Options
  
 

Week of June 29, 2003

 

 

If God intended to create a peaceful world, with friendly animals and beautiful green gardens everywhere, then why did he give Elephants ivory defenses? And why do rhinos have horns to defend themselves? Why do Sharks have 4 rows of razor sharp teeth? Why are there animals suited for artic weather, or for desert? If God intended to make the planet an Edenesque paradise, why are the animals the way they are?

Paul made reference to the "greatly diversified wisdom of God." Certainly as we examine his creation we come to appreciate that the Creator has designed into his creatures the ability to adapt to various environments and situations. We must remember, too, that the animals were created long before Adam and Eve. So, Jehovah designed them with a means to defend themselves and propagate their species. But, it must be recognized too that Jehovah designed into these same creatures the instinct to willingly submit to humankind. Even outside of Eden, animals are submissive to imperfect men, sadly, sometimes to their detriment.

James 3:7 says that virtually all earthly creatures have been tamed by mankind. And we can appreciate that that is basically true. Of course, there are exceptions. In the book of Job, Jehovah reminds Job of the natural ferocity of Behemoth and Leviathan (hippos and crocs) as a demonstration of Jehovah's awesome power manifest in his creatures. But, even these naturally wild creatures provide very useful services. Alligators and crocs, for example, keep swamps from becoming stagnate and overgrown with vegetation because their powerful swimming movements keep water channels open and fresh water flowing.

We ought to appreciate too, that even in Paradise, animals are going to naturally die, the same as they do now. 2 Peter 2:12 says that animals are born naturally to die. So, it seems that Jehovah designed some creatures to serve as scavengers. Basically there are creatures that serve as animal undertakers; that do the dirty work so we won't have to. So, yes, sharks provide a much-needed service. Carrion-eating birds do, too. Perhaps lions and tigers and other big cats will provide a similar land-based carcass disposal service for us. But, it should be obvious that these creatures have the potential to be quite amicable. Big man-eating cats are really just big pussycats, under the right circumstances. Hence the elephants' ivory tusks can be quite useful moving heavy objects for us, as the Asians have employed our pachyderm friends even in modern times.

As for animals suited to specific environments, again it is a case of versatility and adaptability. For example, polar bears and penguins can live in moderate environments, too, which is why they survive in zoos located outside of their natural environment. But, we may need to revise what we imagine Paradise to be. According to Genesis 8:22, there will always be summer and winter, cold and heat. That means that Jehovah is not going to re-create the deluge (Hebrew word for "heavenly ocean") that he had originally suspended above the earth and that moderated the weather, particularly in the polar regions. So, in the Paradise to come there is still going to be great variety in the weather and environment.

 

Dear Brother, if it is true, as I have been taught, that Jehovah withholds His spirit from a congregation that is harboring a willful sinner; then is it not also true that Jehovah is now withholding His spirit from the Watchtower Society because of the unresolved child abuse situation and the UN NGO debacle? And if that is the case, then should witnesses be still under compulsion to attend 5 meetings each week when some of the things taught may not even be prophetically correct?

I don't think it is true that Jehovah withholds his spirit from everyone else simply because some are false. Take the congregations of Revelation, for example, which the recent Watchtower study article focused on. Several of those congregations had serious problems, a "Jezebel" and the sect of Nicolaus, for instance, caused some in the congregations to be misled into fornication and apostasy by their false teachings. Yet, Jesus commended the faithful ones who put up with that wickedness and didn't succumb to it. So, obviously, Jesus did not remove his spirit entirely from the congregations.

However, it is evident that God can withhold his blessing from our ministry if he is not pleased with us. Malachi 2:2-3, refers to God cursing our blessing and rebuking the seed we have sown. That definitely has application to God withholding his blessing from our service, which is becoming more and more evident as time goes on.

As for the matter of meetings, there is nothing in the Scriptures that reveals how often the original Christians met together. Obviously there was no rigid format for every congregation, as we have now. But, at Hebrews 10:23-25, the apostle exhorts all believers to not forsake our gathering together for the purpose of inciting each other to love and fine works, and to keep encouraging one another, "all the more so" as Jehovah's awesome Judgment Day draws near. In view of the counsel from the inspired apostle of God, we merely have to ask ourselves a very simple question: 'Will my neglecting meeting together with my local brothers and sisters result in their encouragement or discouragement?' Act according to the honest answer you come up with.

Also, look at Jesus' example. As a Jew, he went to the synagogue and temple festivals even though he knew there was error and corruption. Take the instance of the time in his hometown synagogue when Jesus was nearly killed by an enraged mob after he introduced himself as the Messiah. Did that turn Jesus off from ever attending a synagogue again? By no means! He later even healed individuals in the synagogues. So, when was the last time the brothers tried to drag you out of the kingdom hall into the parking lot to stone you to death? Get the point?

 

Have you done any thinking on Ezekiel 38 and 39? Have you researched how we came up with the idea that Gog pictures Satan in his debased condition? It seems to me that Ezekiel is saying what the other prophets have to say about the king of north. Your take?

Yes, Ezekiel harmonizes with all the prophets. For example, at Ezekiel 38:17, Jehovah asks Gog: "Are you the same one of whom  I spoke in the former days by the hand of my servants the prophets of Israel, who were prophesying in those days—years—as to bring you in upon them?"

It appears that we are listening in on Jehovah's dialog with Gog, speaking to us from the future, during the actual attack from where Jehovah is referring back to Bible times when the message was originally sealed, as if in a time capsule. Elsewhere, at Isaiah the 27th chapter for instance, through that prophet of Israel, Jehovah also speaks directly to Satan the Devil during the time of his judgment, referring to him as "Leviathan, the gliding serpent, even to Leviathan, the crooked serpent…the sea monster that is in the sea."

Satan the Devil is pictured as a seven-headed dragon in Revelation that causes his seven-headed political monstrosity to ascend out of the sea of mankind. That, of course, reveals that the Devil is the animating force behind the earthly political system—including the king of the north. It is sort of a hand-in-glove operation. Appropriately, Gog is described as the leader of the confederation of nations that come to destroy Jehovah's people. And like the king of the north, the king of fierce countenance, as well as the shining one of Isaiah's prophecy, Gog comes against God's people from the direction of "the remotest parts of the north."

Whereas, most of the prophets deal with these developments from the aspect of the earthly agencies deployed, Ezekiel addresses the satanic master behind the imperial onslaught. Interestingly, Revelation 20:8 connects the temporary releasing of Satan from his incarceration, to the return of war between Gog and Magog and Jehovah's people.  But, in that context, Gog does not appear to be the Devil, but rather the rabble under his control.

 

What are the demographics of the anointed? My cynical response might be old white men of European heritage. Has anyone attempted to determine how many anointed ones are represented by all races of men/women even those in middle eastern and Asian countries where the work of Jehovah's Witnesses is banned? Wouldn't the 144,000 include all races? If a woman is one of the anointed, how does that affect her standing with non-anointed elders when there could be a difference in real understanding?

We might be inclined to make certain assumptions based upon our own ideas about equality and fairness. But, Jehovah has his own way of doing things. In Ezekiel 18, Jehovah takes issue with his people who accuse him of not having his ways adjusted right. Take the case of 1st century anointed Christians. All the apostles and older men were Jewish. No doubt during the entire apostolic period the majority of anointed men and women were also Jewish. Was that an injustice on God's part? Paul wrote that God will show mercy to whomever he chooses. Who are we to say whom he ought to chose? After all, everyone has the opportunity to choose life, so God's giving others extra privileges according to his good purpose to bless mankind is no unfairness to those who were not chosen.

Because Christendom dominated European civilization, which extended to the Americas, persons in those lands naturally are more receptive to Bible teachings. Call it a case of being in the right place at the right time. But when Jehovah started up his work as the harvest time draws near, it appears that Americans (and to a lesser extent, Europeans and Latinos) have had a privilege similar to the 1st century Jews. If you want to believe it, the prophecies lend themselves quite well to portraying America as the modern land of Egypt, with the attendant prophetic blessing: "Blessed be my people, Egypt."  (See essay—Doom of the Anglo-American Dyad) However, as in the 1st century, there are small numbers of individuals from other nations represented among the chosen ones today, but I cannot say how many, only that there are a few, here and there.

As for women who may be anointed, they have no authority over men in the congregation. I once knew an older, anointed sister who had pioneered for over 6 decades. She was the real deal—full of spirit. Had she been male she would have undoubtedly been a member of the Governing Body. She always humbly deferred to the elders, many of whom were young enough to be her grandchildren; but, it was obvious that Jehovah used her as sort of the grand matriarch of the congregation. She was always a source of strength and inspiration to me personally and many others in the congregation. I remember once when some new little wrinkle of understanding was introduced through the Wt, she just laughed and said: "I knew that 20 years ago."

So, sisters can always find an honored place in the congregation by becoming lesser ones and just working within the bounds that God has placed around them. 

 

There are many people who claim that Jehovah's witnesses have twisted and mistranslated the bible. It is said that they have changed the words and therefore changed the meaning. Could you please shed some light on these things?

Those accusations are passed on by people who are uninformed. I have met people in my public ministry who are under the delusion that Jesus Christ spoketh 15th century King's English. That, of course, is simply ludicrous. One poor deluded individual once told me that his pastor assured him that the King James Bible was an exact translation of the original down to the last word. So, there is a lot of misinformation and outright nonsense that gets passed around on these issues.

The truth is that most other Bible translations have incorporated the bias of their translators. Take the name of Jehovah for example. Virtually all translators recognize that God's personal name was represented in the Scriptures by the YHWH. Yet they refuse to use any proper name in their translation, resorting to the unacceptable "LORD" or God. Why the blatant dishonesty? Doesn't that sort of tampering with the word of Jehovah amount to twisting God's word to obscure the identity of God, which has cause millions of people to confuse Jesus and Jehovah?

While it is beyond the scope and purpose of this Mailbag to get into in-depth Bible translation comparisons, here a few links to sites that discuss in detail various issues related to the NWT and other translations of the Holy Bible.

 

I have recently read an article that stated that Jehovah's Witnesses are now using certain components of blood in transfusions, (for example, something in cow's blood). I was under the impression that no blood whatsoever was to be taken into the body, either eaten or by means of a blood transfusion. Was the source misinformed, or is this true?
The substance you are referring to is a newly developed, highly refined form of cow's blood, called Hemopure. Using blood fractions and derivatives is left up to each person's conscience. Some of Jehovah's Witnesses have apparently felt like that type of treatment is far enough removed from actual cow's blood that it does not violate God's law to abstain from blood.

 

In the school meeting of this week, there is a question that asks: in what sense would Jesus come in the same manner as his disciples saw him going into the sky (Acts 1:11)? The Watchtower 1990, June 1 page 11 says that only Jesus' disciples saw him leave, in the same manner only Jehovah's witnesses have recognized his invisible return. If Jesus didn't begin to rule in 1914, as I now believe, how must we understand these words in Acts?

Our understanding of the manner of Christ's return is not the problem. The timing of it is what has gotten us into trouble.

 

In Revelation 20:5, it says that "The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended." Does this mean ones with an earthly hope who have died don’t get resurrected until after the thousand year reign?
No. Elsewhere in the Scripture it speaks of our being "dead in our trespasses." Those who are born again come to life in a very special way, but others must wait until later to gain freedom from condemnation to death. Since any sin at all condemns us to death, from God's point of view we are dead even though we are alive. The way Jehovah's Witnesses understand that verse, then, is that during the 1,000-year reign of Christ, the dead will come to life. But, they will still be under the condemnation of death because they will still be imperfect. However, during the 1,000-year period, Jesus will gradually uplift mankind from our sinful condition, so that at the end of Christ's reign, there will be no more sin as a result of Adam's sin. So, at that point, the dead come to life in the sense of not being under condemnation to death due to sin.

 

In this week's book study (30 June) Isaiah 60:18 was quoted in the Isaiah book: "No more will violence be heard in your land, despoiling or breakdown within your boundaries." Of course, the WT interprets the violence to people of the world. But Jesus said in the signs of the last days that people will hate another and betray one another. There will also be increasing of lawlessness. The context suggests Jehovah's people. Is Isaiah 60 describing the same?
The Watchtower applies the restoration described in the 60th chapter of Isaiah to the period beginning from 1919. As the same prophecy of Isaiah indicates, though, Jehovah has also covered the heads of his own prophets and visionaries so as to conceal his future judgments from them. The truth is that our breakdown and subsequent salvation are future events. Certainly, the fact that presently within the organization all sorts of immorality and defrauding, not to mention violence to our children in the form of sexual abuse, is proof that violence and despoiling and breakdown have not become things of the past as the prophecy foretells. At some point we will have to stop deluding ourselves and face reality. Then we will actually have our ears unstopped and our eyes miraculously opened to God's Word---as Isaiah has also described.

 

I was raised by JW parents, but after years of studying, I never got baptized and became inactive, mostly due to discouragement and feelings of inadequacy. Now I'm engaged to marry someone who does not share my faith but is in agreement to marry and dwell with me. I am concerned about the upbringing of any children we might have together. In light of the many problems with Watchtower doctrine you have highlighted, how can I, as the husband and father, shoulder the responsibility of raising my children in accord with Ephesians 6:4? I certainly want to help prepare my wife and children for a chance of survival during the great tribulation. Please help!

Why does it have to be all or nothing? The Watchtower provides quite a bit of information that can instruct and encourage your family. And, of course, you always have the Bible. Reading the Bible together as a family is about the most spiritually rewarding thing you can do. You read the newspaper don't you, even though you likely realize that a lot of the stories are not exactly accurate, right? Well, we can still read Watchtower publications and benefit from them, can't we? Just make your family aware that Jehovah and Jesus are much bigger than the Watchtower Society and that they have grand surprises in store for us.

 

When is the fulfillment of Amos 9:11 to be fulfilled? Was it in the first century, since James quotes from it in Acts? Or is it at the coming of Christ in the future?
Like many prophecies, that prophecy has multiple fulfillments—with an ultimate fulfillment. I hope to finish an essay on that topic this week, so instead of covering the same ground here, if you could please check the Essays page in a few days, you may find an answer to your question.