Wednesday, November 30, 2005

What about Jesus' lost years?


What is the truth about Jesus’ so-called 17 lost years?






You are referring to the gap between the incident recorded in the Bible that took place when Jesus was 12 years old and the time of his baptism 17 years later. The reason the Bible does not contain any account of Jesus’ life during those years is because it is not important. The reason those years are not important is because Jesus did not begin his ministry until he was baptized at the age of 30. What was Jesus doing during those years? After the incident in the temple when Jesus was 12 the Bible account at Luke 2:51 simply says: “And he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and he continued subject to them. Also, his mother carefully kept all these sayings in her heart. And Jesus went on progressing in wisdom and in physical growth and in favor with God and men.”

So, basically Jesus lived with his parents, studied and went to meetings and worked with his step-father, Joseph, in the family carpentry business until he was baptized and afterwards embarked on his three and a half year ministry.

Thursday, November 24, 2005

Michael the Archangel


Here is one paradox which the WT cannot resolve for me - just one of many! They teach that Jesus was previously - and also now - known as Michael, the created archangel. But it is a simple matter to prove from Scripture, that this cannot be so. Who is the "man" talking with Daniel in chapters 10 & 12? “... here was a certain man clothed in linen, with his hips girded with gold of Uphaz. And his body was like chrysolite, and his face like the appearance of lightning, and his eyes like fiery torches, and his arms and the place of his feet were like the sight of burnished copper, and the sound of his words was like the sound of a crowd.”

When he saw this "man", Daniel fell unconscious, and the "man" told him not to be afraid, and helped him to his feet. Whoever he is, he has these things to say about Michael - "But the prince of the royal realm of Persia was standing in opposition to me for twenty-one days, and, look! Michael, one of the foremost princes, came to help me...And now I shall go back to fight with the prince of Persia. When I am going forth, look! also the prince of Greece is coming. However, I shall tell you the things noted down in the writing of truth, and there is no one holding strongly with me in these things but Michael, the prince of you people…And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of your people. And there will certainly occur a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time. And during that time your people will escape, every one who is found written down in the book. And there will be many of those asleep in the ground of dust who will wake up, these to indefinitely lasting life and those to reproaches and to indefinitely lasting abhorrence."

We see this same man speaking with John in Revelation chapter 1 - "I heard behind me a strong voice like that of a trumpet ... in the midst of the lampstands someone like a son of man, clothed with a garment that reached down to the feet, and girded at the breasts with a golden girdle. Moreover, his head and his hair were white as white wool, as snow, and his eyes as a fiery flame; and his feet were like fine copper when glowing in a furnace; and his voice was as the sound of many waters."

When he saw this "man", John fell unconscious, and the "man" told him not to fear, and raised him to his feet. "Do not be fearful. I am the First and the Last, and the living one; and I became dead, but, look! I am living forever and ever ... " This time, we are left in no doubt at all as to who this "man" is. He identifies himself as Jesus. His characteristics prove that he is the very same "man" who spoke with Daniel, and who said that Michael was just "one of the chief princes", who "came to help him", whom he "left behind with the king of Persia" (as stated in translations other than the NWT.) So, since it is Jesus speaking with Daniel, about Michael in the 3rd person - it is obvious that Michael cannot be Jesus. Jesus is superior to Michael, who is simply "one of the chief princes" and I take this to mean, that he is one of the 7 chief angels Jesus is holding (as stars) in his hand in Revelation 1. In fact, Jesus says that Michael is the chief prince of the Israelites - in both Daniel 12, and Revelation 12.

I would be very interested in your response to this. Other JWs I speak to have been unable to grasp the simple logic of reading the plain evidence of Scripture for themselves, but you are different. You can see the danger of formulating a doctrine around a misconception or a verse taken out of context.



There is no mystery who the “man” was that appeared to Daniel. He was the angel Gabriel; the only angel mentioned by name in the entire Bible (other than Michael). How do we know it was Gabriel and not Jesus? Throughout the prophecy of Daniel there are two angels that converse with each other and with Daniel. Consider the 8th chapter where one angel tells Gabriel to approach Daniel and explain the vision to him. Daniel 8:16-19 reads: “And I began to hear the voice of an earthling man in the midst of the Ulai, and he proceeded to call out and say: ‘Gabriel, make that one there understand the thing seen.’ So he came beside where I was standing, but when he came I got terrified so that I fell upon my face. And he proceeded to say to me: ‘Understand, O son of man, that the vision is for the time of the end.’ And while he was speaking with me, I had become fast asleep on my face on the earth. So he touched me and made me stand up where I had been standing. And he went on to say: Here I am causing you to know what will occur in the final part of the denunciation, because it is for the appointed time of the end.’”

Notice please the similarities to the incident you cited in the 10th chapter. In both cases Daniel became terrified by the sight and fell down as if dead. On both occasions the angel revealed prophetic events tied to the time of the end.

In the 9th chapter of Daniel Gabriel appears again and makes mention of the fact he had been made weary with tiredness. Then in the 10th chapter we are informed that the angel had to fight with the demonic prince of Persia—no doubt the reason for Gabriel’s tiredness in his earlier appearance to Daniel. It would appear, then, that the angel in the 10th chapter is also Gabriel—even though he is not named as such.

Lending weight to that is the fact that the angel was successfully opposed by the prince of Persia for three weeks—until Michael came to his assistance. If the angel in the 10th chapter of Daniel had actually been Christ or the Word as he is also called, surely he would have been more powerful than the prince of Persia and Michael. The account suggests otherwise—that the angel of the vision has less authority than Michael. Indeed, the 12th chapter of Revelation indicates that Michael is the most powerful angel in heaven—even taking the lead in ousting the Devil from heaven--yet the angel in the 10th chapter was not able to overcome demonic opposition until Michael came to help.

However, the similarities between the appearance of the angel in Daniel’s prophecy and the appearance of the son of man in Revelation are undeniable. But, keep in mind that Daniel’s encounter with the angel was in the form of a vision. And without doubt the vision was prophetically significant—prefiguring Christ’s parousia. Later on in the encounter the angel took the less imposing form of an earthling man. What accounts for the similarities then? Most likely the angel was playing the role of Christ in the vision. That Gabriel would have that privilege is in keeping with the fact that Gabriel later announced the birth of Jesus.

Since the angel’s appearance took place after Daniel supplicated God for mercy upon Israel and was for the purpose of informing Daniel of what would befall Jehovah’s people during the time of the end, it seems that Daniel’s terrifying encounter with the glorious angel prefigures Jesus’ presence—when he comes alongside the chosen ones to minister to them after they have been disciplined.

Keep in mind that on numerous occasions angels represented Jehovah himself. For example, when Moses had an encounter with God up on top of Mount Sinai, when he received the 10 Commandments, the account says that Moses spoke with God, but 1,500 years later we are told that Moses merely encountered deputized angels who spoke for God. Now, if the angels have authority to speak for Jehovah, it is reasonable to assume that Michael’s angels have authority to speak for him as well.

Monday, November 14, 2005

Higher Education?


Dear E-Watchman,

Assuming you have already read the Oct 15 WT on Higher Education and the dangers of going to college, why do you think the WTS is so viciously opposed to it? Is it because they are thinning on the ranks of pioneers and MS's; or is it that young JW's are being taught critical thinking and are leaving the WT? If possible, it would be nice if you could do a commentary/essay on this topic, as many in my circle are aghast at this revised stand against university education.


Actually, I haven’t read the October 15th Watchtower yet, but it doesn’t exactly sound as if they are putting forth “new light.” But it does seem as though there is a back and forth struggle between the hardliners and the moderates.

Really, though, why should the Watchtower even have an opinion on the subject of higher education? They should warn of the spiritual dangers and leave it at that. After all, it is a personal matter and an issue for families to decide. It is no one else’s business if another Christian chooses to go to school.

Did Jesus have anything to say on the topic? Paul? Peter? John? James? If the Bible is silent on the issue of higher education, why should the Watchtower weigh in with such a heavy opinion on the matter?

Actually, the Bible indicates that Moses was raised in all the knowledge of Egypt--which means that he received a higher education from the first world power of history. Daniel and the three Hebrews were also schooled in all the knowledge of the Chaldeans. By all accounts they turned out okay.

If Jehovah’s Witnesses are well grounded in their faith then they too should be able to stand up to the challenges and temptations a so called higher education might present.

But keep in mind though---a college degree ain’t what it used to be.

Friday, November 11, 2005

70 X 7 prophetic?


I am wondering if you have any thoughts on the prophetic significance of Matthew 18:21-22 because I cannot find anything written by the Society on the relevance. Is it possible that it's because of how the NWT renders the scripture (compared to other translations, including the Emphatic Diaglott); the NWT misinterprets the original thoughts conveyed by the original language?

The NWT renders the scripture this way: "Then Peter came up and said to him: "Lord, how many times is my brother to sin against me and am I to forgive him? Up to seven times?" 22 Jesus said to him: "I say to you, not, Up to seven times, but, Up to seventy-seven times."


Whereas, other Bible translations have it this way:

"...until seventy times seven." (KJV, NLT, Diaglott, ESV, BBE, ASV, et al)

As you must already know, seventy times seven equals 490, so might this not have been of far more prophetic significance than simply the extent we should be willing to forgive our brothers and sisters? Might this not have been Jesus' way of referring to the 70-week (490 years) prophecy in Daniel 9:24 "There are seventy weeks that have been determined upon your people and upon your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, and to finish off sin, and to make atonement for error, and to bring in righteousness for times indefinite, and to imprint a seal upon vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies."

If Jesus was actually trying to bring Daniel's prophetic declaration to mind for Peter because it addresses Israel's "transgression," why is it that the Society has not published anything about this in our literature, especially because of its prophetic significance?

Whether the correct rendering is 77 or 70 X 7 I don’t think there is any prophetic significance to Jesus’ comment. (Apparently neither does the Watchtower) He was apparently simply using a figure of speech, which he frequently employed, called a hyperbole; which is a form of exaggeration. Jesus wanted to impress upon Peter that the idea of even keeping an account of the number of offenses was ridiculous. Who is going to keep a ledger of even 77 offenses, let alone hundreds?