WT last week 'This Generation"

Advertisement

Viewed 1192 times

    bobld posted Sun, 27 Apr 2008 07:21:00 GMT(4/27/2008)

    Post 269 of 935
    Joined 11/2/2006

    I have a question for Leolaia.You did an excellent review of last weeks WT study article I appreciated it Q13/14. In the paragragh ""As a class,these anointed ones make up the modern-day "generation" of comtemporaries that will not pass away "until all these things occur" "" see footnote.

    My question...if the anointed.ie 144,000 make up a generation of comtemporaries. Would they not be part of a generation say in the 1st century,the 5th century,10th century.15th century 18th century,19th century(1914) providing the proper food at the proper time.If that is so than how can the GB say this generation(anointed ones)will not pass away and that we are living "in the conclusion of the system of things"? True they will say look at the signs in Matt.,Luke, world events etc since 1914.Explain,"This suggests that some who are Christ's anointed brothers will still be alive on earth when the foretold great tribulation begins." All over 100 years old,so they should be walking off the stage by now (gehenna).

    THE END

    Bob

    M Aleman posted Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:09:00 GMT(4/28/2008)

    Post 221 of 262
    Joined 10/30/2007

    Actually, there are still some of the 144,000 still alive so the generation is still alive with them.

    -Aleman

    M Hellrider posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 01:44:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 2166 of 2102
    Joined 6/26/2005

    Not to mention that this nullifies all the supposed significance of the year 1914. If the "generation" started in 33 AD, and Jesus said "this generation will not pass away until bla bla bla", then what the heck is the deal with 1914 anymore? That year is so tied to the "generation" that when the generation isn`t a literal generation anymore (or at least a "generation" starting that year!), that year doesn`t mean a thing.

    Leolaia posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 02:33:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 11446 of 16234
    Joined 9/1/2002

    The old pre-1995 teaching had a definite start-date for the generation, i.e. 1914 (or those at a certain age in 1914). It was the end-date that was indefinite but bound by the usual limits of a generation. Then in 1995, the generation was redefined as "the peoples of earth who see the sign of Christ’s presence but fail to mend their ways". The "sign of Christ's presence" was still believed to have started in 1914, but the new interpretation allowed the generation to continue indefinitely, as the whole period between 1914 and Armageddon was held to manifest the evidence of the "sign of Christ's presence". The Society denied that "Armageddon is further away than we had thought", but in fact that is how things ended up by the course of events, as the older teaching once construed the end coming no later than the 1970s, or no later than the end of the 20th century. The new interpretation only defined the generation as those alive during Christ's presence and at Armageddon. Although the endpoint was unknown, the generation was defined more by its endpoint than its startpoint (other than the fact that the generation dates after 1914, which is true for almost everyone alive today).

    Then in 2008 the Society redefined the generation again, claiming that it is composed of those "anointed ones [who] make up the modern-day 'generation' of contemporaries that will not pass away 'until all these things occur' ". The inclusion of the word "modern-day" would seem to prevent one from regarding the "generation" in a non-literal sense as all the anointed throughout history. These are all contemporaries "living at a particular time", like any other generation. The Society probably still maintains that the generation is set within the period of Christ's presence after 1914, but there is no startdate at all -- as indicated by the fact that the article makes a special point that the generation of Joseph included those born before him and those born after him. This vagueness would allow the understanding of the generation to keep up with the times as 1914 recedes further and further into the past. The generation seems to defined rather by the endpoint, such that the promise about "this generation" not passing away "suggests that some who are Christ's anointed brothers will still be alive on earth when the foretold great tribulation begins". Although the Society claims that the generation of anointed contemporaries is presently in existence on the earth (on account of Armageddon being sooooo close), they could technically claim the same 100 years from now with respect to the "anointed" still alive in that day. Rather, it is when the great tribulation begins (and then subsequently Armgeddon) that the generation would clearly be defined as the one that witnesses both the "sign of Christ's presence" that has been in effect since 1914 and the final events of this system of things.

    My 2 cents, as usual. :)

    M Hellrider posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:07:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 2167 of 2102
    Joined 6/26/2005

    So basically, the 1914-date is based solely on "the signs of Christs presence" (war, earthquakes, famine etc.). Nothing else! And that`s just not enough, because people live longer and are more healthy than ever before. Earthquakes are no more frequent now than they were in the past (although it takes a bit of knowledge to explain why this is, to a jw), and there hasn`t been a war like the world war in 60 years. The only places with famines, are in Africa, and that`s not anything new, it was like that in the 19th century too, we just didn`t hear about it back then. You can show a JW that there has been other periods in mans existence that were much, much worse than the period 1914-2008 (like the entire 14th century, in which 2/3 of the European population died from the plague and all the disasters that followed). And if we get a relatively peaceful period soon...I don`t know how they are supposed to keep up the "urgency". The "signs" just isn`t enough. I can`t believe that the jws can`t see this.

    M cyberguy posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:21:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 687 of 688
    Joined 8/5/2001

    I believe this generation change was done to cover the difficulty they were getting into with the 1935 cut-off date, whereby anyone added after that date would be replacements for unfaithful “anointed.” This change, therefore, allows additional new ones to the 14400 roster, since the complete number of “anointed” is added progressively until the great tribulation. Otherwise, they would have to admit that tens of thousands of “anointed” were unfaithful from 1935 onward to justify all the new memorial partakers each year. Finally, by attaching the generation to the “anointed” as a class, they justify the authority of the “anointed” (as represented by the mystical “slave class” and GB), because all the new GB members were born after 1935!

    Leolaia posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:30:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 11452 of 16234
    Joined 9/1/2002
    Finally, by attaching the generation to the “anointed” as a class, they justify the authority of the “anointed” (as represented by the mystical “slave class” and GB), because all the new GB members were born after 1935!

    A ha!! That makes a lot of sense.

    There will still be a problem with 1935 when the time comes for those identified by Rutherford as members of the "great crowd" pass away. That year is still held as significant as when the "great crowd" was identified, when in fact the facts of history would eventually reveal that none of them were part of the "great crowd" after all. I wonder how they will get out of that one.

    M TD posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:41:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 1710 of 4793
    Joined 5/14/2001

    Leolaia

    There will still be a problem with 1935 when the time comes for those identified by Rutherford as members of the "great crowd" pass away. That year is still held as significant as when the "great crowd" was identified, when in fact the facts of history would eventually reveal that none of them were part of the "great crowd" after all. I wonder how they will get out of that one.

    Yeah. They've gushed over this and called it a bright flash of light more times than I can remember. Problem is, this was over 70 years ago and those people that stood up were already adults at the time. I had a relative who remembered that convention. This individual was born in 1896 and passed away thirty years ago. (Would be 112 this year if still alive....)

    M oompa posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:51:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 2781 of 7147
    Joined 8/15/2007

    tag.........oompa

    Leolaia posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:53:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 11454 of 16234
    Joined 9/1/2002

    My attention was just drawn to this excellent essay on the problem with the "great crowd":

    http://nicodemusjw.blogspot.com/2007/10/note-for-historical-context-below-essay.html

    M neverendingjourney posted Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:55:00 GMT(4/29/2008)

    Post 486 of 1128
    Joined 1/29/2007

    That's an interesting point, Leolaia. The great crowd is supposed to survive Armageddon without ever dying, but eventually all those people Rutherford identified in 1935 are all going to be dead, long after Rutherford made all of those without a "heavenly hope" stand up during a convention talk, pointed to them and made the famous announcement "Look, the great crowd!" They're all going to be dead and not one of them will have formed part of the great crowd that enters the new system without ever dying. What an embarrassment!

    But, as with many other JW mistakes in pronouncements of doctrine and prophecy, this point will be buried in the graveyard of history. Those who ask about it will be dismissed. JWs will point to new light and a readjustment of the flock. The gaff will be irrelevant to them.

    This reminds me of a story Ray Franz shared in Crisis of Conscience. Ray remembered an assembly when he was a young man where Rutherford made the kids in attendance sit right in front of the platform. The WT was releasing a book for kids (I think the book was entitled "Children"). If I remember correctly, in that talk Rutherford stressed that they should not try to seek to get married because the end was really near. They should instead devote themselves to the kingdom work. Ray followed that advice for many years until the society stopped emphasizing celibacy many years later. Ray Franz is now an old man in his 80s. Any of the kids who might have followed Rutherford's advice are now elderly men. But this too has been forgotten by today's JWs. If this point is brought up to any current JW, it will be dismissed as irrelevant. It has been superseded by new light, so who cares. Rutherford's great crowd identification gaffe will likewise become a distant, irrelevant memory.

    The FDS is God's channel. We can't think for ourselves because we're flawed humans. Our thoughts are easily corrupted. We must follow the dictates of the FDS regardless of how illogical they may seem to us. Remember, we're imperfect, but they're directed by God. As Abraham followed God's instructions up to the point of nearly sacrificing his own son, we too shall follow the FDS regardless of how illogical their mandates may be.

    As long as this attitude persists among JWs, none of the holes in JW doctrines will matter to current JWs.

    JCanon posted Wed, 30 Apr 2008 07:23:00 GMT(4/30/2008)

    Post 3322 of 1335
    Joined 3/7/2001

    Just for the record, the GB was "disfellowshipped" by Jehovah on November 10, 1992. Fred Franz died on December 23, 1992, just 2 days before the second coming. So they are supposed to be CLUELESS and a barren wasteland with no green grass of truth at this time. This applies to their understanding of the "generation" and what to expect during this generation to fulfill Jesus' words. So here are the "errors" corrected, so that ultimately some don't think Jesus' words failed just because the WTS has the wrong understanding.

    1. First of all the "end of the system of things" mentioned in Matthew 24 is not Armageddon or the end of the world. He was talking to Jews under gentile rule and that was the "system of things" they looked forward to ending. They understood when the gentile times ended and the new, independent nation of of Israel was reestablished (i.e. the rebudding of the fig tree) that Christ would be "near at the doors." So there was an association between the "end of the system of things" and the second coming. The second coming would arrive very shortly after the end of the system of things, that is, the end of the gentile times. So the WTS does not understand the "end of the system of things" is not Armageddon.

    2. The WTS thinks the "great tribulation" is also connected with Armageddon. But it is not. The "end of the system of things" indeed follows on the heels of the "great tribulation" but this great tribulation is clearly a local event, not global. And women without small children could escape it by fleeing into the mountains. This "great tribulation" was a major "sign" though leading up to the second coming. It is clear in the Bible that it is completely over before the "sign of the son of man" appears, indicating the messiah had been born. "Immediately after the tribulation of those days..." Again, the WTS is clueless! How can they explain Armageddon comes first and is over before Jesus arrives? They can't. They don't understand. Thus the "great tribulation" that Matthew is discussing was actually the HOLOCAUST and WWII.

    3. The "generation" reference that Jesus is thus noting is saying that from the first sign, which is a world war until the appearance of the "sign of the son of man" there would just be one generation. Included in this generation would be the "great tribulation" where 2/3rds of the Jews would be exterminated (Zech 13:8) but also it would see the reestablishment of the State of Israel within that generation as well as the birth of the messiah after which the "sign of the son of man" would begin to appear to the selected anointed ones ("eagles"). The "end" occurred thus in 1947. The new State of Israel occurred in the Spring of 1948. This was an indication that Christ was "near at the doors." The messiah was born in early 1950. So a "generation" can be understood in its most direct reference, that is a generation like that generation in Moses' day after the Exodus of just 40 years. That would be the primary reference in the mind of Jews to a "generation": 40 years. And that concept of the 40-year generation indeed was fulfilled with "all these things" occurring within that generation, including the preaching of the "good news before the end comes" in 1947.

    So in conclusion the WTS' problems figuring out the generation and the great tribulation and the end of the system of things is their own problem complicated by their being in spiritual darkness and unable to see. It is not a problem for Jesus and the Bible, however, in being fulfilled. There is no need to try to find a means to stretch that generation past 40 years from 1914-1994 in order to fulfill that. And indeed, the "sign of the son of man" has been appearing to the anointed "eagles" so this is real.

    The WTS will never understand the "last generation" because they don't understand the "great tribulation" (Holocaust) or the "end of the system of things" (end of gentile times in 1947, not Armageddon). They are clueless and totally in spiritual darkness and only speak from a barren spiritual wasteland. In the meantime, the truth is known to the "eagles", the JIOR, who are the faithful anointed ones and the "wise virgins."

    JC

    JCanon posted Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:09:00 GMT(4/30/2008)

    Post 3324 of 1335
    Joined 3/7/2001

    It has also just occurred to me that this recent change might be reflective of the inevitable demise of the current NB timeline. RC14 dating from Rehov and clearly revisions by Xenophon will only take a matter of time before it affects ancient history dating. Anticipating this inevitability and their focus on 1914, this "generation" revision may be a smoke screen to simply detach significance to 1914. Thus, 1914 will fall softer if it ends up getting revised when secular history finally comes to terms with the Persian Period revision issues.

    I wonder what explanations they will come up with for a 1992 second coming, besides it invisibly occurring. Or maybe they will chuck the 2520-year prophecy all together?

    JC

    M Aleman posted Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:33:00 GMT(4/30/2008)

    Post 237 of 262
    Joined 10/30/2007

    As usual, Leolaia is right. The people of 1914 may be in homes but they are still alive.

    -Aleman

      Close

      Confirm ...