The thought at Pr 4: 18, (“The path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established”) is usually construed to convey the idea of a progressive revelation of Scriptural truth under the direction of holy spirit, and a steadily growing understanding of fulfilled (and yet-to-be- fulfilled) prophecy.
If this view of Pr 4:18 were correct, we might reasonably expect that Scriptural explanations, once published as revealed truth, would, be constructively refined with added detail in the course of time. But we would not expect that Scriptural explanations would need to be revoked and replaced by differing (or even contradictory) interpretations. The numerous instances in which our “official “ interpretations have either changed radically or have turned out to be untrue, lead to the conclusion that we really ought to refrain from asserting that Pr4:18 describes the growth of Bible understanding under the direction of holy spirit.
(Actually, there is nothing in the context of Pr 4:18 justifying its use to encourage the faithful to be patient at the pace with which Scriptural truths are clarified – the verse and the context simply extol the advantages of leading an upright life.)
Where does this leave us? We are asked to believe that the brothers who take the lead in preparing and disseminating Bible understanding are “spirit-directed”. But how can this belief be consistent with their many mistakes? Jehovah never makes a mistake. His holy spirit never makes a mistake. (eg Jo 3:34 “For the one whom God sent forth speaks the sayings of God, for he does not give the spirit by measure.”) But the imperfect men who take the lead in the world-wide congregation have made mistakes – some even leading to needless loss of life for individuals. Are we to believe that Jehovah wishes the faithful occasionally to be misled into believing errors that occasionally prove fatal, for some greater long-term good? Or that Jehovah wishes those with sincerely held doubts to pretend to believe a perceived error, for the sake of a superficial “unity”? I simply cannot bring myself to believe this of the God of truth. There has to be some other explanation.
The evidence that the world-wide congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses is – as a body – doing the will of Jehovah is surely incontrovertible. So why have there been so many mistakes and issues giving rise to unease? Why, despite the influence of God's holy spirit, do the brothers taking the lead not “get it right first time, every time” ?
Perhaps the statement of Jesus at Jo 3:8 may help us come to terms with the paradox:-
“The wind blows where it wants to, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from and where it is going. So is everyone that has been born from the spirit.”
This scripture seems to have its primary application to our human inability to understand how, when and where holy spirit will operate in its choice of individuals to be born again. But Jesus' simile, likening holy spirit to an unpredictable (to humans) wind, blowing hither and thither, might help us to come to terms with the errors made by humans who, in general terms, are truly operating under the direction of holy spirit.
(Some years ago, there was a suggestion that uneven and contradictory progress toward full understanding of scripture might be likened to the “tacking” of a sailing boat, as it makes progress against a prevailing wind. The analogy is unsatisfactory, because it suggests that progress is made despite the force of holy spirit, rather than as a result of its powerful direction.)
So I suggest a different analogy:-
A steadily blowing wind will blow leaves along – usually in the direction of wind – but occasionally, there will be eddies whereby the leaves blow around in circles, even momentarily moving in a direction opposite to the wind. However, the wind continues to blow steadily, and eventually, most of the leaves will - despite the occasional adverse flurries - finish up being blown away, in the direction of the wind. The errors of imperfect men are like the adverse flurries, that in the end, cannot prevent the wind from blowing all the leaves away. Likewise, the error-free force from Jehovah - his holy spirit - will eventually overcome all problems caused by imperfect men's occasional failures to recognize the direction in which holy spirit is “blowing.”
Maybe there's a better analogy, but I'd really appreciate comments on this idea. Moreover, if any brother or sister out there has found a satisfactory way of explaining the paradox of mistakes made by a holy-spirit-directed organization of men, I'd be very glad to learn from them. My mind has been uneasy over this issue for several years, and I have prayed much about it. The line of thought set out above has helped a little.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by saraybach54 on 2013-03-12 16:20:59
Many thoughts come to mind from your post...
The main stumbling block comes from believing that, "the governing body", has been appointed by Christ...and that there has always been an earthly organisation set up as ours is...
Anyone who has done their homework, would know that the early christians, were organised into, self-governing congregations...
The Jerusalem congregation may have had Peter, and a remnant of the original disciples...along with James... but they were in no way, "The Governing Body"...! It was Paul who sorted out any of the problems...and in the recorded instance of gentile circumcision, the Jerusalem congregation had to write a letter of apology...!
Christ was their Leader...and Jehovah wrote his laws on their hearts...
The scriptures are there in their entirety and if we study them earnestly and honestly, asking for guidance... Spirit will always reveal the truth of God's Word...
The problem lies in approaching scripture study with pre-conceived doctrines, taught from pre-conceived agendas...
If Jehovah has written on our hearts, and if Christ has called us to Himself... we just, "know", when something isn't right... because we, "know', Christ...and Christ, "knows", us individually...
Jehovah blesses individuals...and when a whole group of individuals share the love of Christ...?!... He is there amongst them...
He warned us all to watch our individual steps, and be aware of any stumbling blocks...
He also warned anyone who took on the role of shepherding His Sheep to be especially careful with how they behaved towards His Sheep...
But most of all He said that Love would hold us all together...
So maybe we would do well to just continue to love one
another ...and pray for those who have assumed so huge an undertaking as to presume to speak for Jehovah...?!...that they might take a step back and look at their present position...and have the humility to start afresh...with the understanding that they are not in charge of our spiritual welfare...!?
That responsibility lies with us as individuals...Reply by Jude on 2013-03-12 18:44:08
I agree wholeheartedly. And I wish to make some additional points.
I find it very hard to believe that God would direct an organization of imperfect humans by holy spirit and still permit the human imperfections to result in the organization teaching error. To me this defeats the whole purpose of directing them by holy spirit. Not only that, it contradicts the fact that the bible is error free - despite being penned by imperfect men who were spirit directed.
Put another way: how is it that Jehovah was able to use his spirit to direct the imperfect writers of the bible in such a way as to prevent them from writing doctrinal error in the scriptures; yet he is unable to do the same today by preventing the imperfect men taking the lead in the organization from teaching error - and especially if this is his sole channel for dispensing truth on earth today? There is a grave contradiction here that I find very unsettling.
Furthermore, if we are going to make the argument that God's spirit directed organization CAN teach doctrinal error despite being spirit directed, and because of the imperfections of the men taking the lead, then by implication we have just undermined confidence in the doctrinal soundness of the scriptures. Why? Well, wasn't the scriptures also penned by imperfect men who were spirit directed? So how can we be so sure that the imperfect writers of the bible didn't also record error due to their imperfections and despite being spirit directed? We can't have our cake and eat it too. We can't teach on the one hand that the bible is doctrinally sound because God's spirit ensured the imperfect writers wrote only truth, then turn around and teach that God's spirit directed organization at times teaches errors because of the imperfections of the men taking the lead.
Comment by apollos0falexandria on 2013-03-12 17:33:25
I don't have an analogy, but I will offer a general theory.
Nobody receives holy spirit automatically. We all need to ask for it (Lu 11:9). We are assured that if we do so then we will receive it provided what we are asking for is according to God's will (1 Jo 5:14).
It is clear from this latter verse that the direction of God's spirit will be withheld if the matter under consideration is not within the remit of men at this time.
It's not difficult to think of examples as to how that might affect things.
First let's take something positive. It is clearly God's will that we are morally and physically clean. Several decades ago those taking the lead determined that smoking was not compatible with Christianity, based upon increasing medical information that showed that it damages the gift God gave us. I don't think many would argue against such a doctrine being in accord with the spirit. Similarly in moral matters we have strict doctrines on adultery, homosexuality, bloodguilt, lying, etc. We have looked for the spirit's guidance in the preaching work, and it appears that we have received it.
The other side of this coin is matters that are not in accord with God's will at this time.
(Acts 1:7) He said to them: “It does not belong to YOU to get knowledge of the times or seasons which the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction;
It doesn't matter how much we pray for the spirit to understand Jehovah's timetable. It still doesn't belong to us. For well over a century we have ignored Jesus' words, and our doctrines in this area are a mess. The holy spirit is not going to help, because we've clearly been told it is not in accord with God's will. Any doctrines that we formulate in this area can never be anything more than human speculation. Hence why we've just been blowing in the wind, rather than experiencing progressive revelation by the spirit.
Take another example. How many times have we changed our doctrine about the judgement of Sodom and Gomorrah? I think you've documented that somewhere haven't you Meleti? Why do we keep changing our mind as if the spirit is not directing our doctrines. Simply because the judging does not belong to us. Jehovah has "committed all the judging to the Son" (John 5:22). So again we can speculate all we like about who will and will not receive a resurrection, but that is all it will be - speculation - because it is not God's will that we do the judging, so the spirit is not going to direct us.
Are you able to think of any examples where the spirit by rights should have directed us progressively but has failed to do so?
ApollosReply by Steve on 2013-03-12 18:05:22
As often as Proverbs 4:18 is highlighted, I have to wonder how verse 19 is so often ignored in cases as you discuss.
Steve
Reply by saraybach54 Pauline on 2013-03-17 16:49:55
Just a thought...?
When The Lord warned us to keep on the watch...(Matt 24:42)... wasn't He really saying that we need to watch our Selves...?... as to our conduct and personal relationship/standing with Jehovah? The reference to Noah's day, seems to emphasise this...?
And as for praying for guidance, and The Spirit not responding...?... my personal experience is that we have to grow into the right way to pray... We learn the truth of the scripture, where it already knows what we need.. and if we pray for understanding of things we dont need to understand, its futile... Imperfect mans' ego needs to know... it's a control thing...
Comment by Urbanus on 2013-03-12 17:51:56
Mark 13, which all of us should be reading this week, sets the matter in clear order regarding what we think we know about the end times, versus Jesus strong admonition to stay alert and awake, and not think we know from dates and seasons.
Acts 15:20 "to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood" is an such an area where the spirit guidance is open to question.
Is it reasonable to apply this to medical treatments for low platelets? Or hemophilia? Or to change our position?
Comment by Glenn on 2013-03-12 21:33:07
I think the mistake is made the moment we surrender our mental powers over to any one else period. History has shown that all religions become dogmatic and polluted with men's ideas and interpretations of the bible. When Peter said to Jesus "to whom do i go away to" he did not say were or what other organization, he said "whom". With unscriptural ideals about blood that have killed thousands among other doctrines and understanding that are not scripturally correct. I'm coming to the understanding, that is to Jesus were to look to, And having a personal relationship with him and his Father is what really matters. All the scriptures point to this, they do not point to an organization that claims their Jehovah's or any other organization for that matter. Did not Jehovah warn the Israelites about what would happen when they were begging for a King (organization).
Reply by junachin on 2013-03-13 11:04:39
I have to disagree with the idea that 'unscriptural ideals about blood have killed thousands'.
That statement certainly applies to the medical community's eagerness to give transfusions, but how does it apply to JWs? Can anyone document 'thousands' of cases where our stand on blood transfusions have led to unnecessary death? And by 'document' I mean something more than just accepting a doctor or hospital's CYA declarations to the press. The fact is, bloodless surgery is saving lives right now - and will save many thousands more - and the world has, to a significant extent, JWs to thank for that.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-13 11:36:47
I have to agree with Junachin on this. If we are to make such a claim, we need to provide documentation to back it up.
Reply by vascagase on 2013-03-13 12:29:47
Another hint, Isaiah 29:12 speaks of a book given to an unlettered man. There are no cross references in this verse. Nor is there any commentary in the in the Isaiah study books or anywhere the WT library. Who is this unlettered man and what is this book He is given?
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-13 12:45:42
We seem to be getting off topic. What is the point you are making?
Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-03-13 12:58:54
He means Muhammed and the Quran
Reply by Glenn on 2013-03-13 20:29:43
Do you think less then thousands have died from 1945 till present upholding our blood doctrine that is not biblically accurate???
Reply by on 2013-03-13 23:19:54
I have no idea how many - if any - died from upholding a blood doctrine that seems perfectly accurate to me. In fact, I don't see how anyone could know that. Nor can we know how many (thousands?) would have died from transfusion-related complications had our policy been not to abstain from blood transfusions. In any case, time has vindicated us on this issue - and the God we worship - so why would we view this as an example of resisting the direction of the spirit?
Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-03-14 05:56:15
I agree that there are no statistics to support this claim. I don't think it would be even possible to compile such. Nevertheless it does not mean that we can dismiss the loss of life that may have occurred.
It's unquestionably true that bloodless surgery is good practice. However while the medical field is still making progress in that area, it would be disingenuous to deny that many decisions have been made in emergency situations over the past half-century that have ended with loss of life, and that certain decisions were based upon an interpretation of scripture handed down from those in religious authority. As has been pointed out it is generally not possible to say that a life in any particular case was lost by refusal of a blood-transfusion. There are so many variables in critical cases that it becomes one of many factors. That is why it would seem impossible to compile meaningful statistics.
But we publicly admit that in some cases the choice is one of "putting God's law first". What does that imply? First over what? Evidently the context is always about putting this perceived "law" ahead of "preservation of life". Since this has been a long-standing disfellowshipping / disassociation offence it is clearly not a matter of choice or conscience if one wants to remain a Witness.
It becomes a question of what blood truly symbolizes and whether we can apply the scriptural principles to create hard laws against certain medical options in the modern era. I have seen convincing arguments from both sides. In my opinion I have also seen the greatest number of inconsistencies and misapplication of scriptures from the side that rules against the use of blood for medical purposes.
I feel that this is an area where principles could be highlighted, but the decisions should be left to individuals Christians, and they shold be allowed to freely carry their own load before God.
Has the holy spirit been directing us correctly as an organization in this area? Again it's just my opinion, but I believe that as medical science has progressed, the maze we have walked into in the field of blood fractions, and the resultant inconsistent policies that have emerged, seem to indicate that the attempted application of scriptural principles has been very human in this case.
Of course since bloodless surgery is good practice it's easy to put a spin on things the other way too.
To expand on this we'd probably need an article dealing with this particular topic.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-14 08:11:24
I concur with the idea of sidelining this until we can have a topic on the subject.
Reply by junachin on 2013-03-15 23:52:17
As usual, very insightful comment, Apollos. Meleti, consider it sidelined.
Comment by vascagase on 2013-03-12 23:14:58
The word helper in John 14:16, 26 15:26 16:7-13 is paraclete in Koine greek. The word for spirit is pnuema in Koine. NWT reference bible. In 1 John 2:1 Jesus is a "helper" paraclete. The point is they "paraclete" are actual persons, not spirits. Who then was Jesus refering to in Jn 14:16,26 15:26 16: 7 thru 13 who would guide you into all the truth for He will not speak of his own impulse, what He hears He will speak? Holy spirit was in operation before Jesus during His ministry, His miraculous birth his miracles, and after He went to heaven, Pentecost ect......Could the answer be in Jn.1:21?
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-13 06:36:52
I'm not sure what you mean by actual persons in contrast to spirits, since spirits are also called persons in Scripture. (See Ex. 15:3; Mt. 11:11; Acts 3:19; Heb. 9:24) Additionally, the word "helper" can refer to people and things, so using it doesn't automatically imply an actual person--spiritual or physical--is being referenced.
When John wrote his first letter and referred to Jesus as a helper at 1 John 2:1, Jesus was indeed an actual person, being as he was, a spirit in heaven. The helper that Jesus was referring to in John 16:7-13 is clearly identified in vs. 13 as "the spirit of the truth".
Given the above, I'm not clear on what point you are endeavoring to make?Reply by vascagase on 2013-03-13 11:58:33
Thank You for the question. When we look closely at Jn 16:13, "the spirit of truth" notice the it refers to the "helper" in verse 7 (paraclete) in the reference bible NWT. The word pneuma(:koine greek) (ru'ach hebrew) is "spirit or active force". These are two different greek words, pneuma (spirit) paraclete (helper). In Jn. 1:18-21 John the Baptizer is asked if he is the Messiah/Christ. Elijah or The Prophet, of which he said NO! Cross referenced, it takes us to Deut.18:15-18.... Deut. 33:1,2 Hab. 3:3 and Isaiah 42:11 (Kedar) are long range prophecies that we have seen fulfilled and can verify. Actually best to read all of Isaiah 42. So it gets so interesting as to Who is this Prophet? This "spirit of truth" or "The Truthful One"....
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-13 12:35:38
Correct. John 16:13 refers to the spirit (pneuma) of truth. So the helper mentioned in verse 7 is the spirit of truth. Are you suggesting that the spirit of truth is not the holy spirit, but some spiritual person? An angel, for instance?
Reply by vascagase on 2013-03-13 13:24:07
Yes! "spirit of truth" can be understood better and clearer as the truthful one! Notice Jn. 14:16,17. "Another helper" "spirit of truth" in the reference bible is one and the same. Not an active force. The word "HE" masculine is mentioned in these chapters 14, 15,16 is (unique) there is no other set of verses like these in the Gospels! Prophetic of another Prophet. What credentials or proof that He is "The Prophet" ? There are many, many biblical prophecies in regard to this one "even by name" e.g. Song of Solomon 5:16 in the Hebrew lanquage! sadly translated "altogether desirable" or "altogether lovely".....
Reply by Steve on 2013-03-13 16:16:11
It says he because the noun is masculine, but John used a neuter relative pronoun, so this does not suggest the spirit is a person.
Reply by vascagase on 2013-03-13 17:41:15
Steve, good question! The NWT reference Bible is good tool to explain it as we put it on the table...Notice where and how it points to with regard "spirit of truth" and "helper" Could you please expound?
Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-03-13 12:46:06
Muhammad?
Given your breadcrumb trail I am guessing that you might be Islamic. If so it would be better to say it outright in order to have a conversation about that.
If not then it would still be better to spell out your point.Reply by vascagase on 2013-03-13 13:49:56
100% Correct! To reason on the scriptures is a breadcrumb trail, pick up the pieces, verify. Make sure of all things....My point is WHY were we not told the whole story?
Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-03-13 13:58:31
Well I didn't guess Muhammad because the scriptures led me there. I just have heard similar use of them before.
I find nothing incomplete about Jesus' teachings and I can personally find acceptable and fitting applications of all of those scriptures without needing to introduce a new character.
That's my 2c.
Apollos
P.S. It is completely off-topic though. Not only for this thread, but really for the whole site.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-13 13:59:26
Thank you for clarifying that. As laid out in the two pages "About this Forum" and "Commenting Etiquette", this forum is a Jehovah's Witnesses study area. There are other places on the WWW where one can discuss other religious views and we would warmly recommend you avail yourself of that abundant resource.
Comment by junachin on 2013-03-13 11:59:29
Eddies in wind-blown leaves are, as far as I know, caused by external factors like contours in the land. But, as Apollos points out, the real problem appears to be the leaves themselves. They just don't go where the Spirit's blowing. Of course, now we have to reckon with Jude's Law, that if spirit-directed means eddy-free when applied to Bible writers, it should mean eddy-free for the organization. So, is there a difference between "spirit-directed" and "spirit-inspired"? It would appear there is, based on the inspired record of the first century Christian congregation. There the spirit, on the one hand, inspired some Christians to write infallible scripture, while on the other did not prevent problems from arising among those very same Christians. It would appear Jehovah can use his spirit to rake or blow the leaves as He wishes. Anyone who's had to manage other people - in the congregation, in the workplace or elsewhere - knows that there is a time for each approach.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-13 12:44:50
I rather liked the "leaves in the wind" illustration. Much better than the one of the sailboat tacking against the wind. Though, given our institutional propensity to stick with a bad interpretation like "this generation" or whether those in Sodom and Gomorrah get resurrected (an 8-time flip-flop) perhaps the boat against the wind is the most accurate description of the true state of affairs. It's not what they intended. Certainly, not a flattering illustration as it applies to us. But it turns out to accurately describe the tenacity with which we continue to cling to a failed interpretation despite the clear direction the wind is blowing.
In any case, as I said, I like the "leaves in the wind" illustration, but as you've pointed out, leaves do not have a will of their own. So perhaps we could amend it slightly to "eagles in the wind". The spirit of God is driving all of us in the right direction, but like eagles, we have a mind of our own and at times expend energy unproductively fighting against the wind.
Comment by vascagase on 2013-03-13 12:41:02
In Isaiah 29:12, it speaks of a book given to an unlettered man. There are no cross references in this verse, nor in the Isaiah study books nor in the WT library. Who is this unlettered man and what is this book he received?
Reply by Steve on 2013-03-14 01:51:00
It is those like the ignorant discussed in the previous verses. As the subsequent verse shows, one would not want counted among such ones.
SteveReply by vascagase on 2013-03-14 02:44:18
This man could neither read nor write, yet the book that was given him is in its original form, "Arabic". Not one letter has been altered in over 1400 years, millions of people worldwide which Arabic is not their first language can recite its 6,226 verses (ayats) by heart. Arabic is the sister tongue of Aramaic, the language of Jesus. The biography of this Man is phenominal. What he said and did (Sunna). See for yourself. He is listed no. 1 as the most influential man in history by western/christian historians. Google what others said about Muhammed....
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-14 08:08:40
Now this is getting silly. It is ridiculous to say that Aramaic was the language of Jesus. There is a reason the Jews are called Hebrews. You do your argument and yourself no credit by making such a claim.
As I said previously, this discussion has no place in this forum. This is a place for Jehovah's Witnesses to deepen their appreciation and understanding of the Inspired Word of God. We are not going back to the elementary things, because the foundation of our faith in Jesus as the Son of God is solid and beyond question. There are other venues on the web should you wish to continue this discussion. Therefore, We will be disallowing all subsequent posts on this topic.
MeletiReply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-03-14 10:57:26
At the risk of perpetuating the off-topic tangent, I don't think we can be quite so quick to dismiss Aramaic as the language of Jesus.
See Matt 27:47, Mark 5:41, Mark 14:16, etc.
Also Mel Gibson actually filmed Jesus speaking Aramaic so it must be true :)
Hard facts and joking aside, I think it is irrelevant to the credibility of Islam.
Apollos
Comment by miken on 2013-03-13 12:42:40
"We can’t teach on the one hand that the bible is doctrinally sound because God’s spirit ensured the imperfect writers wrote only truth, then turn around and teach that God’s spirit directed organization at times teaches errors because of the imperfections of the men taking the lead."
Jude makes a fundemental point, the later imperfect Bible writers did not contradict or record doctrines that were in opposition to those previously recorded and believed. This was because as Peter disclosed at 2 Pet 1:21 they "spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit". True some of the things written were and still are "hard to understand" (2 Pet 3:16). It has been stated that the governing body is spirit directed but not in the same way the Bible writers were and yet no scriptural support for this is given and I know of no instances recorded in the Bible where the holy spirit can be seen operating in some kind of secondary way.
apollos0falexandria is right “It does not belong to YOU (us) to get knowledge of the times or seasons which the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction;(Acts 1:7). Infact Jesus told us that we need to continually "keep on the watch" because we would not know when "the son of man is comimg", the "appointed time is" and that he would come at "an hour you do not think likely" Matt 24:42-44; Mark 13:33; Luke 12:40. Jesus specifically warned us about those claiming that the due " time had approached" saying "Do not go after them", Luke 21:8. I have never seen the governing body or their predecessors refer to Luke 21:8 in the context of their discussions as to how close to the end of this system we are. The only specific reference to Luke 21:8 I have found was in the Watchtower of Nov 1st, 1964 , page 654 in an article ironically entitled "Wolves In Sheep's Covering". To quote "To his first-century disciples Jesus sounded a warning that applies to us today with even greater force: “Look out that you are not misled; for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am he [Christ],’ and, ‘The due time has approached.’ Do not go after them.” (Luke 21:8) He also admonished: “Be on the watch for the false prophets that come to you in sheep’s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves.” (Matt. 7:15) Watchfulness and caution are therefore essential to avoid becoming prey to greedy, wolfish men".
It would therefore be wise to stop speculating when the end of this system might occur, unfortunately the governing body still has done stating that the younger of the overlapping generations will not pass away before the great tribulation leading to Armageddon begins. "How, then, are we to understand Jesus’ words about “this generation”? He evidently meant that the lives of the anointed who were on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation." Watchtower April 15, 2010, page 10, paragraph 14.
Comment by vascagase on 2013-03-13 14:13:43
Apollos, not hard to figure it out and much to discuss. So can we reason closely on the scriptures?.....By the way I became JW in the middle 70s...
Reply by Steve on 2013-03-13 19:45:51
vascagase,
I can't seem to respond to your post above. I think it is too far threaded. Regardless, I'm uncertain as to your point in the reference Bible. John used the masculine pronoun for comforter because in Greek parakletos is masculine. He used the neuter for spirit because pneuma is neuter in gender. There is nothing about this to suggest the spirit is a person. Had he wanted to make absolutely clear the spirit is a person he could have used the masculine pronoun for pneuma, but he didn't.
Even Trinitarian Greek grammarian Daniel Wallace admits this, and he believes the spirit is a person.
SteveReply by vascagase on 2013-03-13 21:52:49
Steve, I agree its long discussion. I think the key phrase is "another helper" paraclete..........Vascagase
Reply by Steve on 2013-03-14 01:31:46
That doesn't change anything.
Comment by vascagase on 2013-03-14 02:06:27
Yes it does 100%! Deut. 18:15-19 is positive proof of a true Prophet. Whereas 100% failure rate is the mark of a false prophet Deut, 18:20-22....The important thing is to examine everything carefully.....
Comment by Gedalizah on 2013-03-15 17:05:59
It seems that a Muslim ex-JW has diverted the discussion away from the main issue. However, I really appreciate the thoughtful observations made by most responders. Directly pertinent were:-
if FDS attempts to use the Scriptures to determine matters not yet proper for us to know, (eg specific end-time chronology; efforts to decide who will or will not be resurrected etc), then we cannot expect the results to be flawless. In such matters, HS would not give direction to FDS.
there is probably a distinction between activity which is “spirit inspired” (eg the writing of the Scriptures and their preservation) and “spirit directed” (a term which might reasonably describe FDS activity, most - but not all - of which is in harmony with HS. The analogy of the leaves or perhaps the eagles blown erratically by the wind seems plausible.)
when imperfect men run ahead of Jehovah, problems are inevitable. Of course, individual JW's will find difficulty in distinguishing between FDS pronouncements which have been led by HS, and those which have not. JW culture makes it hard to for individuals even to contemplate the possibility that FDS might be in error. (eg Kingdom Song 91“keep in step with PRESENT TRUTH”) Most JWs find it hard even to admit past FDS errors which are matters of record, and become uncomfortable if raised in discussion.
ApollosOfalexandria asked whether there were instances where HS “by rights should have directed us progressively, but failed to do”.... I'm not sure the phrase “...by rights ...but failed..” is appropriate – surely, HS is always right since it is the active force of the God who never fails. But to respond to the idea behind the question – here are a couple of areas that perplex me:-
How about the position taken by the FDS on organ transplants? There must have been quite a number who died refusing organ transplants, only for their surviving loved ones to be mortified at the eventual FDS reversal. (We even take a kind of delight nowadays in telling how even heart-lung transplants succeed without blood transfusion!). Which leads me to our far-from-clear stand on blood/blood fractions. The current FDS pronouncement on which blood fractions are acceptable and those which are not, is more or less arbitrary ….how could it be otherwise, when Scripture is silent on such detail? It's hard to escape the conclusion that in the above-mentioned two areas, the unerring direction of HS would have saved lives and much heartache. Perhaps the spirit's absence of direction in these areas ought to have been understood by FDS as an implicit instruction not to give direction to the congregation, but to allow personal conscience to rule?Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-15 17:39:20
Well put. Thank you.
As for the unwanted Islam-promoting intrusion, once it was recognized for what it was, we put a stop to subsequent posts by this individual.
We've removed the term "present truth" from our publications, and it no longer appears in the new song book. Sad that it took so long for us to realize that truth is timeless. Present understanding of truth may have been what we meant in Russell's day, but today, though the phrase is gone, the idea of "present truth" is alive and well among many of the flock. Such that, even to raise a question is often seen as an attack. They may not bring out the "A" word, but it's in the worried expression on their face.
Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-03-15 18:32:30
Hi Gedalizah
Well you've picked up all my main points without giving me credit, but then only associated my user name with something you took issue with. That's okay though, you are right that it could have been worded better for those that don't know me or didn't appreciate the context.
When I said "by rights ... but failed" I was of course talking about the human view of things. It would seem that those who have taken it upon themselves to declare that they are God's channel would consider themselves "by rights" to be given the correct information from on high if they request the guidance of the spirit.
However to be self-critical about what I was saying it's true that this was not exactly the context of my use of "by rights". I was saying that we have been given a guarantee that whatever we ask for "according to his will" WILL be granted if we keep on asking. You are correct that technically it is not granted "by rights" but nevertheless my whole theory was based upon this assurance that the promise is there in God's Word.
My question to test the theory then could be rephased to ask "is there anything that we have not been granted knowledge of that is in accord with His will at that time?"
Does that make more sense?
You will note that I am on the same page as you when it comes to medical matters if you review my comments so I don't think we have a disagreement so far.
Apollos
Reply by Glenn on 2013-03-15 20:25:27
When one examines Scriptures such as these regarding the blood issue
Deuteronomy 14:21
New Living Translation (NLT)
21 “You must not eat anything that has died a natural death. You may give it to a foreigner living in your town, or you may sell it to a stranger. But do not eat it yourselves, for you are set apart as holy to the Lord your God.
“You must not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.
Leviticus 17:15
New Living Translation (NLT)
15 “And if any native-born Israelites or foreigners eat the meat of an animal that died naturally or was torn up by wild animals, they must wash their clothes and bathe themselves in water. They will remain ceremonially unclean until evening, but then they will be clean.
1 Samuel 14:32-35
New Living Translation (NLT)
32 That evening they rushed for the battle plunder and butchered the sheep, goats, cattle, and calves, but they ate them without draining the blood. 33 Someone reported to Saul, “Look, the men are sinning against the Lord by eating meat that still has blood in it.”
“That is very wrong,” Saul said. “Find a large stone and roll it over here. 34 Then go out among the troops and tell them, ‘Bring the cattle, sheep, and goats here to me. Kill them here, and drain the blood before you eat them. Do not sin against the Lord by eating meat with the blood still in it.’”
So that night all the troops brought their animals and slaughtered them there. 35 Then Saul built an altar to the Lord; it was the first of the altars he built to the Lord.
1 Corinthians 8:4-13
New Living Translation (NLT)
4 So, what about eating meat that has been offered to idols? Well, we all know that an idol is not really a god and that there is only one God. 5 There may be so-called gods both in heaven and on earth, and some people actually worship many gods and many lords. 6 But we know that there is only one God, the Father, who created everything, and we live for him. And there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom God made everything and through whom we have been given life.
7 However, not all believers know this. Some are accustomed to thinking of idols as being real, so when they eat food that has been offered to idols, they think of it as the worship of real gods, and their weak consciences are violated. 8 It’s true that we can’t win God’s approval by what we eat. We don’t lose anything if we don’t eat it, and we don’t gain anything if we do.
9 But you must be careful so that your freedom does not cause others with a weaker conscience to stumble. 10 For if others see you—with your “superior knowledge”—eating in the temple of an idol, won’t they be encouraged to violate their conscience by eating food that has been offered to an idol? 11 So because of your superior knowledge, a weak believer[a] for whom Christ died will be destroyed. 12 And when you sin against other believers[b] by encouraging them to do something they believe is wrong, you are sinning against Christ. 13 So if what I eat causes another believer to sin, I will never eat meat again as long as I live—for I don’t want to cause another believer to stumble
1 Corinthians 10:25-33
New Living Translation (NLT)
25 So you may eat any meat that is sold in the marketplace without raising questions of conscience. 26 For “the earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.”[a]
27 If someone who isn’t a believer asks you home for dinner, accept the invitation if you want to. Eat whatever is offered to you without raising questions of conscience. 28 (But suppose someone tells you, “This meat was offered to an idol.” Don’t eat it, out of consideration for the conscience of the one who told you. 29 It might not be a matter of conscience for you, but it is for the other person.) For why should my freedom be limited by what someone else thinks? 30 If I can thank God for the food and enjoy it, why should I be condemned for eating it?
31 So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. 32 Don’t give offense to Jews or Gentiles[b] or the church of God. 33 I, too, try to please everyone in everything I do. I don’t just do what is best for me; I do what is best for others so that many may be saved.
2 Samuel 23:13-17
New Living Translation (NLT)
13 Once during the harvest, when David was at the cave of Adullam, the Philistine army was camped in the valley of Rephaim. The Three (who were among the Thirty—an elite group among David’s fighting men) went down to meet him there. 14 David was staying in the stronghold at the time, and a Philistine detachment had occupied the town of Bethlehem.
15 David remarked longingly to his men, “Oh, how I would love some of that good water from the well by the gate in Bethlehem.” 16 So the Three broke through the Philistine lines, drew some water from the well by the gate in Bethlehem, and brought it back to David. But he refused to drink it. Instead, he poured it out as an offering to the Lord. 17 “The Lord forbid that I should drink this!” he exclaimed. “This water is as precious as the blood of these men[a] who risked their lives to bring it to me.” So David did not drink it. These are examples of the exploits of the Three.
Matthew 12:1-12
English Standard Version (ESV)
12 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. 2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to him, “Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.” 3 He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him: 4 how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? 5 Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? 6 I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. 7 And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.”
9 He went on from there and entered their synagogue. 10 And a man was there with a withered hand. And they asked him, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?”—so that they might accuse him. 11 He said to them, “Which one of you who has a sheep, if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not take hold of it and lift it out? 12 Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.”
ONE MAY RE-THINK OUR BLOOD DOCTRINE AND IF THE GOVERNING BODY IS IS BLOOD GUILTY? ALSO IF THE HOLY SPIRIT DIRECTS THIS ORGINIZATION ANY MORE THEN ANY OTHER CHRISTIAN RELIGION? ONE MAY ALSO HAVE TO ASK IF LUKE 21:8 INSNT DIRECTED AT US?Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-16 12:22:21
Thank you for sharing these scriptures with us. Reading them has helped me reaffirm my belief that it would be wrong for me to accept a blood transfusion.
By the way, putting an entire statement all in capital letters is considered bad form as it means one is shouting. Just an FYI.Reply by on 2013-03-16 12:41:17
Sorry for the all caps, these scriptures changed my mind on blood transfusions, it showed me that to him life is more valuable then Sacrifice or the Law.
At least here on this forum we can agree to disagree unlike the organization were one must agree with it at all times on all subjects or face disciplinary action.
Comment by Gedalizah on 2013-03-15 20:04:32
Hi ApollosOfalexandria,
Oh dear, I truly didn't mean to offend by failing to give credit where due. My comment was intended as a sort of precis of the helpful thoughts offered by eight or nine contributors. As you rightly point out, your views figured prominently. I apologize for the offence to you and others, it was unintentional. I'm very grateful for all the time and thought that you and others have contributed, it has all been very helpful to me.
I'm embarrassed also that my observation (on your thoughtful question) looks a bit sanctimonious on re-reading. That was tactless on my part. Anyway, the question as rephrased (“is there anything that we have not been granted knowledge of that is in accord with his will at that time?”)warrants some meditation, I can't immediately think of an example. Others no doubt will be thinking about the question too.
It's clear that we have a great deal in common, Apollos. I send you my kind regards and Christian greeting.
Your brother
GedalizahReply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-03-15 21:48:40
Hi Gedalizah,
Absolutely no offence taken. I appreciate your comments, and I didn't want you to take what I said too seriously. It's so easy to misconstrue when we are exchanging what in some cases can come across as soundbites.
You gave me the opportunitiy to provide some clarification, and that's no bad thing.
ApollosReply by Gedalizah on 2013-03-20 17:20:27
Hi Apollos,
I've been thinking some more about the question you posed - “Is there anything we have not been granted knowledge of, that is in accord with his will at that time?”
Since the only reliable source of “knowledge that is in accord with (God's) will” is the Bible, it seems to follow that we have never been deprived of such knowledge. Surely HS gives unmistakeable direction to FDS, to ensure that the faithful are given all the “knowledge” they need. I don't see any way we could know (or even contemplate the possibility) that FDS had failed to respond to HS guidance in any particular instance, so that we weren't given knowledge that Jehovah wanted us to have.
But a number of contributors (including yourself) have drawn attention to issues on which FDS reasoning on the scriptures has led to “knowledge” which time and events proved untrue.
Perhaps HS directs FDS to ensure that the faithful have all necessary knowledge, based on the HS-inspired Scriptures, but does not waste energy preventing occasional excesses of enthusiasm, leading to false hopes and unnecessary “conscientious stands”. If no harm were to arise from such errors, there'd be no reason to stress, but unfortunately, that's not the case.
Unless that is, we take the line that in the eternal analysis, Jehovah will always preserve the faithful in his memory, so that even if they were to give up their lives needlessly under erroneous FDS direction, they would be resurrected. But doesn't that lessen FDS responsibility for Jehovah's sheep, since the Great Shepherd will always recover the losses caused by the undershepherds' errors? Perhaps that's the point – following FDS direction, right or wrong, can - in the eternal analysis - lead us to no harm. But somehow, I just don't find such a conclusion satisfactory. Must our faithfulness be demonstrated by blind obedience to FDS, whatever our misgivings?
Hmm, this is pretty much where we came in......Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-03-20 17:40:54
If I might interject a thought to the point you made in your last paragraph, it is true that if we take a stand conscientiously with pure hearts, then even if wrong, we will be made to stand. (Rom. 14:4) So if we die as a consequence, we will be resurrected. However, is this the equivalent of a blank check for the Governing Body? One could argue the same fate for faithful Catholics obeying the directives of their Pope, even if he should be endorsing war--as has been the case in the past.
There must be a line where the individual becomes responsible for his/her actions despite the direction from an established human authority. The question lies in how to determine where that line is drawn.
There is another issue; one that deals not with causing an untimely or unnecessary physical death, but something far worse, the loss of spiritual life. Stumbling a little one to the point that such a one loses his/her faith and thereupon, eternal life is a real danger for any who presume to speak for the souls of others.
Comment by WT Study: Are You Moving Ahead With Jehovah’s Organization? | Beroean Pickets on 2014-07-29 16:35:59
[…] and accept the teachings of the Organization (aka, the Governing Body) without question. We again misapply Proverbs 4:18[ii] to explain away our errors of the past. We are then encouraged to keep up with […]
Comment by WT Study: Are You Moving Ahead With Jehovah’s Organization? | on 2014-08-26 14:07:37
[…] and accept the teachings of the Organization (aka, the Governing Body) without question. We again misapply Proverbs 4:18[ii] to explain away our errors of the past. We are then encouraged to keep up […]
Comment by Kyp on 2015-06-08 12:42:16
"The evidence that the world-wide congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses is – as a body – doing the will of Jehovah is surely incontrovertible."
Meleti, do you really still think so? When so, why do think this? Is it Jehovah's will to spread a list of phariseeic extra laws and strange doctrines into the world?Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2015-06-08 13:20:36
No, Kyp, I don't. Reading the posts from start to present, it's possible to see my own personal journey of awakening. Doing God's will in this day and age means proclaiming the good news. It also means submitting to the authority of his appointed king. With our teaching of an earthly hope which replaces that of the "upward call of God" (Phil. 3:14), Jehovah's Witnesses have corrupted the message of the Good News. In submitting to the absolute authority of the men of the Governing Body, Jehovah's Witnesses have denied their rightful Lord.
So no, I no longer feel that Jehovah's Witnesses are doing the will of Jehovah. But amongst their number are true Christians who can still enjoy God's spirit and who are 'troubled by the things going on in the temple.' To fulfill Jesus' parables, there must be stands of wheat growing among the weeds that fill the fields of all Christian denominations.Reply by Kyp on 2015-06-08 14:06:14
Dear Meleti,
Thanks for taking time for responding. I thought that way considering your newer articles.
Isn't the transformation kind of fascinating? Once we thought of something as "surely incontrovertible" and one or two ears later we view our past believes as wrong views and misapplications of God's Word.
Greetings in Lord Jesus
Kyp