Hi Quotes:
Thanks for answering my request for a copy of the outline and for your PM. I see there is only one sentence in the outline referring to the 144,000 as being a literal number, leaving it up to the speaker to elaborate on the "proof" or should I say the BS answer.
As I mentioned, I posted a thread last year after hearing the speaker say that "we know the 144,000 in Rev.14:1 is a literal number because the Lamb is mentioned in the same verse, and that Lamb is 1 Lamb, not 'Lambs' and therefore as the Lamb is not plural but rather is '1', a literal number, then "logically"??? the number 144,000 is also literal." I was very surprised to hear that some others on this board had also heard that explanation previously.
So since I can see it isn't explained in detail in the outline, I was then curious to see where the speaker got his info and to read the WTS's actual explanation of this brilliant deduction.
I found it on their CD-ROM in the 1960 WT 6/15 pg 384:
As for the number 144,000 it is reasonable to take this number literally because of its being contrasted with the "great crowd" that no man was able to number. (Rev. 7:9) Further, at Revelation 14:1, 3, we read of Jesus Christ as standing upon the mount Zion together with 144,000 others. The 144,000 would logically be as literal as the 1, making a total of 144,001 standing upon the mount. Besides, why give such a large and specific number if it does not impart information?
So there it is..they actually said it in black and white. And I really love this added gem in the last sentence..."Besides, why give such a large and specific number if it does not impart information?"
This may seem trivial to some, but it was significant to me, as it is such a lame attempt in trying to use logic BS to explain such an important part of their teachings. I actually remember hearing something like the 1st sentence in the above quotation, about taking it literally "because of its being contrasted with the 'great crowd'", but as I usually did with things that didn't make sense, I must have blocked out the rest of the explanation of the Lamb or Jesus as being "1" in number.
Thanks again Quotes.
Cheers, Had Enough
