Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/13/2019 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    We have always used the Bible as the sole authority for our beliefs, so we have adjusted our beliefs as our understanding of the Scriptures has been clarified. - source JWorg Here we have maneuver by JW Clergy Leaders who try to justify, by Bible, how they have made/making changes of Organizational doctrines and beliefs, because they have not understand the Scriptures before (and today too). In meantime, while they were not been aware of false and wrong in own doctrines, they continued to force and run wrong laws inside JW congregations. Exactly this and that WTJWORG mandate beliefs, are what can be called by name you used in comment - provisional laws. With time passing, WT Leaders changed doctrines which they presented as Bible Truths and God's Word. After some time they made new doctrines out of old doctrines, and again they called such modified rules-doctrines-laws as Bible Truths and God's Word. They using lexical terminology such as; adjusted our beliefs .....Scriptures has been clarified. Well, we have different wording but same package of meanings and results: Provisional Laws ........ Adjusted our beliefs ...... Scriptures has been clarified.
  2. 2 points
    What does sex education teach children? Most of the time, they teach safe sex, the idea of overpopulation and teen pregnancy. They teach about infectious diseases. But do they teach abstinence? Why wait to have sex until marriage. Bible understanding. The right to sex as a married couple, not homosexuality, Desire of the flesh, self-gratification. Do these things need to be reminded? 1. Sexual Pedagogies: Sex Education in Britain, Australia, and America, 1879–2000 (2004) 2. Understanding Sex and Relationship Education, Youth and Class: A Youth Work-Led Approach-(2013) 3. The Feminist Bestseller: From Sex and the Single Girl to Sex and the City-(2005) 4. Not The Marrying Kind: A Feminist Critique of Same-Sex Marriage-(2012) 5. Global Perspectives and Key Debates in Sex and Relationships Education: Addressing Issues of Gender, Sexuality, Plurality and Power-(2016) 6. Shaping Sexual Knowledge: A Cultural History of Sex Education in Twentieth Century Europe-(2008) 7. Risky Lessons: Sex Education and Social Inequality-(2008) I believe you have just made a good argument for people like you and John about sanity. 2. I would research wherein the JWorg are those videos. 3. If they are there, what is the actual intent of those videos? 4. The credibility of why ex-witnesses are posting these videos. I can pretend to be a witness, make an outrageous video, post it in YouTube and pretend it came from the Watchtower. With today’s technology, anything is possible. My question to you, you continue to imply you’re a witness, why would you be so concerned about what ex-witnesses have to say, unless you are in the same position they are, and you are pretending just like they are. Pretending is not the conduct of a sane person. But if you agree with John Cedars and apostates from the ’80s, then you must believe Lloyd Evans. It seems to me TrueTom would be able to determine if these people are one in the same person since he has dealt with Evans in the past. Or is it something he doesn’t wish to divulge about his buddy. Can it be, this commentator John is that John? Anywho’, there’s also a video for women. Pillowgate & the Bethel Stories behind It ~ exJehovah’s Witnesses exJW Watchtower Can it be you’re not capable of keeping your head out of the gutter anymore that you have to advertise and promote apostate driven material here?
  3. 2 points
    Yes, I wonder why the GB would find it a need to obsess given today’s atmosphere of humanity acting like the likes of Sodom and Gomorra. Does scripture, NOT THE WATCHTOWER’S GB, have something to say about that? Gee! Let’s take a look, Galatians 5:16-26 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions... 1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world. 1 Peter 2:11 Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul James 1:14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 1 Thessalonians 4:4 That each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor Of course, there is much more. 😉
  4. 1 point
    Jack Ryan

    I am proud to be a JW

    At least three or four times a month, someone will post something like: I am proud to be a JW Seriously, what is up with that? I am not trying to be disrespectful. But I never see anyone here post "I am proud to be a Christian". If you are "proud" to be a JW, it almost sounds like you are boasting about having accomplished a goal, that you were able to do something that others can't do. It almost sounds like you are saying that your salvation is because of something you accomplished on your own.
  5. 1 point
      Hello guest!
  6. 1 point
    Wow this is all so funny. Billy thinks it is ok for a Witness to use things that seem to pretend they are scripture when those people whom he serves (the GB and it's Writing department) say those things are not scripture. So then billy thinks that makes him "more of a witness" by using 'fake scripture'. Oh dear, when we think on scripture it should make us humble not 'exalt ourselves'. (Matt 23 v 12 ) For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. I think Billy is showing his true colours now.
  7. 1 point
    Thanks, but I don't want to watch it again. (I already have it saved, no idea why though, since I don't want to watch it again...)
  8. 1 point
      Hello guest!
  9. 1 point
    With actual words, definition, or the embodiment of having it relative to scripture. You should know by now, scripture also states to use wisdom and discernment. If witnesses would exercise these traits, there would be no need for repeat certain things. But that’s only to the ones already baptized. Shouldn’t new members or interested people get the same benefit from scripture than the ones already having that knowledge? How many times has scripture been misapplied here?
  10. 1 point
    Indeed. The word was well before creation as the firstborn of creation. This is why Jesus also can be relative to the Role of a Levite Preist. Therefore, explain it to Srecko, he doesn't understand. You might also consider your position about the Royal Priesthood. With this, we can agree Jesus was placing judgment on the conduct of the prevailing priesthood. However, did Christ suggest to disobey? where, in scripture have you found that fallacy. Even Christ urged the converts to obey secular authority. I made an example for Srecko to respond intellectually, but it passed him by. Now, gather both ideologies you and Srecko have, and decide which component did Jesus proclaim in scripture to obey the leaders, rather than submit a text that is taken out of context. Yes, specifically all that the Watchtower is all about. Having a direct link to scripture. The constitution of the Watchtower (Holy Bible) as prescribed by Christ. I asked Srecko to give me an example of a provisional law the Watchtower has added to the laws of God. His sarcasm of 140 years just doesn't prove anything. However, I will ask you, where you see the citation in Hebrews to prove The GB are fellow members just like the rest of us that comprise the body of Christ is no different than that of the first-century pilgrims? The apostles followed Christ, as Jesus instructed everyone to do the same. The Goods News and making disciples was a lineage instruction from Christ directly. Either you submit to the entire word of God, or you don't. People cannot pick an chose only the things in scripture that feels right for their argument. Therefore, they take responsibility as leaders just like the Elders. Where in scripture does it specifically state, the body of Christ shouldn't have leaders? Sorry to disappoint you. If anything, I more a witness than witness and all these JW's in this forum put together. However, a true student of the Bible will use as examples all afforded avenues to make a point. Ones that you can compare and get the similarities of what scripture is? A true Christian can make references even with none canon script. They can use commentaries to drive a point. Therefore, I don’t see why you are nick picking unless you got an MMS from space merchant or JWinsider.
  11. 1 point
    God's laws, fulfilled in Christ as the Word. Matt 5:17; John 1:1 Every other "law" or tradition set in place by the corrupted priesthood, oppressed the people: Jesus would not expect obedience to the ideologies and traditions of men, which is what he is referring to in the above scripture. "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” Matt 11:28-30 To the Pharisees, Jesus said: You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.” 9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.” Mark 7:8-13 One of the many "traditions of men" in the Watchtower is to "curse" one's mother, father, son, or daughter for following Christ''s teachings, which results in the "curse" of spiritual "death". Rev 13:15 That conveniently locks out all obligations to one's say, parents; thus, more money, more time, more devotion, can be given to "Jehovah's organization" - as pioneers, in special assignments, and as elders. You mean, linked to the scriptures that describes the hypocrisy of the Pharisees? They expected obedience to them, and not to Christ. Today, full obedience must be given to the GB and elder body - over Christ. Your reasoning is twisted, Allen, in harmony with Watchtower's teachings; and not in harmony with the teachings of Jesus. "Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.” Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. 24 Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me." John 14:21,23,24 His commands, not those of the GB who use an army of henchmen to carry out their will. Matt 24:48-51
  12. 1 point
    One other thing, before, critics start crawling out of the woodwork. Remember the word “similarity” not exactly. Remove from the picture the arm, and work with Pilates word hanging.
  13. 1 point
    For decades now, there are many within the organization that standardized the opinion, since classic Greek used the word Stavros (stake, upright pole) that was the only bases the Watchtower had to conclude Jesus died on a torture stake. The Watchtower investigates at length all possible avenues to come to a discernable conclusion. Pontius Pilate made a report on the event. He used two distinct words that need consideration. Crucifixion, and hanging. Given the Roman attitude to disgrace Christ as depicted in scripture? The TAU in their time was used as a victory banner. Pilate’s letter did not indicate Jesus crucifixion to be a victory but a curse upon humanity. The only 2 possible crosses that are left is Constantine’s Latin cross that all of Christendom revere and the application of the word in classic Greek, not Koine Greek of Stauros. Here comes into question what the word used by Pontius Pilate, meant when he stated “hanging.” Researching all possible avenues, you see the distinction between “Gibbet” and “Stauros.” Why not the Latin cross. If Jesus was crucified in that manner, the word hanging would have very little meaning to its definition, since the form “free hanging” would need to be considered for the body. The difference between that free hanging with a TAU, Latin cross, and the Stavros differ dramatically. Therefore, the most appropriate understanding given all the facts in that historical event would be to accept the Classic Greek word. This is a good reason why the Watchtower adapted and accepted that understanding. Noun Noun: gibbet; plural noun: gibbets A gallows. o An upright post with an arm on which the bodies of executed criminals were left hanging as a warning or deterrent to others. o Execution by hanging. Of course, this example would not be the only foundation to make a wise decision, but it’s the most compelling.
  14. 1 point
    It will not readily yield to change, if history is any guide. About the best I can hope for is some circuit overseer acting similarly as he did with another “crisis.” During a transitional lull from one main point to another, he will say that the expression “Now let us turn the platform over to the next speaker” is ridiculous because it evokes an image of turning the platform over. With that, I eventually heard the expression less, though it still pops up from time to time. It is not easy to correct anyone on anything, especially on a triviality, though occasionally people jump instantly on the trivialities but ignore substantial things. Finding the right degree of emphasis is tough. One recipient will say “Thanks for the new RULE!” and his companion will say “Huh? Did you say something.” There was a certain sister ages ago who enjoyed explaining things to others and eventually left the truth because not enough people listened to her. She had even begun to partake of the emblems. “What the Society is trying to tell us is....” she would often employ as a preamble. She is the inspiration (in this one regard only) for John Wheatandweeds, from Tom Irregardless and Me, who will not let the brothers go in field service in the morning because he insists as the conductor of rattling on and on about the day’s text, and he resists counsel to shorten that part eventually to as short as 7 minutes, and he talks at such length, drawing out comments, that eventually nobody is in the mood to go out anymore. “What the Society is trying to tell us...” he responds to every bit of counsel on the subject. Finally, the Society interrupts him mid-sentence to say “We’re not trying to tell you anything—we’re telling you.” So he finally responds by getting everyone out the door in reasonably short order—not seven minutes, but neither seven years—however he makes up for it by chatting away in the parking lot.
  15. 1 point
    That's what I thought. Please learn the fundamentals of scripture. You will learn, the Watchtower brought back the foundation of the first century Christianity of scripture back from false religion. If you bother to look hard, many modern churches are now adapting those Christian ethics. They still have a ways to go to embody Jesus, but they should thank the Watchtower for paving the way. Will your confusion and hate ever give you the opportunity to once again see that distinction? Not by hanging around here reading garbage and accepting it as truth. Remember your opinion is your truth, NOT the truth. Not by listening to people like James and JWinsider. I will give you an illustration. Certain JW's are perplexed over in the manner of Jesus death. They rack their brains to find evidence, why the Watchtower is wrong for suggesting Christ died in a torture stake. Some make the same arguments ex-witnesses do, and they feel strongly about it. They decide, what we know about history, Jesus died on a TAU cross, not a Stauros. They have brainwashed themselves, they now believe the Watchtower to be in error. But actually, have they researched that a simple letter would find as the cause of death. Scripture then becomes the excuse. But, if they bother to use "word" association, they would have figured out the closest possible solution by Pilates own words would be referring to a "gibbet." Then you use word association to a particular symbol. TAU, Latin cross, Stauros. What definition closest resembles the manner of Christ death? Then, do these so-called witnesses have compelling evidence or just another opinion just like yours, and all those years trying to disprove the Watchtower was just wasted time.
  16. 1 point
    Now, who is putting words in Jesus' mouth? Can anyone alter scripture? sure they can. As you state, Jesus warned us about false prophets. By making an assumption to how "Jesus would modify a little of his words and say" what do you think you are doing? However, give me a good example of how the GB are self-imposing and adding a provisional law? have witness, Jwinsider, John, James, contact you through MMS to help you if you need it.
  17. 1 point
    Interesting. A misapplication? Especially the kind that is directed for ex-witnesses. I guess to those that believe self-gratification is not a sin, because it's not specifically mentioned in the Bible, I guess people should accept homosexuality because the words, gay and lesbian are not specifically mentioned in the Bible. But then again, according to this website. If you can meet a GB in a liquor store, possibly referring that GB's are drunks. However, that won't be the first time nor the last, then it shouldn't surprise any witness to meet these individuals in the parking lot, at the store, mall, etc. Even a house of worship, go figure!
  18. 1 point

    I am proud to be a JW

    It’s a typical two-sided coin for JWs to make sense of, or remain thoroughly confused by it. They must be convinced they’re “proud of the organization”’ thus, proud to be a JW. “ Are you not proud to be part of an organization that cares so much for its members?” “Do you feel proud to be part of an organization in which people truly love one another?” Both quotes from the same magazine - w 14/12/15 Other side of the coin: “Proud people reject the idea that they need to be taught anything” w19 January pp. 1-32 We see that in action. JWs shut down all conversation at the cart or when speaking to an “apostate”. Some here, excluded. “One definition of pride is inordinate self-esteem. That kind of pride gives one an improper feeling of self-importance and superiority, perhaps because of beauty, race, rank, talents, or wealth. (James 4:13-16) The Bible speaks of men being “puffed up with pride.” (2 Timothy 3:4) In other words, they have an inflated opinion of themselves, one that is unjustified.” g 3/07 pp. 20-21 JWs must be proud to be a part of the organization, "puffed up with pride" over belonging to it; but also humble at the same time; otherwise they are not happy. Are they happy also when they are proud? I haven’t looked it up. “Why do those who are part of God’s organization need to be humble? 8 Those who are humble are happy in God’s organization and support the way things are done in the congregation. A humble person supports the elders and the way things are done in the congregation” ws12 11/15 pp. Can one be humble and proud at the same time for the same reason – being part of a religious, hypocritical organization? Ps 18:27; Prov 8:13; 16:18; 1 John 2:16 Now that I finally have the opportunity to see Watchtower’s contradictions placed side by side, I wonder how I lasted as long as I did in the organization, without going insane.
  19. 1 point
    I got you the first time. Who are you trying to satisfy with this commentary? You’re starting to sound like, witness. First, understand the role of the ancient Levites to those of the Jerusalem priesthood in Jesus time. Jesus judges the Pharisees. Seven Woes to the Scribes and Pharisees 23 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you—but not what they do. For they preach but do not practice. 4 They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. 5 They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, 6 and they clove the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues 7 and greetings in the marketplaces and being called frabbi2 by others. When you say Jesus was breaking the laws, which laws are you referring to. God’s laws or the provisional laws set forth by the Pharisees and High Priest. An example of a provisional law was the law Moses applied to divorce. How about the mandate of stoning for adultery. You are claiming The Priesthood was mightier than the Son of God. However, what do you think Jesus meant with “so practice and observe whatever they tell you” to mean? Where do you see Caiaphas (High Priest) in the scheme of things, using deception and lies to have God’s son killed? I don’t know where you got that idea, but it’s an extremely wrong one. Especially, when those groups consorted with each other to have Jesus killed because those “men” wanted to be higher than Jesus, and they didn’t want to lose their authority over the people. Whose laws were these high priest breaking, that you only question Jesus? If you are referring to the Pharisees, Sadducees, High priests that were breaking God’s commandments by their actions and deeds, and by adding to the laws (self-imposed) then your ideology is in question. Then your comparison of the High Priest to that of the modern GB is off the mark since they have yet to self-impose anything that isn’t directly linked to scripture. That you think otherwise, is a matter of your own opinion. Therefore, the question becomes, whose authority was to be obeyed by Jesus standards? God’s or the Pharisees, Sadducees, Scribes, High Priest. When do you personally think the GB and the Watchtower wrote the below script citation in the Bible? Hebrews 13:17 English Standard Version (ESV) 17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.
  20. 0 points
    I agree .... but the reason you "save" stuff like this is because there are people who are agenda driven in their reasoning abilities, and believe with their whole hearts that it is a service to God to suppress, hide, and deny that stuff like this ever happened ... imagining that they are preventing the Truth from being spoken against abusively, and will deny over time that anything not as pure as the wind driven snow ever happened. Over 50 years I have seen a LOT of "revisionist history", where misguided theocratically inclined people have tried to hide or deny the past, in order to change how people act and believe now. This was a running theme in the book 1984, by George Orwell, who explained "He who controls the past, controls the present. He that controls the present, controls the future." The reason we try to secure the past from ERASURE by well intentioned but misguided zealots .. is because if they can ... .... they will. Already this has been actively suppressed by Watchtower lawyers from YouTube, and Rutube, and I would guess that NO ONE at most Kingdom Halls even knows of the existance of this set of videos, and the cringeworthy, creepy insanity they portray. Too late ... there are perhaps a hundred thousand copies to replace what they suppress. This has been on many comedy shows all over the Internet, and we have become the laughing stock of the world, thanks to this and other madness like this. As Pogo once said "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
  21. 0 points
    If you are going to go figure .... figure out why neither Jehovah God, nor Christ, never even mentioned such things ... EVER ... not even once .... and the Governing Body positively OBSESSES over such things. There IS a reason. .... for BOTH.
  22. -1 points
    I mentioned this same fact a long time ago but folks turned against me on it, saying it was me that was obsessed with it.. However I'm glad you have reintroduced the point. Thank you JTR Jr.
  23. -1 points
    ANSWER: My theory is that, with the obvious painful discrepancy you just pointed out, that cannot be ignored by any sane, rational person, is that those holding such perspectives are just rock-dumb clueless, dangerously ignorant, or bat-crap crazy ... or all three. What makes it WORSE is that they are also very nice people, with the very best of intentions. Such people would be easier to identify if, as they pontificated, one eye would twitch, and they would drool all over themselves. ... or obsess publicly about Brothers wearing tight pants, and make "Pillowgate" videos.
  24. -1 points
    There are a LOT of things not specifically mentioned in the Bible, Billy. It was my understanding that Spiritual Integrity is dependent on not going beyond the things that are actually written in the Bible. ...and not trying to lay heavy burdens on others that Jehovah God, and Christ Jesus DID NOT. Having Spiritual Integrity is like being pregnant ... there is no being "half-pregnant".

  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
    • Most Online

    Newest Member
    Humberto Signorelli
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.