Peace and Security, Great Tribulation, Armageddon

[New World Explorer]

On 8/9/2024 at 1:47 PM, trottigy said:

 

He said he meant... He'll have things in the US fixed so well that they wouldn't have to vote any more and he thought that would be important to religious people because they are low percentage voters.

 

Anyway .... Soon no more voting for anyone! Come Lord Jesus - come quickly!

It’s really painful to hear how some politicians talk knowing that God’s Kingdom stands in place and is ready to take over very soon. 

[New World Explorer]

The United States will send an additional $3.5bn to Israel to spend on US-made weapons and military equipment, the Department of State has said.

Edited August 10 by New World Explorer

[JennyM]

3 hours ago, New World Explorer said:

The United States will send an additional $3.5bn to Israel to spend on US-made weapons and military equipment, the Department of State has said.

Will they ever not lose all  money? 

[Dhanyel]

Thoughts.....

 

Ukraine is subtly attacking Russia—could this provoke Putin's fury, leading him to retaliate and escalate the situation into a full-scale war involving NATO?

[chuck83]

1 hour ago, JennyM said:

Will they ever not lose all  money? 

No USD is the world reserve currency. Everything like the AUD, GBP, JPY, etc is tied to it. Also it’s not possible when you simply print more when you run out. This is essentially why BRICS albeit no new news on it is so big for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (plus more countries.) Trying to level the playing field for themselves.

[Doug]

On 8/7/2024 at 5:24 PM, BLEmom said:

 

So I don’t think the increase in bad news or lack of it will be the ultimate clue. 

Im more inclined to go by the age of “this generation” by proximity than the headlines. And even then, we can only guesstimate about the current understanding of ages/generation. And wonder if that understanding will be adjusted. Again  🤭

 

 

I'm right there with you.  Let's use some reasoning (imperfect though it may be):  Jesus didn't say things without a good reason, especially the things that are on the record.

 

He said "Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things happen".  "Truly" is used to preface a statement of fact, a promise, or a prophecy, thereby emphasizing the absolute truthfulness and reliability of what he said.  His statement was further prefaced with "Now learn" and "Likewise."

 

So then, what would be the point of his reliable statement if there was no awareness of how many of "this generation" remain?  That doesn't make sense.

 

One brother here said that he was the secretary for many years and he never understood why there's a notation on each publisher's card indicating if the publisher is anointed (A) or other sheep (OT).  Well, isn't the reason because Matthew 24:34 is a barometer for understanding where we are in the stream of time, in other words, "how many of this generation are still alive?"

 

Personally, I believe the GB monitor how many of the partakers in 1992 are still alive.  Why?  Because they (the GB) need to have a barometer when it comes to the urgency of the message.  How else can they gauge the message if they don't have a sense of how close we are to the GT?  The bad things in the news are a gauge too.  But there's no way to know if those things will get far worse or far more recurrent before the end.

 

His words were so well chosen, leaving us without one key piece of information.  We don't know How Many constitute "by no means" pass away (completely pass away).  The GB has commented on this.  They have said the generation doesn't have to go down as low as a few dozen nor does it mean those few that remain would be old and decrepit.

 

But, Jesus gave us this promise, this clue, for a good reason. "This generation" is only on the decline, which serves the purpose Jesus had in mind. Learn by this. It doesn't go up and come back down as with the full number of anointed from year-to-year (and why are these counted and reported?)  It's been 32 years since the close of the first group. Their contemporaries are the 8,600 of the second group who were partaking in 1992.  They are the ones who will "by no means pass away", now 32 years on.

 

[trottigy]

2 hours ago, Doug said:

 

Personally, I believe the GB monitor how many of the partakers in 1992 are still alive.  Why?  Because they (the GB) need to have a barometer when it comes to the urgency of the message.  How else can they gauge the message if they don't have a sense of how close we are to the GT?  The bad things in the news are a gauge too.  But there's no way to know if those things will get far worse or far more recurrent before the end.

 

 

I'm wondering what mechanism you think the GB is using to track that? For example, I've been an elder for 30 years and I know no congregation I've ever been in from New York to California has sent any of that kind of information to the branch. And imagine how often people move. There isn't a box pre-92 post 92 anointed, and no simple way from one CO to another to say this person is pre-92and moved into that congregation. So don't count them or keep track of them? How do you imagine this is being done?

[truce]

7 minutes ago, trottigy said:

 

I'm wondering what mechanism you think the GB is using to track that? For example, I've been an elder for 30 years and I know no congregation I've ever been in from New York to California has sent any of that kind of information to the branch. And imagine how often people move. There isn't a box pre-92 post 92 anointed, and no simple way from one CO to another to say this person is pre-92and moved into that congregation. So don't count them or keep track of them? How do you imagine this is being done?

I was going to comment on that but I couldn't have said it any better. 

 

I think the Bible is not as complicated as we tend to make it look.

 

I also have a hard time understanding why the GB would tie the nearness of the end around whatever did or did not occur in 1992. It's the same old matter of dates. Oh, I'm so wary of them!

[BLEmom]

1992 was part of an example of how to think of the word generation. It wasn’t a year set in stone. 
Here is a worldly definition of generation. 
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/generation

 

Notice it can be defined different ways. The illustration of Br Franz’s life was just to help us understand overlap within a generation. 
 

 

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 indicates 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.

[Dhanyel]

1992 was a reference used as an example !

 

 

David H. Splane: Close to the End of This System of Things

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/StudioTalks/pub-jwban_201509_1_VIDEO

[Doug]

3 hours ago, trottigy said:

 

I'm wondering what mechanism you think the GB is using to track that? 

 

3 hours ago, truce said:

 

I also have a hard time understanding why the GB would tie the nearness of the end around whatever did or did not occur in 1992. It's the same old matter of dates. Oh, I'm so wary of them!

 

Respectfully, brothers, you're questioning, but not offering an alternative explanation for the reason Jesus gave the prophesy,  the reason the anointed are today still counted and reported, the reason our publisher cards indicate our hope, nor the reason Br. Splane went to great lengths to explain 1992 in the September 2015 broadcast, followed by Br. Flodin also in 2015.

 

Dhanyel, thank you. Your post came up as I was typing. No one is disputing that 1992 was presented as a possible marker, an example, between the first group and the second group.  It really wouldn't matter if it was 1992, or 1972.  The point is that there was an overlap between the two groups, and the second group will "by no means pass away until all these things happen."

Unless Dawn's suggestion that there may yet be a further adjustment in our understanding of Mt. 24:34, who knows?  Maybe the "overlap" model could apply to a third group  Does the "overlap" model ever end?  

 

It's obvious the GB themselves have a keen interest in this prophesy. And why wouldn't they?

[Ahuvah]

A question please.

When the notation of whether a publisher is Anointed or the OS ... in the case of an Anointed, is there also a date included of when they first partook? If they were simply counting all the Anointed as partakers, it wouldn't automatically mean they are of that overlapped generation especially if it's been a recent anointing. Or is it their baptism date that indicates this?

Edited August 11 by Ahuvah

[truce]

I like the balanced reasoning that 1992 wasn't a year set in stone. I dare say too that it shouldn't even be seen as a marker for anything. Frederick Franz died in 1992. Brother Splane used it as a reference point in a video. Brother Franz was used as an example because he was a well known brother who professed the heavenly hope, not because Jehovah's purpose is tied around the year he died. Let's be very careful to not read more into these things than we should. Jehovah's eternal purpose in bringing about the end can not be tied around the year one man died (not referring to Jesus). I've also seen a comment or two in this thread that seem to link the coming of the end to the life span of Donald Trump. I've seen some seem to suggest that Trump will be the last president of the United States when the end comes. I find it laughable. We have another case of possible but not probable yet some will almost take it as the truth. But we should remember that neither Trump nor Putin on their own are the Kings of the South and North, just as much as 1992 has no bearing whatsoever on when the end will come. Jehovah has a timetable. We wait for it. I won't push this any further. Peace and love. ❤️ 

Edited August 11 by truce

[Ahuvah]

I agree... he was very clear it was an example only.  I don't think it's a specific year, rather more a clump of years ... like the 'last days' but more definitive because it's dealing with peers of the generation. If that makes sense.

[cme]

8 hours ago, Doug said:

 

 

Respectfully, brothers, you're questioning, but not offering an alternative explanation for the reason Jesus gave the prophesy,  the reason the anointed are today still counted and reported, the reason our publisher cards indicate our hope, nor the reason Br. Splane went to great lengths to explain 1992 in the September 2015 broadcast, followed by Br. Flodin also in 2015.

 

Dhanyel, thank you. Your post came up as I was typing. No one is disputing that 1992 was presented as a possible marker, an example, between the first group and the second group.  It really wouldn't matter if it was 1992, or 1972.  The point is that there was an overlap between the two groups, and the second group will "by no means pass away until all these things happen."

Unless Dawn's suggestion that there may yet be a further adjustment in our understanding of Mt. 24:34, who knows?  Maybe the "overlap" model could apply to a third group  Does the "overlap" model ever end?  

 

It's obvious the GB themselves have a keen interest in this prophesy. And why wouldn't they?

I believe that there is  "1" overlap and not 3.  Otherwise, that generation can possibly extend into hundreds of years.  We do not live as long as our ancestors.  We live about if fortunate 100 years max.  But, most die at 75-90.  So, the second overlap of anointed is what we have to watch.  Those of the second overlap are getting on in years and, Jesus said they would not pass off the world scene.  There can't be any 3rd overlap.  We ourselves possibly would not be here to see the prophesy fulfilled.  Coupled with that is the deterioration on the world scene the likes we have never seen before nor, the generation before us.  Yes, after 1914 our great grandparents saw a shift in the world but, not what we are looking at today.

 

Government upheavals, fight amongst themselves, divisions to a great degree, suicide, pandemics and epidemics, same sex marriage now legalized in all its glory.  Economy is on the run.  Climate change.  Anger amongst people never before seen.  Wars!  An action is taken and a reaction ensues and then retaliation and vengeance to counteract retaliation and then war!  There is a tit-for-tat.   You kill my dog I kill your cat!   The world is in a TURMOIL  not seen ever.

 

I pray before I go to a door in the hopes that no one will shoot me through that door.

[Richie]

16 minutes ago, cme said:

can't be any 3rd overlap

Absolutely there is no 3rd overlap otherwise it become illogical.

[Keep Fighting]

Here we go again making this thread about a thread we alerady have.
Can we go back to the topic please? 😄🙃

Now, some may argue that it's about the same thing, and I agree with that. But on a completely different level, we have to remember that what we're talking about is in the public domain.

[Tortuga]

5 hours ago, Ahuvah said:

A question please.

When the notation of whether a publisher is Anointed or the OS ... in the case of an Anointed, is there also a date included of when they first partook? If they were simply counting all the Anointed as partakers, it wouldn't automatically mean they are of that overlapped generation especially if it's been a recent anointing. Or is it their baptism date that indicates this?

We have been using the Assembly Hall for the Memorial for several years. When the emblems are passed and the servers see someone partake, they may not know who they are, which congregation they are from or when they started partaking, all they know is that someone partook. They give the number of partakers in their section to the brother in charge. That's it, no personal information is gathered or recorded. No one knows if it is the first time they partook or not.

[Ric]

Just out of curiosity, I got these answers when consulting the IA.

How many people are there over 100 years old in the world?
Sent by Copilot (IA):
Currently, it is estimated that there are more than 621 thousand people over 100 years old in the world. This number has increased significantly in recent decades and could surpass the 1 million mark by the end of this decade1.

How many people are there over 110 years old in the world?
Sent by Copilot (IA):
The number of people over 110 years old, known as supercentenarians, is estimated at between 150 and 600 worldwide1. This number is difficult to pin down, as not all supercentenarians are officially recognized, and some extreme age claims are unproven.

Thus, even if the ancient understanding had not changed and the generation that would not pass referred to those who were born when the set of signs of Christ's presence began, around 1914-1919, it would still be possible that the generation was not completely extinct today . And it would not be ruled out that there would still be some representatives if the end came in the next 10 years.

Personally, I would find it sensational if both understandings could be fulfilled with equal accuracy.

[Ahuvah]

4 hours ago, Tortuga said:

We have been using the Assembly Hall for the Memorial for several years. When the emblems are passed and the servers see someone partake, they may not know who they are, which congregation they are from or when they started partaking, all they know is that someone partook. They give the number of partakers in their section to the brother in charge. That's it, no personal information is gathered or recorded. No one knows if it is the first time they partook or not.

That I knew.  So there's no information on our cards as to what group we belong to?

[Old]

47 minutes ago, Ahuvah said:

That I knew.  So there's no information on our cards as to what group we belong to?

There is but that information is never passed on to the Branch. There is no blank to fill in the annual report for a number claiming to be of the anointed.

I have never understood the reason for showing it on the publisher card.

[Ahuvah]

20 minutes ago, Old said:

There is but that information is never passed on to the Branch. There is no blank to fill in the annual report for a number claiming to be of the anointed.

I have never understood the reason for showing it on the publisher card.

Aah that answers my question... thank you.

[Doug]

9 hours ago, Keep Fighting said:

Here we go again 

 we have to remember that what we're talking about is in the public domain.

 

I appreciated the footnote on the talk Why Have JW's Changed Some of Their Beliefs?

 

* - We do not try to hide these changes in our understanding of the Bible. In fact, we record and publish them. See the "Beliefs Clarified" entry in the online reference to our publications.

 

Changing, or clarifying, our beliefs is something that has attracted honest-hearted people to pure worship.

[Ric]

[Doug]

14 hours ago, Ahuvah said:

A question please.

When the notation of whether a publisher is Anointed or the OS ... in the case of an Anointed, is there also a date included of when they first partook?

If they were simply counting all the Anointed as partakers, it wouldn't automatically mean they are of that overlapped generation especially if it's been a recent anointing. Or is it their baptism date that indicates this?

 

To the first question, is there a date noted when a baptized publisher first partakes?  I don't know.

But I wonder if the initial notation of OT (Other Sheep) at the time of baptism, is erased, or covered with white-out, and then A is written in, for anointed.  In that scenario, really only the anointed one's family and his or her own congregation may have awareness of what year they began to partake.  Obviously, that they partook is reported to the branch immediately (later that night).  Not their name,  just the count.

 

Virtually all partakers are counted each year and published. The ones from the public who may have accepted an invitation to the Memorial and may partake, and for other extenuating reasons, can be omitted from the count.

Partaking doesn't mean the publisher is included in the second group of "this generation".  That's what Br. Splane was attempting to clarify.  The second group would have been baptized and anointed and had a substantial overlap with the first group to be considered contemporaries of the first group.

 

Br. Franz is identifiable as belonging to the first group and we know he died in December of 1992.  We can't say with certainty that a person partaking for the first time in March/April 1992 would actually belong to the second group because there wouldn't have been much of an overlap there.

 

In 1990 there were 8,869 partakers.  In 1991 there were 8,850.  So, 19 fewer partakers, which had been the trend (fewer) for decades.  Then in 1992 there were 8,682.  A decline of 168.  So, it's reasonable to believe that the second group numbered around 8,600-8,700 and would not increase.

 

But it doesn't matter exactly how many were included in the second group.  The point is that "this generation" is a finite number of anointed that is only on the decline for about the past 32 years.

 

Br. Splane, I think, went so far as to make the point that all the current members of the GB at that time, were in the second group.  I haven't heard anything on that regarding Br. Fleegle and Winder.  And it doesn't matter if they are or not.

 

Back to the publisher's card for a minute.  I thought that if the notation OT wasn't simply erased and replaced with A, but rather, if a new publisher card was started with the notation A, then there's the record of when someone began partaking!  If someone here had the opportunity of changing a publisher's card from OT to A, they can tell us how that's handled.