Watchtower Questions

[Lineman101]

I had previously mentioned that I would post the Watchtower's "You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth." What I wanted to share was the confusion regarding the Watchtower and the resurrection of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. I have these volumes that communicate opposite teaching regarding this subject.

These are photos of the volumes. As far as I know, these books are still being used by the Watchtower in their study.


These are the pages in question (page 179). As you can see, the pictures are the same.


This volume says that some of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah will be resurrected on Judgement Day-


But this volume says the inhabitants of Sodom will not be resurrected at Judgement Day-


I hope that there is an answer as to why these volumes are different in their teaching? Anyone?
Take care,
Lineman101

[ArmedJackal]

Religious institutions have routinely changed their mind on doctrine through the years.

[RAMCLAP]

Orthodox Christians have never changed doctrines. They may have left orthodoxy. But the Orthodox have never changed doctrines.

[Subotai]

Just stick with the Bible. The Joho's would be better if they did.

[Just Dave]

There are books of Mormon out there that do the same thing, a friend was telling me that the Mormon church would pay a pretty penny for one.
They want those older books out of circulation.

[eb47]

I had a JW come to my door so I tried to give him a pamphlet of my own. Why would he not even look at it? I told him that I've had previous JW's come before and literally try to make me take their tower thing. I politely declined. Now I am offering him scripture according to the KJV and he refused. I laughed. So I told him that we could talk but only if we go off of the KJV. He said okay but kept trying to "reason" (his word) to the NWT. I said that I will not reason the Word of God. Reasoning to me is another word for compromising. I told him that the KJV was translated in the late 1500's to early 1600's by 47 scholar's who knew Greek and Hebrew. The NWT was translated by a committee of around 20 high school graduates who were deemed in a court of law not to be able to translate in the first place Greek or Hebrew in 1961. Therefore the NWT is not an AV (authorized version). I asked him to reconsider his sources. He does not want to meet anymore. This reminded me why God mentions a Proud look first, even before something like murder. Pride keeps people from humbling ourselves and repenting (No longer walking away from him, but doing a 180 and now walking towards him).

[POLICESTATE]

Just stick with the Bible. The Joho's would be better if they did.

And many other groups besides just them. The Bible is all you need.

[madsend81]

There are books of Mormon out there that do the same thing, a friend was telling me that the Mormon church would pay a pretty penny for one.
They want those older books out of circulation.

FUD. Yes there are 1st Edition copies of the Book of Mormon, and they will cost you a pretty penny on the resale market, but the LDS church isn't actively trying to remove them from circulation in order to hide changes. Yes there have been some changes from the 1st Edition, but most have been grammatical and spelling corrections. I have a reprint of the 1st Edition of the Book of Mormon (not an official LDS Publication) as well as the 1980 printing of the LDS cannon of Scriptures. There isn't much of a difference aside from the addition of an expanded introduction, chapter headings, and cross references.

[Lineman101]

FUD. Yes there are 1st Edition copies of the Book of Mormon, and they will cost you a pretty penny on the resale market, but the LDS church isn't actively trying to remove them from circulation in order to hide changes. Yes there have been some changes from the 1st Edition, but most have been grammatical and spelling corrections. I have a reprint of the 1st Edition of the Book of Mormon (not an official LDS Publication) as well as the 1980 printing of the LDS cannon of Scriptures. There isn't much of a difference aside from the addition of an expanded introduction, chapter headings, and cross references.

Hi madsend81,

Are you willing to defend this statement? There are thousands of known changes. Some may be minor, but many are significant. I also have an original 1830 reprinting of the BOM. By the way, the reprinting I have is according to Deseret Book, "...this great book in facsimile of how it first appeared in 1830..."

Additionally, no known manuscripts exists before Joseph Smith to verify the authenticity of the BOM.

Are you willing to defend the BOM and its authenticity?
Lineman101

[ArmedJackal]

Orthodox Christians have never changed doctrines. They may have left orthodoxy. But the Orthodox have never changed doctrines.

Good point. They may be the only major one.

[sonofeugene]

Every religion changes its doctrine and "truths" to suit its needs. After all, every bit of it is made up and fabricated by man. Including the idea that what they have to say comes from some diety.

[madsend81]

Lineman101-

My post was regarding the claimed attempts by the LDS church to cover up differences between different editions of the Book of Mormon. The LDS church is not trying to actively remove 1st Edition BOM's from the market. I don't deny and the LDS church does not deny that there are editorial differences between the different editions. However, the doctrine taught by the BOM has not changed.

Now, if you really want to get into a discussion about the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, start a new thread and I'll gladly participate. I am willing to defend the divine origin of the BOM. I have and will continue to do so.

[furyous68]

In answer to your OP, it was a clarification of a viewpoint on scripture. As in anything, the more you study something, the more you understand it. This was not a change in doctrine.

The second edition of that book contained a few revisions that came about as our understanding of certain scriptures became clearer. I can guarantee you that if you read the bible several times, each time you'll notice something that you didn't before. That's kind of what happened here. If you notice, the second print pretty much explains why the revision was made. The scripture in Jude makes sense, that if one group is compared to another that has no chance of salvation... that first group most likely doesn't have a chance either. That scripture was always there of course, but when the first edition was written, that connection may not have been necessarily clear.

[uxo2]

They did come back.

As US politicians still doing the same thing

[colossians323]

In answer to your OP, it was a clarification of a viewpoint on scripture. As in anything, the more you study something, the more you understand it. This was not a change in doctrine.

The second edition of that book contained a few revisions that came about as our understanding of certain scriptures became clearer. I can guarantee you that if you read the bible several times, each time you'll notice something that you didn't before. That's kind of what happened here. If you notice, the second print pretty much explains why the revision was made. The scripture in Jude makes sense, that if one group is compared to another that has no chance of salvation... that first group most likely doesn't have a chance either. That scripture was always there of course, but when the first edition was written, that connection may not have been necessarily clear.

I wont start here, but the jehovas who have the wrong name in their cult (tetragrammaton), and have way too many changes in doctrine to count on all my body digits. If this thread continues I will shed some light on the changes throughout the jehovas cultic existence. Remember if you're a jehova, Christ already came back in 1914 in the " spirit world", because of a jehova false name and false prophesy and of course the common man did not Know of Christ's second coming. After all the bible said that Christ was only coming back in the spirit world for his second coming