September broadcast

[train]

For those who think that the only way the Kingdom Songs should be played is by an orchestra - or that style - this program should open their eyes

Was glad to see this too - I have family that doesn't think some of the videos I've sent of "unusual" versions were appropriate.

Check YouTube for Tak Fujiwara.

[timpin]

Generation, Mennonite, Music/WBBR, Single

[Friends just call me Ross]

These monthly reminders of how blessed we truly are

to belong to such a LOVING worldwide brotherhood

can't help but make you smile.   

 

Puts a smile on your face--and keeps it in place.  

 

 

"Who is like Jehovah our God...?"  --Psalm 113:5

 

[AH173]

It was beautiful!

[Stormswift]

I wish the FDS could see this thread, a small token of how much it is appreciated.

[Qapla]

Was glad to see this too - I have family that doesn't think some of the videos I've sent of "unusual" versions were appropriate.

Check YouTube for Tak Fujiwara.

 

He is one of my favorite - I do wonder if he ever got baptized, I know he stated on one post that he planned to.

 

He can sure play that guitar!

Edited September 7, 2015 by Qapla

[Tortuga]

No!

This 'beard" thing is so contagious!      

[richietj77]

Interesting thing I noted:
At first nor English or Spanish was available, so I decided to play Albanian. Granted, some of the interviews and sections were in Albanian, but the thing that surprised me was to hear the song "Just a smile", not subtitled, instead, it was sung in Albanian! In Spanish, it is in English with Spanish subtitles.

It's not easy to translate an article, and a song it's a challenge. Rhymes, rithm, everything. That's why I see the songs on the Monthly Program subtitled. I pray that sometime in the future we could hear these songs in our language.

[mserskine]

If anyone wants to know, it's now on JW Broadcasting.

 

http://tv.jw.org/#video/VODStudio/pub-jwb_201509_1_VIDEO

[ArthurW]

the song "Just a smile", not subtitled, instead, it was sung in Albanian! In Spanish, it is in English with Spanish subtitles. It's not easy to translate an article, and a song it's a challenge. Rhymes, rithm, everything.

 

In Romanian it's also subtitled. However, the lyrics of the songs are translated as lyrics, so it matches the measure and the rhythm to the English, and it rhymes too.

[sunshine]

I appreciated Bro Splane's explanation of the generation.

First group "this generation" = those who were anointed in 1914 see the sign and understand it's meaning. (ex Fred Franz, Bro Rutherford). "Second group": anoitned contemporaries of those in the first group.

 

I must admit I'd never thought of the first group extending to the 90's (... I understand bro Franz did live an extraordinarily long time and was just given as an example) but I didn't think that the younger members of the governing body (such as brother Sanderson) as part of the second group of "this generation"...

Edited September 8, 2015 by sunshine

[timpin]

I appreciated Bro Splane's explanation of the generation.

First group "this generation" = those who were anointed in 1914 see the sign and understand it's meaning. (ex Fred Franz, Bro Rutherford). "Second group": anoitned contemporaries of those in the first group.

 

I must admit I'd never thought of the first group extending to the 90's (... I understand bro Franz did live an extraordinarily long time and was just given as an example) but I didn't think that the younger members of the governing body (such as brother Sanderson) as part of the second group of "this generation"...

 

Shawn, Jerry & others had a nice graph in another Generation thread to help us understand too    ...    this explanation seems to clarify that someone anointed [not just GB] just before Bro. Franz died in '92 could also be part of "this Generation" (overlap must be greater than 23 years ago) am I correct in this understanding?

Edited September 8, 2015 by timpin

[ArthurW]

Yes, Tim. To be in the second group one must have been anointed before the last one of the first group passed away. First group = anointed who were at hand in 1914 to understand the significance of the sign of the last days to have the spiritual discernment of the reality.

[trottigy]

Shawn, Jerry & others had a nice graph in another Generation thread to help us understand too    ...    this explanation seems to clarify that someone anointed [not just GB] just before Bro. Franz died in '92 could also be part of "this Generation" (overlap must be greater than 23 years ago) am I correct in this understanding?

 

This one:

 

 

I bumped that topic back up in the "Research" forum -> http://jwtalk.net/forums/topic/5233-how-long-till-the-great-tribulation-and-armageddon/page-17

 

The "overlap" is the time group 2 was anointed while group 1 is still alive. Using Bro Franz as a group 1 example - the number of years BEFORE 1992 that a person was anointed.

 

23 years is the number of years from today back to 1992 - that is not the overlap, but it does give a great point. A person would have to have been anointed BEFORE group 1 was gone and so would need to be anointed for at least 23 years - if not MORE years (as those "more years" are the overlap years) - again if we are using Bro Franz as our extreme example of group 1.

 

Anyone NOT anointed that long would NOT be part of "this generation". They would still be anointed, just not part of this prophecy in Matt. 

[well]

I have not yet seen it... But, I heard this month has some parts about Indonesia and singleness? Is it so? Sounds exciting!

[Araujo JW]

I appreciated Bro Splane's explanation of the generation.

First group "this generation" = those who were anointed in 1914 see the sign and understand it's meaning. (ex Fred Franz, Bro Rutherford). "Second group": anoitned contemporaries of those in the first group.

 

I must admit I'd never thought of the first group extending to the 90's (... I understand bro Franz did live an extraordinarily long time and was just given as an example) but I didn't think that the younger members of the governing body (such as brother Sanderson) as part of the second group of "this generation"...

 

 

outwalkin, on 01 Sept 2015 - 2:36 PM, said:

Do we know when Bro. Sanderson was anointed?

 

Officially, nothing has been printed.

 

Unofficially, he was born in 1965, baptized in 1975, anointed in 1983.

http://jwtalk.net/forums/topic/22622-gods-kingdom-rules-book/page-2#entry327105post # 21

[cautionjump]

I watched through the talk a few times and came out a bit more confused... Is the biblical definition of generation different then on common English? I can see be considered of the same generation as my siblings as the scripture pointed out, but our current underatabding says that I am of the same generation as my great grand father, yet if someone is born ten minutes after I die they are of a different generation...

[sunshine]

re: Bro Sanderson,

His example struck me because I was born the same year as him, he woulld have been in his early 20's in the early 90's (like me) certainly old enough to be anointed and part of the "second group". Br. Splane pointed out that some of the second group are "getting on in years" certainly many are much older than Br. Sanderson, but evidently some can be in their late 40's early 50's ...

(I'm making myself feel quite old with this post)

[sunshine]

I watched through the talk a few times and came out a bit more confused... Is the biblical definition of generation different then on common English? I can see be considered of the same generation as my siblings as the scripture pointed out, but our current underatabding says that I am of the same generation as my great grand father, yet if someone is born ten minutes after I die they are of a different generation...

I think that the word "generation" in a secular sense can have many meanings but usually means 'a lifespan'... in any case biblically we are looking at it as a group AND it's contemporaries (those alive at the same time) that witnesse and understand a particular event. For Mat 24:34 you couldn't be the same "group" as your great great grandfather but if he lived for say 100 years like bro Franz, (and everybody in your family fathered children at 13) I suppose you could technically be part of the "second group"

[scholar JW]

I was rather disappointed in the explanation of 'this generation' by David Splane  in the September Broadcasting. He really explained nothing but simply added to the confusion over the interpretation of this most problematic phrase. Further, the current explanations seem at odds with what is now published on this subject in the updated online Insight to the Scriptures.

 

A much more prudent interpretation of matters is simply to return to what was published in the Watchtower in 1927? that 'this generation' represented the Church or the Anointed as a whole which is well supported if one consults the meaning of the Hebrew/Aramaic form of which Jesus spoke in his Olivet discourse.

 

scholar JW

[Tortuga]

 Further, the current explanations seem at odds with what is now published on this subject in the updated online Insight to the Scriptures.

 

Please quote the section in the Insight that you are referring to and cross reference it to the information in the Kingdom Rules book. I'd like to understand what you think is a discrepancy.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Tortuga

[Stavro]

Further, the current explanations seem at odds with what is now published on this subject in the updated online Insight to the Scriptures.

 

Could you share a citation of the contradiction in the printed publications?

 

A much more prudent interpretation of matters is simply to return to what was published in the Watchtower in 1927? that 'this generation' represented the Church or the Anointed as a whole which is well supported if one consults the meaning of the Hebrew/Aramaic form of which Jesus spoke in his Olivet discourse.

 

At the time that explanation was believed, it was understood that most if not all the (remaining) anointed were selected within a few decades of 1914, with the relatively few new partakers being replacements, or in the case of younger ones, false partakers. (w75 2/15 p. 108)

 

Today, we know that the selection is not yet completed, there are still new anointed ones being selected every year. So would it really be fair to say that someone who is anointed tomorrow at the age of 20 is in the same "generation" as someone who died several years before they were born?

Edited September 8, 2015 by Stavro

[On the huh]

The point is that those who are of  "The Generation" are getting old and before they all die, the end will come.  So not long left.  It simply cannot be, unless these ones are like Moses or Job and live to 120 or 140 years old.

It answers the question that some had of newer anointed ones.  These DO NOT make up that "Generation", so regardless of their age, the time left to the end is not dependant or linked with them. So even if a young brother, say 20 years old is anointed, that does not mean the end could be another 50 years away.

 

The explanation is no different to recent published ones.  In fact, I think he made it even clearer.

[jpcook]

I was rather disappointed in the explanation of 'this generation' by David Splane  in the September Broadcasting. He really explained nothing but simply added to the confusion over the interpretation of this most problematic phrase. Further, the current explanations seem at odds with what is now published on this subject in the updated online Insight to the Scriptures.

 

A much more prudent interpretation of matters is simply to return to what was published in the Watchtower in 1927? that 'this generation' represented the Church or the Anointed as a whole which is well supported if one consults the meaning of the Hebrew/Aramaic form of which Jesus spoke in his Olivet discourse.

 

scholar JW

 

 

No Neil, we're not going back to 1927!  What Br. Splane explained about the Generation goes hand in hand with what is explained in the book "God's Kingdom Rules" on page 12.  The graph is pretty clear.  It is really a very simple concept.  I think the reason folks have trouble with it is because they are reading too much in to it!  If one is anointed before 1914 and saw the events at that time, as Br Franz did, they are part of the generation, then, those anointed after 1914 seeing these events occur, are still part of the generation.  Using the example Br Splane used, any that were anointed and saw the events after 1914 while Br Franz was still alive are part of his (Br Franz) generation... those anointed before Br Franz died continue that generation even after Br Franz died.  Any that were anointed after Br Franz death were not part of that generation.

[sunshine]

A much more prudent interpretation of matters is simply to return to what was published in the Watchtower in 1927? that 'this generation' represented the Church or the Anointed as a whole which is well supported if one consults the meaning of the Hebrew/Aramaic form of which Jesus spoke in his Olivet discourse.

 

scholar JW

Neil, I was very uncomfortable with the tone of your post

Jehovah's people are not a backward looking organization, while we appreciate the truths revealed to previous générations, Jesus is leading the Slave to greater understanding as we reach the end. To refer to the generation of Mat 24:34 as the body of the anointed christians would be to include those in the first century as well as any anoited in recent years - thus to totally negate the point of Jesus' words which apply only to the time of the end and our sense of urgency in relation those events.

In any case one is not obliged to appreciate Bro Splane's explanation but if you suggest that it was contradicting hitherto recent explanations or is out of harmony in some way with the original lanuage text, you should provide references.

Edited September 8, 2015 by sunshine