This Week's Bible Reading - Acts 1 to 4

Comment by junachin on 2013-06-11 23:24:37

"Just as many as Jehovah our God may call to him“ sounds like a deliberately indefinite number. True, it could be argued that Peter didn't know what was going to be revealed later to John. But it seems odd that he would, under inspiration, use a phrase that gives an impression 180 degrees away from a relatively small, predetermined number.

• Reply by junachin on 2013-06-17 13:22:57

  Here are a few things that I think are clearly established:
  1. There will be eternal life for humans on Earth. I base that on scriptures like those in Psalm 37, Proverbs 2, Matthew 5 and Revelation 5, among others.
  2. There will be those who serve as kings and priests for those on Earth. I base this on Jesus' words to the apostles about a covenant for a kingdom and Revelation 5. Whether those who serve as kings and priests do so from heaven does not particularly concern me. Neither, for that matter, does their exact number. However, it does seem logical that the number of rulers will be far smaller than that of those ruled.
  But the question of quantity has some interesting implications. If, for instance, there really will be representatives from "every tribe and tongue and people and nation", we must then conclude that some of the kings and priests will be people who never knew Jehovah during their pre-resurrection life-time. Also, would 144,000 be enough or too much?
  What I don't see is a pre-Armageddon, two-tier system here on Earth, established by an intangible process and based on the honor system. Not only is that not provable from scripture, but from a practical standpoint, it's an idea that begs for problems in a way that the Inventor of practical wisdom would hardly be expected to do.

  • Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-06-17 16:23:36

    Hi junachin,
    Would you mind expanding that point about concluding "that some of the kings and priests will be people who never knew Jehovah during their pre-resurrection life-time"? I might have a thought on that, but I'm not certain that I've correctly understood what you mean. Perhaps it's the preceding clause that I'm not following i.e. if there will be representatives from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. Is that taken from scripture, or from the ideas that have been proposed as interpretation from scripture?
    Apollos

    • Reply by junachin on 2013-06-17 17:15:53

      Well, I was referring to Revelation 5:
      9 And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, because you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought persons for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10?and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.”
      Now, it could be I've missed something here, but it seems like a fairly straight-forward declaration that some will rule as kings and priests over the people of the earth. If they really do come from "every tribe and tongue and people and nation", and there have been peoples and tribes that have never had a chance to learn about Jehovah, then some of those who will rule will be getting a crash course upon resurrection.

      • Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-06-17 17:39:07

        Yes, now I appreciate your point. I was looking at “all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues” in Rev 7:9, and checking the x-refs to see, and of course there is no x-ref to Rev 5:9 (surprise, surprise).
        Now that I know what you mean my previous thought is a moot point, since you are quoting scripture not an interpretation of Rev 7.
        However, it is interesting that the word translated “every” (Gr. pas) is the same as “all” in Col 1:23. So it would seem that the term is not as encompassing or complete as we would treat it in English. Perhaps it simply means that no nation, tribe, people or tongue would be excluded in principle, or out of God's partiality, but in reality it could still end up being limited (just as the creation that was actually preached to by the Apostle Paul).
        Thoughts?

    • Reply by junachin on 2013-06-17 17:27:03

      Taking another look at this, I suppose that Jehovah can teach people about himself any way he wants, whenever he wants. The assumption that aborigines and Native Americans, for example, never had a chance to learn about God because they didn't have access to the Bible, is just an assumption after all.
      I suppose, also, that the people bought out of "every tribe and tongue and people and nation" could simply be all faithful servants of God, destined to rule over the resurrected masses, but that would make the "government" rather large.

      • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-06-17 17:41:26

        Another aspect of this may be that we are coloring our perception of their role based on our current understanding of what government is and how it functions. We really don't know how they will perform the role of king or priest.
        We understand that their function will be to restore all things to the state they were in when Adam and Eve were perfect and "God was all things to everyone." Perhaps their role will be to serve as the spiritual equivalent of congregation shepherds, but without all the failings that plague our current arrangement. As such, they would have a small flock to overseer, guide, teach and heal. They would report directly to Jesus. Nothing would be hidden from their eyes so no wrongdoing would be allowed to corrupt the masses clandestinely. Being perfect spirit creatures, they would be incorruptible.
        With billions returning all needed personal attention, a large number of kings and priests would be called for. Unless a) then can be in two or more places at one time, or b) they make extensive use of human kings and priests. But then you get the whole human limitations thing going on. After all, does Jer. 10:23 only apply to imperfect humans? I don't think so.

        • Reply by apollos0falexandria on 2013-06-17 17:49:14

          Good points.

Comment by crazyguy on 2013-06-11 23:48:17

I came to the conclusion that the anointing wasn't strictly for a certain group but all of Jesus followers, after reading these scriptures, because how would it include their children.

Comment by erick on 2013-06-12 18:25:50

It is a mark of spiritual progress when you can start to abandon long held dogmatic positions on scripture.
The fact of the matter is the bible is fairly unclear on quite a number of "doctrinal" issues. What it is very clear on is ethics and morality. For example, there is no question on how we should treat other people. There is no question on how the bible views honesty, love, etc.
Jesus said the 2 greatest commandments were love of God and love of neighbor. The Society (along with many other fundamentalist religions) has tried to make certain debatable doctrinal issues such as the Trinity, Immortality of the soul etc. some kind of a touchstone for true Christians. It is implied that any person that disbelieves in any of these interpretations of the Society could not possibly be a "true christian" even if they obey what Jesus said were the 2 greatest commandments.
It has been very easy for the Society to see the straw in the eye of other religions but it is totally blind to the rafter in it's own. I commend you Meleti for questioning what you have always believed. It isn't for the feint of heart.
A few years ago I had to ask myself the question "If my beliefs are incorrect or incomplete would I want to know?" I said yes and it really led me down a rabbit hole. But I would never change that decision I made. Any belief that one is afraid to question is probably at least partially an illusion.

Comment by Vassy on 2013-06-13 03:42:49

"For there are MANY invited, but FEW chosen". Mat 22:14. This very qualification, the CHOSEN ONES, is indicative of a limited number. No matter how one wishes to interpret Scriptures, the fact remains that a limited number (144000) is seen ruling with Christ in heaven on Mount Zion (Rev 14). I think the rest is speculation from the very ones who accuse the Society of speculation.

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-06-13 07:46:24

  Contrasting "many" with "few" does not imply a finite number. If it did, then the many would also be a finite number. The fact is, all whom we preach to are invited, but only a few respond, and few still stay the course. It is true that those who rule in heaven will be few by comparison with those who live on earth. However, whether the number in heaven is predetermined or not, remains to be seen.
  As for speculation, I fully agree. We do engage in speculation on this site and privately. It is how we learn. However, I don't think anyone can accuse us of treating our speculation as doctrinal fact and requiring others to accept it or be punished.

• Reply by Mark watts on 2013-06-13 10:42:01

  Matt 7 13-14 Enter through the narrow gate.For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction and many enter throught it.But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and a few find it.
  I think this passage of scripture is used in watchtower publications to apply to both the 144000 and other sheep.

  • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-06-13 10:53:46

    It is indeed. An excellent point.

Comment by silas on 2013-06-13 21:51:09

Hi.. I am new to commenting in this forum. I read it all the time and enjoy the comments. However many thoughts just don't fit in well with the scriptures'
As an example... Acts 2:39 ( "all those afar off") is referring to the gentiles.
How can we know this from the scriptures.
(Ephesians 2:13-17) But now in union with Christ Jesus YOU who were once far off have come to be near by the blood of the Christ. 14 For he is our peace, he who made the two parties one and destroyed the wall in between that fenced them off. 15 By means of his flesh he abolished the enmity, the Law of commandments consisting in decrees, that he might create the two peoples in union with himself into one new man and make peace; 16 and that he might fully reconcile both peoples in one body to God through the torture stake, because he had killed off the enmity by means of himself. 17 And he came and declared the good news of peace to YOU, the ones far off, and peace to those near,
The enmity and the wall that existed between them... is referring to the law covenant and the differences between the Jewish system and the gentiles.
This also fits with the words of Jesus to Paul..
(Acts 22:21) And yet he said to me, ‘Get on your way, because I shall send you out to nations far off.’”
Here Paul was commissioned as an apostle to the nations (gentiles) or those afar off.
As an interesting add on. The language of Ephesians (above) is also very similar to the language that Jesus uses in
(John 10:16) 16?“And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those also I must bring, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.
As we know, in the first century the preaching work was for the sole purpose of gathering the chosen ones. Jesus is here explaining that both Jews and gentiles would be gathered in as "chosen ones". Understanding this: can we then say that the "Other sheep" is a distinct class of Christians with an earthly hope that only appear after 1935?
Food for thought.

• Reply by Vassy on 2013-06-17 07:13:29

  Hi Silas,
  “all those afar off” is NOT referring to the gentiles. When Peter uttered those words, he was addressing the JEWS and PROSELYTES, not the Gentiles. In fact, Gentiles were received into the Christian congregation much later, and this event was a surprise for the newly converted Jews. So, Peter could not have had Gentiles in mind when he spoke to the Jews in Acts 2.
  And, indeed, the promise was for “all those [Jews] afar off”, to as many as God would call to join Jesus’ bride. We do not know whom God calls but apparently few Jews responded to God’s invitation. If enough Jews had responded and proven faithful to complete the foreordained number of 144,000, then the heavenly opportunity would not have been expanded to include the Gentiles. Paul’s words in Acts 13:46 clearly indicate this order. “It was NECESSARY for the word of God to be spoken FIRST to YOU. Since YOU are thrusting it away from YOU and do not judge yourselves worthy of everlasting life, look! we turn to the nations”. Why ‘first’ to the Jews? If heaven has unlimited places for everyone faithful, why not start the preaching work (almost) simultaneously for both Jews and Gentiles? Why was Paul, though appointed preacher for Gentiles, eager to incite those who were his own flesh to jealousy? (Rom 11:13,14)?
  That there is a limited number of Christ’s brothers is also indicated by Jesus words in Revelation 3:11 “keep on holding fast what you have, that NO ONE may take your crown”. Notice Jesus does not say that “I” will take your crown or that “God” will take your crown, as if removing someone’s crown. He says “NO ONE”, that is, another one may take over what someone has lost. Replaceability is a strong indication of a limited number within the heavenly group.

  • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-06-17 15:29:02

    "Why first to the Jews", you ask? Simply because the promise was made to the Jews first, through Moses. All the Scriptures that establish that the opportunity was first to the Jews do so on the merit of their having been chosen first as God's holy people, not because there are allegedly a limited number of crowns set aside for Jewish heads. Such an idea finds no support anywhere in Scripture.
    Rev. 3:11 does not prove that there are a fixed number of slots in heaven for crowned ones. By your line of reasoning we are being warned to not let another take our slot. Who would this other person be? Only a faithful Christian would be allowed to wear the crown taken from you. How could one faithful Christian take the crown from another? It would imply some type of competition with millions of faithful Christians vying for a limited number of slots; as if there were a tiny number of heavenly job openings with a large number of applicants submitting resumes, each one hoping the other one gets rejected so as to open up one more space. Hardly sounds like a Christian environment, does it?
    Doesn't it make more sense and is it not more consistent with Scripture that Paul is warning Christians not to let their crown or reward get stolen by the evil one. The evil one cannot wear the crown, but he can take it from you if you do not hold fast to what you have.

Comment by Urbanus on 2013-06-15 11:09:38

Acts 2:39?"For the promise is to YOU and to YOUR children and to all those afar off"
Is this not a refrain of Exodus 19:
3 And Moses went up to the [true] God, and Jehovah began to call to him out of the mountain, saying: “This is what you are to say to the house of Jacob and to tell the sons of Israel,
4 ‘YOU? yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, that I might carry ?YOU? on wings of eagles and bring ?YOU? to myself.
5 And now if ?YOU? will strictly obey my voice and will indeed keep my covenant, then ?YOU? will certainly become my special property out of all [other] peoples, because the whole earth belongs to me.
6 And ?YOU? yourselves will become to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you are to say to the sons of Israel.”
So the context here of "promise" is the role of Jehovah's chosen people to provide a priestly service towards others of mankind.
Is it possible that your analysis and the purpose of this topic is a matter of "over-thinking" the words of the text?
.

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-06-15 14:05:42

  Interesting question, Urbanus. I'd like to hear what others think. Is it over-thinking to understand that "just as many as Jehovah...may call" refers to an undetermined quantity. Or would it be over-thinking the words of the text to assume that a phrase like "just as many" refers to a finite, predetermined number?

  • Reply by mark watts on 2013-06-16 03:15:10

    Its difficult not to read entrenched ideas into the text of scripture.The Watchtower has developed the idea of a two class system of belief, which came about through the sincere but wrong understanding that Christ had arrived in 1914 and the Great Tribulation was underway.
    They applied scriptures to that time which where not yet to be fullfilled. They taught that the call to Christians had ended.That all new converts where not Christians but a Johonadab class, which were to be, the Great Multitude or crowd that would come out of the tribulation.These were not included in the new covenant and not to partake of the bread and wine.Tens of thousands of Jehovahs Witnesses have lived and died since, being described as this group.They of course could not be.
    Is it not the reason why many Witnesses are a little confused right now?When we think about many scriptures which seem to explicitly contradict a two class system within the christian congregation.
    Tim 2 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus,
    Ephesians 4 4-6 There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling;5one Lord, one faith, one baptism,6one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.
    Galatians 3 26-29 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.27For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise.
    Galatians 4 27-29 27For it is written,
      “REJOICE, BARREN WOMAN WHO DOES NOT BEAR;
      BREAK FORTH AND SHOUT, YOU WHO ARE NOT IN LABOR;
      FOR MORE NUMEROUS ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE DESOLATE
      THAN OF THE ONE WHO HAS A HUSBAND.”
    28And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise.29But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also.

    • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-06-17 15:13:27

      Thank you, Mark. It is most helpful to have all those Scriptures grouped to reveal a common theme. It becomes ever more clear that the two-tier system is an invention of men.