The 144,000 in JW theology

[Wootah]

My understanding only 144,000 JWs go to heaven in total over the sum of human history.

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/q ... to-heaven/

Is that correct?

There are 9 million JWs worldwide (rounded up).

https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesse ... w-many-jw/

Will the vast majority of them not go to heaven and be annihilated? What happens to the JWs that don't make the 144, 000?

[Sherlock Holmes]

I do speak with people and I listen to their views and I sometimes ask their opinions but I do not rely on others to define what is right and wrong, what is legal and illegal, I must and do face those decisions myself and the Bible is my reference not humans.

Yet that is not what I see you doing. I see a bunch of judging based on your dogma and wanting others to trust you on what is right and wrong.

I do not ask anyone to trust me, I ask only that they doubt organizations and the "statement of beliefs" and their rules and regulations and their self serving "we are the ones" attitude.

Most JWs want to live on Earth forever on a paradise. Yet you say this is wrong even though the Bible says that the earth will endure forever with righteous people on it. The Bible gives a limited number of those that will be Jesus as rulers in Heaven. But you define that as wrong too. While you say you don't rely on others for what is right and wrong you sure do want others to depend on you.

For what I read in your replies to me and others, your dogma takes center stage. Which is in reality just an opinion.

What dogma? that the word of god is my statement of beliefs? that I have no need for human authorities? that I do not stoop to made up rules? my refusal to accept that I need intermediaries? that I need "elders" to explain the truth? that I cannot rely on God's word but must rely on other people?

If that's my dogma then so be it.

[JehovahsWitness]

What dogma? that the word of god is my statement of beliefs? that I have no need for human authorities? that I do not stoop to made up rules? my refusal to accept that I need intermediaries? that I need "elders" to explain the truth? that I cannot rely on God's word but must rely on other people?

If that's my dogma then so be it.

Unless you are claiming not to be human you do rely on human authority, you are your authority. You are human, so you rely on human authority. You say "god is my statement of beliefs" thats cute but since the bible is open to interpretation, who decides if your understanding is correct?

[Sherlock Holmes]

I ask because, if you reference the bible you must know that the Apostles and first century Christians most certainly made up what would be described today as an organized religion. And Jesus indicated this was exactly what he intended for them.

Perhaps, there's perhaps some truth to that, ... but the Apostles did know Christ personally, they were true witnesses, the Apostolic fathers knew the Apostles, but as time went on the connection naturally grew more and more tenuous and the Catholic church emerged very early on.

So you recognized that an organised structured church was the Apostolic model and that these {to quote you" } "Apostles did know Christ personally, [and] were true witnesses"? From this can we not soumise that Christ' s wish as communicate to his Apostles is that his followers belong to an organised religion that follows the original early pattern?

No I do not see it that way.

There was in fact no centralized authoritative organization, just many small communities, there were not "statements of belief" I know of no such documents existing at that very early time, there wasn't even a Bible as we know it.

The first extra canonical "Creed" emerged around 320 AD, prior to that (that is for the first 300 years after Christ!) these communities relied on the Gospels and Epistles and some (what are now) extra canonical writings (for example the 1st Epistle of Clement).

[Sherlock Holmes]

What dogma? that the word of god is my statement of beliefs? that I have no need for human authorities? that I do not stoop to made up rules? my refusal to accept that I need intermediaries? that I need "elders" to explain the truth? that I cannot rely on God's word but must rely on other people?

If that's my dogma then so be it.

Unless you are claiming not to be human you do rely on human authority, you are your authority. You are human, so you rely on human authority. You say "god is my statement of beliefs" thats cute but since the bible is open to interpretation, who decides if your understanding is correct?

God decides if my understanding is correct, I place my trust in God.

[2timothy316]

I do speak with people and I listen to their views and I sometimes ask their opinions but I do not rely on others to define what is right and wrong, what is legal and illegal, I must and do face those decisions myself and the Bible is my reference not humans.

Yet that is not what I see you doing. I see a bunch of judging based on your dogma and wanting others to trust you on what is right and wrong.

I do not ask anyone to trust me, I ask only that they doubt organizations and the "statement of beliefs" and their rules and regulations and their self serving "we are the ones" attitude.

Most JWs want to live on Earth forever on a paradise. Yet you say this is wrong even though the Bible says that the earth will endure forever with righteous people on it. The Bible gives a limited number of those that will be Jesus as rulers in Heaven. But you define that as wrong too. While you say you don't rely on others for what is right and wrong you sure do want others to depend on you.

For what I read in your replies to me and others, your dogma takes center stage. Which is in reality just an opinion.

What dogma? that the word of god is my statement of beliefs? that I have no need for human authorities? that I do not stoop to made up rules? my refusal to accept that I need intermediaries? that I need "elders" to explain the truth? that I cannot rely on God's word but must rely on other people?

If that's my dogma then so be it.

Yes, that is your dogma. Your rules you stated above are not scriptural, as you gave only your words but nothing from the Word of God.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I do speak with people and I listen to their views and I sometimes ask their opinions but I do not rely on others to define what is right and wrong, what is legal and illegal, I must and do face those decisions myself and the Bible is my reference not humans.

Yet that is not what I see you doing. I see a bunch of judging based on your dogma and wanting others to trust you on what is right and wrong.

I do not ask anyone to trust me, I ask only that they doubt organizations and the "statement of beliefs" and their rules and regulations and their self serving "we are the ones" attitude.

Most JWs want to live on Earth forever on a paradise. Yet you say this is wrong even though the Bible says that the earth will endure forever with righteous people on it. The Bible gives a limited number of those that will be Jesus as rulers in Heaven. But you define that as wrong too. While you say you don't rely on others for what is right and wrong you sure do want others to depend on you.

For what I read in your replies to me and others, your dogma takes center stage. Which is in reality just an opinion.

What dogma? that the word of god is my statement of beliefs? that I have no need for human authorities? that I do not stoop to made up rules? my refusal to accept that I need intermediaries? that I need "elders" to explain the truth? that I cannot rely on God's word but must rely on other people?

If that's my dogma then so be it.

Yes, that is your dogma. Your rules you stated above are not scriptural, as you gave only your words but nothing from the Word of God.

So you think the word of God is not sufficient? we do need some additional help? some clarification? a custom translation of the Bible perhaps?

[JehovahsWitness]

There was in fact no centralized authoritative organization...

You might like to examine the Christian scriptures more closely. The Christians under the Apostles had ...

• A chosen name which identified them as a group - Acts 11:26

• A "hierarchical" structure, with a central body of decision makers - Acts 15:2, 28; Act 16:4

• Written instruction that those representing said leadership be obeyed - Heb 13:17

• A system of communicating their decisions and directions to the wider community Acts 15:22, 23

• Regular congregational meetings for upbuilding and instruction - Hebrews 10:25 compare 1 Cor 16:19, Acts 13:1

• Appointed elders authorised to discipline, judge and in extreme cases expulse from the community 1 Tim 3:2, 8 ; Acts 14:23 compare 1 Cor 5:13

• A centralized system to finance community aid and disaster relief Act 11:29

• Travelling missionairs and local preachers - Acts 16:3-5

There is no doubt about it the Apostolique pattern was most certainly of a organsised religion.




JW

FURTHER READING Do You Need Organized Religion?
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/maga ... -religion/




RELATED POSTS

Do the teachings and philosophies of Jesus as expressed in the Gospels,
indicate he intented to start a "new [organised] religion"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 45#p792645

Can the first century church be rightly described as "an organised religion"?
viewtopic.php?p=1062104#p1062104

Were the first century Christians an organized, unified community?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 34#p885434

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

RELIGION, ORGANISATION and ...CHRISTIANITY

[Sherlock Holmes]

There was in fact no centralized authoritative organization...

You might like to examine the Christian scriptures more closely. The Christians under the Apostles had ...

• A chosen name which identified them as a group

• A "hierarchal" structure, with a central body of decision makers

• A system of communicating their decisions and directions to the wider community

• Regular congregational meetings for upbuilding and instruction

• Appointed elders authorised to discipline, judge and in extrême cases expulse from the community

• A system to finance community aid and disaster relief

• Travelling missionairs and local preachers

There is no doubt about it the Apostolique pattern was most certainly of a orgaansised religion.

I'd be delighted to explore this further, some sources would be appreciated.

I think it true though that there was a) No "statement of beliefs" b) No obsession with the manufactured sound "Jehovah" and there are no examples of the tetragrammaton being used in any surviving examples of Greek NT manuscripts or texts that quote from them.

[JehovahsWitness]

I think it true though that there was a) No "statement of beliefs"

What do you mean a statement of belief? (The first century Christians obviously had a set of beliefs or they would not have been distinguisable as a community from Pagans)

[JehovahsWitness]

I'd be delighted to explore this further, some sources would be appreciated.

Like you my sources are the bible and the bible alone. Are you asking for scriptural support for the above?

(I am confident you are not asking me to refer you to "experts or authorities")

my refusal to accept that I need intermediaries? that I need "elders" to explain the truth? that I cannot rely on God's word but must rely on other people

Please clarify what you are asking for when you request "sources".



JW