September broadcast

[Stavro]

As soon as the video is uploaded, it will be available here:

 

http://www.jw.org/download/?fileformat=MP4&output=html&pub=jwbgg&issue=201509

 

The last Gilead Graduation video was available a couple days ahead of JW Broadcasting, so the same may be true this time as well.

[jpcook]

Well Russo, one thing comes to mind, after 1990, we do NOT know for sure who the King of the North is!  That will be interesting to learn.

[Guest newyorker2015]

Sometimes it is good to remind ourselves that "generation" is an English word. The Bible was not written in English. One older parishioner in an evangelical church was quoted as saying, "If the King James Bible was good enough for Saint Peter, it was good enough for her." We know better. The Greek word was Genea'.

*** w95 11/1 p. 30 Questions From Readers ***

But in the Greek text of Jesus’ words found at Matthew 24:34, we find the word ge·ne·aʹ. It is widely recognized that Jesus was referring, not to any “race” of people, but to the people living at a certain period of time.

*** w99 5/1 p. 11 “These Things Must Take Place” ***

British scholar G. R. Beasley-Murray observes: “The phrase ‘this generation’ should cause no difficulty for interpreters. While admittedly genea in earlier Greek meant birth, progeny, and so race, . . . in the [Greek Septuagint] it most frequently translated the Hebrew term dôr, meaning age, age of humankind, or generation in the sense of contemporaries. . . . In sayings attributed to Jesus the term appears to have a twofold connotation: on the one hand it always signifies his contemporaries, and on the other hand it always carries an implicit criticism.”

*** w10 4/15 pp. 10-11 par. 14 Holy Spirit’s Role in the Outworking of Jehovah’s Purpose ***

¹⁴ What does this explanation mean to us? Although we cannot measure the exact length of “this generation,” we do well to keep in mind several things about the word “generation”: It usually refers to people of varying ages whose lives overlap during a particular time period; it is not excessively long; and it has an end. (Ex. 1:6) How, then, are we to understand Jesus’ words about “this generation”? He evidently meant that the lives of the anointed who were on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation. That generation had a beginning, and it surely will have an end. The fulfillment of the various features of the sign clearly indicate that the tribulation must be near. By maintaining your sense of urgency and keeping on the watch, you show that you are keeping up with advancing light and following the leadings of holy spirit.—Mark 13:37.

Excellent post!

What we need to understand is that we should follow the Governing Body's definition of "generation", whatever it may be this year. Our trust and obedience belong to them, as they've been fully entrusted by Jesus.

It doesn't matter how many charts and graphs are needed, I am convinced that this current generation teaching is clear and not convoluted. Simple and easy to understand, just like Jesus' teachings. Hopefully it will be easier for most to grasp, but until then me and my household will continue to serve, always looking AHEAD with this wonderful organization.

I've watched the September broadcast several times now, and I'm encouraged more each time.

Edited September 11, 2015 by trottigy

[peper-eliot]

It's not the time for new discoveries ... only adjustments.

Like in a horses race... https://youtu.be/NHwXjv1cE28 many adjustments until the end of the race

We have all the elements... but... "we need to keep in mind that God's Word does not reveal the exact time order of events. It seems likely that some events will overlap " (this weekend w study, paragraph 11)

 

So, keep on the watch

[campanula]

 I don't care about the Generation because it could last another 20 years.

.... and more

[campanula]

I was having a think about the part on singleness in this month's program.  It was interesting that relationships with those outside the truth, ie not marrying "in the Lord", was mentioned in the same point as jw dating sites - seems like the GB don't encourage that sort of activity in looking for a mate.

I know quite a few that have used these dating sites and so far are successful and happily married. 

That's why there is always temptation....

[ATALAYA]

Do you believe this is the final explanation or maybe in a near future more clarification will be given?

[Tortuga]

Do you believe this is the final explanation or maybe in a near future more clarification will be given?

         

 

It is the final explanation until there is a new one..

[trottigy]

Do you believe this is the final explanation or maybe in a near future more clarification will be given?

I do not believe there will be any further explanation. There is no room for it - as brother Splain noted in the video. We really need to do our best to understand this one.

[timpin]

We are NOW living through the Final Scene folks! 

 

​http://jwtalk.net/forums/topic/22599-wt-“your-deliverance-is-getting-near”-september-7-13/  

Edited September 13, 2015 by timpin

[Qapla]

As far as those dating sites .....

 

I know some who married out of the Truth and their mates came in to the Truth and it worked - so, should we endorse marrying unbelievers? I don't think so!

 

Just because these sites have seemed to work for some - that does not mean it is a good thing. After all, how many brag that it did NOT work for them? The few who had success will say so, or, at least, others will. Bit, for the far greater number of those who failed with these sites, perhaps even leaving the Truth, those we don't really hear about because nobody wants to talk about them - especially not the ones who want to use such sites.

[New World Explorer]

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

The spiritual food comes from the Governing Body ... Your suggestion has no authority ( I am referring to your prudent interpretation to return to 1927)

You can express your opinions of course ... But be careful not to undermine the authority of the Governing Body which was given to them by Jesus .... In time we will have a clear picture of everything !

[well]

Oh! I like the MV... Just a smile! I really need to work hard on this...

[Krusso]

I do believe that there is always a possibility of a new explanation. There are two components involved : generation and "all these things". Since it seems that there is no more room for updates in the generation , how about " all these things? Has anybody here dissected the entire chapter and came to the realization that there is possibility for clarifications? I will just wait and see.

[Stavro]

Personally, I don't believe that we will know the exact intent behind Jesus' words of 'this generation' until it's explained in the new scrolls, so during this system there will always be room for clarification.

 

With that being said, at this late stage these clarifications would be largely academic. Given the young age of some who are now considered members of group two, (potentially as young as 40,) it's a certainty that they will not all die off before the GT begins.

 

If the understanding generation is later adjusted to be "all anointed ones", "all mankind", or something similar, that would not change the fact that many of those currently considered to be members of group two would live to see the end.

 

Or if the understanding were further restricted, say a cutoff date of being anointed in 1965, that would shrink the size of group two significantly, but many of those newly understood to be in "group three" would be considerably younger than group two, so as a group they too would live to see the end.

 

What we are being told is not long-winded math lessons on dates we have no right to calculate, we are being told that the end is imminent. So instead of finding flaws in the math, let's focus on the lesson itself, the nearness of the end, and let the finer details of the prophecy be explained through the fulfilment.

[Hanah45]

Personally, I don't believe that we will know the exact intent behind Jesus' words of 'this generation' until it's explained in the new scrolls, so during this system there will always be room for clarification.

 

With that being said, at this late stage these clarifications would be largely academic. Given the young age of some who are now considered members of group two, (potentially as young as 40,) it's a certainty that they will not all die off before the GT begins.

 

If the understanding generation is later adjusted to be "all anointed ones", "all mankind", or something similar, that would not change the fact that many of those currently considered to be members of group two would live to see the end.

 

Or if the understanding were further restricted, say a cutoff date of being anointed in 1965, that would shrink the size of group two significantly, but many of those newly understood to be in "group three" would be considerably younger than group two, so as a group they too would live to see the end.

 

What we are being told is not long-winded math lessons on dates we have no right to calculate, we are being told that the end is imminent. So instead of finding flaws in the math, let's focus on the lesson itself, the nearness of the end, and let the finer details of the prophecy be explained through the fulfilment.

I wish I could double-like this!

[Cheeks]

Whoa!  Can’t believe 10 pages already on the Sept broadcast!  J

 

So been trying to get the generation portion from the broadcast into my empty/thick head and I think I got it, so correct me if I am wrong:

-based on the example of Brother Franz, who was anointed before or at 1914, he is part of that “generation”

-Bro Franz lived until 1992 when he passed away

-using the reasoning about other anointed one’s being part of that same generation as Bro. Franz, one would have had to be anointed at least as late as 1991 to be counted as part of the 1^st generation.

 

Based on that, and I am just picking a number, but someone who is 45 years old in 1991 and becomes anointed – they would be part of that first generation?  

[Tortuga]

Whoa!  Can’t believe 10 pages already on the Sept broadcast!  J

 

So been trying to get the generation portion from the broadcast into my empty/thick head and I think I got it, so correct me if I am wrong:

-based on the example of Brother Franz, who was anointed before or at 1914, he is part of that “generation”

-Bro Franz lived until 1992 when he passed away

-using the reasoning about other anointed one’s being part of that same generation as Bro. Franz, one would have had to be anointed at least as late as 1991 to be counted as part of the 1^st generation.

 

Based on that, and I am just picking a number, but someone who is 45 years old in 1991 and becomes anointed – they would be part of that first generation?  

 

It's all one generation but they explained it as two groups just to illustrate that there can be overlapping lifetimes within that one generation.

[Stavro]

Based on that, and I am just picking a number, but someone who is 45 years old in 1991 and becomes anointed – they would be part of that first generation?  

 

There is no "first generation", only groups of the singular generation.

 

If someone was anointed at the time they saw 1914, they are part of the generation.

 

If someone was an anointed contemporary of someone who was anointed at the time they saw 1914, they are part of the generation.

 

If someone never lived as an anointed contemporary of anointed ones who saw 1914, they are NOT part of the generation.

 

As a linguistic shortcut, these are referred to groups one, two, and three respectively, but prophetically speaking there are only two groups alive today, those who are of the generation, and those who are not.

[Cheeks]

There is no "first generation", only groups of the singular generation.

 

If someone was anointed at the time they saw 1914, they are part of the generation.

 

If someone was an anointed contemporary of someone who was anointed at the time they saw 1914, they are part of the generation.

 

If someone never lived as an anointed contemporary of anointed ones who saw 1914, they are NOT part of the generation.

 

As a linguistic shortcut, these are referred to groups one, two, and three respectively, but prophetically speaking there are only two groups alive today, those who are of the generation, and those who are not.

I think it is the contemporary part that is messing me up.  If a brother was annointed in 1990 he would be considered as group one re: part of that generation, correct?

[Stavro]

I think it is the contemporary part that is messing me up.  If a brother was annointed in 1990 he would be considered as group one re: part of that generation, correct?

 

Generation? Yes.

Group one? No.

 

Group one is gone, and has been since the 1990s. Those on the earth today are members of group two if they were anointed prior to ~1993, otherwise they are no part of the generation.

[Tortuga]

I think it is the contemporary part that is messing me up.  If a brother was annointed in 1990 he would be considered as group one re: part of that generation, correct?

 

There have been several conversations about this. Perhaps some of the posts in this topic will help.

 

http://jwtalk.net/forums/topic/22622-gods-kingdom-rules-book/?p=325125

[Cheeks]

Generation? Yes.

Group one? No.

Group one is gone, and has been since the 1990s. Those on the earth today are members of group two if they were anointed prior to ~1993, otherwise they are no part of the generation.

I think I got it. I watched the broadcast and was confident I understood, then a couple of brothers were speaking at the mtg on Sunday and their comments completely messed me up and I became confused.

This is what I get from it: Based on the broadcast: someone would be considered part of the generation if they were anointed anywhere from 1913-1992, based on the date brother Splane used of brother Franz's death.

Not getting too hung up on actual dates but is this correct..?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[trottigy]

Yes, basically.

To fully explain that, 2 overlapping groups are used, but what you are saying would be correct.

Just a note: any of those anointed after Oct 1914 to 1992 would be group 2 of "the generation".

Edited September 14, 2015 by trottigy

[Cheeks]

Yes, basically.

To fully explain that, 2 overlapping groups are used, but what you are saying would be correct.

Just a note: any of those anointed after Oct 1914 to 1992 would be group 2 of "the generation".

Ok I got it. So any between 1914 and 1992 would be considered Brother Franz's' contemporaries, using him as the example.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk