{"id":210,"date":"2012-08-09T19:50:21","date_gmt":"2012-08-10T00:50:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/smmcroberts.net\/blog\/?p=210"},"modified":"2018-02-19T05:03:45","modified_gmt":"2018-02-19T05:03:45","slug":"the-new-and-improved-80-questions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.smmcroberts.net\/blog\/the-new-and-improved-80-questions\/","title":{"rendered":"The New and Improved 80 Questions!"},"content":{"rendered":"

An RCL Exclusive!<\/h1>\n

\"\"A visitor reported finding the following in the trash container outside of Bethel. It appears to be a printer’s proof of a yet-to-be-released revision to the Organization<\/em> book, with a new set of baptism questions (the infamous “80 questions” that baptismal candidates must answer before a group of elders). \"\"It is designated as the Elder’s Administration Guide with Answers. I have faithfully transcribed it here, but I hid the answers under links so that you can take a shot at answering the questions before looking at the answers (some of which may surprise you). Unfortunately, we don’t have the full set of 80. If anyone out there can dig up the missing pages I will publish them here. Otherwise, if you have any suggestions for new questions I’m sure the Society would be glad to have our input, so feel free to post them here.<\/p>\n

Question 1.<\/strong> Is “Jehovah” the correct name of God?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 1.<\/em> No, it is not. It’s just the name we arbitrarily decided upon while acknowledging that “Yahweh” is the correct name. [At this point try calling the baptismal candidate an arbitrary name such as “Jocko” to see their reaction.]
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nWhile inclining to view the pronunciation “Yah.weh” as the more correct way, we have retained the form “Jehovah” because of people’s familiarity with it since the 14th century.
\n— New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures with References, Revised 1984, p. 23
\nBy combining the vowel signs of ‘Adho.nay and ‘Elo.him’ with the four consonants of the Tetragrammaton the pronunciations Yeho.wah’ and Yehowih’ were formed. The first of these provided the basis for the Latinized form “Jehova(h).” The first recorded use of this form dates from the thirteenth century C.E. Raymundus Martini, a Spanish monk of the Dominican Order, used it in his book Pugeo Fidei of the year 1270. Hebrew scholars generally favor “Yahweh” as the most likely pronunciation.
\n–Aid to Bible Understanding, pp. 884, 885.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 2.<\/strong> Does the name “Jehovah” or the Tetragrammaton appear anywhere in the Greek Scriptures?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 2.<\/em> No, it does not. The New World Translation Committee took it upon themselves, as part of being “faithful and discreet”, to add to the Word of God by inserting the name Jehovah into the text in place of Kurios<\/em> (Lord). The exception to this rule is when Kurios refers to Christ (otherwise Philippians 2:9-11 would unfortunately read “Jesus is Jehovah”, which would be apostasy.)
\nReference:<\/em>
\nThe New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures richly enhances accurate Bible knowledge… the foremost feature of this translation is the restoration of the divine name to its rightful place in the English text. It has been done, using the commonly accepted English form “Jehovah” 6,973 times in the Hebrews Scriptures and 237 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures.
\n— New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures with References, Revised 1984, p. 6
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 3.<\/strong> What is the punishment God metes out for adding to or taking away from the words of his law?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 3.<\/em> Plagues.
\nReference:<\/em>
\nFor I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book
\n— Revelation 22:18
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 4.<\/strong> Since “Jesus set the example of how to worship” is it appropriate for Christians to address God by name when Jesus never referred to him by name, but always referred to him as “father”?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 4.<\/em> Yes. [If the baptismal candidate expresses wonder about this remind them that it is the Governing Body that decides what is appropriate, not Jesus.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 5.<\/strong> Prior to eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil Adam and Eve did not know right from wrong. Was it fair to punish them for doing something they couldn’t know was wrong?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 5.<\/em> Yes; Divine justice does not follow humane ideas of justice. It is the same principle by which we know Jehovah is about to destroy all those who do not know him.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 6.<\/strong> How many of each animal did Noah bring onto the ark, and how long did he have in which to collect them?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 6.<\/em> Two of every unclean, and seven of every bird and clean animal. He and his family had 120 years to collect two of every animal, and one week to collect the remaining 5 of every bird and clean animal. [If the baptismal candidate mentions that the distinction between clean and unclean animals was not made until Moses’ time, tell them there must be new light coming which they should trustingly wait for.]
\nReference:<\/em>
\nOf every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth. For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
\n— Gen:7:2-4<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 7.<\/strong> Who slew the giant Goliath?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 7.<\/em> Elhanan, the son of Jaare-oregim, of Bethlehem.
\nReference<\/em>
\nAnd war arose once again with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite got to strike down Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like the beam of loom workers.
\n— 2 Sam. 21:19
\n[Note that “David” is also an acceptable reply: 1 Sam 17.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 8.<\/strong> Identify the source for the 607 BCE date of Jerusalem’s destruction.<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 8.<\/em> The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. [If the baptismal candidate wonders why no historian agrees with our date, tell them that ours is based on fulfilled prophecy relating to 1914, and if the date 607 BCE were incorrect then so would the 1914 date.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 9.<\/strong> Name the three nights between Friday evening and Sunday morning.<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 9.<\/em> [Submit all answers to this question to headquarters; we’re still searching for a good one.]
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nFor as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth
\n— Matthew 12:40
\nAnd now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea… went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus.
\n— Mark 15:42, 43:
\nWhen the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus’ body. Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb… As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. “Don\u2019t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen!”
\n— Mark 16:1-6:
\n[According to the above, Jesus died and was buried late on the day before the Sabbath — that is, on Friday –and rose on the morning after the Sabbath, or on Sunday.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 10.<\/strong> What color was Jesus’ robe?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 10.<\/em> Scarlet.
\nReference:<\/em>
\nAnd they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe.
\n— Matthew 27:28
\n[Purple is also an acceptable answer (see below).]
\nAnd the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a purple robe.
\n— John 19:2<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 11.<\/strong> Challenge Question<\/em>: Since God’s inspired word states that “the son shall not bear the sin of the father” why was the Ransom Sacrifice needed?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 11.<\/em> The Scripture refers to a future time period when the “God who does not change” will no longer punish descendants for their ancestor’s sin.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 12.<\/strong> Since the Bible records instances of God forgiving sins without the shedding of blood, why was the ransom sacrifice needed?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 12.<\/em> Because Paul said so.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 13.<\/strong> God cares about every sparrow, yet he instituted a massive system of animal sacrifices when he knew that such sacrifices would not induce him to forgiveness. Explain.<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 13.<\/em> God just wanted to demonstrate how futile it was for us to try to save ourselves.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 14.<\/strong> Why did God choose Abraham and bless his children, when Abraham had married his half-sister (which God told Moses was a sin worthy of a curse)?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 14.<\/em> God also chose Moses to lead his people even though Moses was the child of incest (his father had married his aunt: a sin according to the law God gave to Moses). So, despite our answer to question 11, it appears that God sometimes in the past did not punish children for their father’s sins (or their fathers either, for that matter). Go figure!
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nAnd if a man shall take his sister, his father’s daughter, or his mother’s daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister’s nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity.
\nAnd thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother’s sister, nor of thy father’s sister: for he uncovereth his near kin: they shall bear their iniquity. And if a man shall lie with his uncle’s wife, he hath uncovered his uncle’s nakedness: they shall bear their sin; they shall die childless.
\nAnd if a man shall take his brother’s wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brother’s nakedness; they shall be childless.
\n— Lev:20:17-21
\nCursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother.
\n— Deut:27:22
\nAnd yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.
\n— Gen:20:12:
\nAnd Amram took him Jochebed his father’s sister to wife; and she bare him Aaron and Moses
\n— Ex:6:20
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 15.<\/strong> If a woman is raped and she fails to scream, is she guilty of fornication?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 15.<\/em> Yes, and\/or no; depending upon when you ask and which way the wind is blowing over headquarters.
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nYES – Watchtower, 1\/15\/64, p. 63.
\nNO – Aid to Bible Understanding, 1969, p. 601; 1371.
\nYES – Awake!, 3\/8\/74, p. 14.
\nNO – Awake!, 7\/8\/80, p. 5, 6.
\nYES – Watchtower, 10\/15\/80, p. 7.
\nNO – Watchtower, 3\/15\/83, p. 30.
\nYES – Awake!, 2\/22\/84, p. 24.
\nNO – Awake!, 6\/8\/84, p. 28.
\nYES – Awake!, 5\/22\/86, p. 23.
\nNO – Awake!, 9\/22\/86, p. 28.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 16.<\/strong> What organization has “abolished hatred”?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 16.<\/em> The Society of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
\nReference:<\/em>
\nYes. The international society of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses is living proof that hatred can be abolished\u2026 It is a foreglimpse of a worldwide program to eliminate hatred and its causes.
\n— Watchtower, 6\/15\/1995 p.8<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 17.<\/strong> Who are the “mentally diseased” wicked ones that Jehovah’s people are required to hate?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 17.<\/em> Anyone who has willingly left the organization.
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nWell, apostates are ‘mentally diseased’, and they seek to infect others with their disloyal teachings
\n— Watchtower, 7\/15\/2011
\nWe must hate in the truest sense, which is to regard with extreme and active aversion, to consider as loathsome, odious, filthy, to detest. Surely any haters of God are not fit to live on this beautiful earth. What do you do with anything loathsome or repugnant that you detest and abhor? The answer is simple. You get away from it or remove it from your presence. You do not want to have anything at all to do with it. This must be exactly our attitude toward the haters of Jehovah.
\n— Watchtower 10\/1\/1952 p.599
\n\u2026in order to hate what is bad a Christian must hate the person with whom the badness is inseparably linked\u2026 Jesus did not mean for us to love the hardened enemies of Jehovah.
\n— Watchtower 7\/15\/1961 p.420)
\nYou have seen the benefit of godly love, but do you know how to hate? …These very strong words are an expression of godly hate, and you too must have this quality to be pleasing to God. Hate causes a feeling of disgust to well up inside you. You loathe, abhor, despise the object of your hatred.
\n— Watchtower 7\/15\/1974 p.442)<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 18.<\/strong> Vocabulary Definition<\/em>: What is “a stack of bones and a hank of hair”?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 18.<\/em> According to former Watchtower president Joseph Franklin Rutherford, this is the definition of a woman (Watchtower, 9\/15\/1941, p.287)
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 19.<\/strong> What would Rutherford be disfellowshipped for today?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 19.<\/em> Smoking cigars, drunkenness, adultery, apostasy…<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 20.<\/strong> What was the fulfillment of the Great Plagues of Revelation?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 20.<\/em> A series of conventions held by Jehovah’s Witnesses in the early part of the 20th century. These conventions (held in Cedar Point, Ohio and other such centers of world importance) were basically “book drives” in which Rutherford gave his followers pep-talks to encourage them to sell his books. (These books of Rutherford’s are no longer believed to be the truth by anyone.)<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 21.<\/strong> Heritage Question<\/em>: What was the name of Rutherford’s second mistress?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 21.<\/em> Berta Peale. [The answer “Bonnie Boyd-Heath” must be considered incorrect, as this was his first mistress.]
\nReference:<\/em>
\nhttps:\/\/www.jehovahs-witness.com\/topic\/154191\/rutherford-exposed-story-berta-bonnie-redux<\/a>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 22.<\/strong> Name one of the “magical arts” most prevalent in today’s world.<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 22.<\/em> The practice of medicine.
\nReference:<\/em>
\nWe do well to bear in mind that among the drugs, serums, vaccines, surgical operations, etc., of the medical profession, there is nothing of value save an occasional surgical procedure. Their whole so-called “science” grew out of Egyptian black magic and has not lost its demonological character.
\n— The Golden Age, 8\/5\/1931, p.727<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 23.<\/strong> Vocabulary Definition<\/em>: What did the faithful and discreet slave identify as “filthy pus that never saved a life”?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 23.<\/em> Vaccines.
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nAvoid serum inoculations as they pollute the blood stream with their filthy pus.
\n— The Golden Age, 11\/12\/1929, p.107
\nThinking people would rather have smallpox than vaccination, because the latter sows the seed of syphilis, cancers, escema, erysipelas, scrofula, consumption, even leprosy and many other loathsome affections. Hence the practice of vaccination is a crime, an outrage and a delusion.
\n–The Golden Age, 5\/1\/1929, p.502
\n[Vaccination is] a direct violation of the everlasting covenant God made with Noah after the flood\u2026Vaccination has never saved a human life. It does not prevent smallpox.
\n— The Golden Age, 2\/4\/1931, p.293-294
\n[Note that we’ve since changed out minds on this, but offer no apology for misleading people into death from smallpox and persecution for their stand against vaccinations.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 24.<\/strong> Since blood transfusions are “a matter of personal conscience” does that mean there are no consequences for accepting one?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 24.<\/em> No. The “matter of personal conscience” is just something we tell the media. In reality we dish out our most extreme punishment for people using blood to save their lives.
\nReference:<\/em>
\nThe receiver of a blood transfusion must be cut off from God\u2019s people by excommunication or disfellowshiping.
\n— Watchtower, 1\/15\/1961, p.64
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 25.<\/strong> Since the Bible’s prohibition on blood stems from the command to pour an animal’s blood on the ground, why are Jehovah’s people permitted transfusions of cow’s blood?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 25.<\/em> Because the Society says so. [Offer no further rationalization; the baptismal candidate must get used to arbitrary decisions from his Governing Body and accept them without question.]
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nThat they [Jehovah’s Witness] must adhere absolutely to the decisions and scriptural understandings of the Society because God has given it this authority over his people.
\n— Watchtower, 5\/1\/1972, p.272
\nAvoid independent thinking…questioning the counsel that is provided by God’s visible organization.
\n— Watchtower, 1\/15\/1983 p.22<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 26.<\/strong> Heritage Question<\/em>: What did the “faithful and discreet slave” identify as “cannibalism” and “against God’s law”?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 26.<\/em> Organ transplants.
\nReference:<\/em>
\n…removing the organ and replacing it directly with an organ from another human… Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic. However, in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans to try to perpetuate their lives by cannibalistically taking into their bodies human flesh, whether chewed or in the form of whole organs or body parts taken from others.
\n— Watchtower, 11\/15\/1967, p.702
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 27.<\/strong> Follow-up Question<\/em>: How did the above “faithful and discreet” ruling affect certain individuals?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 27.<\/em> Those who obeyed the Society’s mandate died. Those who disobeyed lived, but were disfellowshipped.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 28.<\/strong> Witnesses who accepted organ transplants during the time when the society said they were against God’s law, and who later died: will they be resurrected?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 28.<\/em> That is not for us to judge. But probably not since they disobeyed God’s Organization on Earth. [Explain that even if the Governing Body is wrong about something, it is not up to any individual to act contrary to their guidance.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 29.<\/strong> If the above Witnesses didn’t die, were they accepted back into the organization with open arms and an apology once the ruling changed?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 29.<\/em> You’ve got to be kidding.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 30.<\/strong> How were those who lost loved ones recompensed after the organ-transplant ruling was changed?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 30.<\/em> They were recompensed with the knowledge that their loved ones died in service to Jehovah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 31.<\/strong> What is a cult?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 31.<\/em> A cult is a group that follows the leadership of a man or a group of men instead of following God’s leadership.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 32.<\/strong> Witnesses who needed organ transplants but who died obeying the Society’s pronouncement that transplants were against God’s law are praised for “putting the kingdom first”. Since we now know that this wasn’t really a law of God’s kingdom, what did they really put first?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 32.<\/em> The Society. [Other acceptable answers: The Governing Body; The Faithful and Discreet Slave; The Organization.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 33.<\/strong> Are Jehovah’s Witnesses a cult?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 33.<\/em> No, of course not!<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 34.<\/strong> Since our Lord said that “nothing that enters into a man can defile him,” how does a blood transfusion defile a Christian?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 34.<\/em> Because the Society says so.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 35.<\/strong> Inferring Biblical Principles<\/em>: When accused of breaking the Sabbath law, Jesus referred to David’s breaking the law when he and his starving men ate the sacred showbread. And Jesus concluded: “The law was made for man, not man for the law.” What principle does this suggest to you?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 35.<\/em> That it is permissible to break God’s law to save a life.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 36.<\/strong> Follow-up Question<\/em>: If an unbeliever then asked you to follow the above Bible Principle and save your son or daughter’s life by giving them life-saving blood, how would you reply?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 36.<\/em> “I must follow the leadership of the group of men known as the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses rather than this Bible principle, even if it means sacrificing my own life or that of my children.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 37.<\/strong> Inferring Society Principles<\/em>: Why is it okay to take a siesta but not to celebrate a birthday?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 37.<\/em> [Point out that in the only place in the Bible where a siesta is mentioned it is only pagans who take them, and that someone was killed during the siesta. This is the same rationale for not celebrating birthdays.] The correct answer, once again is: “The Society tells me so.”
\nReference:<\/em>
\nAnd the sons of Rimmon… proceeded to go and come to the house of Ishbosheth about when the day had heated up, as he was taking his noonday siesta… And here they came into the middle of the house as men fetching wheat, and they struck him in the abdomen. When they went into the house, he way lying upon his couch in his inner bedroom, and they struck him so that they put him to death, after which they removed his head
\n— 2 Sam. 4:5<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 38.<\/strong> What institution is the Image of the Wild Beast?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 38.<\/em> The United Nations.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 39.<\/strong> What is the fate of that institution and its members?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 39.<\/em> Destruction and death.<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 40.<\/strong> Name the most important former associate-member of the United Nations.<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 40.<\/em> The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.
\nReference:<\/em>
\nhttp:\/\/www.jwfacts.com\/watchtower\/united-nations-association.php<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Question 41.<\/strong> Who is God’s prophet in modern times?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 41.<\/em> The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nSuch persons should remember that the Watchtower sets out the words of God’s prophet.
\n –Watchtower, 1936 p.182 par.18
\nGod uses The Watchtower to communicate to his people; it does not consist of men’s opinions.
\n — Watchtower 1\/1\/1942, p.5
\nThe twentieth-century preaching prophets of Jehovah are the ones who are running to and fro over the Bible to gain knowledge of the divine pronouncements which is on the increase.-Dan. 12:4.
\n — Watchtower 4\/15\/1952 p.253 “Aids for Understanding Prophecy”
\nAs Jehovah revealed his truths by means of the first-century Christian congregation so he does today by means of the present-day Christian congregation. Through this agency he is having carried out prophesying on an intensified and unparalleled scale. All this activity is not an accident. Jehovah is the one behind all of it.
\n — Watchtower 6\/15\/1964 pp.365-6 “Jehovah, the God of Progressive Revelation”
\nPeople today can view the creative works. They have at hand the Bible, but it is little read or understood. So, does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come?
\nIDENTIFYING THE “PROPHET”
\nThese questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet? … This “prophet” was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah’s Christian witnesses. … Of course, it is easy to say that this group acts as a “prophet” of God. It is another thing to prove it. The only way that this can be done is to review the record.
\n — Watchtower 4\/1\/1972 p.197 “They Shall Know that a Prophet Was Among Them”
\nThe facts substantiate that the remnant of Christ’s anointed disciples have been doing that prophesying to all the nations…
\n — Holy Spirit — The Force Behind the Coming New Order! (1976) p.148
\nIn behalf of such individuals who at heart seek God’s rule instead of man’s rule, the “prophet” whom Jehovah has raised up has been, not an individual man as in the case of Jeremiah, but a class. The members of this class are, like the prophet-priest Jeremiah, wholly dedicated to Jehovah God through Christ and, by the begettal of Jehovah’s holy spirit, they have been made part of “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for special possession.”
\n — Watchtower 10\/1\/1982 p.27 “Be as Men Who Are Facing Har-Magedon Unafraid”
\nYou will be interested to learn that God has on earth a people, all of whom are prophets, or witnesses for God. In fact, they are known throughout the world as Jehovah’s Witnesses.
\n — Awake! 6\/8\/1986 p.9 “Would That All Were Prophets!”<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 42.<\/strong> Challenge Question<\/em>: Since we were “more certain” of our prophecy concerning the resurrection of the “Ancient Worthies” in 1925 than we were about 1914, and since the 1925 prophecy proved false, what does that say about 1914?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 42.<\/em> Logically it would mean that we shouldn’t be trusted as to what we claim about the spiritual significance of 1914. But as this is a spiritual matter we shouldn’t use logic.
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nWe may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old … 1925 shall mark the resurrection of the faithful worthies of old and the beginning of the reconstruction…
\n— Millions Now Living May Never Die, pp. 89, 90, 97
\nWe have no doubt whatever in regard to the chronology relating to the dates of 1874, 1914, 1918, and 1925.
\n— Watchtower 1922 p.147
\nThe date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914.
\n— Watchtower 9\/1\/22, page 262
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 43.<\/strong> What is the definition of a false prophet?<\/div>\n

Answer<\/a>Answer 43.<\/em> One whose prophecies fail to come true.
\nReferences:<\/i>
\nBut the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
\n — Deut. 18:20-22 KJV
\nIf he is a false prophet, his prophecy will fail to come to pass.
\n — Watchtower, 5\/15\/30
\nThe difference between a true and a false prophet is that one is speaking the word of the Lord and the other is speaking his own dreams and guesses.
\n — Watchtower, 5\/15\/1930, p.45
\nJehovah, the God of the true prophets, will put all false prophets to shame either by not fulfilling the false prediction of such self-assuming prophets or by having His own predictions fulfilled in a way opposite to that predicted by the false prophets.
\n — Paradise Restored to Mankind – by Thecoracy, p.47- WBTS 1972<\/span><\/p>\n

Question 44.<\/strong> Is the society a false prophet?<\/div>\n

(Answer missing along with questions 45-80. But if you’ve come this far you can answer this question yourself.<\/em>)
\n\"\"
\n\"\"
\n