Issue of universal sovereignty not settled until after 1000 year reign!


Viewed 2211 times

    M yadda yadda 2 posted Sun, 05 Oct 2008 10:10:00 GMT(10/5/2008)

    Post 191 of 2938
    Joined 4/22/2008

    The Watchtower Soc and others say that the Bible teaches that Jehovah is allowing time to pass so that evidence can build up to prove that man cannot live and govern himself independently of God. The argument is made that God has tolerated wickedness so that the evidence can gradually accumulate against Satan's claim that God's might does not necessarily give him the right to rule and that man can rule himself successfully without God's direct governance. When Armageddon breaks out, it is said that the evidence will be conclusive that man could not rule himself independently of God and the Devil's claims were false.

    The analogy is put forward that this drama is being played out like some great universal court case in heaven, with Judges sitting examing evidence being presented to assess the Devil's claims. (I think the Creation book in particular uses this illustration.)

    I think in many ways this is probably rather true in terms of what the Bible does actually teach, however, there is a logical problem with the Watchtower's version: Since Jehovah has never directly ruled over mankind, there is no evidence that his rule would be any better than man's independent rule since man rebelled right from the very start, in the Garden of Eden.

    In other words, there is no direct evidence yet that God's direct rule would work better because God hasn't yet done that (except arguably in a microcosm with the Nation of Israel in the ancient past!) At Armageddon there will only be evidence to show that man has failed to govern himself successfully on his own, not evidence that God's rule would be better!

    So, logically, this divine Universal Court could not possibly render it's decision until at least after the 1,000 year reign, by which time Jesus and the Kingdom would have been ruling for some time and evidence gathered to practically prove God's side of the issue.

    To put it bluntly, the issue of universal sovereignty cannot be said to have been settled until the 1,000 year reign of God's Kingdom has ended!

    Slappy posted Sun, 05 Oct 2008 18:58:00 GMT(10/5/2008)

    Post 80 of 163
    Joined 6/26/2008

    I think they err in their basic use of the word "rule". I think it's apparent that there is such a thing as free-will, at least that is how I perceive it. So if free-will exists, how can one 'rule' those who can and will do their own thing if they feel the desire to do so? 'Rule' no longer has any meaning.

    Also, I think they err in their initial assumption that God wants to 'govern' His creation. Going back to Genesis, it appears to me that there was no governing of any sort going on...just a relationship between a creation and his Creator.

    I do feel, however, that the time under the law, and before Grace, was to show us (not God) that we cannot attain that perfection that is necessary to allow us to have that relationship with Him, as was His original intent.

    Those are just a few of the WT assumptions that I feel are off base; it would take forever to expound on the rest. Of course, this is only me perception of the matter based on my understanding of what is said within the Bible. I am very much aware of the fact that I could be just as wrong.


    M stillajwexelder posted Sun, 05 Oct 2008 19:41:00 GMT(10/5/2008)

    Post 14971 of 16009
    Joined 2/24/2003

    I agree - after the 1000 years would make the most sense

    M V posted Sun, 05 Oct 2008 20:14:00 GMT(10/5/2008)

    Post 625 of 713
    Joined 5/29/2006

    yadda is correct! Let's see how Jehovah own prophecy proves a dismal approval rate according to JWs:

    Pre-flood: Humans are eating, drinking and marrying, only because of God's defecting angels is there violence on the earth.
    God's Response: Destroy all humans except for 8.

    Postflood: Human's first attempt at organised government, 'there is nothing that was impossible for them.'
    God's Response: Confuse their languages and scatter the people.

    Sodom and Gomorrah: Cities filled with evil humans with preverse practices, 'not 10 righteous men.'
    God's Response: Save only 4 people, wife of Lot killed for turning around, Lot and 2 daughters have druken incestouos orgy immediately after.

    Armageddon: Most of world population to be condemned to everlasting death, including 70 million babies born every year.
    God's Response: Save only about 7 million JWs, if that.

    End of 1,000 year reign: After resurrecting most of humans ever to die in history for a life perfect health and government, so many rebel against God that their number is 'greater than the sands of the sea.'
    God's Response: Save the minority, possibly the greatest slaughter ever.

    All to prove God has the right to rule? Sounds like a dictator culling the dissenters.

    M jwfacts posted Tue, 07 Oct 2008 04:24:00 GMT(10/7/2008)

    Post 4331 of 8024
    Joined 6/25/2005

    Interesting point.

    Another reason that the concept does not make sense is that men die. It is hardly a fair trial to compare how well Man can rule with how well God can rule, if God's rulership is when we are perfect and Man's rulership is when we are imperfect and die. In such conditions, man's rulership will always be imperfect and shortsighted as a result.

    M gymbob posted Tue, 07 Oct 2008 04:50:00 GMT(10/7/2008)

    Post 434 of 577
    Joined 6/29/2006

    Somebody should write the script and send it to would make a great movie! Gymbob

    sspo posted Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:45:00 GMT(10/7/2008)

    Post 1579 of 2352
    Joined 6/25/2006

    Jehovah is a very insecure God that needs to prove that he's better than others.

    He claims that he is complete and that does not need anyone to be a happy God but " if you don't worship me and serve me i'll kill you"

    A confident person and secure person does not need to prove anything.


      Confirm ...