You can’t. You’ll be saved and you’ll be happy about it. 🙂
If JWs fully embrace universalism then this will be a massive step in the right direction because I think it’s true.
i’ve not been paying close attention to watchtower developments, but talking to a jw yesterday it occurred to me the society (yes, still use that term - old school) have been sending out mixed messages in recent years.
from what i gather, a few years ago the gb announced that during the great tribulation jws would be required to preach a “hailstone message of judgement” which involved telling people it was too late for them to repent and they were definitely going to be destroyed.
there were hints that this could be very soon, “any day now” preaching could stop and the hailstone message come in, kind of thing.
You can’t. You’ll be saved and you’ll be happy about it. 🙂
If JWs fully embrace universalism then this will be a massive step in the right direction because I think it’s true.
uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
he needs to retract his statement that this new light is a nothing burger.
Why? Does anyone care what he says nowadays? Let him prattle on whatever, it doesn’t impact anything much.
uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
The result is that Lloyd's videos are becoming less informative …
Less informative. Is that even possible? I can almost feel him scooping into my brain and removing reams of information at a time. Watch a few of his videos and you’ll soon end up knowing nothing at all.
mark jones writes:.
how will history treat joseph rutherford?.
like ben gorden has said, it would depend on who’s looking back.
People sometimes change. I have a theory that Rutherford started out as a nice person and turned into quite a nasty ruthless person later. I can’t remember where it was, but something I read indicated that he had a really good relationship with his wife early in their marriage and that he was a more pleasant person all round in his younger years. Something went wrong for Rutherford to turn him into a different person. What was it? It was his time in prison in 1917. It really turned him into a bit of a paranoid crank and a ruthless manipulator. His health suffered badly during his time in prison and he never recovered for the rest of his life. It made him bitter, angry, and cynical. Everything bad about his character: the drinking, scheming, misogyny, paranoia, arrogance, jealousy, crude and cruel behaviour, all come after his imprisonment 1917. I’m not the first to make this observation, but I think there may be something to it.
mark jones writes:.
how will history treat joseph rutherford?.
like ben gorden has said, it would depend on who’s looking back.
How will history treat Rutherford? I just wish history would treat him at all.
For the second leader of a religion that has grown to around 9 million active members and 20 million adherents, it’s pretty remarkable that no scholarly biography has been attempted. Brigham Young, the second leader of the Mormons has been the subject of many books and articles, despite the Mormon church being smaller than JWs in terms of active members.
He’s certainly an interesting character, so what’s stopping people? Maybe there just aren’t enough good sources for his private and pre-Watchtower life for a biography to be viable. Maybe there’s a lack of interest in JWs among scholars generally, and a lack of motivation among JWs to apply scholarly methods to their own history.
I like the story that Rutherford became a Bible Student because he had been an encyclopaedia salesman himself and so felt he couldn’t turn them away the people at his door away when he was offered a set of Studies in the Scriptures. His support for William Jennings Bryan, and his early family life, and strife, and meeting his wife sound interesting if anyone could find sources to illuminate them. It’s a shame apparently nobody managed to record any anecdotes or views from his wife and son before they died.
again this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
i’ve not been paying close attention to watchtower developments, but talking to a jw yesterday it occurred to me the society (yes, still use that term - old school) have been sending out mixed messages in recent years.
from what i gather, a few years ago the gb announced that during the great tribulation jws would be required to preach a “hailstone message of judgement” which involved telling people it was too late for them to repent and they were definitely going to be destroyed.
there were hints that this could be very soon, “any day now” preaching could stop and the hailstone message come in, kind of thing.
I didn’t find any reference to the “hailstone message” in the recent Watchtower, but I think I’ve found it in the June 2023 Watchtower:
During the great tribulation, elders will need courage to obey instructions they will receive—regardless of the dangers involved. The instructions may relate to delivering a symbolic hailstone message and to surviving the attack of Gog of Magog.
Does that mean the message is now about telling JWs how to survive rather than telling non-JWs they are going to die? If so, this change seems to predate the annual meeting. Did people pick upon it at the time. They don’t seem to signpost it “this is a change” as they sometimes do. Did people realise it was a change from the old “hailstone message”?
i’ve not been paying close attention to watchtower developments, but talking to a jw yesterday it occurred to me the society (yes, still use that term - old school) have been sending out mixed messages in recent years.
from what i gather, a few years ago the gb announced that during the great tribulation jws would be required to preach a “hailstone message of judgement” which involved telling people it was too late for them to repent and they were definitely going to be destroyed.
there were hints that this could be very soon, “any day now” preaching could stop and the hailstone message come in, kind of thing.
Does it mention the hailstone message specifically? Did they call it a revision, or “new light” on the meaning of that term in particular?
i’ve not been paying close attention to watchtower developments, but talking to a jw yesterday it occurred to me the society (yes, still use that term - old school) have been sending out mixed messages in recent years.
from what i gather, a few years ago the gb announced that during the great tribulation jws would be required to preach a “hailstone message of judgement” which involved telling people it was too late for them to repent and they were definitely going to be destroyed.
there were hints that this could be very soon, “any day now” preaching could stop and the hailstone message come in, kind of thing.
I’ve not been paying close attention to Watchtower developments, but talking to a JW yesterday it occurred to me the Society (yes, still use that term - old school) have been sending out mixed messages in recent years.
From what I gather, a few years ago the GB announced that during the Great Tribulation JWs would be required to preach a “hailstone message of judgement” which involved telling people it was too late for them to repent and they were definitely going to be destroyed. There were hints that this could be very soon, “any day now” preaching could stop and the hailstone message come in, kind of thing. Have I got that right? If so, that seemed like a hardening in their position from the traditional ambiguity about exactly who would be saved, or could repent and get saved at what time.
But now, at the latest annual meeting, and in the recent WT, the Society have announced a complete reversal. Instead of people being condemned during the Great Tribulation they can repent and be saved right up to the last minute, regardless of their earlier actions.
Have I got the original position right, and now the revision?
If so, I’ve got questions. What have they done with the idea of the “hailstone message”? Have they given it a new interpretation, abandoned the idea, or just ignored what they said previously?
If this description of the change in position is accurate, does anyone have any ideas what prompted it? It is part of a larger programme of liberalisation, including beards, and what else? Do you think the removal of Morris from the GB is related to these changes in any way?
uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
Wow. Horrible. That’s pretty desperate. Don’t know what more to say.