Posts by slimboyfat

144

Hailstone message AND everyone will be saved? Questions

by slimboyfat in

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.

slimboyfat

As far as I know JWs don’t use the phrase “heart condition” any more. That’s old terminology. Where are you getting the idea that survival is based on “heart condition”? Is it in the latest statement and Watchtower and I missed it?

What the statement said was that an unbeliever at Armageddon has the same chance as an unbeliever being resurrected. Since JWs have long believed that billions will be resurrected (the Reasoning book speculated that the earth could cope with and feed 20 billion) it is reasonable to wonder whether the recent statement really implies that billions will survive Armageddon. If that’s not what they meant, or if they backtrack, as it stands it is a reasonable inference from what they have said.

144

Hailstone message AND everyone will be saved? Questions

by slimboyfat in

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.

slimboyfat

But it is clearly not as it makes the Big A pointless.

You seem to be operating on the assumption that if it doesn’t make sense then it can’t be what they’re saying. Is that a safe assumption from the same people who brought us the inflatable rolling generation?

They do seem to be saying that people alive at Armageddon have as good a chance of surviving as the billions who died beforehand. If they really mean that then it would mean billions surviving. Does that make any sense in view of everything else they teach about God and salvation? No, it doesn’t seem to make sense at all. But that is to state the problem, not to solve it.

144

Hailstone message AND everyone will be saved? Questions

by slimboyfat in

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.

slimboyfat

The anticipation has always been that most who have died will be resurrected except certain cases like Pharaoh and the Pharisees.

If the same standard is applied to those who are alive at Armageddon this would seem to imply that billions probably would survive.

Presumably for them to survive the end of the thousand years they would need to convert and not follow Satan in the final rebellion, so billions could still end up being destroyed then.

That would be remarkable if that is the new position. I think it needs clarification.

144

Hailstone message AND everyone will be saved? Questions

by slimboyfat in

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.

slimboyfat

That does seem to be the logic of what they’re saying, even if all their statements are not consistent at the moment.

It does seem to be a major change and it will be interesting to see how it goes. Presumably they will either explain how billions possibly surviving Armageddon makes sense in their overall teaching or they may backtrack on the implication of their latest comments. Either would be revealing of the current mindset of the GB. The fact we’re at the point where this needs clarification indicates movement by the GB in a more liberal direction.

144

Hailstone message AND everyone will be saved? Questions

by slimboyfat in

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.

slimboyfat

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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_universalism

3144

It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)

by Simon in

jw
friends

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.

slimboyfat

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.

3144

It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)

by Simon in

jw
friends

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.

slimboyfat

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.

23

How will history treat Judge Rutherford?

by Vanderhoven7 in

mark jones writes:.

how will history treat joseph rutherford?.

like ben gorden has said, it would depend on who’s looking back.

slimboyfat

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.

23

How will history treat Judge Rutherford?

by Vanderhoven7 in

mark jones writes:.

how will history treat joseph rutherford?.

like ben gorden has said, it would depend on who’s looking back.

slimboyfat

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.

https://youtu.be/-lSLzYKVd2s?si=Ce-5HAX2pYKvWVW1

56

Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man

by peacefulpete in

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?.

slimboyfat

What do you mean by the “identification” of the Son of Man? Do you mean who the original author thought he was? Or the Greek translator(s)? Or the early Christians? Or who we should identify as the Son of Man?

For me the interesting thing is what the early Christians thought about the Son of Man. From what I can tell they identified Jesus as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and they perceived him to be a supreme angelic being distinct from and subordinate to God. This might be different (probably is) from what the original author had in mind, and what later Jews thought, as well as later Christians.

To me the distinction between Jesus and God is maintained in Rev 1 and throughout Revelation. It may be that Jews came to identify the Son of Man and the Ancient of Days as one and the same person in response to the so-called two powers heresy, just as later trinitarians in their own way conflated the two to suit their own dogma.

But as far as the original author was concerned, they seem to be separate beings, and the Son of Man is naturally subordinate to the Ancient of Days, and the same probably goes for how the early Christians identified the Son of Man.