Dispel the Darkness Ministries
Inoculating Christians Against Cults

Menu

Latest News

In the April 15, 2010 "study issue" of the Watchtower magazine, the doctrine of the "generation" has changed yet again. Until 1995, the "generation" was defined as that group of people who had been alive in 1914. It was taught that at least some members of that generation would see the "end of the system of things" and the institution of God's Kingdom on earth.

According to the new teaching, the "generation" is now to be understood differently. The magazine says, "How, then, are we to understand Jesus’ words about “this generation”? He evidently meant that the lives of the anointed whowere on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation." So now the new teaching is that those whose lives overlapped with the members of the 1914 generation will see the end come within their lifetimes. A few of the 1914 generation are still alive, though they are almost 100 years old.

According to the Watchtower's new teaching, therefore, anyone who is alive now, even small children, can comprise part of the "generation" that will see the end. It seems quite possible under those circumstances that the Watchtower may have bought itself another 60 or 70 years before this new prophecy fails. Unfortunately, the former teaching about the "generation" was presented as "the Creator's promise" and "Jehovah's prophetic word." So the JW leadership has already branded itself as a false prophet, and no person who wishes to follow Christ should give them credence (Deut. 18:20-22).

Are All Beliefs Equally Valid?

In recent decades, it has become fashionable to claim that there is no such thing as absolute truth, and that all belief systems and truth claims are equally valid.

It seems to me, though, that the essence of believing in something (having "faith") is believing that what you believe is really true. Doesn't matter what it is, the Bible, the Koran, science, atheism, little orange men living on Pluto - whatever. If you believe that little orange men live on Pluto - if you really have faith in that - isn't there an automatically inherent implication that anyone who denies that there are little orange men living on Pluto is wrong? In fact, if you believe that all faiths come from God, doesn't that imply that someone who believes that some faiths come from God and others do not - or that some come from the Devil - is wrong? Even more to the point, if you believe that all beliefs are equally valid, does that not imply that one who believes that all beliefs are not equally valid is wrong?

Whether a faith is provable or not isn't the issue; by definition a religious faith is not provable. If it were, no faith would be needed. Faith is personal assurance of what we cannot prove.

That's why I have such a problem with the postmodern maxim, "It's OK to believe that you're right, but it's wrong to believe that others are wrong." The statement is self-falsifying. If you really believe that you are right about anything, then you must believe that those who disagree with you are wrong. Otherwise you don't really believe, or else you lack the courage of your convictions.

And. frankly, that's how the universe is. Some things are true, and others are not. No matter how sincerely you believe that following I-95 will get you from New York to Chicago, you aren't going to get there by following that route. All the faith in the world won't make it true, if it's not. Nor is it a question of selecting the route that's "right for you". If you want to get to Chicago from NYC, I-95 won't do it, no matter how good it makes you feel to follow it. It does no good to assert that all paths are equally valid. They aren't. You might really enjoy your drive down I-95 (though I can't see how), but the trip will never, ever bring you to Chicago.

Similarly, one who really believes that Jesus Christ is the only way to God (John 14:6) must of necessity deny the validity of any other path. To acknowledge that there may be other paths to God would negate the words of Jesus, and thus, the basis of Christianity. Now, you can argue that Christianity is wrong about that if you want to. But to argue that both sides of the debate are "equally valid" just makes no sense.