by Vanderhoven7 23 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Then for a long time he did nothing until 1919 when he chose the Watchtower society publishing company to be his channel of communication on earth. 3 He fed false information to the Watchtower leaders over the decades “as a cleansing” to sift out “those serving a date”. This is known as “new light”. 4
So, according to the Watchtower, Jesus is a lazy do-nothing and a liar.
have a hard time reading any book other than the Bible.
Did you figure out what everything means all on your own? Or did you read a translation?
Christians don't need unscholarly men's changing teachings based on eisegesis to know and love both Father and Son. Nor do they need count on men who say they are appointed to guide them into saving truth. The word is sufficient for that as well as for instruction, doctrine and correction. Nor would believing or not believing in 1874, 1919 or 1934 affect that salvation in the slightest.
What does one need to know to be saved that is not found in the Bible Fisherman?
Vanderhoven7: Nor would believing or not believing in 1874, 1919 or 1934 affect that salvation in the slightest.
May I ask, what significance does 1934 play in the Watchtower belief system?
Hi SV,
1934 is the date arrived at if one accepts Watchtower calculations but applies it to 587 instead of 607 for the destruction of Jerusalem.
Both dates are irrelevant and spurious to scripture.
Got it. Thanks.
Their ideas about the 'ending of the Gentile Times' are totally useless. Regardless of when the Gentile Times supposedly ended JWs were banned in Russia just a few years ago, and are banned in several other countries as well. How could that be possible if the Gentile Times have ended and God's Kingdom has been ruling since 1914 (or 1934)?
What nonsense they teach!
Pastor Russell concluded that the second advent took place in October of 1874.
Then he added 3 and half years and came up with 1878 as the time that Jesus began ruling as king.
Since that time it has been emphatically manifest that the time had come in A.D. 1878 when kingly judgment should begin at the house of God. It is here that Rev. 14:14-20 applies, and our Lord is brought to view as the Reaper crowned. The year A.D. 1878, being the parallel of his assuming power and authority in the type, clearly marks the time for the actual assuming of power as King of kings, by our present, spiritual, invisible Lord–the time of his taking to himself his great power to reign, which in the prophecy is closely associated with the resurrection of his faithful, and the beginning of the trouble and wrath upon the nations. –The Time Is At Hand, 1902, page 239.view
Believe it or not, his date works.
According to Revelation, 3 and a half times = 1260 days
Then 1 time = 360 days, the length of a prophetic year
2,520 360 day years = 2,484 solar years
Count 2,484 solar years from 607 BCE and you arrive at 1878,,,the very year Russel determined that Jesus was enthroned.
The governing body needs to take a look at this. The overlapping generation still works with this as well.
And Pastor Russell was right all along.
Three cheers for The Dawn Bible Students; the only ones who did not apostatize.
Vanderhoven7, I notice that you said you "have a hard time reading any book other than the Bible." By "any book other than the Bible" did you mean that literally, or did you mean something somewhat different? Did you mean "any religious book other than the Bible"? If all books (including all science books) other than the Bible are hard for you to read and understand, then that largely explains why you and I disagree with each in a number of matters. A number of science books (and some other books) are vastly easier for me to understand than some parts of the Bible.
Perhaps by "hard time" you do not mean hard to understand, but rather hard to tolerate (in other words, other books are annoying) or perhaps you mean other books are too boring and thus it is hard for you to motivate yourself to read such books.
The opening post of this topic quoted Mark Jones saying the following. "The
good news that Christians in the first century preached was the birth,
death and resurrection of Jesus Christ; that all those who believed in
him were saved and reconciled to God through the death of his son." But if the message of the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a major portion of the gospel ("good news") taught by Jesus then there is a major problem with the gospel. That is because https://thechurchoftruth.org/the-bible-is-wrong-about-the-resurrection/ proves conclusively that the resurrection of Jesus Christ never took place! Furthermore that web page says that "The inescapable fact is that Jesus’ teachings (as presented in Matthew,
Mark and Luke) are diametrically opposite those of Paul and John." That page has a link to https://thechurchoftruth.org/path-to-salvation-is-not-clear/ which provides the proof of what the three earliest biblical gospels claim Jesus said was the means to obtaining salvation. None of those words attributed (in the synoptic gospels) to Jesus said Jesus required belief in the resurrection of Jesus!
" None of those words attributed (in the synoptic gospels) to Jesus said Jesus required belief in the resurrection of Jesus! " Good point !
"Mark" was the first Gospel that we find in the N.T to be written, Matthew and Luke copy "Mark" word for a word to a great degree, and then add their two cents. The "Long Ending" to Mark is a later addition, because "Mark" lacked any real reference to the resurrection as significant perhaps.
This reluctance to include BELIEF in the Resurrection as vital to being saved is not really contradictory to the earliest teaching we have on Christianity in the N.T, that of Paul, but of course, if one denied the FACT of the Resurrection, that person would be automatically an Apostate from their Brethren's point of view.
So Mark Jones' summary of the Good News is not so far off, it was a simple message, which is why it had such appeal, and why Christianity spread like a flame in dry tinder.
Jehovah's Witnesses do not preach this simple message, they add to it, complicate it, and make it not just less effective in promoting Christianity, but ruin it.
