JWs consider God's Kingdom to be a Government

[JehovahsWitness]

Jehovah's Witnesses believe God's Kingdom for which many Christians have prayed throughout the ages to be a (heavenly) government (three words).

What, in three or four words if possible, do you believe it to be?

(Many Christians I have met have said its "A feeling" (in one's heart).

[JehovahsWitness]

I have already said the kingdom is not a "system of rulership"

Are these not your words?

Could you explain what you mean it's a "the reign" then, its not clear to me. Do you mean the kingdom is a system of rulership?

Probably yes, I guess, but as described and/or written about by Jesus and his apostles.

Why did you concede that the kingdom is [probably] a "system of rulership" in the post above?

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 56 by Checkpoint]

Good scriptures too, but how do they shed more light on details about the "system of rulership" that is the Kingdom?

That is your concern, it is not mine.

I have already said the kingdom is not a "system of rulership", as if that is all it is.

The JW take on this is on very shaky ground.

How so? Don't the scriptures indicate that Jesus will actually rule? Don't we call this sort of thing "government"? How do you explain the following Scriptures if God's Kingdom "is not a system of rulership"?

1.) Isaiah 9:6a,7
2.) Daniel 2:44
3.) Daniel 7:14
4.) Luke 1:32,33
5.) Revelation 5:10
6.) Revelation 20:4,6

I await your explanations.

.

I understand what you are saying, and agree those are relevant scriptures.

Note how I qualified my statement by adding "as if that is all it is".

"The JW take" is what I instanced, in which details are outlined.

Such as those about a limited number "reigning" over others and separated from them, and this "rulership" or "government", is only in the future, not now.

Those and associated matters are, in my opinion, "on very shaky ground"

Nice to be again exchanging with you, onewithhim, after a long break.

[Checkpoint]

I have already said the kingdom is not a "system of rulership"

Are these not your words?

Could you explain what you mean it's a "the reign" then, its not clear to me. Do you mean the kingdom is a system of rulership?

Probably yes, I guess, but as described and/or written about by Jesus and his apostles.

Why did you concede that the kingdom is [probably] a "system of rulership" in the post above?

Good obsevations that illustrate I still need to work on my writing and discussion skills.

Nevertheless, my exchange with onewithhim, posted before your post was, does bring some clarity and consistency (I think!).

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 56 by Checkpoint]

Good scriptures too, but how do they shed more light on details about the "system of rulership" that is the Kingdom?

That is your concern, it is not mine.

I have already said the kingdom is not a "system of rulership", as if that is all it is.

The JW take on this is on very shaky ground.

How so? Don't the scriptures indicate that Jesus will actually rule? Don't we call this sort of thing "government"? How do you explain the following Scriptures if God's Kingdom "is not a system of rulership"?

1.) Isaiah 9:6a,7
2.) Daniel 2:44
3.) Daniel 7:14
4.) Luke 1:32,33
5.) Revelation 5:10
6.) Revelation 20:4,6

I await your explanations.

.

I understand what you are saying, and agree those are relevant scriptures.

Note how I qualified my statement by adding "as if that is all it is".

"The JW take" is what I instanced, in which details are outlined.

Such as those about a limited number "reigning" over others and separated from them, and this "rulership" or "government", is only in the future, not now.

Those and associated matters are, in my opinion, "on very shaky ground"

Nice to be again exchanging with you, onewithhim, after a long break.

The term "reigning" is distasteful to many people, and I understand that. The term is associated with the harsh, often brutal rulerships of men. But isn't a "reign" SUPPOSED to be for the benefit of the people, in theory? Under Christ, that will be the situation for people on Earth, unlike the unfair rulership of men. So those people who will be "reigning" with Christ in heaven will be doing so with the purpose in mind of helping, guiding the people here to re-invigorate the earth and make it a beautiful paradise.

This government could not be NOW, because conditions are bleak here, under the rulership of men. Hasn't it been scripturally established that the government of God will put an end to human governments, and peace will be enjoyed by all? How has this happened already?

.

[JehovahsWitness]

Note how I qualified my statement by adding "as if that is all it is".

Okay, fair enough. So from your clarification I take it you accept that the kingdom is indeed a "system of rulership" albeit also other things. I say this because if someone were, for example to ask if a man is a doctor and the response was "That is not ALL he is" then the answer to "Is he a doctor" is the affirmative. Or if someone were to ask: Is that a hospital and the answer was "that is not all it is" the reasonable conclusion would be that it is indeed a hospital but also serves as in some other capacity (but those other capacities do not negate it being a hospital)

That being the case, although we may disagree on details, we both agree (correct me if I am wrong) on the basic idea that the KINGDOM is a system of rulership (or as you put a "reign").


Given the above, I have a question: Do you think this system of rulership has any connection whatsoever to the "government" that is spoken of being upon the shoulders of the messiah (the prince of peace)?

ISIAIAH 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

JW

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 64 by onewithhim]

The term "reigning" is distasteful to many people, and I understand that. The term is associated with the harsh, often brutal rulerships of men. But isn't a "reign" SUPPOSED to be for the benefit of the people, in theory? Under Christ, that will be the situation for people on Earth, unlike the unfair rulership of men. So those people who will be "reigning" with Christ in heaven will be doing so with the purpose in mind of helping, guiding the people here to re-invigorate the earth and make it a beautiful paradise.

Some do take that view of "reigning". I am not one of them.

This government could not be NOW, because conditions are bleak here, under the rulership of men. Hasn't it been scripturally established that the government of God will put an end to human governments, and peace will be enjoyed by all? How has this happened already?

I have not said or inferred that "this happened already".

"This government", as described by you, is yet future, regardless of our differences on the details.

What you describe is the JW version of the future aspect of the kingdom, which is the manifestation of what is presently in its growth stage or aspect.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 64 by onewithhim]

The term "reigning" is distasteful to many people, and I understand that. The term is associated with the harsh, often brutal rulerships of men. But isn't a "reign" SUPPOSED to be for the benefit of the people, in theory? Under Christ, that will be the situation for people on Earth, unlike the unfair rulership of men. So those people who will be "reigning" with Christ in heaven will be doing so with the purpose in mind of helping, guiding the people here to re-invigorate the earth and make it a beautiful paradise.

Some do take that view of "reigning". I am not one of them.

This government could not be NOW, because conditions are bleak here, under the rulership of men. Hasn't it been scripturally established that the government of God will put an end to human governments, and peace will be enjoyed by all? How has this happened already?

I have not said or inferred that "this happened already".

"This government", as described by you, is yet future, regardless of our differences on the details.

What you describe is the JW version of the future aspect of the kingdom, which is the manifestation of what is presently in its growth stage or aspect.

Please explain how you see the Kingdom as presently in a "growth stage."

[Checkpoint]

Note how I qualified my statement by adding "as if that is all it is".

Okay, fair enough. So from your clarification I take it you accept that the kingdom is indeed a "system of rulership" albeit also other things. I say this because if someone were, for example to ask if a man is a doctor and the response was "That is not ALL he is" then the answer to "Is he a doctor" is the affirmative. Or if someone were to ask: Is that a hospital and the answer was "that is not all it is" the reasonable conclusion would be that it is indeed a hospital but also serves as in some other capacity (but those other capacities do not negate it being a hospital)

Interesting examples that are not nearly as apt as one you wrote about earlier.

That is, the British queen.

Her "system of rulership" operates only in a place called "the United Kingdom", in which dwell her people, UK citizens.

Can you see, now, a kingdom is not only "a system of rulership"?

That being the case, although we may disagree on details, we both agree (correct me if I am wrong) on the basic idea that the KINGDOM is a system of rulership (or as you put a "reign").


Given the above, I have a question: Do you think this system of rulership has any connection whatsoever to the "government" that is spoken of being upon the shoulders of the messiah (the prince of peace)?

ISIAIAH 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

It does indeed have a connection!

A very direct one.

This "government"[rule, authority, dominion] he is now exercising, and that began when his ministry began, and will continue until he delivers the kingdom to the Father, 1 Corinthians 15:24-28.

In fact, for balance and clarity and context, we need to add the next verse, a long one, to the well-known verse you quoted.

Isaiah 9:7

Of the increase of his government and of peace
there will be no end,
on the throne of David and over his kingdom,
to establish it and to uphold it
with jusice and with righteousness
from this time forth and forevermore.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 67 by onewithhim]

Please explain how you see the Kingdom as presently in a "growth stage."

I am happy to do so, but for now I prefer that you, please, reread what Jesus had to say about that, in Matthew 13.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 68 by Checkpoint]

So Jehovah's Witnesses say God's kingdom is a governmental system of rulership and you say we are on "shakey ground" and then go on to say that God's is indeed a system of rulership and Jesus has a government.

Is that about right?

Jesus has a government, the kingdom is a system of rulership and they are both directly related. Is it conceivable that they are in fact be one and the same thing? If not why?