Stop the Presses!

Comment by Eleasar on 2017-08-07 12:42:41

Hi Meleti,


I would like to add the following points to prepare our minds and hearts for the discussions that will arise.
The teaching of the "Great Crowd" is based on 4 fundamental elements.

1. Where do they stand in the temple? (See Revelation 7:15) Naos means the inner sanctuary as based on the 1st May WT 2002 Question from readers. This means that the "Great Crowd" location needs to be revisited. On the understanding of the Spiritual temple (see w72 12/1 pp. 709-716 "The One True Temple at Which to Worship", w96 7/1 pp. 14-19 Jehovah’s Great Spiritual Temple and w96 7/1 pp. 19-24 The Triumph of True Worship Draws Near) The last article has the point corrected in the 2002 Question from Readers.

2. Jehu and Jonadab teaching of type and antitype based on the 1934 WT 1st August on "His Kindness"  no longer applies based on the FDS rule as stated in the bible. This is implicit and not explicitly stated.

3. Cities of Refuge teaching of type and antitype teachings based on the 15th August 1934 "His Kindness Part 2" is no longer valid. This is an explicit statement as we can see in the November 2017 edition and you have covered this in your article.

4. The teaching of John 10:16 is the only one remaining and that is disproved scripturally by Ephesians 2; 11-19.

I make it 3 out of the 4 points have now shown to be in error. The 4th point can be reasoned contextually and will fall.

This raises the question on how to help JWs with this. We should stick to using the organisation's guidelines to the flock. The best place in my opinion is the Ministry School Book. The following might be useful:

a. be p. 52-p. 54 Preparing Discourses for the Public
Use of Scriptures

"Jesus Christ and his disciples built their teaching on the Scriptures. (Luke 4:16-21; 24:27; Acts 17:2, 3) You can do the same. The Scriptures should be the basis of your talk. Rather than simply explaining and applying statements made in the outline provided, discern how those statements are supported by the Scriptures, and then teach from the Scriptures."

b. be study 49 p. 255 par. 3-p. 256 par. 2 Sound Arguments Given
"Based Firmly on God’s Word. What we teach must not be of our own originality. We endeavor to share with others what we have learned from the Bible. In this, we have been greatly helped by the publications of the faithful and discreet slave class. These publications encourage us to examine the Scriptures carefully. In turn, we direct others to the Bible, not with the goal of proving that we are right, but with the humble desire of letting them see for themselves what it says. We agree with Jesus Christ, who said in prayer to his Father: “Your word is truth.” (John 17:17) There is no greater authority than Jehovah God, the Creator of heaven and earth. The soundness of our arguments depends on their being based on his Word.

"At times you may speak to people who are not familiar with the Bible or who do not recognize it as the Word of God. You should exercise good judgment as to when and how you bring in Bible texts. But you should endeavor to direct their attention to that authoritative source of information as soon as possible.

"Should you conclude that simply quoting a relevant scripture provides an irrefutable argument? Not necessarily. You may need to direct attention to the context to show that the scripture truly does support what you are saying. If you are merely drawing a principle from a scripture and the context is not discussing that subject, more evidence may be needed. You may need to use other scriptures
that bear on the matter in order to satisfy your audience that what you are saying is really solidly based on the Scriptures.

"Avoid overstating what a scripture proves. Read it carefully. The text may deal with the general subject that you are discussing. Yet, for your argument to be persuasive, your listener must be able to see in it what you are saying that it proves."

Many of those in the congregations want to serve God. They need the blindfold removed. We need to win their hearts through the words of scripture. All we need to do is to introduce them to their Father as not just friend and also how his Son through his offices as their redeemer mediator, High Priest and King has made all this and more possible for each of us now and in the eternal future.

In addition, I hope and prayer the leadership will recognise the importance of this teaching and start making the necessary adjustments. I very much hold with the following scripture 1 Corinthians 13:7-8a "It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails."

• Reply by Rufus on 2017-08-07 16:53:15

  Well this will get confusing in a hurry. The Q from Readers answer in May 2002 establishes that John saw the "Great Crowd" in the na-os of the Temple, specifically the Holy of Holies.
  
  It then concludes in two more paragraphs by contradicting the points just made:
  *** w02 5/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
  Members of the great crowd exercise faith in Jesus’ ransom sacrifice. They are spiritually clean, having “washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” Hence, they are declared righteous with a view to becoming friends of God and of surviving the great tribulation. (James 2:23, 25) In many ways, they are like proselytes in Israel who submitted to the Law covenant and worshiped along with the Israelites.
  
  Of course, those proselytes did not serve in the inner courtyard, where the priests performed their duties. And members of the great crowd are not in the inner courtyard of Jehovah’s great spiritual temple, which courtyard represents the condition of perfect, righteous human sonship of the members of Jehovah’s “holy priesthood” while they are on earth. (1 Peter 2:5) But as the heavenly elder said to John, the great crowd really is in the temple, not outside the temple area in a kind of spiritual Court of the Gentiles. What a privilege that is! And how it highlights the need for each one to maintain spiritual and moral purity at all times" [end citation]
  
  So which is it? In the Holy of Holies or like foreign proselytes who never were invited to enter the temple itself?

  • Reply by Eleasar on 2017-08-07 17:19:13

    Rufus,
    
    Points 1-4 in that article deal with using the wrong temple I.e. Herod' s. It says that it should be Solomon's temple or the tabernacle. They acknowledge that the court of gentiles does not apply. Please see the 1972 and 1996 wt discussions on the great spiritual temple.
    
    After that comes point 5 which clearly states that what naos means. The clear conclusion is that this great crowd must be in heaven.
    
    The following two paragraphs that you have given above contradicts the conclusion based on scripture!
    
    They answer the original question by taking a position that contradicts their own analysis of scripture. How do they get away with such bad logic?
    
    Eleasar

    • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-07 19:03:40

      They get away with it because (a) the rank and file are spiritually lazy, or (b) they are afraid to speak up.

  • Reply by amoreomeara on 2017-08-08 02:57:41

    "In many ways, they are like proselytes in Israel..." Really? Which ways in particular? WT don't need to bother with specifics, let alone scriptual proof!

Comment by rusticshore on 2017-08-07 14:16:52

This reasoning I believe is right in line with Ephesians 3:6 and Romans 1:14. I suppose the next reasonable question is, what of so many who are faithful who all along should have been partaking but have not? Is their lot on the earth with the Princes and others? Just a thought

• Reply by Rufus on 2017-08-07 15:33:41

  Every year at the Memorial of our Lord's death and ransom sacrifice in our individual behalf, each participant in the observance is given individual opportunity to obey the instructions of Jesus to be included in the New Covenant by accepting its terms:
  Matthew 26:26-27 New International Version (NIV)
  "26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the[a] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."
  
  Faithful ones who should have been partaking have listened to imperfect men who organized themselves into an ecclesiastical hierarchy, and obeyed their instruction that opportunity for entry into the New Covenant was closed. They have put themselves outside the New Covenant by an explicit decision on their own part not to accept Jesus plain words, "Drink from it, ALL of YOU."
  
  That is why this information is vital to share with our brothers still making that error.

  • Reply by tyhik on 2017-08-07 17:54:42

    Q: If apostles had been JWs, how many of them would have partaken when Jesus gave them the cup?
    A: No one. Because none of them was yet spirit anointed.

  • Reply by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-08-10 03:53:51

    This was the main issue that led to me being dissed, I informed them that I would be obeying jesus command to partake of the bread and wine , thy set up a meeting , and tried to convince me otherwise . They said I wasn't doing enough on the ministry , they said I would be stumbling the brothers, they then asked if I accepted the GB as the faithful slave , when I didn't give them a satisfactory answer , they then dissed me for apostasy , that was fine , I don't want to be part of a religion , that prefers to teach commands of men ,over the words of jesus .

    • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-10 07:28:12

      So they disfellowshipped you because you refused to make an affirmation of faith in the Governing Body. That now constitutes apostasy. Interesting...

      • Reply by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-08-10 18:32:01

        Sorry brothers , I do hope I haven't misled you at all here , when I said I didn't give them a satisfactory answer to the question , do you recognise the faithful slave ? I did give them an answer but it wasn't the one they wanted to hear , what I did say , and I quote , " that I probably have a different view of that verse than you " they took that as apostasy , and a rejection of the authority of the GB of JWs , however what I really meant was I'm not in a position to judge , Wether they are or not that's for jesus to decide , 1 corinthians 4 and that's the true meaning of "do not go beyond the things written " it's okay like I said , I do believe it was a terrible miscarriage of justice really , but there you go , I'm not bitter about it , I wasn't expecting fair treatment , I'm healing now and doing fine . Yours truly ,

    • Reply by Robert-6512 on 2017-08-10 11:09:28

      In the Australia hearings, Geoffrey Jackson of the GB himself would not confirm that the GB was the FDS. It seems when put to the test, the GB does not have the courage of their own convictions. So, if they themselves don't accept the GB as the FDS, how could anyone else be expected to do so, and therefore on what grounds could you be expelled? Such blatant hypocrisy.

    • Reply by Rufus on 2017-08-10 11:16:16

      The basis on which I became a JW prior to 1985 was baptism upon affirmative answers to:
      *** w58 8/1 p. 478 par. 22 Baptism ***
      
      (1) Have you recognized yourself before Jehovah God as a sinner who needs salvation, and have you acknowledged to him that this salvation proceeds from him, the Father, through his Son Jesus Christ?
      
      (2) On the basis of this faith in God and in his provision for salvation have you dedicated yourself unreservedly to God to do his will henceforth as he reveals it to you through Jesus Christ and through the Bible under the enlightening power of the holy spirit?
      
      Your experience indicates that the basis on which you were announced as “no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses” was your unsatisfactory answer to:
      (1) “Do you accept the Governing Body as the ‘faithful slave’?”
      
      What a great change. Sad.

      • Reply by PraytoJahDaily on 2017-08-12 13:37:35

        What of the scripture at 1 Cor. 11: (27-33)Therefore, whoever eats the loaf or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will be guilty respecting the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 First let a man approve himself after scrutiny,+ and only then let him eat of the loaf and drink of the cup. 29 For the one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment against himself. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and quite a few are sleeping in death.*+ 31 But if we would discern what we ourselves are, we would not be judged. 32 However, when we are judged, we are disciplined by Jehovah,*+ so that we may not become condemned with the world.+ 33
        
        This is the scripture that gives me some pause with respect to this issue. And it certainly should give anyone who IS partaking a bit of a pause as well, before acknowledging before Jehovah, and everyone, that they are of the 'little flock' class

        • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-12 20:46:34

          Welcome, PraytoJahDaily. You ask a valid question. The Organization has used this passage to dissuade Jehovah's Witnesses from partaking, suggesting that unless you got the "special calling" you are unworthy and are drinking judgment against yourself. However, we have to consider the historical context. In writing these words to the Corinthians, Paul was writing to anointed Christians. All such were partakers. There was no non-anointed class in the first century, even by JW theology. So he couldn't be suggesting that some were not worthy to partake. The context indicates that some were not in a sober state or were engaging in gluttony. Whatever the case, they were not treating this most sacred of Christian events with the dignity and respect it deserved, and in that state, they were partaking unworthily. That all Christians should partake is not a matter of worthiness, but of faith and obedience.

          • Reply by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-08-13 18:45:09

            Meleti , you just took the words right out of my mouth , yet again , that's the point Paul was making , hello praytojahdaily, the scripture says , that those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ , eat and drink a judgement against themselves ,1 corinthians 11v 29 , its obviouly an important point so, what does it mean to discern the body of Christ ? And do you feel that Jws are discerning the body of Christ today ?

          • Reply by Robert-6512 on 2017-08-14 11:12:01

            Meleti, you wrote, " In writing these words to the Corinthians, Paul was writing to anointed Christians. All such were partakers. There was no non-anointed class in the first century, even by JW theology."
            
            This view is indeed part and parcel of JW theology, but I believe it is incorrect. Paul was writing to Christians, who were adopted as God's sons. But not all Christians were necessarily anointed. Just as in the nation of Israel, anointing was performed on a select few, to become kings or priests under the Law. In the Christian arrangement, many are called to be God's children, but few are chosen to be king/priests, because having every Christian be a king would be too much; they would not all be needed as kings.
            
            But, being destined to be a future king or not, all of God's children fall under the obligation to "keep doing this".
            
            Suppose that understanding were NOT true. If so, it would almost amount to telling God, 'unless you make me a king, I refuse to be 'merely' adopted as your son, because that's not 'good enough' for me!' Are we really so presumptuous to think such a thing?
            
            Our Father is not responsible for our own religious misunderstandings. It is not His job to indulge our selfish desires and egotism that might lead us to expect a role as a king. Being adopted as a child of God and receiving of His salvation through Christ ought to be enough of a reward, shouldn't it?

            • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-14 13:51:35

              I won't disagree with you out of hand, Robert. I am in the process of researching this. Having said that, if the destiny of the children of God is to serve as kings and priests, then those who "don't make the cut" are not denied salvation. There are two resurrections, and the resurrection of the unrighteous is a resurrection of those who have not been declared righteous by God. This could include the very worst of humanity to the very best, from our point of view.
              
              Again, I'm not putting this out there as fact. It's a work in progress.

              • Reply by Robert-6512 on 2017-08-14 14:21:12

                I have felt that this (WT) viewpoint has it backwards. It's not that children of God have a destiny to rule, but that those who rule will be children of God. Other children of God that do not rule are such, not because they 'didn't make the cut' but merely because not every last child of God will rule. Our Father simply doesn't need EVERYONE to rule. It would be as if there were a country in which every last, single man were the king of that country. It's not needed, and just doesn't make any sense.
                
                So many religions have held up the ideal and notion that "it's heaven or hell". WT says, "it's heaven or earth". They go further, and say 'heaven = son, earth = friend'. In doing so, they create doubt and uncertainty, and worse, create an artificial, damaging division between Christians.
                
                Is it reasonable that God and Christ would create a belief system that caused separation, or fear of separation, between family members? How many times have you read WT articles where a "non anointed" wife is grieving the death of her "anointed" husband, wistfully noting how 'they would not be reunited in the New System' or words to that effect? What happened to, "what God has yoked together let no one tear apart"? No one except God himself, that He would break his own rules?
                
                Anyone believing that "anointed" ones, those destined to rule, are to be in heaven have some enormous hurdles to overcome to make a convincing case.
                
                In Eden, Satan said Adam and Eve would not die (would have immortality) and would be like God (a spirit, who lives in heaven). That satanic assertion is essentially identical to the "heavenly hope" doctrine of every Christian religion including WT. Anyone claiming this doctrine were true would have to explain how and why it is not a teaching of demons.
                
                You would also have to explain what these rulers would do after the 1000 year reign was over. Are they now "on the unemployment line"? Would they be retained in heaven after their services were no longer required, perhaps in an act of apparent favoritism by God?
                
                When we reject these false religious teachings and let the Bible speak for itself, the truth is much simpler and makes sense. No one is going to heaven, all Christians are children of God, all properly partake of emblems, and no families will be divided during the resurrection with some in heaven and others on earth.
                
                As far as all first-century Christians being anointed, I believe there are two aspects to the "spirit" that were involved, as described in Acts. In one sense, those early Christians received "gifts of the spirit" to confirm that the Christian congregation was where God's approval was, and no longer with Israel. Those receiving this "gift of the spirit" were not necessarily chosen to be rulers. In the other sense, others that received the spirit got this because they actually were being chosen to be among the future rulers.
                
                Since the gifts of the spirit eventually ceased, the removal of that feature did not mean that Christians from that point forward stopped becoming children of God for lack of being "anointed". They were all God's children. It's just that a few of them would ALSO be rulers at a later date, while the rest would not be.

                • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-14 21:41:40

                  Hi Robert,
                  
                  I think we may be arguing the cross purposes. Your reasoning counters the WT doctrine, but no one here is arguing for that understanding to the best of my knowledge. I do not believe that the children of God will live in heaven, abandoning the earth forever. I do believe that all the children of God were called out up to the presence of Christ are destined to rule with him for a thousand years.. The purpose of their rule is to reconcile creation as defined at Romans 8:18-23 back in the family of God. Eventually all humans will again be children of God. What those making up the first resurrection will do after the thousand years have ended is not relevant. The Bible says nothing about that. So we will just have to wait on God to reveal what he has in mind for them and the rest of humanity at that time.
                  
                  I disagree that no one is going to happen however. I think there is no need to be made for that. Nevertheless, going to heaven best means living in heaven.
                  
                  In any case, I plan to write an article explaining when I believe the Bible teaches on this subject in the very near future. For the most part, these articles are essays and I invite any scripturally based review that will help us to further understand or better understand these topics.

        • Reply by amoreomeara on 2017-08-13 10:53:26

          Hi PraytoJahDaily!
          
          I think you raise an interesting question: Which is the greatest danger, which has the worst consequences?
          
          1) To partake 'unworthily'
          2) To not partake at all
          
          It is interesting that 1 Cor 11:32 says "when we are judged, we are disciplined by Jehovah,*+ so that we may not become condemned with the world."
          
          It seems to me that even after being judged for partaking unworthily, we are disciplined by Jehovah, not condemned with the world (including those in the world who never partook at all).
          
          So really what is the absolute worst case senario of partaking unworthily? Being disciplined because we made a mistake? Surely being condemned with the world is even worse than falling asleep in death?
          
          What then are the consequences of not partaking at all?

          • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-13 15:10:06

            I have not been able to verify this, but I'm told that those Satan worshipers who practice a black mass will pass the emblems and refuse to drink the wine and eat the bread. They are pointedly rejecting the symbols of what Christ offered us through his death. How unsettling to realize that Jehovah's Witnesses are performing the same practice that Satan worshipers perform.

            • Reply by Robert-6512 on 2017-08-14 10:56:26

              Somewhere I read a comment from some Christian group critical of WT. They were saying, 'the Memorial is an annual ritual of JWs in which they reject the body and blood of Christ'. That alone is bad enough, but to think that rejection puts them in the same company as Satanists ... whew! That's a lot to take in, and a severe rebuke of WT if true.

Comment by River on 2017-08-07 14:50:40

Interestingly, under Russel and Rutherford, nearly all living humans should live on the earth and be ruled after first 1914 and later after 1925, from heaven by the 144000 and the great crowd. The great crowd should be like police officers preventing people from doing wrong (Studies in the Scriptures big 7).

Comment by apollos0fAlexandria on 2017-08-07 15:37:02

That's interesting. Although I was aware of Rutherford's original article, I was not aware that they haven't published anything else to support the understanding of the "other sheep".

If talking to JWs about this it's worth remembering that the "great crowd" doctrine is actually distinct from the "other sheep" doctrine. Back in the days when I thought I knew what I was talking about I would point out that the two terms were not interchangeable. "Other sheep" were supposed to be all the righteous who've ever lived with the earthly hope, and the "great crowd" would be JWs who survive Armageddon.

Of course I now know I was totally off-base with both of these. But it's worth pointing out the distinction as JWs teach it.

• Reply by Eleasar on 2017-08-07 17:05:58

  Apollos,
  The reference from wt CD-ROM is w95 4/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers .
  
  The question is on the technical difference.
  
  Good reference point to show.
  
  Interestingly looking at the updates from questions from readers, they have known since 2002 at the latest that the teaching cannot be supported scripturally.
  
  Eleasar

Comment by eve04 on 2017-08-07 18:25:40

I started to get excited and then I had a thought. Meleti you stated "The Organization has just admitted that the Other Sheep doctrine is unscriptural.
Okay, to be fair, they don’t know they’ve admitted this yet" The sad thing is neither will most JWs. I don’t think many know or really paid attention that the other sheep was dealing with an antitype, until I came on this site. I don’t remember being taught this unless I just didn’t pay it any attention because it didn’t make sense, however for most JW s this is going to go right over their heads. I took a gander at the articles for that magazine and did a search for other sheep and it is only mentioned 2 times for the series of study articles in the Nov 2017 issue. John 10:16 is not mentioned at all. Because of this, most will only think of the cities of refuge being updated.
The Other Sheep doctrine is just to tangled of a mess which would cause so much unraveling I wonder who would stay.

Comment by Kim on 2017-08-07 18:54:14

The January 1st, 2007 Watchtower explains that they are not sure where their understanding of the Great Crowd came from. Since it mentions the year 1935 for when this came to light, I gather they would include the other sheep teaching in this understanding.

They think it may have come from the resurrected anointed, communicating with them, even though they are not sure when the anointed began to be resurrected.

The article would suggest that they are not relying on any antitipical interpretation. Even so, the bottom line is, they don't know how they come to their understanding.

Here's the quote from the Watchtower

"What, then, can we deduce from the fact that one of the 24 elders identifies the great crowd to John? It seems that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today. Why is that important? Because the correct identity of the great crowd was revealed to God’s anointed servants on earth in 1935. If one of the 24 elders was used to convey that important truth, he would have had to be resurrected to heaven by 1935 at the latest. That would indicate that the first resurrection began sometime between 1914 and 1935. Can we be more precise?"

• Reply by Rufus on 2017-08-07 19:42:58

  "Can we [the GB] be more precise?" I'd say so. How about going back one more year to 1934:
  
  
  KNOW JEHOVAH chap. 9 p. 177 par. 35
  ***Marking Foreheads of Those to Be Spared ***
  Consistently, then, in 1934, or three years after the release of the book Vindication (Volume I), the magazine The Watchtower published in its issue of August 15, 1934, the article entitled “His Kindness.” In this it clearly set forth, on pages 249, 250, that even the “other sheep” of the present time must be made up of those who have dedicated themselves to God through Christ and who have symbolized that unconditional dedication by being immersed in water, like Jesus. This, at the earliest, marks the point where the work of the anointed remnant began in marking the foreheads of those whom God would choose to spare alive during the “great tribulation” upon antitypical unfaithful Jerusalem, Christendom. Why? Because prior to that the work toward these consisted merely of imparting Biblical knowledge to them. (Matthew 24:15-22; Mark 13:14-20) But even at that time the “other sheep” of the present time were not identified as being the same ones as those who make up the “great multitude” or “great crowd” as foretold in Revelation 7:9-17. Hence up till that time no organized effort was made to gather the “other sheep.” [end citation]
  
  So this great selection work of marking those chosen to survive was carried out by the anointed from 1935 to 2016. Then it all fell apart:
  https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-june-2016/man-with-inkhorn/

Comment by Yehorakam on 2017-08-07 19:36:15

The doctrinal merry-go-round of the governing body reminds me of the man in Amos 5 who fled the lion and was confronted by the bear, then hiding from the bear in a house he gets bit by a serpent. The GB create a problem with a false doctrine, and trying to abandon it they just get themselves in more trouble as you have clearly shown. Sins always catch up with us. Some men's sins catch up with them quickly, others take decades to catch up with them (1 Tim 5). Their sins are finally catching up with them. And how about we let them be judged by their own words: Using THEIR definition of a "generation", the present GB are of the same generation as Rutherford. Therefore, being that they say they are are the same "generation", they thus bear the guilt of all the false teachings from 1914 until now. Perhaps the errors of over a century will be charged against this "generation" of over a 100 years. Wouldn't that be poetic justice if Jesus judged them by their own definition. Sure, the GB would like to accept credit for good things previous GB'S did. But are they willing to accept guilt and judgement for the errors of previous GB's? They readily say they are of the same "generation" so let them accept ALL that entails!

Much love,

• Reply by eve04 on 2017-08-08 03:52:58

  AMEN, AMEN!!!

Comment by Christian on 2017-08-07 21:49:13

I have found that the more convoluted a religion gets the more it pulls itself away from the simple truths of God's Word. How do men come up with all of these 'new truths' and keep a straight face. I've been going to JW meetings since the 50s and made and kept many friends there. When I begain Pioneering in the early 60s I kept my own belief as pure and simple as I could. I partake of the emblems, not because I think I will be a Prince or a Judge, but because our Lord Jesus Christ instructs us to take them. Yes, I have a hope to live in the Heavens when I die, but I'm quite happy to be resurrected on my home planet. I'm not convinced it's my place to dictate to God as to my outcome. I feel secure in God's hands and leave it at that. As to the 144,000 I've had this lingering thought that goes this way: With all the preaching activity going on in the first century, I wouldn't be surprised if that number, plus, was reached back then. If that were the case, then the entire concept, as thought up by the organization in 1935 has no credibility, for that reason alone. Thanks brothers, I love reading your comments.

Comment by Phelps on 2017-08-07 22:58:39

Hola a todos... es asombroso como puedo amar a personas que nunca he visto en mi vida.Todos tan sabios y tan espirituales y con tanto amor por Jesús y nuestro padre jehova. Muchas gracias a todos por sus comentarios,aquí sí que me alimento de platos con Muchas carnes jejeje. Meleti no hagas eso otra vez casi me haces saltar de la emoción por tu anuncio,pensé que la organización era consciente del cambio... Muchas gracias querido hermano y amigo .espero algún día perder estrechar tu mano.con amor desde bogota Colombia

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-07 23:59:03

  Hi Phelps,
  
  Vivía en Bogotá durante seis años, en la década de los setenta. Me encantó la ciudad y me encantaría volver un día. Si lo hago, te buscaré.

Comment by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-08-08 04:03:59

I remember my son, years ago asking me , dad who do you think the other sheep of John 10 v16 are ? Answer , oh thats easy son they are the gentile christians and became one flock with the jewish christians , when you read the bible that seems to be the most common sense logical answer anyway , here we go now , JESUS and I "HAVE" other sheep , disciples ,,,,,,, yeah but these are not coming in to existence till the 1930s are they , ? JESUS and they will become one flock , disciples ,,,,,,,,,, hold on , I always thought there were 2 flocks , the little flock and the great crowd of other sheep , how does that work jesus? JESUS ,,,,,,,,,, Get out disfellowshipped ! Hahaha ha ,

Comment by pquin7 on 2017-08-08 05:33:23

I think your reading into this watchtower article to much all they are saying is that the city of refuge has no prophetic application. No anti type they will continue with there understanding of the other sheep. It does not take way anything brother, all it does is take way the application of it the other sheep that's all. It does not destroy their understanding to the other sheep.

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-08 08:26:51

  I agree that it does not destroy their understanding of the other sheep. Their understanding is not based on Scripture, and never has been. It is based on the teaching of men, and since they put faith in these men, their word is as good as God's word to the average Jehovah's Witness. However, they live under the illusion that their understanding of the other sheep is based on Scripture. I doubt if one in the thousand even knows the original foundation for this doctrine. However, for those who truly love God's word, and yet have been deceived all their lives about the meaning of John 10:16 – as I was – this is powerful evidence that those promoting this doctrine don't really know what they're talking about, even when it relates to their original foundation for this teaching.
  
  Will it change people's minds? Only if the people involved truly love truth; if they take the light in the word of God. Ps 119:97-100

  • Reply by pquin7 on 2017-08-08 21:55:57

    Only time will tell if they give up on this ridiculous interpretation.

Comment by Phelps on 2017-08-08 06:50:03

Meleti...Con mucho gusto querido amigo y hermano.brazos abiertos para todos

• Reply by mailman on 2017-08-08 23:34:32

  Muchos gracias hermano! :)

Comment by hezekiah1 on 2017-08-09 22:53:54

It seems they are in a downward spiral. They don't seem to realize what they are admitting to.

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-10 07:22:45

  Yes. In clouds, blinded with no frame of reference, a pilot can very literally be in a downward spiral and not know it. If he trusts his instruments, he can save himself, but there have been times where pilots trusted the feelings, their gut, and ignored their instruments. The result, a crash, or near crash once they cleared the clouds. Seems the Governing Body is flying by the seat of the pants and not trusting the navigation that comes from the Lord. They are bound to crash when the airspace runs out.

Comment by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-08-11 03:53:00

I know I'm going off the point here , but what type of question is it , when the elders ask you "have you identified the faithful and discreet slave " ? Answer , I thought it was jesus that was supposed to do that not me !

Comment by Rynda on 2017-08-13 18:26:43

I always thought that Scripture meant something other than what the GB always said! LOL!! A careful reading of the Bible, oops, we're not supposed to be reading the Bible without the guidance of the GB and it's minions...would reveal that Yeshua was talking about two groups...Israel and the Gentiles. The natural sheep and the other sheep...the sheep of the nations. Why does the GB ALWAYS make everything so difficult? IJS

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-13 18:59:38

  Welcome Rynda. The answer to your question is they make it complicated, because if it were simple, you wouldn't need them. Trouble is, it is simple. Meant to be understood by babes. So they also have to convince you that it is complicated.

  • Reply by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-08-14 16:17:20

    Hahaha that's right meleti , I was thinking the very same thing a few a days ago , in fact a lot of bible is self explanatory , granted there are things that are difficult to understand , but there's also a lot of things that are easily grasped,by a sincere bible student , this reminds me of a line from father ted " the great thing about catholocism is its that vague no one understands what its all about " hahaha , the witnesses seem the same to me ,

  • Reply by mailman on 2017-08-15 00:11:39

    The GB is the modern mediator between God and his Witnesses, the broker for genuinely understanding (I am coughing) the Scriptures.

Comment by Thaddeus on 2017-08-25 14:29:10

I'm curious to see what information may come up if I search "the antitype to the Israelite cities of refuge."
Has anyone explored this?

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-08-25 16:52:03

  I hadn't until you asked. Typing "cities of refuge" gives us references in the 1930-1985 Watchtower index. Under "Discussion", the 1934 WT article that gave rise to the "Other Sheep" doctrine can be found. Typing "cities refuge antitypical" shows the 1955 Watchtower with this:
  
  *** w55 12/1 p. 719 par. 10 Avoidance Inside the Cities of Refuge ***
  What is the antitypical city of refuge today? As the typical refuge cities were cities of the temple servants, including the high priest of Jehovah, the antitypical city must be Jehovah’s provision for protecting us from death for violating the divine covenant concerning the sacredness of blood by our coming and remaining under the benefits of the active service of Jehovah’s High Priest Jesus Christ. That provision of protection is to be found with Jehovah’s theocratic organization of his people.
  
  *** w55 12/1 p. 722 par. 17 Avoidance Inside the Cities of Refuge ***
  Hence the members of the spiritual “body of Christ,” the congregation of anointed Christians, need this provision, too, for they are the antitypical “sons of Israel”; they are members of spiritual Israel. The original part of this remnant passed through the years of World War I, during which they became captive to the Babylonish world because they came under the fear of men in high station and their course of action was not altogether clean from this world, not entirely neutral toward the mortal combats of this world.
  
  This is a departure from the 1934 reasoning which cast the anointed JWs as the antitypical high priest whose death freed the manslayers in the cities of refuge and allowed them to return home. Now, these anointed are part of the manslayser class.
  
  *** w55 12/1 p. 722 par. 18 Avoidance Inside the Cities of Refuge ***
  But the ancient refuge cities were also “for the temporary resident and for the settler” in Israel.
  
  The Other Sheep are cast as the antitypical "temporary resident". Of course, the Bible speaks of the anointed children of God as "temporary residents", but now we're mixing our metaphors, err, antitypes. (1 Peter 1:1)

  • Reply by Phelps on 2017-10-20 11:11:58

    Hermano meleti. Una solicitud si es posible;no tengo ese índice de la watchtower de publicaciones tan antiguo...nunca me interesé en tenerlo;pero viendo que tu lo utilizas tanto me gustaría saber si lo puedes facilitar de alguna manera....Gracias

    • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-10-21 17:48:47

      You can download the historical watchtowers from this location: http://archive.org/download/WatchtowerLibrary/magazines/w/
      
      Puedes conseguir las atalayas antiguas de este sitio arriba.
      
      Here is more: http://archive.org/download/WatchtowerLibrary