Options
 
 

Week of December 1, 2003

 


 


Would it be wrong for a Christian to attend just the weekly Sunday meetings? How do we know that the early Christians (1st century) met more than this? Isn’t the pattern of meetings taken after the principle of the Sabbath-among other things? And isn't it a little overly-controlling to demand 100% attendance at all 5 meetings? It makes some wonder if organizational mind-control is at hand. I can understand the importance of meeting with other Christians as much a possible to build each other up, but does this “call to meet” require such a structured, formal atmosphere?


As a free moral agent you are free to meet as often or as infrequently as you choose. And you are quite right that there is nothing in the Bible that indicates how many times per week the original Christians met. There was no “organizational policy” laid down by the apostles as regards the number of meetings; except, of course, Paul’s exhortation in the letter of Hebrews not to be “forsaking the gathering of yourselves together.” Perhaps some groups of early Christians met together every day and others less frequently. We just do not know.

However, there is a principle that might apply in our case. Paul also wrote to the Hebrews, saying: “Be obedient to those who are taking the lead among you and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over your souls as those who will render an account; that they may do this with joy and not with sighing, for this would be damaging to you.”

Since those taking the lead among us follow the five meetings per week program, it stands to reason that those following their lead would do the same. It is interesting that the reason given for Christians to meet together in the first place is “to consider one another to incite to love and fine works...encouraging one another, and all the more so as you behold the day drawing near.” Conversely, Paul noted that our not following the lead of the shepherds would be discouraging to them and ultimately spiritually damaging to ourselves. The bottom line is that love of God and love of our brothers and sisters has to be the motivation for everything we do or else it is all for naught anyway.


 


History establishes that Christianity banned cremations due to its usage by heathen/pagan nations, recognizing it as a pagan custom (including the use of funeral pyres), and many branches of Christianity continue to forbid the practice as unscriptural. In addition, there seems to be ties in the practice to the Hindu religion's belief in cremation being used to release the soul of a person so that they can go to heaven. The Bible tells us that God forbade anyone in Israel from causing a son or daughter to "pass through the fire," something which He described as one of the "detestable things of" the nations around Israel (Deut. 18:9-10a), which seems to support the historical evidence that cremation was in practice since long before those days. In light of the above, how should a Christian view "cremation" and isn't it something we should avoid due to its pagan and unbiblical origins? Also, are there any examples of Jews performing cremations or Christians performing cremations in the Bible?


The burial customs of the ancient Jews reflected their belief in a physical resurrection from the dead. For example, because of their faith and hope in the coming Messianic seed, the patriarchs all wanted to be buried in the Promised Land. That’s why Abraham bought a cave and buried Sarah there. That is why Jacob and Joseph, while in Egypt, expressed their desire to have their remains transported back to Canaan to be buried there.

Since the Bible was written by Jews it naturally reflects their customs. Hence, David wrote in the Psalm that Jehovah would not forsake his soul in Sheol. (Obviously, a cremated soul would not “see corruption” in Sheol) And, of course, that prophetic Psalm was fulfilled in Christ, who was resurrected after being buried in the traditional Jewish way.

The only exception to the Jewish custom of burial was when Jehovah’s judicial decision called for a violator of the law to be burned with fire. For example, Leviticus 20:14 says: “And where a man takes a woman and her mother, it is loose conduct. They should burn him and them in the fire, in order that loose conduct may not continue in your midst.”

It is also noteworthy that during the time of Christ the Jews had the custom of tossing the dead bodies of criminals into a brimstone-smoldering dump called Gehenna; because they thought them unworthy of a resurrection, and hence a decent burial. Jesus used the perpetual fires of Gehenna as a symbol of everlasting death. So, it seems that cremation has a certain stigma attached to it.

As for causing a son or daughter to “pass through the fire,” as the Bible words it, that does not have reference to cremation. Instead, it is referring to the horrific practice of offering a living sacrifice to the demons—a human sacrifice. In order to procure a “blessing” from Baal and other phony gods, the Jews were seduced into offering them their own baby sons and daughters. Obviously, the demons were merely intent on making a mockery of the anticipated sacrifice of Jehovah’s own son, which of course was foreshadowed long before when God asked Abraham to sacrifice his son—Isaac.

Jeremiah 32:35 makes it plain that “passing through the fire” meant a human offering to the demon-god Molech. It reads: “Furthermore, they built the high places of Baal that are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, in order to make their sons and their daughters pass through the fire to Molech, a thing that I did not command them, neither did it come up into my heart to do this detestable thing, for the purpose of making Judah sin.”

But, even though the Jews did not practice cremation, there was no law against it. And even though Christians and Christendom have carried on Jewish burial customs to the present, there is nothing pagan about using cremation as a method of disposing of a corpse. The Egyptians were well known for both their embalming and mummification techniques to preserve the dead as well as their belief in an ongoing afterlife. Yet, just because the Egyptians preserved their dead in accord with their false notions about death does not necessarily make embalming or entombing a pagan custom.

While the Jews may have felt that they needed to preserve the dead in some specific location to perhaps help God out on resurrection day, ultimately Jehovah has the power to reclaim the dead no matter whether the corpse has been preserved to some degree or obliterated. That’s why Revelation pretty much covers all the bases when it says: “And the sea gave up those dead in it, and death and Hades gave up those dead in them, and they were judged individually according to their deeds.”

So, whether a person has been buried in a memorial tomb, or perhaps buried at sea, or merely consumed by death in some other manner, the dead are not beyond ear-shot of Jehovah’s rousing wake-up call in the re-creation.


 


The Society teaches that the 20th century wars, famines, earthquakes, etc are a so-called 'composite sign' that Jesus gave in Matt 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13. What are your thoughts on this? Is there any truth to it, or is it a fiction like 1914?


That question has been discussed a number of times already. If you use the e-watchman search feature it will direct you to the mailbag that discusses that particular topic.


 


How does a Witness react when he/she hears that the Watchtower makes 950 million dollars a year, and is ranked among the 50 richest companies in New York? You consider this as a lie, a satanic conspiracy or a truth that every Witness must face and understand? Should you contribute to the box or should you understand they have enough money already?


Jehovah’s Witnesses view the wealth of the organization as a fulfillment of Bible prophecy.

For example, in the 60th chapter of Isaiah it says: “Raise your eyes all around and see! They have all of them been collected together; they have come to you. From far away your own sons keep coming, and your daughters who will be taken care of on the flank. At that time you will see and certainly become radiant, and your heart will actually quiver and expand, because to you the wealthiness of the sea will direct itself; the very resources of the nations will come to you. The heaving mass of camels itself will cover you, the young male camels of Midian and of Ephah. All those from Sheba—they will come. Gold and frankincense they will carry. And the praises of Jehovah they will announce. All the flocks of Kedar—they will be collected together to you.”

Even though the prophecy is couched in an ancient setting, there is no question but that the 60th chapter of Isaiah applies to the Christian organization and not literal Israel. And since the Watchtower applies this to itself since 1919, it is not at all unseemly to Jehovah’s Witnesses that the organization is prospering in accord with our present understanding of prophecy.



Who, or what, are we to believe? For years we have been persuaded by logic and cogent arguments from The Watchtower to believe certain 'truths'. Now, you are presenting logical and cogent arguments showing where some of what we learned is wrong, misleading and even sinister. How can an 'ordinary' Christian decide what to believe? I'll wager the Society could mount a convincing argument, using scripture and prophesy that you, in fact, are the Antichrist or man of lawlessness. (Although they are not likely to do that, since they have already tipped their hand in that regard). At the very least you could be a credible false prophet. Taking this a step further, aren't you concerned for your safety and even your life, from elements in BOTH sides? Sound unlikely? Maybe not when you consider some of the crazy things men are capable of.


It is not really necessary for you to believe what you read on e-watchman. We are talking about the future for the most part anyway. On the one hand, the Watchtower has laid out its view and expectation of the way things are going to occur in the future, according to their understanding of prophecy. On the other hand, e-watchman has presented another interpretation of prophecy that differs in some significant ways from the popular view. Time will tell which is correct. If the prophecies ultimately unfold in a manner I have described, then you might consider yourself in an advantaged position—but nothing more. The principle is the same as when Jesus once said to his disciples: “From this moment on I am telling you before it occurs, in order that when it does occur you may believe that I am he. Most truly I say to you, he that receives anyone I send receives me also. In turn he that receives me, receives also him that sent me.”