“Keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he comes”—1 Corinthians 11:26
[From ws 01/19 p.26 Study Article 5: April 1 -7]
“For whenever you eat this loaf and drink this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he comes.”
Meeting attendance is an important part of the worship of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The preview to the article this week says that the article will consider what our attendance at the Memorial as well as weekly meetings says about us. So, let us indeed examine what it say about us.
Paragraph 1 opens with the statement “IMAGINE what Jehovah sees when millions around the world gather for the Lord’s Evening Meal”.
Indeed, what does he see? We can only imagine what he sees. But, more importantly what does Jehovah think about what he sees at this time?
What Jehovah really sees
In Luke 22:19-21 Jesus told his disciples including Judas, “keep doing this in remembrance of me”. What were they to keep doing? Matthew 26:26-28 shows it was to eat the bread and drink the wine, and it was a command to all (including Judas Iscariot). “Drink out of it, all of YOU” Jesus said. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 (the read scripture in paragraph 4) says in part: “For whenever you eat this loaf and drink this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he comes.”.
By extension if we neither eat the loaf nor drink the cup, can it be truly said we are continuing to proclaim the death of the Lord?
What a contrast between Jesus instructions and the events occurring during the memorial celebration in congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Here close to almost all the 20 million or so in attendance, refuse to drink the wine and refuse to eat the bread in remembrance of Jesus. In fact, under 20,000 actually partake all because of the teachings of the Organization.[i]
Would Jesus and Jehovah be happy about this? Psalm 2:12 suggests not. There it says, “Kiss the son that He may not become incensed and YOU may not perish [from] the way”.
We then move into the realms of speculation, as we cannot discern if Jehovah is pleased or not. If what he sees is in accord with his will and Jesus request to his disciples then it would be accurate to suggest he is pleased. However, the opposite is also true. As shown above is it likely that Jehovah is pleased as Paragraph 2 claims? Paragraph 2 says, “Certainly, Jehovah is pleased to see that so many attend the Memorial. (Luke 22:19) However, Jehovah is not primarily concerned with the number of people who come. He is more interested in the reason for their coming; motive matters to Jehovah”. Where is the showing of proper respect for Jesus' sacrifice by partaking?
In addition, if numbers are not Jehovah’s primary concern, why does it seem to be the Organization's primary concern? Why does the Organization constantly focus on and publish the number of people attending the Memorial? Why does it frequently highlight the growth in the year-to-year attendance as if this is something of great importance?
““THERE IS NO WISDOM . . . IN OPPOSITION TO JEHOVAH”
Indeed paragraph 4 says that by attending the memorial we show we are humble, and “we attend this important event not merely because we feel it is a duty but also because we humbly obey Jesus’ command: “Keep doing this in remembrance of me” (Read 1 Corinthians 11:23-26)”
Did you notice the subtle misapplication of scripture? Here the Organization is teaching that it is the act of attending that is obeying the command of Jesus. Yet, the commandment (if such, rather than a request) was actually the partaking in remembrance. It was not the meeting together.
The next sentence states: “That meeting strengthens our hope for the future and reminds us of just how much Jehovah loves us”. However, it made no mention how much Jesus loves us. Would Jesus sacrifice his life on behalf of humankind if he did not love us? This led the author to check in this article about meetings and the memorial how often Jehovah is mentioned. Jehovah appears 35 times, but Jesus only 20 times. This seems rather unbalanced, especially when Jesus is the head of the Congregation and the one we should be encouraged to remember.[ii]
The paragraph continues: “So he provides us with meetings each week and urges us to attend them. Humility moves us to obey. We spend a number of hours every week preparing for and attending those meetings”. No suggestions are made as to how Jehovah provides us with meetings, nor why the meetings have to be in the particular format they are. Perhaps the reason is that there is no suggestion in the scriptures for either the mechanism, the content or the formal structure as practised by the Organization. Indeed, while the scriptural encouragement is to “not forsake the gathering of ourselves together” the form it should take is neither suggested, nor prescribed, nor given in an example or model to follow.
In particular, we also need to heed the advice of the Apostle Paul in connection with meetings. He warned “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ” – Colossians 2:8 English Standard Version (ESV)
Another point made in the paragraph (4), is that “Proud people reject the idea that they need to be taught anything.” The question is, would the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses accept any counsel or teaching from within its ranks or any other Christian organisation, if it could be demonstrated that such counsel was Scriptural or are they the proud ones?
For example, recently a Witness sent a letter to the Governing highlighting discrepancies and inconsistencies in the way they themselves interpret scriptures regarding Biblical chronology around the time period of 607 BCE. As it would have required a correction in the Watchtower and local elders do not have the authority to correct teachings, they were offered a 3 month period during which these points would remain confidential to them. This was to give them the opportunity to reply to the Witness as to what they would do. Sad to say, they did not bother to reply and yet at the time of writing (late March), local elders are now trying to bring that Witness to a judicial hearing. No doubt, it will be on trumped-up charges of apostasy. Who really are the proud ones?
How do Jehovah’s Witnesses view all other members of Christendom?
When going from house to house, do Jehovah’s Witnesses accept any teaching material or literature from other religious organisations? An obedient Witness would not do so, although some perhaps accept the literature and throw it away without reading it. Yet we expect those we meet to read our literature. Who is proud?
Any Jehovah’s Witness would openly admit to not being willing to listen to any other Christian group. Is that not the prideful attitude the Watchtower was referring to?
At least it is good that the article says: “And during the days before the Memorial, we are urged to read Bible accounts about the events surrounding Jesus’ death and resurrection” (Par.7).
The heading on paragraph 8 is “Courage helps us attend”. This paragraph reminds us of the courage Jesus showed during his last days before his death. The following paragraph applies it to Witnesses meeting in countries where they are under ban. However, they would not necessarily need such courage if they met like early Christians rather than in the Organization’s prescribed regularity and format, and dress code. More importantly for those who do wish to obey Jesus and partake, they need courage. If you started partaking in your local congregation, would you still be welcomed or would you be viewed with suspicion? That would take more courage than simply attending.
LOVE COMPELS US TO ATTEND
Having ignored the elephant in the room as to whether meetings in their prescriptive Organization defined format are required, these paragraphs go on to claim benefits from obeying the Organization’s commands.
These include:
- “what we learn at the meetings deepens our love for Jehovah and his Son.” (Par. 12). Yet Jesus importance is continually played down, and the quality of material provided is reducing. The main themes that come out of the meetings today are “obey the Governing Body”, “carry on preaching, preaching, preaching with our literature” and the emphasis on Jehovah with Jesus powerful position being minimised.
- “We can show the depth of our love for Jehovah and his Son by being willing to make sacrifices for them.” (Par. 13) This is good counsel. If love is the motivation for any sacrifice we make in the worship of Jehovah, Jehovah and Jesus appreciate the sacrifice we make. However, it is vitally important that our sacrifices are not directed or to support a man-made Organization. The phrase “religion is a snare and a racket” comes to mind. All religions ask for money, something not authorised by the scriptures.
- “Does Jehovah notice that we attend our meetings even though we are tired? Certainly he does! In fact, the greater our struggle, the more Jehovah appreciates the love we show for him.—Mark 12:41-44.” Words failed me over this paragraph (13). The message from this quote (and the previous sentences) is, that even though most Witnesses will be tired when going to an evening meeting, and non-Witnesses will be resting while Witnesses attend a meeting at the weekend, we are still expected to effectively flagellate ourselves and go to the meetings. Then to cap it all, according to the paragraph, Jehovah allegedly notices with appreciation this self-flagellation to meetings he did not prescribe, “in fact, the greater our struggle, the more Jehovah appreciates” it! (Par.13)
- “However, we are particularly interested in helping those who are “related to us in the faith” but who have become inactive. (Gal. 6:10) We prove our love for them by encouraging them to attend our meetings, especially the Memorial.” (Par.15). What hypocrisy! The Organization encourages partial shunning of those who are weak, and most Witnesses blindly follow these instructions.[iii] Even if these weak ones attend, very few would speak to them, also any attempts to comment would be limited. Yet, love is allegedly proved by encouraging those considered weak to attend the meetings!
In conclusion, attendance at the Organization’s meetings on a regular basis in reality says the following about us:
Humility?
- To the dictates of the Governing Body? Yes. (Jeremiah 7:4-8)
- In obeying God’s word? No. (Acts 5:32)
Courage?
- To attend meetings while awaken to the false teachings being promoted? Yes. (Matthew 10:16-17)
- To partake as Jesus requested? (1 Corinthians 11:23-26) Yes.
- To leave the Organization knowing you will be shunned by your Witness family members? Yes. (Matthew 10:36)
- To attend the Organization’s formal meetings while the Organization is under ban? No, foolhardy.
Love?
- To look after Widows and Orphans in their tribulation? Yes. (James 1:27)
- To love-bomb when someone first attends the meetings? No. (Romans 12:9)
- To shun weak or disfellowshipped ones? No. (Acts 20:35, 1 Corinthians 9:22)
[i] There is estimated to be about 9,000 who believe they are of the ‘anointed class’ according to the Organization's teachings (based on figures of partakers from a few years back before the increase. From information gleaned from comment, blogs and You Tube videos it seems a large proportion of the majority of the rest are made up of those who have awoken to the truth about Jesus request and hence partake as they wish to comply with Jesus request to all.
[ii] This is not a rare occurrence. This imbalance is to be found in nearly every Watchtower article and publication. Yet Jesus said “Come be my followers” I.e. Christians, not Witnesses of Jehovah.
[iii] The Organization appears to be careful about putting this policy of attitude in print. This was the closest I found.“Admittedly, though, a negative view of those in need may at times hold us back from assisting them.” Where might they get this negative attitude? How about this on JW Broadcasting? This contradicts their written message and makes it clear that weak ones are not good company in the eyes of the Organization. See https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=745aXHQWrok for a very good example.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by messenger on 2019-04-01 20:47:48
A very nice review Tadua.
Thank you.
Comment by jamesbrown on 2019-04-02 01:13:42
Well written Tadua
There are 3 kinds of elders in our cong. Those who worship GB – Those who are willing to listen to different point of view – Those who don’t even care one way or another.
I approached all of them at different times with a simple question:
Why did Jesus conclude a covenant with HIS apostles only? Where were the 70 disciples & the women that where ministering to him and the apostles? What was so special about his apostles that did not involve the rest of disciples?
First group said: We don’t have to go beyond what is written in the WT, we just have to wait for GB if they will deal with this question.
Second group said: Good question, we don’t know why, but please don’t go around KH and pose this question.
Third group said: Who cares, why even think about such a question, just let it go.
I just wanted them to be spiritual about their answer. And that didn't happen.
Well I dare not tell them what I think because it would have taken me into the second school in no time as I am already in their bad books.
This is the only site that makes me think spiritually & ask without being judged.
Again, Tadua you made me think with the first article that you wrote.
I wonder how Eric is going with his hearing?
Love to allReply by samisaac on 2019-04-02 06:20:03
I am also curious about Eric...
Comment by Eleasar on 2019-04-02 07:07:09
The issue about Judas is a major problem for JW theology. In Luke 22:19-20 Jesus mentions the New Covenant. The Greek word is Strong's Gk number 1242 diathéké and is a NOUN. All English translations that I have checked translate it as "covenant".
In Luke 22:29, the Greek word is Strong's Gk number 1303 diatithémi and is a VERB. Only two translations give it as "covenant", NWT and Weymouth. Most other translation use terms like assign, appoint, confer, grant, bestow, promise, etc.
A simple direct reading of Luke makes it clear that Judas was present for the inauguration of the "New Covenant" and probably left before Jesus' words in Luke 22:28-30. This involves comparing it to the other two synoptic gospels. John does not mention the Lord's Memorial. Probably, because he writes in the late 90s of the 1st century and was aware of the accounts in the Synoptic Gospels and of Paul's letters to the Corinthians. In addition, Luke writes in chronological order.
Also, the seating positions hint that Judas sat Jesus right and John at his left, the first and second most prominent places. For Luke 22:29, a more direct reference is Matthew 19:28.
So if the betrayer shares in the emblems of the New Covenant, what about the rest of us? The way JW theology twists the verses can be seen from the Insight Vol 2 under Judas. Please see the paragraphs and read the scriptures to see how it does not add up.
"Last Night With Jesus. In spite of having turned against Christ, Judas continued to associate with him. He gathered with Jesus and the apostles on Nisan 14, 33 C.E., for the celebration of the Passover. While the Passover meal was in process Jesus ministered to the apostles, humbly washing their feet. Hypocritical Judas allowed Jesus to do that to him. But Jesus said, “Not all of you are clean.” (Joh 13:2-5, 11) He also stated that one of the apostles there at the table would betray him. Perhaps so as not to appear guilty, Judas asked if he was the one. As a further identification, Jesus gave Judas a morsel and told him to do quickly what he was doing.—Mt 26:21-25; Mr 14:18-21; Lu 22:21-23; Joh 13:21-30.
Immediately Judas left the group. A comparison of Matthew 26:20-29 with John 13:21-30 indicates that he departed before Jesus instituted the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal. Luke’s presentation of this incident evidently is not in strict chronological order, for Judas had definitely left by the time Christ commended the group for having stuck with him; that would not fit Judas, nor would he have been taken into the “covenant . . . for a kingdom.”—Lu 22:19-30." The word "Immediately" is in italics.Reply by Leonardo Josephus on 2019-04-02 11:57:55
Eleasar,
Hi and Hello
Thank you for your analysis. I have spent a lot of time trying to figure out when Judas left , and checking what WT has stated. Your research is spot on, and you correctly observe that the Insight book tries to get round things by suggesting, with no evidence to back it up, that Luke's account is not in strict chronological order. I threw this at our Watchtower study conductor last week, as this matter was also discussed on this site re the previous article, and basically got back a "Do you think Jesus is using the Faithful Slave, If it is wrong don't you think Jesus will correct it" sort of reply.
Comment by jamesbrown on 2019-04-03 00:00:07
Hi all
Last night as I was wandering, did 11 apostles or 12 partook of the bread and wine. So, I prayed about it, and done some research, this is what I personally came up with.
Revelation 21:10 So he carried me away in the power of the spirit to a great and lofty mountain, and he showed me the holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God 11 and having the glory of God. Its radiance was like a most precious stone, like a jasper stone shining crystal clear.
12 It had a great and lofty wall and had 12 gates with 12 angels at the gates, and on the gates were inscribed the names of the 12 tribes of the sons of Israel. 13 On the east were three gates, and on the north three gates, and on the south three gates, and on the west three gates.
14 The wall of the city also had 12 foundation stones, and on them were the 12 names of the 12 apostles of the Lamb.
So, I thought if Judas did not partake, then I will not have 12 apostles, but 11 only and I could not count on Matthias because Jesus didn't include him in the covenant as he was not one of the 12 and I cannot count him as the "overlapping apostle".
So, I reasoned, Judas could have partaken of the bread and wine and latter Matthias took his place.
My second way of thinking was, Judas could NOT have been there for the new covenant.
Well I thought if I was Jesus, would I want son of Satan to be present for this momentous occasion? Answer NO.
After all, what does light have to do with darkness. And if I am about to be delivered by Judas, would I be sharing my intimate feeling with someone who doesn’t care about how I feel?
Would I open my mind and heart about this site to someone knowing full well they will be running to the elders and have me expelled from the congregation?
Well you know what my answer will be.
In the end I thought, one day I will ask Jesus if Judas did partake of the bread and wine.
These are my personal feelings only, I could be right or wrong.
Love to all
Has anyone heard from Eric?Reply by messenger on 2019-04-03 20:23:38
Hello Jamesbrown,
The name on the 12th gate is most likely Paul's. At acts 14:14 both he and Barnabus are called apostles. But the scriptures state Paul was hand picked by Christ, just like the eleven faithful apostles Christ handpicked. Christ also communicated with Paul and told him he was sending him out on a mission.
An apostle is sent out on a mission, like Paul. was. The 11 faithful apostles are the ones that picked Matthias, not Christ.
It's very unlikely the name of a traitor, Judas, would be on one of the gates or pillars.
People take much of Revelation as metaphorical. If those names are metaphorical they represent Christ's hand picked disciples that started the Christian congregation as apostles. Therefore metaphorical or literal Paul is the most likely name.
According to what we know from biblical records Paul is the only other apostle that did as much as Peter or John to spread the gospel. He might have done more.
What did Judas do after Christ died (Matthew 28:18-20) ? Nothing. What did Matthias do? Who knows. The Bible record concerning him does not reveal that.
Barnabas was a missionary, chosen by Holy Spirit. The Bible doesn't say Barnabas was chosen by Christ, as a handpicked apostle. Also, scriptures place Paul as more famous than Barnabas, and probably more active as a missionary. His writings certainly have effected the church more than anything Barnabas did that is revealed in scripture.
Comment by jamesbrown on 2019-04-04 01:58:16
Hi messenger
Many thanks for your reply, however this is what I am struggling with:
Luke 22: 28 “However, you are the ones who have stuck with me in my trials; 29 and I make a covenant with you, just as my Father has made a covenant with me, for a kingdom, 30 so that you may eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom, and sit on thrones to judge the 12 tribes of Israel.
Paul & Matthias were not their when Jesus concluded a covenant with the apostles & certainly Paul did not stick with Jesus in his trials & some how I cannot imagine we are talking about “overlapping” apostle, or are we!
And if you consider the 11 apostles, not many of them did as much as Mark, Luke & I am sure their would-be others, BUT they were not in the covenant.
So, the jury is still out I think
Love to allReply by Eleasar on 2019-04-04 04:26:20
Hi JamesBrown,
The word Apostle in Greek means "sent one". There could have been may apostles in the 1st century. It has also another sense of being a foundational apostle. This can be seen by reading Ephesians 3:1-6 (also Ephesians 2:14-22, specifically verse 20). In verse 5, Paul refers to the prophets and to apostles. The prophets of old talked about the Messiah to come and then he came and became the cornerstone and the "foundational apostles" were the ones who saw him resurrected and ones he chose.
This could mean the 11 and Paul met this criterion, since Paul saw the resurrected Jesus and was called by him. Interestingly, Paul is the only Apostle to use the term Christ Jesus, all the others use Jesus Christ. These are the 12 mentioned in Revelation etc.
We do not need to assert any of this with dogmatic conviction but put forward postulations for consideration. We can differ on whether is it Paul or Matthias but we should accept each other's perspectives and live with it.
Reply by messenger on 2019-04-04 10:04:01
Hello Jamestown,
All members chosen to be a part of Christ's church are rulers and judges, not just the twelve apostles whose names appear on the foundation stones of New Jerusalem. See 1 Corinthians 6:3 and Revelation 5:10.
In Luke 22:28 Christ was addressing those disciples directly in front of him. That doesn't exclude others from being a part of the covenant he made with them for a kingdom, or from sharing in judging the 12 tribes of Israel.
The term apostle as used in the New Testament almost always refers to the 12 faithful ones who were hand picked by Christ. The only exclusions to that which I remember are Barnabas and Matthias.
The 11 drew straws to pick Matthias and insinuated God chose him because of a prayer they offered before drawing straws. I don't remember there being anything in scripture that confirmed God chose Matthias to replace Judas, though I believe scriptures state he joined the group. Correct me if I am wrong as I comment from memory only.
The point about the names on the foundation stones is a completely different matter. Revelation states those names, whether literal or metaphorically representative, are the names of the apostles that started the church. Even though it doesn't say they started the church that idea seems quite apparent. because of how the word apostles is used in the New Testament. Those folks were the ones that started building on Christ's teachings, and from their work the church sprung up. So, it's fitting Revelation describes the foundation of New Jerusalem as bearing their names.
Luke 22:28 speaks of two different matters, the covenant to share with Christ in his kingdom, and judging the 12 tribes of Israel. As stated above I don't read Christ limited sharing in those two things to the apostles. Sharing in his kingdom applies to the whole church. Judging the 12 tribes of Israel will be done by which ever members of that church he chooses. Remember how he said different assignments will be delegated to the faithful based on how they carried out HIS work in this world's system?
Take care.
Reply by Psalmbee on 2019-04-04 10:49:36
Hi James,
I've said it before, there are 25 Apostles mentioned in the NT. Twenty three of them were named two unnamed (2Cor 8:23).
I named one of my dogs after an Apostle, I call him Barktholomew.
If you are not aware of the full list I can compile it for you.
PsalmbeeReply by messenger on 2019-04-04 14:17:30
Psalmbee
How about listing the scriptures instead of providing a list of names, as the scriptures are needed for that to be verifiable. Probably nobody wants to read the whole New Testament to verify your list.
Also, since words frequently have multiple meanings how about sticking to the exact English words used in English translations of the Bible. Most people will give more credence to how Bible scholars have translated ancient words from foreign languages than they give to alternative translations offered laymen.
Thanks
Reply by Atromitos on 2019-08-01 05:54:56
Haha! Brilliant
Comment by jamesbrown on 2019-04-05 00:55:38
Hi Messenger & Eleasar
Many thanks for your thought provoking scriptures and the explanations, and I truly do appreciate them.
Psalmbee, 25 apostles and a barking dog, you made me laugh my brother.
Love to all and thank you again, enjoy your weekend.
Comment by Psalmbee on 2019-04-05 10:25:00
I'm glad you got a good laugh JB.
For starters, at Acts 1:13 there's eleven Apostles named and Judas Iscariot is not one of them, so if you add him and Jesus (Heb 3:1) to that list you have thirteen.
But we need twelve more to make twenty five so at (1Thess 1:1 and 2:6) you'll find Timothy and Silvanus. Now we are up to fifteen.
We can't forget Barnabas (Acts 14:14).
Then there's Paul. (Acts 14:14) and many others!
Epaphroditus (Phil 2:25) making 18 so far!
The two unnamed at (2Cor 8:23) that makes an even 20.
(Gal 1:19) we have James the brother of the Lord, making it 21
Apollos at (1Cor 4:6-9). (22)
Andronicus and Junia (Ro 16:7), that makes 24.
And last but not least Matthias, for a total of twenty five.Reply by messenger on 2019-04-05 18:27:00
Hello Psalmbee.
I asked you to provide scriptures with the English word apostles or apostle in them, so that it could verified your assertion about 25 apostles being in the Bible was correct. But instead the majority of scriptures you included do not contain the word apostle.
What you are instead claiming is that anyone sent out on a Christian mission is an apostle. At least that's what appears to be the case, as you cited scriptures merely containing several people that worked with Paul, or that Paul sent to a congregation. You appear not to have considered Ephesians 4:11 where Paul distinguished the role of an apostle from evangelizers, shepherds, and teachers, also from prophets.
That's not how the title apostle is used in scripture. If it only meant someone sent on a Christian mission it would be interchangeable with the word Christian. Because Christ sends all Christians out on a Christian mission. And we all know that. Christ being Lord of Paul, if he sends us out, that would make us apostles, if Paul caused people to biblically attain that designation by
sending them out on a mission. See Matthew 28:18-20. All Christians are sent out.
The word apostles as the word is primary used in scripture were the men who with Christ established church doctrine. That is its teachings and beliefs. See Acts 2:42. That idea of sharing in the early establishment of church teachings and beliefs probably has more to do with individuals of that group being one of the apostles than their going out on a mission. And it might shed light on why the Bible comments very little on what some of 12 apostles did. From scripture we can tell that the more known apostles, like Peter, collaborated with the others in making decisions about doctrine. See the council considering circumcision in Jerusalem. Most or all of the ones considered apostles were there, with other elders. Another qualification is that Christ hand picked each one. And Christ personally let them know that. Matthias and Barnabas being the two exceptions. And that's assuming Matthias was recognized by Christ as being one of his apostles. For me personally, I don't know that.
The men Christ personally picked and personally gave the assignment to spread his message, thus establishing HIS church, are the men the Bible calls apostles, almost in every case. And HIS church for the most part followed their teaching. What Christ did in picking them worked to his benefit.
Take care.
Comment by messenger on 2019-04-05 19:14:11
Since this article is about meeting attendance, are we biblically required to go to the "synagogue"? That is a place that REQUIRES us not to speak the truth, and if we do speak truth we will be ostracized? If we speak at all there without agreeing to ideas we know are beliefs in opposition to God, we will be hung on the proverbial stake, cross, or whatever else they decide to call it. Only after to have our bodies flung out into Egypt, leaving us there, and pronouncing us dead. Dead not just to them, but dead to God. Are we biblically required to go to such a place?
Comment by messenger on 2019-04-05 19:45:44
What if I told you that you must believe me, messenger, and you must believe everything I say, just like you believe God? And I teach that my elders, those working under me, will tell you to wait on Jehovah to correct messenger should he ever, and only by mistake, tell you anything that is not factual. Because I am spirit directed by God.
Well my flock, how does that sound? Now, how does it sound if I'm Watchtower?
Do the scriptures teach you must believe everything messenger says, even if some of it is not factual? What if I am Watchtower?
Comment by messenger on 2019-04-05 19:56:18
Is there a bigger apostate than one who teaches that to be acceptable to Christ you must believe everything he teaches, even if some of what he teaches about scripture might be proven inaccurate in the future, as it has in the past?
Is he teaching Christ if teaching that? Could he possibly be?
Comment by katrina on 2019-04-06 04:47:01
The GB know that those not attending regular (if not really ill) are fading of course JW will believe they are spiritual sick and I know some that are shunned because their meeting attendance is low, instead of kindness they are pushed away even further because of lack of care and love, sadly quite a few turn of the bible.
Comment by Psalmbee on 2019-04-06 12:26:36
Hi Messenger,
Which one's are you disputing or denying? Also which Bible do you consider authorative?
There are some English versions that use the word Apostle in these instances, perhaps you have not seen them yet. Jesus speaks all languages that we know of and some we don't know of yet. (Mark 16:17)
PsalmbeeReply by messenger on 2019-04-06 16:33:53
Well Psalmbee it is possible someone could have translated a phrase calling Titus or another one of those men apostles in some English translation. Just as you might if you translated a Bible.
If so that doesn't make the translation correct in using that word as it is commonly understood today. If so other Bible statements like "the 12 apostles " would be almost meaningless. Which 12 apostles?
Plus what designates an apostle in that case. If sent on a Christian mission every Christian is that accepts the mission. If a teacher, every Christian teacher is.
The point you make that there are 25, and that 25 people are named apostles in some English translations to me highlights why it is a most logical decision to trust God has kept his hand in the distribution of HIS word throughout the ages. That means HE has effected translations by steering the greater number of translators to the correct conclusions about which words to use.
To believe he hasn't means we believe people could have changed anything in the Bible, and we might not really have God's word. But if I am correct, and God did protect the copying of it in different languages then the English Bibles that cause most Christians to understand the meaning of the word apostle should be the dominant translations. And Christian teachers should understand that meaning. Therefore most Christians should know it. So, if you just throw that word out in a conversation with any Christian in any denomination who will they understand you to be speaking of. You know it is not Timothy, Titus, or one of the elders Paul worked with. It will be one of the original faithful eleven Christ chose plus Paul who Christ chose later. Why would you let some alternative interpretation change the meaning of a commonly used biblical word?
You asked what translation I looked up your scriptures in. I just hit on the highlighted scriptural links in your earlier comment. I didn't look to see what translation this cite took me to. But whichever one it was the word apostle was not used in most of your cited scriptures.
Take care Psalmbee.
Comment by Bernardbooks on 2019-04-06 13:18:32
Besides the false teaching, another painful part of attending meetings is the outright displays of complete trust and allegiance to the governing body by those on stage, in the audience and in videos.
I find it as repulsive as any other type of idolatry and it made me think of a quote from one of their interpretations of the book of Revelation.
Sad to say, I’m just waiting for the day when they’ll actually say at their meetings, “All bow to the governing body!”
re chapter 12 p.64 paragraph 19
“a great crowd . . . out of all nations” has come to “bow down” to the anointed slave. (Revelation 7:3, 4, 9)”Reply by messenger on 2019-04-06 17:05:44
Brenardbrooks,
To me they already say bow down to the governing body. And to me that is the most disgusting things about WT. And I see that it is the greatest danger to some Jehovah's Witnesses, primarily elders because they are the ones that enforce it.
It is disgusting because it is idolatry. Make no mistake about it. And the enforcement of that policy is an act of beating by "the evil slave". The evil slave is not one group of Christians. It is any group that DOES what Christ claims in that scripture. And it (he) has been in the congregation since that first evil man began throwing people out who would not follow him.
The danger of being an elder is WT requires elders to participate in enforcing its idolatry and throw members out. Thus WT requires elders to become part of the evil slave. That's a very dangerous position they are in, and hopefully Christ will have mercy on those that participated in ignorance.
Maybe the great apostasy had more to do with this than it did with different ideas. After all Christ said we would be persecuted and thrown out of the synagogues. And the leaven of the Pharisees did that to him.
If anyone teaches their teaching might be wrong, but God requires you to follow it (right or wrong), and if you don't they will throw you out of the church and tell all members not to talk to you, then how can they not be setting themselves in the seat of an idol. You know if ANYONE else did that except Watchtower then Watchtower would call it idolatry. What does Christ calls it? 1 Corinthians 4:8-10; 3John 1:9-10Reply by Bernardbooks on 2019-04-06 18:46:53
I agree messenger
they do say it in many different ways in words and actions, clearly and subtly.
You mentioned two important things to watch out for and keep away from.
1. Leaven/hypocrisy
2. Idolatry
Thank you for your reply.
Reply by Dajo on 2019-04-06 18:02:47
Good morning BernardBooks,
There is an article about this that you might find interesting in the archives.
http://meletivivlon.com/2014/07/02/identifying-the-man-of-lawlessness/Reply by Bernardbooks on 2019-04-06 18:51:54
Good morning Dajo,
Thank you for the reference
and your reply.
Reply by Chet on 2019-04-27 02:04:12
I’m right with you on this. I quit going to meetings some time ago, but occasionally attended for the sake of a friend or family member. It sickened me, because even back in the ‘90s, they were starting to worship their organization, instead of the One True God.
The very last meetings I attended, and that was a rare event, were close to ten years ago, and I remember two things distinctly; one being comments from the audience that betrayed disdain for people “in the world” and the other, a sickening continuous reference to “The Slave”. They’d answer questions at the Watchtower Study, then the conductor would say; “let’s see what The Slave has to say by reading the next paragraph”. After a few minutes of this, I wandered out to the parking lot and cooled my heels. That was the last regular meeting I attended.
More recently, I was visiting an old friend that was having serious health problems and they “attended” a meeting by telephone while I was there. Out of respect for the individual, I remained present, but it was not easy. The manner of the persons leading the meeting was both pedantic and amateurish. I couldn’t believe how much things had changed.
Comment by messenger on 2019-04-06 19:48:18
The word TRANSLATED covenant in the Bible essentially means contact. Contact law in the USA states that if a party on either side of a contract breaches any provision then either the whole contract is unenforceable or if the innocent party does not attempt to mitigate the damages caused by the offense he loses his right to enforce the breached provision in the future.
It seems God treated his covenants with Israel in the same way. God carried out harmful acts against those people many times when they failed to honor their agreement with him. Yet he carried through with the greater purpose of that agreement, even while canceling some provisions in it. He mitigated the offenses of the Jewish people with actions.
With regard to the agreement Christ made, his covenant for a kingdom, he said, "you are the ones who have stuck with me in my trials".
What should happen if in the remainder of his life they stopped doing that? What about the remainder of their lives? Judas stopped before either incident. He even betrayed Christ, resulting in his death.
Why would Christ continue to honor an agreement with Judas? Wouldn't Judas be required to stick with Christ and not stab him in the back? That's if Christ is to honor the covenant for a kingdom with Judas. If Judas and those others were required to remain fairhful-and isn't that what the Bible requires of all of us, unless you believe in once saved always saved-then it doesn't matter if Judas partook if the emblems or not. He's done. Christ likely canceled any agreement he had with Judas because in this case Judas breached the contract. And Christ works just like his Father.Reply by messenger on 2019-04-07 01:03:53
Forgive me as I spelled a couple words above incorrectly. One is contract. that was spelled as contact. My wife was driving, the vehicle was bouncing, and I evidently punched in the wrong words from auto-fill on my phone.
Comment by jamesbrown on 2019-04-11 00:17:16
Hi all
What is happening!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
today is 11/4 no one is saying anything, not even Eric.
Hope all are well.Reply by lost in space on 2019-04-11 02:35:10
Absolutely!!! Can only imagine we are all waiting and wondering. We are thinking of you Eric.
Reply by Dajo on 2019-04-11 07:59:49
I think we might hear from him “soon”. I really hate that word!
Reply by Dajo on 2019-04-11 08:04:28
He’s a very good communicator. I believe he has an email address.
Comment by Psalmbee on 2019-04-11 18:02:55
Negotiations must be going well for Meleti, for it taking this long.
Perhaps he's making way with them!
Love, Love, Love!
Psalmbee