Bookmark and Share

Viewed 1154 times

I have other sheep which are not of this fold

    Wayward Son posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:09:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 16 of 53
    Joined 12/23/2011

    John 10:16 - “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.

    Setting: Jesus was talking to a blind man he had recently cured and the Pharisees were listening in. It sounds like he had a larger audience that likely included his apostles.
    So, who is "this fold" he was referring to and who are the "other sheep"?
    According to WTS doctrine, the heavenly calling (covenant) had not been instituted yet. We don't hear about that until the last supper. So why would he be talking about an upper-class vs. lower-class of Christians just yet? And why would he be talking about it such a setting?
    Since Jesus was sent first to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mathew 15:21-28), and since they were his audience at the time he said these things, wouldn't it make sense that they were the "fold" being referenced? Wouldn't it make sense that the "other sheep" are just non-Jews?

    Nebeska Nada posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:19:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 126 of 166
    Joined 1/23/2011

    It totally makes sense, Son!

    TITO

    TimothyT posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:25:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 547 of 580
    Joined 2/23/2011

    Spot on!

    transhuman68 posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:42:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 1345 of 2368
    Joined 3/30/2010

    I started looking up references in the Gospels to sheep: and counting them, but I fell asleep. Sorry.

    This “quote” from Jesus is actually a paraphrasing of Ezekiel 34.

    The Gospel of John was written somewhere near the end of the 1st century, probably in Ephesus, in Roman Asia (modern-day Turkey); so the “other sheep” would indeed be the Gentiles- the locals, as well as Jews living in the diaspora.

    Wayward Son posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:16:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 17 of 53
    Joined 12/23/2011

    But this is so simple!

    I am was a good Jehovah's Witness. That means I aren't higherly educated. I ain't got no skills. But I was reading in John last night and came across this story and suddenly the "great crowd" explanation didn't fit in with the context of the "other sheep" comment.

    If a mere highschool graduate like me can see this, how could the spirit directed sons of God not catch it ?

    TimothyT posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:28:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 548 of 580
    Joined 2/23/2011

    When i came out of the organisation i started to read the bible just as it is. The gospels in particular are SO easy to read and to understand. I even picked up the book of Revelation a month ago, read it and got the jist of it. The reason why many JWs cannot see the simplicty of it all is because they are surrounded by and spoonfed the perspectives, slants, and opinions of several men in New York. The Good News is simple! Men complicate it!

    :)

    Amelia Ashton posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:52:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 485 of 1903
    Joined 11/2/2010

    When i came out of the organisation i started to read the bible just as it is.

    I hadn't come out, I moved countries so had no WT literature just a bible.

    I started to read it properly rather than just the WT cherry picked pre-determined key scriptures to back up their doctrines but I too saw the 2 flocks as being Jews and Gentiles.

    Fernando posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:53:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 363 of 3044
    Joined 9/21/2009

    Wayward Son!

    Simple and true only if God grants us faith (wide opening of our spiritual eyes).

    It seems there are also legal impediments to God granting such faith to those that are not open-minded and not openhearted - especially those that prefer spiritual intimacy with the "god of religion" (Satan the Devil who transforms himself into an angel of light and is the sponsor of all Watchtower aberration and abuse).

    M Qcmbr posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:12:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 2410 of 3331
    Joined 7/31/2004

    Maybe not since he was only sent to the House of Israel. What about the Israelites who were not Jews?

    transhuman68 posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:30:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 1346 of 2368
    Joined 3/30/2010
    Maybe not since he was only sent to the House of Israel. What about the Israelites who were not Jews?

    LOL, you could be right, too. Matthew & John were each written by different sects of Christianity- Matthew being pro-Jewish; and John being virtually Gnostic- so the application of meaning is probably different too.

    Refriedtruth posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:38:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 173 of 754
    Joined 5/5/2010

    That's it!

    The chapter is talking about the gentiles.Ray Franz in COC points this out and tells how at least one member of the GB said that it was "obvious Jesus was talking about the gentiles".

    When I first read COC 16 years ago it was the main thing that blew me away!

    Moreove....r Ray also went on to demolish the literal 144,000 figure as everything in Rev 7th chapter is symbolic and the WT takes it so except one thing the 144,000 figure they take out of context as literal.

    Sulla posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:00:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 366 of 1165
    Joined 6/2/2011

    Amazing to observe that you can't simply drop scripture on a drunken, lunatic, lawyer and come away with a coherent theology.

    designs posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:37:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 9303 of 18396
    Joined 6/17/2009

    'We never lost it'

    By all accounts within Judaism Jesus was not the Messiah.

    No Room For George posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:57:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 2165 of 1758
    Joined 4/25/2011

    It really is that simple too. There's nothing to debate, nothing to refute. Has the WT ever attempted to explain why the other sheep aren't simply, Gentiles? I mean there's plenty of articles reminding their audience of the special role the annointed have and how the other sheep's salvation is dependent upon their treatment of the former, particulary the slave class. However, I don't ever recall an article from the WT making the case that the other sheep weren't, Gentiles.

    Ding posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:57:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 3113 of 5015
    Joined 8/27/2010

    This thread illustrates the problem with the WTS' insistence that all non-WT Bible commentators must be avoided.

    It keeps the vast majority of JWs completely unaware of Bible interpretations that have been around for centuries.

    As a result, JWs spend years never even hearing non-WT ideas and are shocked when they discover those alternatives and realize that they make a lot more sense than the WT spin.

    dog is god posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:09:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 65 of 298
    Joined 12/31/2011

    Interesting to note neither Matthew, Mark, Luke or John had NOTHING to do with writing these books. They were long dead when these were written by anonymous writers. The names were given much, much later. Since these apostles were "unletterered and ordinary" who made a written record or the exact conversations? I submit....nobody. Just like who wrote the 1st five books of the Bible? Moses? I think not since all the stories there preexisted in other "pagan" myths such as the Epic of Gilgamesh.

    The borg is just another attempt at interpretation of the impossible...just like the Catholic Church.

    pirata posted Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:24:00 GMT(2/27/2012)

    Post 1544 of 1419
    Joined 12/31/2009

    Has the WT ever attempted to explain why the other sheep aren't simply, Gentiles?

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/196282/1/THE-OTHER-SHEEP-ARE-NOT-GENTILE-CHRISTIANS-because

    Disillusioned Lost-Lamb posted Tue, 28 Feb 2012 20:47:00 GMT(2/28/2012)

    Post 76 of 1171
    Joined 2/3/2012

    @ dog id god: So true, I made a comment on another thread about the tower of Babel. I questioned the unified message of the bible because there are so many holes in the modern version. Part of that post read:

    This leads me to ask: When the Catholic Church assembled the Bible cannon, why did they choose the books we know today? What other inspired writings were there? What else were they considering? Where did those writings go? Why weren’t they included?

    What is modern Christianity trying to hide!?

    No Room For George posted Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:11:00 GMT(2/28/2012)

    Post 2190 of 1758
    Joined 4/25/2011

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/196282/1/THE-OTHER-SHEEP-ARE-NOT-GENTILE-CHRISTIANS-because

    Thank you, Pirata!!!!

    M sir82 posted Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:41:00 GMT(2/28/2012)

    Post 6021 of 8734
    Joined 5/17/2005

    Brother Wayward, clearly you are running ahead of Jehovah's almighty celestial chariot.

    I think you have pride issues as well.

    And I notice your field service time has dipped below double digits.

    You have time to meet with a couple of elders after the meeting tonight, don't you? Just a friendly chat.....

      Close

      Confirm ...