I don't necessarily agree that all sins should be disclosed publicly in the congregation but they should definitely be communicated to the authorities if needed... (1 Peter 2:13, 14) . . .For the Lord’s sake subject yourselves to every human creation, whether to a king as being superior or to governors as sent by him to punish wrongdoers but to praise those who do good. (Romans 13:3-7) . . .For those rulers are an object of fear, not to the good deed, but to the bad. Do you want to be free of fear of the authority? Keep doing good, and you will have praise from it; for it is God’s minister to you for your good. But if you are doing what is bad, be in fear, for it is not without purpose that it bears the sword. It is God’s minister, an avenger to express wrath against the one practicing what is bad. There is therefore compelling reason for you to be in subjection, not only on account of that wrath but also on account of your conscience. That is why you are also paying taxes; for they are God’s public servants constantly serving this very purpose. Render to all their dues: to the one who calls for the tax, the tax; to the one who calls for the tribute, the tribute; to the one who calls for fear, such fear; to the one who calls for honor, such honor.
Utuna, what do you say about the following scriptures?: 1 Timothy 5:20 Reprove before all onlookers persons who practice sin, that the rest also may have fear. And James 5:16 Therefore openly confess YOUR sins to one another and pray for one another, that YOU may get healed. A righteous man’s supplication, when it is at work, has much force.
Hi Jan: The Bible, I don't think recommends that course. Although on the surface it may sound like a good idea, on further inspection it may do more harm than good. In James 5 the sinner is clearly encouraged to go before the older men in the congregation, not the congregation as a whole. It is difficult enough for some to even do this our of their fear and shame. To expect everyone to expose their wrongdoing before the whole congregation would be counterproductive. Now if you chose that course, then that is your prerogative, but I don't think it is a "requirement" of all Christians. Is there anyone sick among you? Let him call the elders+ of the congregation to him, and let them pray over him, applying oil to him+ in the name of Jehovah.* 15 And the prayer of faith will make the sick one* well, and Jehovah* will raise him up. [HR][/HR] James 5:14,15 I admit I could be wrong, but I think what reproving before all onlookers means that if the sin is of an already public nature that all those who have seen or heard of the sinful act should come and hear the reproof of the sinner. JW's have chosen mostly to accomplish this through the local needs parts in the Service Meeting. A talk is given laying the basis for sin and the consequences to the sinner and anyone who might join in the offending behavior. In this way the sinner is reproved, all those that are party to the sin as well as "onlookers" learn what God's Word says on the matter. In this way the sinner is reproved and onlookers as well as the rest of the congregation get a reminder of the consequences of this sin. Make sense? The point is, you don't want to cause so much fear in sinners that they don't come forward on their own. That is the best way, to make it easier for sinners to overcome their fear and shame and come forward and be "healed". You must read the scriptures you cited in James 5 in the context that it was given. frank
Hej Jan, You may "reprove" someone before all without having to disclose the reason of the reproval. The sinners who are "reproved" generally lose their "privileges" in the congregation, such as the right to give talks or make comments. The b/s notice what happens. In the end and as time goes by, people get to know what happened, we're all humans and we're not stupid. At times, an elder says from the platform that so-and-so was given a blame, without disclosing why. When a person is marked, a talk is given in relation to the sin or to the negative reaction observed and "reproved". As for James, there are sins that I would never ever disclose, excepted to trusted and mature individuals. I don't throw my innermost feelings and thoughts to swine : “Do not give what is holy to dogs nor throw your pearls before swine, so that they may never trample them under their feet and turn around and rip you open." - Mat. 7:6 I do love my brothers and sisters but there are some of them who will definitely need 1 000 years to reach perfection... I read this once : "Throughout his teaching, Jesus talked about the good ones and the bad ones. But what about those who are merely stupid ?"
Hi Tsaphah: For the sons of Israel had walked forty years in the wilderness, until all the nation of the men of war who came out of Egypt that did not listen to the voice of Jehovah had come to its finish, to whom Jehovah swore that he would never let them see the land that Jehovah had sworn to their forefathers to give to us, a land flowing with milk and honey. Joshua 5:6 When a person writing in Hebrew writes that all did something or another, they do not necessarily mean all as in "100%", but I am under the impression that the Hebrew language does not have a way to say "with the exception of" when saying "all". So, you have to get from the context the exact meaning of "all". So it was everyone, except Joshua and Caleb who don't come under the saying, "that did not listen to the voice of Jehovah". So in this context we can see that all of the men 20 years and older expired "except those that "did" listen to Jehovah's voice", which of course would mean Joshua and Caleb. I agree with your basic premise though that "Robert is not always right". frank
Utuna, What about Jesus' words when he says to tell your offender's sins to the congregation, if he has not responded to the 2 previous steps? “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. 17 If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector. Let me provide additional examples of publicly confessing sins. Here it is: Matthew 3:5 Then Jerusalem and all Ju·de′a and all the country around the Jordan made their way out to him, 6 and people were baptized by him in the Jordan River, openly confessing their sins. I think a person that is truly repentant and humble is able to confess to the congregation his wrongdoing and ask for forgiveness. It is also good so that it will be obvious to everybody what kind of dangers there can be in the congregation. It is good to know who has for example been a rapist, pedophile, defrauder, adulterer, homosexual, murderer etc. Once a new brother in my congregation said he wants to confess to us (we were a few brothers gathered privately) that he had been a serial rapist in the world. I thought that was well done, and I could take that to account. But it did not prevent me to let him together with his wife and two children live in my apartment together with my family, when they where in need. I told my wife what he had confessed to us. That he confessed his previous sins surely helped him personally to avoid to fall to old sins.
Brother Utuna, but to me it seems the great crowd will come out of the tribulation quite righteous according to Revelation 7 : “These who are dressed in the white robes, who are they and where did they come from?†14 So right away I said to him: “My lord, you are the one that knows.†And he said to me: “These are the ones that come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 15 That is why they are before the throne of God; and they are rendering him sacred service day and night in his temple;
Hi Jan: I think that I have already related to you in a PM that this was one of the reasons why I decided to disassociate myself from Jehovah's Witnesses, for the way they handled or "miss handled" the pedophile issue. So, I don't take this situation lightly, but I think that if the situation were handled correctly in the first place, it would not be necessary for the congregation to "out" the pedophiles and violate the confidentiality that is established and so very necessary in the congregation for the rank and file Christians. The brothers in the congregations (for the most part that is, there are exceptions) are not equipped to effectively deal with this situation. And in a way they are "hamstrung" by principles in the Bible, like the two witnesses principle. They would be far better off in turning the investigation over to the legal authorities who can truly get to the bottom of the issue and are not limited by Christian principles. And if a person were found guilty of pedophilia, they would already be "outed" by the police and the media etc, etc. . Now, just like in everything mistakes do happen and innocent people could get convicted of something that they did not do. But I would personally rather be wrongly convicted of pedophilia than for true pedophiles to continue to get away with their awful behavior because the "brothers" are so ill equipped to handle this. I have sat on judicial committees trying pedophilia cases, and I can tell you it is no cake walk and pedophiles are true sons and daughters of Satan. No matter what impression they give, they are not Christians in any way. They just use the Christian identity so they can have access to their prey. Now the serpent+ was the most cautious* of all the wild animals of the field that Jehovah God had made. So it said to the woman: “Did God really say that you must not eat from every tree of the garden?†This is from Genesis 1 and I don't know why the NWT translates the word "cautious", when the footnote says that it means “shrewdest; craftiest.†These words would better fit the context of Genesis 3 and they would help us appreciate that pedophiles, like their Father Satan are also the “shrewdest; craftiest.†Pedophiles are masters at hiding their craft and are master manipulators. Both to their prey, the children and also to anyone who is tasked to catch them in their crime. The brothers in the congregations for the most part are not up to such a task, they are way outmatched by the shrewdness of the Pedophiles coupled with the fact that we are to love our "brothers" and one part of true love is to "believe all things". That is how they get away with this behavior for such long stretches of time. They know that it is the tendency for the brothers to believe them even when they are lying through their teeth. And we for the most part don't want to think that our "brothers" could do such an awful thing. I can't speak for others but that was the main reason why I was not recommended as an Elder when my wife and I moved to the Spanish speaking congregation that we were in. I told the brothers on my body of Elders that I would not stay silent as the Watchtower Society recommended in their correspondence to Elder bodies ( I read all the letters in our congregations files from the Society to our body of Elders on how to deal with the pedophile issue, so I know what they wrote even if they now deny writing it) I told them that if there was a pedophile in the congregation that I would warn the parents of young children to be on guard. I may not have explicitly "outed" the pedophile by name (in the far chance that they were not guilty) but I would make sure parents knew that their children were at risk. At the time I didn't care that I was not recommended as an Elder because I was busy trying to learn a foreign language and was not really in a position to really be an Elder anyway. In time, when my language skills improved I would have been. So, if you are thinking that this was why I left JW's, it was not in any way involved. I think the pedophile issue should be an issue for the "superior authorities" and if the Society would deal with them in that way, they would have much less of a problem on their hands. The pedophiles would look for greener pastures. The way it is currently though, there are no greener pastures. I think from my knowledge and understanding of the issue (per capita wise) JW's have a greater problem with pedophiles than even the Catholic Church. At least the Catholic Church is making an attempt to purge the pedophiles from their organization. They are fleeing the Catholic Church and coming to the "greener pastures" of the Watchtower Society. I would "out" them by getting the police and other social agencies involved. frank
Hi Jan: By being baptised, they were in effect saying publicly "I am a sinner, and I want to be made clean of my sins". They did not present themselves before John and then in a loud voice publicly reveal every detail of every sin that they have ever committed. The point was that they recognized themselves as "sinners" no matter what those sins included. frank
Hi Francis, Sorry, I had the wrong book that I listed. It should be Nu 14:30-31. “You shall certainly not come into the land which I lifted up My hand to cause you to live in it, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun. As for your infants, of whom you have said, They shall be a prey, I shall bring them in, and they shall know the land which you have rejected.†(Nu 14:30-31 LITV) The Hebrew word used here is kiy [kee], and with this context means except.
for all we know the watchtower society did have its message and dates correct! Jehovah may have shown mercy to the world since so many did repent! remember the days oh Jonah? 40 days until Nineveh is destroyed!! but people listened and repented and Jehovah put of destruction for 200 years!
Hi JIG: The purpose of my question about when the beginning of "the world" was has a lot to do with the end of the current system of things that certainly was not 1975. How did the Watchtower Society calculate the end of the system in 1975? Simply they took their calculation as to when Adam was "created" and they added 6,000 years to it and came up with 1975. The equation would be 4026 BCE (calculation of Adam's creation) plus 6,000 of Satan's part of the system would give us an answer of 1975, taking into consideration that there was no year zero. So we would actually come out with 1976 if we added 6,000 to -4026, but if we deduct 1 year since there is no year zero, we end up with 1975. Why did this not work out? Where is the flaw or flaws in the calculation. It was a pretty good try, even though it ended up being wrong. How could the calculation be improved? Should the 6,000 years of Satan's rulership over mankind begun at Adam's creation, or at some other time? frank
Your asking the wrong question, you want to know when Eve was created, for it was after that the seventh day of creation/or rest day began.
Hi Joshua: That was basically the Watchtower's explanation, oops we should have calculated it from when Eve was "created", made. That's not it either! Is that when the "world" began? Or was it at some other point? frank
The ultimate point is you want to know the length of the seventh day, that will give you an idea of when the end will come, it works like this; We know Eve was the last creation as it pertains to the earth, and after she was created Jehovah rested. Now Jehovah's purpose will still be accomplished before the end of that rest day. We know we're close to the end which means 6000 years have past before 1975 when Adam was created. Now Eve wasn't created right away, so while Adam was naming the animals it was still the 6th day. Once Eve was created then the 7th began. We know Adam and Eve sinned thereafter. So the understand about 1975 should be that Adam was at least 40 before Eve was created and the 7th day began. Now given there is a 1000 year rule ahead that means each creative day was 7000 years long. We don't know how long into the 7th they sinned but it doesn't matter, the 7th day still ends and begins on it's own day. How ever old Adam was when Eve was created will give you an idea where we are as it pertains to the end of this system. Your just asking the wrong question, when the "world began" is irreverent and open to interpretation based on personal understanding of what the "world" is. The right question as it pertains to our day is when was Eve created.
Hi Joshua: How old was the last Adam when he got his "Eve"? You see before Adam sinned he was the First Jesus so to speak in relation to Jesus being the last Adam. If Jesus equals Adam then Adam equals Jesus. So, again how old was Jesus when he got his wife, or more accurately started getting his wife? frank
Over 2000 years old and counting. You see, the marriage hasn't taken place yet, it is still future. Now as far as "starting to get his wife" (as you ask) I'm not really sure what your getting at. He was about 30 when baptized. Three and a half years later he was killed. Holy spirit was poured out on the 120 at Pentecost. Cornelius was baptized about 36CE. I would say he started gathering his bride when Andrew the brother of Peter started following Jesus.
Hi Joshua: The answer is in your rambling response. Look at the scriptures and you will see that it was Peter, Andrews brother who was the first member of Christ's Bride. How old was Jesus? Would it be a big stretch of the imagination to figure that since Jesus equals Adam and Adam equals Jesus that Adam may have and probably was the same age as Jesus at this point in both their lives. And since Jesus died faithful at the age of 33.5 then Adam probably was 33.5 when he died due to unfaithfulness. Not everything is spelled out in plain language in the Bible, but the answers are there if you look hard enough and the Holy Spirit guides you. frank frank
The "rambling" as you called it was an attempt at shooting many arrows in the dark attempting to hit some kind of target that your alluding to like some kind of hide and seek game. With all do respect, you are mistaken Sir, Andrew and a companion of his were the first disciples of Christ, Andrew later went and told Peter about Christ. If this is the case Frank (even though there is no proof) and that Adam was 33.5 years old when he sinned, that would mean that Eve would have been created before then. Now let's say 1975 was 6000 years since Adam was created, that would mean we are 7 years into the 1000 year reign of Christ. Then that 1000 years is looking less and less like a 1000 years every year. Even if the end were to occur right now, that would mean there would be 993 years of Christs reign in the new world, and that's saying if the end occurred right now. First off, let me give you a helping hand for a minute here. You are saying that the day Adam sinned should equal the day Christ died. You say this by implying that Adam "died due to unfaithfulness". Frank, that right there is how you get off track in prophecy so many times. That is nothing more then a personal interpretation, and I say this in this way in hopes that you will sit back and think about this seriously. What does Adam sinning have anything to do with Christ dying perfect? Besides the fact that your interpretation of Adam dying the moment he sinned in a metaphorical way comes from no where in scripture. Gen 2:17 says in the day he eats of the fruit he will die. This is to denote the fact that from that moment on Adam would begin to die physically. If you take away the physical nature of the statement and make it a metaphor, then Adam would never have been told he would die physically, and more importantly Adam could not have understood that he would die as to unfaithfulness because before eating the tree of knowledge of good and bad he would not have any concept of sin. Adam would have however had knowledge of physical death observing the animals. Sorry friend, but that's a dead end...