, so as not to be misunderstood, especially by those outside the organization. In the past we have had to do so much needless explanation and extricating of ourselves from embarrassing positions by not being specific on this. The footnotes of the New World Translation show the early use by Latin-speaking Christians of the term religio as the equivalent of the Greek term thres·kei′ a. It simply means “form of worship”, of which there can be a true and a false kind. Study over the footnotes in the New World Translation on the texts at Acts 26:5, Colossians 2:18 and James 1:26, 27, and see how the footnote renderings allow for the use of the term “religion” or “religious”, though the texts themselves use the expressions “form of worship” or “formal worshiper”. Hence it is well to make clear our use of the term “religion” by qualifying it as “true” or “false”, if the context or setting does not do this sufficiently.

    *** w51 8/15 p. 511 Questions From Readers ***

    Why has the Watchtower Society suddenly approved the use of the word “religion” relative to the worship of Jehovah’s witnesses?—P. L., New York.

    We are not trying to make a new language, but we want to use the language we have to the honor of God’s name, and do so with as little confusion as possible in Kingdom preaching. In the English language the word “religion” means the service or adoration of God or a god, as expressed through certain forms of worship. So the religion may be either true or false, depending upon both the god being worshiped and the form or manner of expressing the worship. If we practice the true form of worship of the true God Jehovah, and if we are speaking the English language, then when discussing our worship we may properly use the English words that will so limit our meaning, namely, “true religion.”

    The word “religion” is used in the English Bibles in several places. It is used in the KingJamesVersion at James 1:26, 27. There James distinguishes between the vain or false religion (1:26) and the pure or true religion (1:27), and does so by appropriately qualifying in each instance the same Greek word, thres·kei′ a. The Greek threskeía is equivalent to the Latin religio, both simply meaning “form of worship”, of which there can be a true and a false kind. From the Latin religio comes the English word “religion”. Study over the footnotes in the NewWorldTranslation on the texts at Acts 26:5, Colossians 2:18 and James 1:26, 27, to see how they allow for the use of the words “religion” and “religious”. When the Bible uses the term “religion” it is either properly qualified or the context or setting indicates whether it is speaking of the true or the false. Note how the setting shows that at Isaiah 29:13 it is false religion and at 2 Timothy 3:5 it is true religion, reading both texts from the Moffatt translation.

    This viewpoint on the use of the word “religion” was not suddenly adopted by the Society. Careful readers of the Society’s publications have noticed that during the past few years when religion was being discussed the publications were careful to limit any condemnation to false religion. Two years ago Awake! quoted Moffatt’s translation of 2 Timothy 3:1-5, 13, and identified the religion mentioned in that text as being true by inserting this qualification in brackets, as follows: “Though they keep up a form of [true] religion, they will have nothing to do with it as a force.” (September 22, 1949, page 9) So this matter had been under careful study and consideration for a long time, and what was brought out on it at the Theocracy’s Increase Assembly at Yankee Stadium in New York last year was further enlargement and welcome clarification, and not some new idea brought forth suddenly. None should feel upset by the use of the term “religion”. Because we use it does not put us in the class of the tradition-bound false religions, no more than does the calling of ourselves Christians put us in with the false Christians of Christendom


    Have JWs EVER Been Right?

    Image result for Jehovahs Witness logo.Image result for 100% wrong

Share this