What scriptural proof is there that there would be a gathering together into one religion? The watchtower has changed their teaching that a harvest was underway between 1874 and 1914. Jesus indicated that the wheat and weeds would grow in the same field together until the conclusion of the system of things. Could it be that all those who claim to be "born again" or "anointed" are viewed by Jehovah as spiritual Israelites many of whom have deviated from true worship as did Jehovah's original covenant people. This would fit with the prophecies relating to a cleansing and refining of only a remnant...with the majority being cast off by Jehovah.

God has always sought to gather his people into one flock. In the first century, we are told, God added people daily to the original congregation. Elsewhere, Peter made reference to the persecutions that were being accomplished in the 'entire association of brothers in the world.' Doesn't that indicate that God has the will, as well as the power, to draw people into one religion?

Now, as for the anointed, there are a few things to bear in mind. The anointed that make up spiritual Israel at any given time, are said to be in a covenant with Jehovah through Christ, who mediates that covenant between the two parties. In order for any person to be a party to that special covenant they must know some basic crucial facts. For example, they must know the difference between Jehovah and Jesus. That precludes any Trinitarian from participating in that covenant. After all, how can any devotee of the Babylon mystery religion possibly be a sharer in the sacred covenant with Jehovah? It is not possible. So, reasoning just from that standpoint, we come to the conclusion that preliminary to God's judgment upon his own house, that those who are invited into God's house to begin with, must, of necessity, be separate and distinct from Christendom's house of confusion. Paul's quotation of Jehovah's exhortation applies with equal force today: 'Get out from among them, and I will take you in.'

What are the differences between main stream Christianity and Jehovah's Witnesses.

Why does the organization teach that Jesus is only the mediator of the 144,000? The Bible plainly teaches that we have only one mediator between man and god and that is Jesus!

Because that's what the Bible teaches. The verse you were alluding to says: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Jesus Christ, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all." Notice, please, that there are two vital services that Christ performs for us. One has to do with mediation and the other has to do with providing the ransom price. Notice in the first instance that the verse does not say that Christ is a mediator for all men. It merely says that Christ mediates between God and men. Secondly, it states that the corresponding ransom is provided to all. We need to be careful that we do not jump to the erroneous conclusion that just because Christ's ransom covers all men, that he also is the mediator for all men. That's not what the verse says. However, it is never wise to base our judgments on one verse. What we want to know is what it means to be a mediator. What does Christ mediate?

The book of Hebrews goes quite a bit into the way of explaining Jesus' role as the mediator of a new covenant. For example, 8:6 says that, "he is also the mediator of a correspondingly better covenant." The 9th and 12th chapters also speak about Jesus being the mediator of a new covenant. The new covenant is between Jehovah God and those whom he anoints with his holy spirit. The purpose of the covenant is to produce a kingdom of priests. It is open to all men, in that, Jehovah does not restrict his calling and choosing to any one race of peoples, as the Jews imagined in Paul's day. So, that is why Paul wrote that it was God's will that "all sorts of men should be saved." It is in the context of that comment that Paul next spoke of Christ as being a mediator between God and men. It didn't mean that Jesus was the mediator for every human, or even every believer, but of the "all sorts of men" who accepted the truth and were anointed as sons of God, Jesus mediated in behalf of those men.

Do you think that the role of women in the organization is balanced? A brother who is not a good reader will be asked to read at the book study even though there are sisters present who are better readers. Since reading isn't teaching, what scriptural basis is there for making a distinction between male and female? Also, I've noticed subtle put-downs in the Watchtower publications, e.g. see page 203 of Isaiah I book.

The issues between men and women go back to the Garden of Eden, and unfortunately they will not be fully resolved until the human race returns to its perfect human condition. In some ways, the Society seems to be very liberal in that area. For example, many women today might cringe at the fact that Paul did not permit women to even speak in the congregation. Yet, women are allowed to speak during our meetings. They comment freely and give parts from the platform, and sometimes, in not so subtle ways, they do counsel and teach the brothers indirectly by their pointed comments. By the way, my wife tells me that the reason she doesn't comment at the meetings is because she is following the apostolic counsel. I don't know about that.

But, you raise an interesting question about sisters being used as readers. After all, sisters do read selected scriptures during the meetings and no one objects to that. In the early days of the Society, and probably even now in areas where qualified brothers are lacking, women were used as readers. They were used in other capacities as well. Personally, I wish sisters were used as readers during the Watchtower and book study. I can only imagine the anguish that our sisters must go through to be subject to brothers who are less spiritual and, yes, intelligent than themselves, and you have to suffer through as they stumble and fumble around. But, when you get down to it, being submissive doesn't mean that we submit to men for the sake of men. When we submit to the congregational arrangement, as hard as that may be in some areas, we are really demonstrating our submission to Jehovah's will. So, that should make it a little easier.

As regards the subtle put-downs and the example that you gave in the Isaiah book, I don't think that that really qualifies as a 'put-down' from the Society. But, my wife and I have had many lively discussions over these types of issues and I can better see that there are many ways in which brothers show disrespect to sisters and women in general. However, the example in the Isaiah book was merely citing a prophecy where Jehovah called for men to become weak like women, in that the men would not stand and fight the invading enemy. Let's face it, men are more war-like and aggressive, and some men revel in spilling blood. Women are not like that. Women don't start wars. For a fact, women have their own negative, downward propensities that they have to fight against, but the tendency to annihilate others is not one of them. Thank God! My sister coined a term to describe the innate aggression that many men suffer from. She calls it "testosterone poisoning."

So, what hope is there that things might ever change and that women can finally be accorded the honor and respect that they deserve as being made in the image of God, the same as males? Well, look at the way Jesus treated women. Some of his closest confidants were women. Contrary to Jewish taboo, Jesus freely spoke with women in public. The Samaritan woman at the well is an extraordinary example because Jesus told her plainly on that occasion that he was the Messiah. He didn't tell very many people that. Yet he told a stranger, a non-Jewish woman at that. Particularly interesting is that when Jesus was resurrected, he first appeared to Mary and Martha and told them to go tell the brothers. This was obviously Jesus' way of rebuking the brothers for having abandoned him during his last hour. What a humiliation for the Jewish men who were apostles of Christ to have to be enlightened and taught by women!

May we expect something similar to happen in the future? Yes! According to the little- understood prophecy of Joel, Jehovah's people are going to be laid low. But, during that time of darkness and calamity, Jehovah is going to pour out his spirit upon the faithful like never before. Notice that Joel 2:28-29 specifically states that God's spirit will be poured out on Jehovah's "sons and daughters," and "even upon the menservants and maidservants."

So, I expect that the tired old way that we do things now, like reading paragraphs and following a rigid formatted program of instruction, is going to be swiftly scrapped and that an entirely new spirit is going to be infused into men and women, and that as a result of that infusion, we will see each other in a new light and appreciate each other as we never have before.

We have learned, through the WTBS, that we are in a court case and that Jehovah has 'allowed' mankind this time to prove to all and sundry that they cannot live without his guidance… But is this really a fair test? Consider: man lives for just 80 odd years, on the whole… No one can learn from previous mistakes… Add to that the fact that we are imperfect and getting more so as each day passes, we succumb to illness, disease and death. But that is not all. We have inherent leanings toward what is wrong. The final 'Cherry on the cake' is we are harassed by powerful, superhuman and invisible evil forces that do not have the frailties we have. They have seen God and have lived for aeons, have far greater intellectual capacity than we have and are bent on doing our world harm and us. When you pile all this into one heap and look at it, how can it be said that this is a fair 'trial' to see if we can live without God?

The so-called court case that you referred to does not really focus on each individual. While it is true that the integrity and faith of each servant of God comes under scrutiny by God, men, and angels, the record established by the human race as a whole also provides a basis for God's judgment. Remember that we are trying to look at things from God's perspective. The Bible can help us do that. For example, in the 11th chapter of Genesis, we are told that Jehovah came down and inspected the Tower of Babel construction project. In his judgment, God said that, "there is nothing that they have in mind to do that will be unattainable for them." Notice, please, that Jehovah used the plural, referring to "they" and "them." People back then had made a determination to create a type of city-state civilization that ran counter to Jehovah's previously stated will. But the point is, that it took a concerted effort by a relatively large number of individuals in mutual cooperation to pull off the tower project.

So, the question is not just if one man can rule himself and succeed without God's direction. Since we must share our world with millions, and now billions of other people, the question has become can we succeed as a people, as a race? Can we develop a just and righteous civilization? And so it is that each individual counts only in relation to their contribution to the development of civilization and society as a whole, which can be considerable even given our obvious limitations.

For example, the complex system that we have today is not the product of one man, nor did it emanate from one mind, nor is it necessary. All human discoveries are passed on to others, to successive generations. Knowledge is indeed cumulative and is passed on as an inheritance. So, that's why people living today don't have to go out and discover how to make fire. We learned from our ancestors how to do that and we have benefited from that inheritance so that we are free to move on and discover other things. So, we don't have to waste our time rubbing two sticks together.

Look at it this way: Plato lived 2,500 years ago. Yet, his ideas are the basis for the modern Anglo-American civilization. That's because his ideas are preserved in books and discussed in universities and they are communicated in ways that were beyond imagination a few years ago. Now, because of inventions that developed from Ben Franklin's kite-flying experiment over 200 years ago, whereby he proved that electricity could be harnessed and directed, successive generations of inventors have built upon that and ultimately given us the Internet. So, now it is possible for somebody in an igloo in the Arctic to log on through a satellite link-up and tap into a library and read Plato's thoughts online, for example. It is as Jehovah said centuries ago, that there is nothing unattainable for man. That is the result of the accumulation of knowledge.

And, given the open and democratic system that Americans have inherited and further developed, it is not as if each individual is powerless, as you express. In fact, the relentless enemies of the American system have had to go to great pains to dumb-down Americans and stupefy the masses with mindless distractions in order to dis-empower the little guy. That's because demons and their oligarchic lackeys know the potential of the individual human mind.

Ultimately, the point is that Jehovah is going to judge, not just individuals, but the entire human system of things that we have built. It's all going to be weighed in the balance. In fact, that's the very analogy that Jehovah used when passing judgment upon the Babylonian Empire in the time of Daniel. That brings to mind, too, the court scene that is depicted in the 7th chapter of Daniel. That's where we read about the succession of symbolic wild beasts that are finally judged by Jehovah. If you recall, that prophecy refers to books being opened, no doubt containing the historical record as evidence upon which Jehovah God bases his judgment. Again, that indicates that it is the entire present civilization that is judged before the supreme court in heaven and not just individuals.

Jesus instructed his disciples to make more disciples and teach them all that he had commanded them, but do the scriptures really say that Christians must go from door to door or is this a man made teaching?

In view of Jehovah's acceptance of Cornelius, should those who are employed by "Caesar" in a military capacity be required to change profession before being allowed association with the Christian congregation or should this be a personal decision?

You raise an excellent question. It is obvious that at some point Cornelius' profession as a soldier in the employ of imperial Rome would come into conflict with his calling as an anointed Christian ambassador of the Prince of peace. Just how Cornelius resolved that conflict we are not told in the Bible. But, it is obvious that since Jehovah anointed Cornelius in the presence of the apostle Peter, that Peter did not impose any sort of restrictions on Cornelius; that it was left up to Cornelius to sort out as a matter of faith. Unlike today, it was left up to the individual to resolve their own matters of conscience on that issue.

Sadly, in many ways the Watchtower has become the master of our faith, in that they have dictated how we must comply with certain things in order to be considered as true Christians. Of course, there are such things as doctrine. And there is no way we can allow each person to make up his or her own interpretation of doctrine. But, it's unfortunate that we have to demand conformity on issues that should be resolved from the heart of each Christian. I suspect, though, that Isaiah's prophecy in the 28th and 29th chapters apply to us. That's where the teachers of Jehovah's people are depicted as teaching them in a condescending manner, as if we were children, teaching us by means of the nursery rhyme, saying, "command upon command, command upon command, measuring line upon measuring line, measuring line upon measuring line, here a little, there a little." That really describes the perspective of the Watchtower Society, in that they imagine that Christian faith should be expressed by our conforming to a large body of rules, regulations, and organizational procedures.

Have I understood you correctly? The king of the South is the Anglo-American world power. The king of the north is the United Nations.

Why do you advise those who are aware of the false teachings of the "Slave" to continue to associate with the organization that it controls and keep silent about what they know? What are your scriptural reasons for this stance?

Because, as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I believe, as do many others, that, in spite of the errors, it is Jehovah's organization. And, because it is Jehovah's organization, Christ is going to effect a cleansing and refining of Jehovah's house. That's what all the prophecies are about. If there were no errors why would the scriptures foretell that Christ is going to arrive and do the work of a laundryman? Shall we just air the dirty laundry out of sheer perversion? Or, shall we presumptuously try to cleanse Jehovah's house for him? Do we really believe that Christ is going to clean things up? If we know Jehovah and Christ, and we really have faith in God's Word, then the expression "wait on Jehovah" is not merely a cliché, but rather---words to live by.

Take, for example, the corruption of Israel in the time of Eli and Saul. In the case of Eli, did Samuel rise up against him? No, although he had to have known about the bad things Eli was allowing, he waited on Jehovah to fix things, which of course, Jehovah did. The account of Saul is even more instructive, in that David had several opportunities to set things straight with Saul, but he didn't. He said it was unthinkable to thrust out his hand against Jehovah's anointed. David's toleration of Saul was because David respected Jehovah. If God's anointed, handpicked king was berserk, then it was God's place to set things straight---not David's---even though David was himself the handpicked successor of Saul.

In the Psalms, Jehovah refers to "the stumbling blocks of the wicked." It is true that the Society has put many potential stumbling blocks before us. But, why should we see to it that other brothers and sisters are faced with the same stumbling blocks that may have upended us? Unless we are qualified and prepared to point to the prophecies that foretell Jehovah's solutions to the problems in the organization, our calling attention to mere problems could cause us to be judged by Jehovah as a wicked one who stumbles others.

What would be the sign of the conclusion of this system?

Paul said that even if an angel were to reveal truths to the anointed but with a different message from the one he preached, they were not to believe it. Does this mean that all the truths we actually need during the last days are in the bible?

Is the NWT really as accurate and unbiased as the Watchtower says it is?

I don't think the Watchtower makes the claim that the New World Translation is not biased. It is decidedly, unabashedly for glorifying the name of Jehovah. In fact, one of the major knocks against the NWT is that they have added the name "Jehovah" in a couple of hundred places in the Greek Scriptures, commonly called "New Testament." Of course, our criticism of most translations is that they have removed God's sacred name from thousands of places where it should appear. Since we all have preconceived ideas and religious leanings, it doesn't seem possible, even for translators, to factor that out.

I think translators want to be loyal to what they perceive is the intent of the Bible's original writers. In so doing, the main goal of the translators must be that they remain consistent with their renderings and they must be honest with the reader on those occasions when there are departures. The New World Translation is both honest and consistent. The Large Print "Reference Edition" has hundreds of footnotes that explain certain original language words and also give alternative variations from ancient texts. The Appendix explains why the Watchtower translated certain words in such a way (in order to give the reader some insight into the controversies and complexities facing the translator). Personally, I possess numerous translations. Each one has its own merit and value and I enjoy reading them. But, in my biased opinion, the NWT is a superior translation. By far, it is the Watchtower's greatest, most enduring gift to Jehovah's Witnesses and to all those who love God's Word.

In view of the words of Peter and Paul, when did the last days actually begin?

The first mention by an apostle of that exact term, last days, was on the day of Pentecost when Peter introduced the freshly anointed 120 disciples to those Jewish celebrants gathered for the festival. Peter quoted the prophecy of Joel concerning Jehovah pouring out his spirit upon his sons and daughters. But, what is interesting is that Joel himself made no mention of the last days. Yet the spirit-filled apostle was nonetheless inspired to add that phrase at Acts 2:17.

The last days of the Jewish nation evidently commenced a few weeks before Peter's proclamation, when Christ pronounced doom upon the city of Jerusalem and the temple. So, the last days for Jerusalem lasted about 40 years. However, much later Peter said that the "end of all things has drawn near." That would imply that an actual time of the end was about to commence for the Jewish religious system headquartered in Jerusalem. So it is that the last days went into a new phase when once the Roman juggernaut bore down on Jerusalem in 66 CE. That's when things became critical and life and death decisions would have to be made by all the residents of Judah---including many Christians living there. The period from 66 to 70 CE was the actual judgment period of tribulation---the literal last days of Jerusalem. It is apparent, then, that the "last days" can apply in a generic sense to the broad period of time leading up to Jehovah's judgment, and it can also apply to a much shorter interval during which the actual judgment transpires.

Of particular note is that the prophecy of Joel, which Peter quoted from, has its major fulfillment during the actual judgment period, which, as Peter noted, are the last days. For example, during the period of the ultimate outpouring of Jehovah's spirit, verses 30-32 say: "And I will give portents in the heavens and on earth, blood, and fire and columns of smoke. The sun itself will turn to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the coming of the great and fear-inspiring day of Jehovah."

True, on the day of Christ's death, the sun literally turned to darkness and there was other miraculous phenomenon that occurred. But, Jesus foretold these very same heavenly portents would immediately precede his manifestation from heaven. For instance, perhaps the fire and columns of smoke may be in reference to mushroom-shaped clouds produced by nuclear warheads that may at some point cast their deathly pall over the earth. The point is, though, that the ultimate events of Joel, which Peter was inspired to associate with the last days, have not yet begun. See essay Day of the Locust Attack.

Paul mentioned the last days once, and described it as "critical times hard to deal with." Paul went on to foretell that "men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money," etc. While the many wicked traits that Paul listed are much in evidence, can we say that people and society will not manifest those unchristian characteristics even more so in the future, and that things will become even more critical and hard to deal with?

Interestingly, in that context Paul mentioned two characters, namely: Jannes and Jambres. He compared apostate individuals to those two men, whom he said resisted Moses. Paul went on to relate: "Nevertheless, they will make no further progress, for their madness will be very plain to all, even as the madness of those two men became." A few verses down Paul foretold that "wicked men and imposters will advance from bad to worse, misleading and being misled."

The relevant point is that those whom Paul described as corrupt men who are resisting the truth, apparently are presently continuing to make "progress," advancing from bad to worse. Their madness has not become obvious to everyone, at least not yet anyway. See the essay The Mystery of the Antichrist.

So, again, we have a prophecy concerning the last days that broadly applies to the present period, but also hints at a more intense period in the future when Jehovah's judgments become manifest on our opposers.

Peter also referred to the last days in connection with those who would ridicule Christ's presence. Keep in mind, though, that ridiculers also ridiculed Jesus while he was on the earth. So, just because unbelievers ridicule the message of Jehovah's Witnesses doesn't necessarily mean that we are witnessing the actual, ultimate fulfillment of the prophecy. Peter said that those who ridicule the proclamation of Christ's presence during the last days are ignorant of the facts concerning Noah's deluge. Christ Jesus also connected his presence with the days of Noah, saying, "And they took no note until the flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be." Notice, please, that Christ likened his presence to the actual destruction brought on by the unleashing of the deluge. While Noah preached for many years prior to the flood, marking the last days of the antediluvian world, neither Jesus, nor Peter referred to that period of years prior to the deluge as the last days. In fact, Jesus never used the expression "last days," not even in his detailed prophecy of his presence and the conclusion of the system.

So, it appears that we cannot always make things so nice and neat, as we would like. The last days may refer to an indeterminate prolonged period leading up to Jehovah's judgment, or it may be also apply to an intense period that immediately precedes and includes the final execution of God's judgment upon a system of things.

Who is the angel who fell from heaven and was given the key of the abyss? [Revelation 9]

In one of your answers you say: "Jehovah's Witnesses actually play in prophecy" My question is can you point to any such prophecy? If nothing that the Society applies to themselves is true, but will apply in the future, then which prophecy is left to be applied to JW's now?

You talk much about Jehovah's Organization and that it is His Organization etc. In the early days of Russell, and up to his death, there was no Organization as such and in fact Russell was entirely against any kind of Organization and spoke of the 'natural man' who would want such but not the spiritual man. Having a 'loose fit' of congregations without any Org was more or less how the first century congregations worked with the apostles leading the way, but by no means an 'organization' per se, which is not to say that they were not organized. It was not until Rutherford entered the scene that the Organization began to be formed, and to the detriment, given his excesses. Is it your opinion that the modern day Organization reflects the Jewish Pharisees' Organization' that was in place and bearing down on the people burdening them with petty regulations and forgetting the essence of the law. Can it be said that Jesus condemnation of those leaders back then can be directed to the current leadership? In other words is the WTBTS the antitype of the Pharisees?

First, Russell did in fact recognize that Jehovah has an organization. He recognized the spiritual Israel composed of 144,000 spirit-anointed ones as the only organization that can rightly call itself Jehovah's possession. There are several facets of what is known today as Jehovah's visible organization. One the one hand, we have the various legal entities associated with the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, with all of its branches, assembly halls, kingdom halls and factories. These are merely the infrastructure that we have used to try and accomplish Jehovah's will on the earth and it is not really what we ought to think of as Jehovah's organization. Jehovah's organization is entirely spiritual in nature. Then there is what you note, what some might call, the ecclesiastical authority, or as we might say, the theocratic order. That includes the various layers of overseers and ministerial servants.

In comparing Christian elders with Pharisees, it should be pointed out that the Pharisees were an illegitimate arrangement. When God instituted the nation of Israel he merely arranged for a priesthood. The Pharisees came along much later and as Jesus said, they "seated themselves in the seat of Moses." So, we should make a distinction that the elders and ministerial servant order that we have is based upon the Christian arrangement and is a legitimate Christian institution. Having said that, it doesn't mean that the system cannot become oppressive or some individuals become abusive, as were the Pharisees, generally. The apostles counseled the elders many places in the Scriptures to not lord it over Jehovah's people. The fact that they strongly admonished elders not to misuse their power indicates that the tendency is there for abuses to occur.

So, the problem is not the organization itself. The real problem is certain men have not lived up to their obligation as overseers and have not treated the flock with kindness. Like the Pharisees, there are appointed men among us who are simply unbelievers. They are like those described in Zephaniah, who are congealing upon the dregs, saying in their hearts: "Jehovah will not do good, and Jehovah will not do bad." To be congealing upon the dregs is to say that they are deeply ensconced in the organization. Obviously, faithless men who serve as overseers cannot possibly impart what is spiritual to the flock. They can only go "subduing according to their own powers," as Jehovah said of the Jewish prophets and priests at Jeremiah 5:31. Sadly, Jehovah said: "and my own people loved it that way." Today, we, too, have organizational types, "men-pleasers" we might call them--men who know all the right theocratic phrases, but who don't really have the spirit in their hearts. The prophecy says that Jehovah is going to make a careful search among his people in order to remove such faithless overseers. e-Watchman has pointed to numerous prophecies that spell out how Jehovah purposes to rectify the problem.

my spouse and I have been in and out of the truth for the past 4 yrs. Recently, he left me and has since put another woman in his bed. According to the standards, there should be 2 witnesses' in such a situation, are we under the same since we know the truth, but are not baptized witnesses'. Will he be able to remarry and enter the truth? I don't want the divorce, but he says he does. I am very heartsick.

Divorce is an act of treachery and betrayal, and the Scriptures say that God hates such things, and that he is eventually going to judge adulterers and fornicators. As far as having two witnesses to your husband's infidelity: once a separated mate takes up living with another person, then that is considered public knowledge. You should be considered scripturally free to remarry, if that is your desire. However, there is no judicial action that the congregation can take since neither one of you are baptized as Jehovah's Witnesses.

My advice to you is to draw close to Jehovah. Hopefully, you might find some comfort and support in the local congregation where you were associated. Many, many of Jehovah's Witnesses have gone through the emotional devastation of divorce. The Bible says that Jehovah is near to those who are crushed and broken-hearted. While you may never regain your lost marriage partner, Jehovah can gradually infuse hope into you. Many Christians have found that when human relationships fail us, that is the time when we really come to appreciate the unfailing nature of our heavenly Father. May you come to appreciate that while you may have been rejected by your husband, for whatever selfish impulse was motivating him, you may become very dear to God himself. As time goes on, you will heal. May Jehovah bless you in your time of distress.

Will all those who die, believing errors, before judgement day begins receive a resurrection?