Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/06/2020 in all areas

  1. 5 points
    Here is the material for the weeks of July 6-12 and July 13-19 , 2020. TB MEETING WORKBOOK week of July 6-12, 2020.doc MEETING WORKBOOK week of July 6-12, 2020.pdf Watchtower July 6-12, 2020, par. 3 Rival Kings in the Time of the End.”.doc Watchtower July 6-12, 2020, par. 3 Rival Kings in the Time of the End.”.pdf Watchtower July 6-12, 2020.doc Watchtower July 6-12, 2020.pdf Additional Highlights -July 6-12, 2020.doc Additional Highlights -July 6-12, 2020.pdf CBS July 6-12 , 2020.doc CBS July 6-12 , 2020.pdf CBS July 13-19, 2020.doc Additional Highlights -July 13-19, 2020.pdf Additional Highlights -July 13-19, 2020.doc Watchtower July 13-19, 2020.pdf Watchtower July 13-19, 2020.doc MEETING WORKBOOK week of July 13-19 , 2020 .pdf MEETING WORKBOOK week of July 13-19 , 2020 .doc CBS July 13-19, 2020.pdf
  2. 5 points
    Here is the MEETING WORKBOOK material for weeks of June 22-28 and June 29–July 5, 2020. TB CBS June 22-28, 2020.pdf MEETING WORKBOOK week of June 22-28, 2020.doc MEETING WORKBOOK week of June 22-28, 2020.pdf Watchtower June 22-28, 2020.doc Watchtower June 22-28, 2020.pdf Additional Highlights -June 22-28, 2020.doc Additional Highlights -June 22-28, 2020.pdf CBS June 22-28, 2020.doc CBS June 29–July 5, 2020.doc Additional Highlights -June 29–July 5, 2020.pdf Additional Highlights -June 29–July 5, 2020.doc Watchtower June 29, 2020–July 5, 2020.pdf Watchtower June 29, 2020–July 5, 2020.doc MEETING WORKBOOK week of June 29–July 5, 2020.pdf MEETING WORKBOOK week of June 29–July 5, 2020.doc CBS June 29–July 5, 2020.pdf
  3. 4 points
    No. That would actually be cynical. I was only saying that the idea I mentioned would sound cynical. Instead, I was proposing that someone wrote the original with no intent of implying anything ominous or "cult-ish." The GB would have checked it and it would have sounded perfectly innocuous, because they were also on the same innocent "wavelength" as the original writer. Then as some others read it "in print" months later, they might have noticed the negative connotation and pointed it out. So the GB had a choice to clarify, or even admit it implied an unintended overstatement. As it was in a November 15th issue, it would be studied in the following year, and would have already made the bound volume by then, so that it was too late to edit it out. Later, in the February 2017 Watchtower, perhaps they thought that the statement was mitigated by admitting there that the GB is neither inspired nor infallible, and saying that may make mistakes not only in doctrine but in directions given. But someone might have pointed out that this could sound even worse, admitting that we must be ready to obey fallible, mistaken direction. So, since they probably originally intended things that would be understood better at the time when such issues came up, then the matter would best be cleared up when that type of issue might soon come up. I thought that the type of direction might come up with some of the brothers suffering persecution in Russia. As a made up example, perhaps some Russian brothers might be asked to stay and keep a low profile, while others might be asked take flight to Finland and Norway. "Why go there, so far away, when it's easier for us to just move to Crimea?" some Witnesses might ask. But the direction given might have been based on data that the central HQ of the WTS receives from many sources, perhaps even secret sources, not just the local information that Russian brothers might have had before some of their communications with WTS HQ broke down. Anyway, the Covid19 case helped show that the original statement could easily refer to important, but potentially mundane directions, and didn't have anything to do with ominous or scary blind obedience. It was still a "weak" example as Anna pointed out, too. But it does help to defuse the overreach, so the GB were happy to use it.
  4. 4 points
    So much can go wrong with trying to read too much into the numbers. Even if there is a database of 12,000 or more pedophiles, this does not mean that all of them were found to be actively committing crimes in the congregation. A big reason for such a database is clearly to keep a lookout for danger even if the person had been convicted or suspected long before becoming a Witness. Some were probably cases of incest, and crimes of opportunity, where the children are no longer in direct danger after they leave the household. (And this is another reason why the WTS would want to protect the privacy of such a database.) Many of the persons involved are likely dead by now. Remember that the brother who estimated this percentage was giving a rough estimate, not of how many are currently in the congregations, but the number that a typical congregation might "have had." If it was 1% over a period of a couple decades, then I would suspect it's more reasonable to conclude that there was another 1% or so who got away with it. But even here, we are talking about a period of decades, not a current number. Recently, closer attention to the subject has helped to drive down the opportunities. It has helped parents stay more alert and better equipped to protect their children. I think you remember that years ago, on this forum, I complained that the WTS had not yet done nearly enough to change the process and the basic direction of the way such crimes were treated. In the last year, I have explained that I agree with the current direction. I have seen important changes to these processes, and important changes to the basic direction of the judicial focus. (There is no longer an implied element of protecting the reputation of the congregation, and the focus has shifted almost completely to the protection of children, and recognizing that the shame is on the perpetrator and no one else.) I am satisfied that the WTS did about as much as it was possible to do for now, and that most of the current issues are carry-overs from prior to these last changes.
  5. 4 points
    I think two reasons...one for protection of the sheep...and one for their own protection. True apostates are devious and incredibly selfish...con men and women who speak artfully contrived things and aid in scattering the sheep who are already beaten down and wounded,....Apostates were stumbled..and need to have ones think like them to justify their stumbling. Keep in mind many who are branded Apostates are not True apostates...I’m talking about True Apostates here, Secondly They truly have been used by Jehovah in advancing Gods work and knowledge of his Great Plan....BUT....pride and humility And abuse of such a position may also prove to be their stumbling stone...
  6. 4 points
    I am not sure, but do you mean that God communicates with us through the GB? If you do, then I do not agree. I do not think the GB are like Moses, or any prophet who Jehovah used in the past to communicate with his people the Israelites. Jesus did away with all that, he is the only high priest, and we have the holy spirit to help us. This goes for both the annointed and the great crowd. Not much difference in my opinion. Now do I agree there has to be organizational leadership, yes. I also think there has to be someone who makes sure the Bible is followed and upheld. So the GB calling themselves "guardians of the doctrine" as per Br. Jackson is ok too. Also the "spiritual feeding" is understandable as well, as long as it's not made up food and is always based on the Bible. But as for communication, well doesn't Jehovah communicate with us through his written word? I know whenever this is discussed "Bible publications" are brought up, which is also ok, but those publications are not rocket science. You could write them. Would it then mean that God was communicating through you? Not unless you wrote something which was an interpretation of a scripture. And we know what happens with that, some were wrongly interpreted. That's hardly Jehovah passing on information. Sorry if this sounds like a rant. I finally convinced my hubby that the GB are like the rest of us, except somebody has to take the lead....and the great thing is actually, GB agree with me 😁
  7. 3 points

    The Devil and Dennis Christensen

    Dennis Christensen was to be released after serving 3 years of his sentence—there is a formula in Russia for counting each day of pre-trial detention as 1.5 days of actual time—but the Ministry of Justice has appealed. He is now in a special holding cell. He was guilty of ‘misconduct’ during his term, the MOJ charges. He had organized an English class for fellow inmates—how bad can his ‘misconduct’ be? They are trying to break him, Watchtower HQ says, and everyone with a brain in their head knows it is so. His ‘misconduct’ was not renouncing his faith. I couldn’t believe it when I heard of his early release. Two days later, I saw that I was right not to believe it. The reason I could not believe it is that it flew in the face of recent Russian escalation of efforts to stamp out the faith. The stiffest prison term yet had just been imposed upon sixty-one-year-old Gennady Shepakovsky. Is he not a little old for such harshness, especially when his “crime” is no more than worshipping God per the tenets of his faith? The judge of the case suggested that Jehovah’s Witnesses (there are 175,000 of them!) go to a country where their faith is “more needed.” I thought of how the prophet Amos was told exactly that by rebellious servants of the king: “Off with you, seer, flee to the land of Judah and there earn your bread by prophesying! But never again prophesy in Bethel for it is the king’s sanctuary and a royal temple.” It is exactly how an anti-God world responds to hearing his words. This comes directly on the heels of the MOJ appealing its own victorious verdict against another Witness because the sentence imposed was insufficiently harsh. This comes directly on the heels of another Witness having his citizenship revoked. These penalties are unheard of—even a crime-boss does not have his citizenship revoked—the Ministry of Justice comes across as unhinged in its hatred of a faith—for that’s all these ones are—members of a faith—and everyone of sense knows it. Russian enemies are fighting Christianity, for none of these convicted ones are guilty of anything other than being Christian—and the most exemplary of Christians at that: Christians who will not kill, Christians who will not steal, lie, fall into sloth, do drugs, abuse alcohol, Christians who do more than their share to contribute to the common good. It is possible to overplay one’s hand and in so doing provide a glimpse into a deeper reality. There is no human explanation that makes sense for such over-the-top ill-treatment. Therefore, it dawns upon some to look for a super-human explanation. At the Kingdom Hall, a weekly segment for 2 or 3 years running has been a consideration of the book, Jesus’ Life and Ministry, detailing events of his life in chronological order. Last night, his post-Passover final meeting with his disciples came up for examination. Was it to be always easy sailing for those who would stick with him? “Men will expel you from the synagogue. In fact, the hour is coming when everyone who kills you will think he has offered a sacred service to God”—Jesus’ words of John 16:1-2 were reviewed. See why Dennis is not unprepared? He has been fortified with these words all his of his life. He has also been fortified by Revelation 2:10: “Look! The Devil will keep on throwing some of you into prison so that you may be fully put to the test, and you will have tribulation for ten days. Prove yourself faithful even to death, and I will give you the crown of life.” It is also to be mentioned John 15: 19-21: “If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own. Now because you are no part of the world...for this reason the world hates you. Keep in mind the word I said to you: A slave is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me [Jesus], they will also persecute you; if they have observed my word, they will also observe yours. But they will do all these things against you on account of my name, because they do not know the One who sent me.” So Dennis is not unprepared. He is bummed, no doubt—how could anyone not be? but probably not unprepared. He knows who he is battling, and it is not men. If I didn’t believe his early release, he probably didn’t, either—“not until it is in the bag,” he would have said. He knows he is up against the Devil, standing up as a test case almost like that of Job. The humans don’t matter—if one of them forgets his/her lines or has a change of heart, he is replaced by someone true to the wicked cause of a play that has not only continued from Jesus’ time but is coming to a head. A friend who has traveled to Russia tells me that the brothers there are cautious—but they have always had to be cautious. They find satisfaction in knowing that their resolute stand answers the taunts of the Wicked One before the entire world. Of course, Dennis had no way of knowing that he would be the test case—no doubt he does not like that. Or maybe he does. You never know. Some Witness survivors of the Holocaust are on record as saying that they would not have traded away their experience if they could, for it gave them opportunity to give answer to the Devil before the world. They mirror the attitude of certain first-century Christians who, upon release from abusive treatment, went out “rejoicing because they had been counted worthy to be dishonored in behalf of [Jesus’] name. (Acts 5:41) Is it a coincidence that the weekly Bible reading schedule that Witnesses adhere to has rolled around to Exodus chapter 5, about how Moses’s first foray to Pharaoh initially went badly for the Israelites? ‘Afterward, Moses and Aaron went in and said to Pharaoh: “This is what Jehovah the God of Israel says, ‘Send my people away so that they may celebrate a festival to me in the wilderness.’”... “The king of Egypt replied to them: ‘Why is it...that you are taking the people away from their work?’... That same day, Pharaoh commanded the taskmasters and their foremen: “You must no longer give straw to the people to make bricks. Let them go and gather straw for themselves.... Make them work harder, and keep them busy so that they will not pay attention to lies.” (Exodus 5: 1-9) “Hmm. Is there anything today that corresponds to supposedly good news being turned on its head like in Moses’s time and unexpectedly made harsh news?” I asked myself, and then I read about Dennis being shoved back into the slammer. The events even parallel in how the faithless ones back then charged that Moses had made a hash of his assignment and should have left matters alone—just as faithless ones today have charged that the Witness organization reads the situation wrongly and makes it worse for the Russian Witnesses. “They’re no Moses!” the villains will say. Maybe not, but in this case the developments could not have paralleled those of Moses more closely. In fact, the modern Russian brothers put the Israelites to shame, for the latter did blame Moses for their problems. “May Jehovah look upon you and judge, since you have made Pharaoh and his servants despise us and you have put a sword in their hand to kill us,” they accused the one assigned to deliver them. (vs 21) “There’s something happening here—what it is ain’t exactly clear,” sings the Buffalo Springfield—50 years too soon and on the wrong stage. The fog is dissipating fast. Russia becomes the most visible nation to fight against God. “The kings of the earth take their stand, and high officials gather together as one against Jehovah and against his anointed one” (Psalm 2:2), and Russia acts as though wanting to lead the charge. You never know when a given king will read ahead and decline to play the game, for the ending bodes ill for them: “Ask of me, and I will give nations as your inheritance,” God says to his son, “and the ends of the earth as your possession. You will break them with an iron scepter, and you will smash them like a piece of pottery.” So far, though, most are adhering to script. Matters are coming to a head—you can smell it. Is it reasonable to insist that Exodus 5 finds a parallel in today’s Russian events? No. But it’s reasonable to suggest it—just as it was reasonable to suggest that the then-scheduled Bible reading of the Assyrian army assaulting Jerusalem prepared the hearts of Russian brothers who were facing immanent ban of their organization in 2017. Is it reasonable to look at these parallels? It hardly matters. Reason has had its day in the sun. It has been weighed in the scales and found wanting. The point of 2 Timothy 3: 1-5 is that in the last days people would forget all about reason, and a host of other stabilizing qualities. Does it seem that reason is the order of the day in light of the Covid 19 epidemic, as punctuated by protests escalating to riots as a black man’s death at the hands of police stokes mayhem around the world? Jehovah’s Witnesses are among the few—at least in my American home—who without fuss don masks. Normal meetings and methods of ministry are suspended, and it is almost as though ones are retreating to interior rooms until the denunciation passes. Anger, not reason, becomes the order of the day, and it is not so foolish to lie low. The world is not friendly to Christian values. The persecution that Jesus guaranteed would visit his followers is not to be averted. But it can be guaranteed, as Paul said to Agrippa, that this thing will “not be done in a corner.” It will receive maximum publicity so that whoever is of good heart will be moved by it. This the Witness organization has done and continues to do. ...This post will soon be appended to the free ebook: Dear Mr. Putin - Jehovah’s Witnesses write Russia. The book is in ‘safe’ and ‘unsafe’ version—the only difference being that in ‘safe’ version, all quotes from Watchtower publications are redacted. Even if is the New World Translation quoting Jesus on how we must love our enemies. “Redacted for reader safety,” it will say.
  8. 3 points
    That is exactly how I feel. I hazzard a guess that I'm not the only one. It has actually been one of the things that I have found difficult to get my head around. I am glad that others see this paradox as well. What I find concerning though is when the same people who see the illogicality of it will then say something to the effect that they will just obey regardless. That's a bit scary. I like the way you explained what you think might have been the steps to rectify this situation. I meant to reply to your other comment a few days ago, just haven't got around to it yet!
  9. 3 points
    In light of such atrocities, it gives them the right to question an organization that says it belongs to the Almighty God.
  10. 3 points
    You moron, nothing was said of “inside information” and he didn’t “say” anything—he “estimated”—there is a difference. Moreover, you ignore the overall inference of the above remark that everyone else likely has significantly more CSA than within JW. I’m not sure that you care about children at all. If you do, that concern is far overshadowed by your mission to run down the Witness organization. What a hateful loon!
  11. 3 points
    I know this is just your opinion, but the numbers don't bear this out. In mathematical terms 1 percent is 1 out of 100, so that .0001 percent, literally means that only one out every million JWs are pedophiles. In other words, there are only 8 pedophiles in the entire world who are JWs. Since 1950, there have been on the order of 100,000 JWs in Australia (there are over 60,000 today). During that time, there were over 1,000 perpetrators who were considered by the congregations to be pedophiles, persons who had committed sex crimes against children. 1,000 out of 100,000 (1 out of 100). That's actually 1 percent, not .0001 percent. And since most cases are never caught and most pedophiles attack more than one child, the effect of the crimes probably affect an even higher percentage of Witness children. Even back in the early 1990's a brother in Writing who had worked in the Service Department for several years estimated (to me) that every congregation of 100 people has had at least one. (That's also 1%.)
  12. 3 points
    JWs are spiritually blind. Satan may be getting ready to do just as you say. But, what should be your concern? What's happening on the outside of your organization, or where spiritual "Israel" resides...in sin? Can there be a difference to the same sin according to who commits it? Does it take on a better, acceptable hue within the organization, than outside of it? Who are "my people" in Rev 18:4-8?
  13. 3 points
    According to WTJWorg interpretations of Bible, event you mentioned is future event an fulfillment, hypothesis, of Bible prophecy. It is interestingly that satan who allegedly created "all religions on earth" want to destroy own kingdom ?? I don't understand this logic. I would understand that he want to destroy JW religion because, hypothesis, JW religion is his enemy, but why would he destroy own lies?? No. That mean you have to pay own lawyers and fight against WTJWorg Australasia in individual court case. And WT Lawyers have more money than individual victims. ARC is not "kangaroo court". ARC established, according to WT Branch Office cca 5000 documents - 1006 perpetrators in WT archive documentation and 1800 victims. I wonder what sort of "court" is "kangaroo court"? JW Judicial Committees from 1950 to 2015 or ARC in 2015 ??
  14. 3 points
    It’s true. With Zoom, I thought I could get away without wearing a tie. When the speaker noticed it, he told the cable company to cancel my ISP, and now I have to communicate through smoke signals. I had imagined that the beard I have grown would have covered up the lack of tie, but no such l**k. On the other hand, it might have been the Farmer Mort pants my wife has taken to wearing.
  15. 3 points
    If it was JWI, you’d still be reading it. Because that “merely” is a pretty big merely. What if my roof caves in tomorrow and I decide it’s God’s fault? What if I park on the Kingdom Hall lawn, the elders tell me not to, and I say, “Oh yeah?! Well I show you right here on my blog!!!!” If I do it at Bethel, the GB will “merely” decline to put their stamp of approval on my rant—they will put me on potato-peeling detail in the kitchen instead, and call up someone from the bullpen who has his head screwed on straight. But if I am a loose cannon with my own blog—there is nothing anyone can do when I go haywire. That’s why I don’t ever expect to be acknowledged for my self-appointed role as an apologist, much less commended for it. Even the real apologists of the early centuries have not fared will at the hands of the writing committee, that tends to focus on things they got wrong. No, the “merely” is a big deal. It makes for constancy and consistency. Call it a “think tank” at Bethel if you will. It is a concentration of gray hairs and experience, of meeting trials, of knowing they are to be judged for their actions (or inaction), of following up on having brought understanding of the sacred writings to begin with. I can just shoot my mouth off here, say whatever pops into my head, insult 4Jah whenever he deserves it (which is almost always), praise the Benoit Blanc movie even though there is crude language—and perhaps I have never faced a care in the world. But they can’t. What are my morals? I could (to paraphrase Bob Dylan) “be respectably married—or running a whorehouse in Buenos Aries.” Nobody knows. But the Bethel writers are vetted, not just for being good writers, but for being good Christians. They take it for granted that if your conduct is sullied, somehow that will come out in your guidance, even if it doesn’t seem to at first glance. I had a friend that, eccentric though he was, had a gift of making complex things simple—even oversimplifying to drive the point home. I can still hear him recounting to someone just how it works in Jehovah’s organization: “At Bethel, the Governing Body study their Bibles. An idea will occur to one of them. They will discuss it among themselves and when they all come to agreement, it will appear in print.” “Now, the thing is,” he continued, “you also study your Bible. The same idea might have occurred to you, maybe even before it occurred to them. ‘And if this were Christendom, you’d run out and start your own religion over it.’ But because you know it is not a free-for-all, and you know that Jehovah is a God of order, you wait for material to come through the appointed channel.” So if they have called themselves “Jehovah’s mouthpiece” in the past, I can live with that. They have the greatest think tank collection of gray hairs that per the scriptures denotes wisdom, of experience in Christian works, in safeguarding and extending the king’s belongings, in knowing the will be held accountable before God. They have the greatest sense of direction and following up on momentum. No, I will not do a Miriam and say—“does not Jehovah speak through all of us?” I am happy to have a thought that makes sense—I don’t go thinking I am God’s gift to the brotherhood for it. The trouble is that there are so many literalists who see the expression “crocodile tears” and take it as proof that the one shedding them is a crocodile. There are so many literalists who do not strive to think of how phrases like “Jehovah’s mouthpiece” might apply, but they strive to think of how they don’t. It is the same with “being led by spirit.” It is almost too explosive a phrase to use because of the literalists—if you go to the bathroom—well—how can you be guided by spirit? since holy spirit would never do THAT! It’s the same with elders and servants being “appointed by holy spirit.” How do you know they are? To my mind it is because the qualifications are in the Book inspired by holy spirit and the judgment as to how they measure up is made by a (small) “think tank” of holy spirit, and seconded by a traveling minister patterned after scripture—another repository of holy spirit. It works for me. But there will be some who think that if an appointee ever goes bad afterwards it must be that they were not appointed by holy spirit. I think not. Any of these terms must necessarily be “watered down” some when put in the context of humans, “in whose heart the inclination to do bad” is ingrained from youth up. I think of certain brother appointed upon the recommendation of the BOE. The circuit overseer, an older and very experienced man, okayed the recommendation, with the observation: “He’s not the most humble brother in the world.” He didn’t have to be. All he had to do was to meet each of the qualifications to an acceptable degree. Alas, the CO should have listened to his gut, for the man in time went apostate. He was the one who was a history buff and used to impress the householder by answering, “Because I’m an historian,” when asked how he knew this or that about the past. Once I said to him, “Will you knock it off?! You are a history buff. An historian is when other people acknowledge you, not just you yourself!” I could be wrong, but I bet the GB has learned to be very leery of such phrases and terms as “mouthpiece” and “inspired” and “spirit-directed”—not just for all the literalists, but for all the critics (who are often the same). Some things if they say just once, it is magnified 100 times. Other things they say 100 times, only to find it ignored. “Don’t save seats for everyone you know,” they would say about the Regionals, “think of the elderly.” Finally, they gave up, and said to let the elderly in early, and everyone else only after the oldsters were seated. Innumerable directives went unheeded. Yet if they speak just once about “forums,” theIr words are enshrined for all time. I alluded to this in Tom Irregardless and Me. The organization would say that the Governing Body does not endorse such and such, and the friends would accordingly have a helpful sense of priority and focus. And then Oscar or someone would be found doing it, and Tom Pearlandswine would descend to tell him that the Governing Body DOES NOT ENDORSE!!! such and such. You never know what quote will be magnified and what will be forgotten, but I bet they are advancing on the learning curve.
  16. 3 points
    Aaah Tom you talk a lot..you have a lot of words.....and you at times come over as a bit self righteous...why did I chose thinking,,,not for the reasons you so wrongly presume....thinking was ..because I simply often dont know...what to think...is this right...is that right?...is he right...what if I’ve got it wrong?..Am I leaning on my own understanding??....always thinking..because I cannot afford not to...not having your confidence and assurity of one self...so alas..as old as I am...I have to keep thinking...to make sure...You are to cocky Tom...too self assured....but hey...every Congs got one.... If you read his book he clearly explains he spoke up because of the many who were disfellowshipped wrongly ...he had first hand experience ....and there was a lot of truth in this section of his book. there were other reasons also...but that one stood out to me the most... I guess he fell on his sword because he felt it was the right thing to do basically..he is getting old..his time is short...maybye there are other reasons..but I don’t know the brother myself..not personally. ive never spoken to him...never watched him with other brothers and sisters...I have not read his other books....but that would prove nothing....Personally I think he would have done more good staying with in the cong..But he must have thought speaking up was worth the sacrifice. your on a forum..I’m on a forum...JWI is on a forum...Billy the kid is on the forum.....but that’s okay...our sin is not as big as Rolfs sin after all...Is it?....ours is just a little sin...so we should be right....after all...a forum is different to writing a book isn’t it....Rolf did on a big scale what we do on a small scale... you gotta give it to him...he had more guts than me and nearly everyone else on this forum...name and picture up for all to see.... we all use monikers ( not you ) because we know very well if we published our names and pictures we would be marked or out in that back room like jack flash. we have been warned from the platform about forums...when we had meetings...I have anyway.... thats one point he was making in the book... I totally agree with you that all the scholarly knowledge means nothing with out the basic love...And words are just as useless with out love too....Now I’m writing a novel...picking up your bad habit I think 😉
  17. 3 points
    Don't know who has had the midweek meeting yet. But the CBS this week is chapter 120 of Jesus - The Way, The Truth, The Life. The comments showed that so many were taking to heart that all of Jesus' disciples are the branches, and all should bear fruit, and this fruit is especially shown by following the commandments, and the greatest of these commandments is "love one another." Everyone was perfectly in sync with how this can and should apply to themselves. To me, this is part of the great progress we have made in applying the lessons from Jesus' teachings to everyone. And then, at the last paragraph, a very knowledgeable older brother, makes a long comment that showed how an older WT said that bearing much fruit can apply to the effort in the ministry, not the success rate of making disciples. That was OK, I guess, but then he added that another older WT from 2002 says 'but of course the branches represent only the 144,000.' It made me wonder whether some of that enthusiasm the whole congregation seemed to share in those previous answers might have been dampened just a bit by this idea that it doesn't really apply to most of us after all. Earlier in the meeting, of course, there was the Covid19 announcement that implied the GB were in no hurry to open things back up. (There is a separate rumor that the current plan includes extending Zoom*style meetings all the way into 2022 in many countries, and seeing whether this might even be a preferable way to go forward in some countries.) During that part, the idea was repeated a couple of times that the GB ["slave"] had given instructions to be obeyed even though they didn't make sense from a human perspective at the time. The chairman commented after the video that instructions about Covid were the equivalent of spiritual food because it's about being cautious and saving lives, and that the video had included a couple of lessons from Proverbs and a lesson about following the secular "superior authorities" too, based on Romans 13. I don't see anything wrong the instructions, but it made me think about the fine line between spiritual food and just good advice, and how closely this "spiritual" admonishment was the exact same thing as the "secular" advice we are simultaneously getting from governmental agencies. In a kind of "worst case" scenario, I wondered if a brother in Chile might have read a directive from the WTS that said they needed to put up the national flag of Chile on the KH property because of Romans 13, and then thanked the GB for the "spiritual food."
  18. 3 points
    I believe that when a person reads Furuli carefully they will see evidence for such traits of narcissism. And as long as I am saying this, I think that what came through in the subtext of his books also appealed to persons having similar traits. The persons who had been Furuli's most vocal defenders in the past, like a person named "scholar JW" is an example who has shown the same extreme indifference to the "counsel of evidence." Any correction provided by evidence was always thrown back as if the reputation of the sources of correction needed to be trashed and dishonored for daring to correct them. Examples of this type of reaction to counsel and evidence abound in discussion forums, too. And any and all of us can fall into that trap of pride: (But keep an eye on yourself, for fear you too may be tempted.) Furuli, for example, didn't like the fact that all the hundreds of Neo-Babylonian scholars, 100 percent of them, told him that he was wrong to believe that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE. So he focused on one piece of evidence that clearly shows the 607 date is wrong. And what does he resort to? He trashed the scholars, he trashed the museum curators. He accused them of fraud, even accused unspecified persons of sanding down evidence of the original cuneiform and replacing it with markings that makes it fit their own scheme. (He doesn't bother to point out that this is only one of thousands of pieces of evidence that supports a 587/6 BCE date and that there is still absolutely zero evidence going against that accepted date, Biblical or secular.) Now moving forward to the present, there is evidence that Furuli was being told he was wrong about "higher education" and that he was wrong to want to stick with "Fred Franz" interpretations when the rest of the GB had already moved on from that. He would have seen the example of "A. Smith" that Brother Splane spoke about at the 2014 Annual Meeting as "counsel" against his own view that hadn't changed. He clearly compared himself to Fred Franz, and wanted to continue that role. If he was a narcissist, then he would have seen the need to trash and dishonor these counselors. And he did! He needed to project back onto them, some of the same traits that he should be able to see in himself, but can't. Especially in the case where he knows he is about to be "proven" wrong to the worldwide congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, he would be forced to trash those who had decided he was wrong. Narcissists simply cannot accept counsel or evidence that says they are wrong. I could be wrong, but that's how I currently see it.
  19. 3 points
    Interesting Australian news today, the Australian Government has put JW on notice if they don't join the Scheme.
  20. 3 points
    The WT on Australia TV news report stated they will be no joining the Australian compensation scheme Here is the video from The Project news report. Google drive
      Hello guest!
      Hello guest!
  21. 3 points
    Unfortunately everything that doesnt support or help the WT is apostate or lies even if u show them proof.. thats what you have to deal with. I mean a deficit 1.5 mil after donating 26 mil to themselves how dodgy is that...
  22. 3 points
    Stop advertising apostate books and PRAISE JEHOVAH INSTEAD
  23. 3 points
    When these stories emerge, why do JWs continue to tolerate an organization that closes its eyes to its own sins, while exalting itself above all other organizations in the world? What keeps JWs from walking away? Fear? Obligation to men? Do they think that such filth could ever be connected to God and Jesus? If we know God does not condone such atrocities, why would we? Why would we allow our heart to be influenced by men who create the atrocities by their rules and doctrine? Adam and Eve committed one grave sin against God. They rejected His warning, and they lost their chance of living eternally under God’s care. They turned away from God, to listen to the father of the lie. How many sins has the organization committed over and over again? Every sin is a rejection of God’s decrees through Christ. If we are to ever become sinless, should we remain in an atmosphere where sin thrives? Eph 2:1-3 God does not change, but men do, who easily dismiss their sins without apology, without repentance. They make humorous excuses instead. They believe they can rewrite the meaning of Christ’s teachings. They can convince millions that Jesus is the “head” of corruption, of an organization in the realm of Satan, the enemy of Jesus Christ. For those who continue to support this organization of sin and lies, what is wrong with their hearts? JWs are a stubborn people, afraid to move from their false comfort of “peace and security”, and stand for decency and righteousness. 1 Thess 5:1-3; Rev 18:4-8
      Hello guest!
  24. 3 points
    The quote is not mine, but I wish it were: Future historians will be asked what quarter of 2020 did they specialize in.
  25. 3 points
    Research from the University of Maryland and Michigan State University confirm the results of a more limited study a couple years ago of the Philly Police Dept—that the race of the officer is not a factor in who gets shot. Yet the MSM would all but have us believe that the entire purpose of the police is to shoot back people. One can only wonder at their motive.
      Hello guest!
  26. 3 points
    Daniel 29:30 says a kingdom will rule OVER the earth: But after you another kingdom will rise, inferior to you; then another kingdom, a third one, of copper, that will rule over the whole earth. As @Outta Here already explained, you can rule on or over and it doesn't make much difference in the context under discussion. However, grammatically I would prefer to rule over @4Jah2me if I become Queen of England, not on him. In any case, it is quite clear Revelation 5:10 is talking about pesons in heaven. If we were to apply it to an earthly scene, Jehovah would literally have to be seated on a throne ON earth in order for Jesus, "the lamb who was slaughtered" to be seated next to him ON earth. We know Jesus went to heaven and sat at the right hand of God in heaven. We also know that Jesus promised his followers in the 1st century that they would be seated next to him. We know there is a heavenly hope. So for clarities sake it is more accurate to say they will be ruling over the earth rather than on it. Evidently, saying on the earth is confusing, as made evident by the need to make this a topic for discussion in the first place.
  27. 3 points
    I had no doubt that YOU knew it. But there are some people here from the UK, like @4Jah2me (assuming of course that he is the reincarnation of @John Butler). And, I'm not so sure that they had any groups like the Beatles over in the UK. 😉
  28. 3 points
    I know the original lyric. And I also know something of women. I once told JTR that I would love to hear from his kids. I begin to think that I would love to hear from yours as well.
  29. 3 points

    What will you do?

    This is a sincere question, and not just aimed at the folks here, but all jw's who have a dissenting view of the governing body and organization. What will you do now that you have realized Jehovah God is not backing this governing body and thus the organization. Are you going to just sit idly by and continue to do what the governing body tells you to do, or comes up with more unbiblical doctrine? If that would be the case, you are still a partaker in the governing bodies sins by not denouncing their actions and continuing to go along with their flow. If Armageddon starts tomorrow and the governing body do not make it through it and into the new system, what about those who continue to follow them?
  30. 3 points
    I think a lot of people are surprised at the global spread of the protests and rioting. What might be even more surprising is the support by many media outlets, not just of the protests, but also supporting the rioting and destruction. MLK is quoted where he said that 'riots are the language of the oppressed.' (Which cherry-picks the quote out of MLK's context that did NOT support rioting.) It's also odd that all this happens in the midst of Covid19, which has disproportionately killed more African-Americans than police have for the last 100 years. Yet, there is no protest about the languishing response to that particular part of the Covid19 problem. Another odd thing to notice about BLM is that one of their major contributors is from a CIA-backed organization. For those who might think this is just a conspiracy, the Ford Foundation has already admitted to giving more than $100,000. The CIA.org website reviews a book called "The Cultural Cold War" sometimes critiquing and sometimes accepting the author's claims: She also does a fine job in recounting the intriguing story of how the CIA worked with existing institutions, such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, and established numerous "bogus" foundations to "hide" its funding of the Congress for Cultural Freedom and its other covert activities. In truth, the Ford Foundation has a long history with the CIA, especially post-WW2 through today. The New Yorker admits a connection, of sorts: The Ford Foundation . . . The left thought that it was propping up the status quo, and was probably a front for the C.I.A. to boot (and, in fact, the C.I.A. was using other foundations for covert funding). Books, websites, (in some cases even those written by persons involved with the Ford Foundation) admit to the intended effect of hiring CIA recruits and supporting CIA projects. Summaries of some of these activities are easily found, and not even denied: Ford Foundation, a philanthropic facade for the CIA by Paul Labarique Between 1947 and 1966 the Ford Foundation played a key role in the network of US interference in Europe through the subvention of magazines, scientific programs and non-communist left-wing organizations. The largest philanthropic organization in the world was in fact providing a respectful facade for CIA financial and contact operations. This role was even more possible by the fact that the same persons designed and directed both organizations. Also here: James Petras, retired Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University in Binghamton, New York, and adjunct professor at Saint Mary’s University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, wrote a damning article on September 18, 2002, exposing the Ford Foundation’s sinister choice of beneficiaries of its donations. He accused the CIA of using “philanthropic foundations as the most effective conduit to channel large sums of money to Agency projects without alerting the recipients to their source”. A quick search on Google shows that even the Washington Post has made the connection as recently as 2018:
      Hello guest!
    The CIA funded a culture war against communism. It should do so again. Magazines like Der Monat and English-American literary-political journal Encounter were not the only activities supported by nonprofit pass-throughs such as the Farfield Foundation and the Ford Foundation. The CIA-backed Congress for Cultural Freedom brought the Boston Symphony to Europe (at the cost of $166,359.84 . . . It can be just as hard to guess what the CIA's thinking is about BLM. But, based on past uses and abuses of philanthropic organizations, the surreal response should be looked at with some suspicion. Oh wait, did I promise I wouldn't say things like: "but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one"? Or, "They are, in fact, expressions inspired by demons and they perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the entire inhabited earth, to gather them together to the war of the great day . . ."
  31. 3 points
    Lol he must have got all the responses from the watchtower, only the watchtower bible translation is correct without any errors... According Space M.
  32. 3 points
    I haven't done a political post in a while, but it is probably a good idea that I try to explain in what ways I agree with Tucker Carlson (whom I usually disagree with to such a point that I never watch more than about once a month). I will try to avoid religion in this post, although it usually creeps in. This is more of an attempt to explain what I think is going on from a completely socio-economico-political perspective. I think the recent “Black Lives Matter” protests are an outgrowth of a few specific factors. Conceptually, at least, there are the very real issues of police brutality, racist violence, and the “disparities” people of color often face. Materially, however, I think that there are 2 main factors driving the protests. One has been been the very recent social isolation and economic pain caused by America’s COVID19 response. This is too obvious. The other is — and has been for about 40 years now — the increasing proletarianization of the Professional/Managerial Middle Class (PMC). This has been particularly acute since the rapid liberalization and financialization of the economy since the 1980s and especially since the Recession/Depression of 2008. Members of the PMC are a relatively privileged class, distinct from the already “precarious” working class. Typically they are university-educated (the ~35% of the population with Bachelor’s Degrees or higher) possessing — or having close family that possess — upper-middle or higher incomes. The PMC is engaged in (or has close family engaged in) professional work involving business, management, finance, computers, engineering, law, medicine, media, education, and other technical fields. They make up about 40% of the recently employed labor force, or about 30% of the total population (typically earning the top 30% of incomes). While distinct from the ruling capitalist class (the 1% or less that own and control the bulk of capitalism), and also distinct from the vast working masses, the PMC has attributes of both. As they are typically inculcated in elite institutions, they carry the ruling ideologies: liberalism, individualism, self-help, liberal capitalism (“representational” economics), quasi-religious idealism, cosmopolitanism (“diversity and inclusion”), imperialism, and identitarianism (“identity politics”). But, in the era of monopoly capitalism, and thereby of stagnation, war, rising prices, and large-scale crisis, they have also had to face some fraction (however small) of the grim reality the proletarian masses face on a daily basis. Low wages and part-time employment, the absence of unions or collective bargaining, concerns about childcare, and unprecedented levels of debt have all become commonplace. This has bred an acute sense of insecurity and entitlement for those directly or even indirectly affected. This has bred hopelessness and political polarization. It also breeds a corresponding anarchist ideology tied to its liberal counterpart: the rejection (to varying degrees) of authority, intellectuals, elections, law, leadership, centralism, control, government, and/or “politics” more generally — in favor of decentralization, reaction, emotional catharsis, fetishization of “protest,” and local “communitarianism.” Needless to say, these are not the only people showing up to Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests. But neoliberal antiracists and their anarchist counterparts do form the majority or at least a plurality of what might be termed the “movement.” And they certainly drive the gist of its politics, its “strategy” and tactics, and its social media presence. I use quotes around a lot of words here — “disparity,” “representation,” “movement,” “strategy”... This is because I believe these to be flawed categories; PMC distortions of reality often serving the neoliberal ruling class (not necessarily consciously). It is difficult to see the “strategy” that BLM takes as a whole (though there is great potential in some organizations, which typically devolves over time). There is not really a unified or long-term plan outside of performative acts such as “Say Their Names,” the confessionals of white guilt, firing a few police officers, the rioting, and the media spectacle. Even specific, political goals (e.g., “Abolish the Police”) are often short-sighted and lack regard for future strategy or the larger political-economic context. (And there is evidence of overwhelming rejection to the ideas of defunding police departments among African-Americans in general.) The same problems were present within BLM in 2014-2016. They should have been critiqued for very similar reasons then, too. Unfortunately, it was and is because the ideology motivating a lot of the participation and organizations is empty, anarchist, or at its core the ruling neoliberal ideology. (And these problems are not new: Bayard Rustin made similar critiques of “Black Power” in 1966.) The typical framing of “disparity” and “representation” by neoliberal antiracists, for example, serves really to privilege essentialist notions of race and gender and sexual orientation, while often raging against the unequal distribution of social “goods and bads” for these idealized groups (or “identities”). That framing — plus many other aspects of the “woke” university jargon and neoliberal ideology — serves a double-function. First, it offends and alienates constituencies which might otherwise unite with the causes of ending police violence and more systemic issues like poverty, which are both sources of great consternation for many white working class people. (This is even to an extent true of the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag itself, though, of course, everyone should acknowledge that black people are “over-represented” in killings by about 2.5 times*, and a whole host of other discriminations and problems too.) *No time for sources yet, but I'll add a few later. Secondly, it also normalizes capitalism and the elite’s power to shape the more general context of jobs, real estate, and government, contributing to the very problems BLM purports to want to solve. Neoliberal antiracists tend to dismiss this charge outright, as they claim to “always mention” the problems of “the system!” But simplistic concession is not enough; theoretical and especially pragmatic questions are critically important to real movement-building, as they have been throughout world history. In any case, for those wishing to make progress within the confines of this system, they would have to look at the greater context in which police violence occurs. There are some states in the US — and strikingly many of them in the Southern “Black Belt,”** where police killings of poor whites are often roughly equal to police killings of black people, even adjusted to their proportions in the society. Nearly all police killings (95%) occur in areas where the per-capita annual income is less than $50,000 (median income less than $25,000). Some of these areas have more crime. ** Expanded from Adolph Reed's 2017 data by double-checking with other sources. These facts alone illustrate the problem with using “disparity” as an analytical lens. It also poses a positive practical question: Could this allow for a bridging of the gap between White and Black America on organizational lines? Is there something to be salvaged from the “All Lives Matter” retort so often dismissed as racist? Put differently, would more effective movements be built if they were of the sort that organize around broad working-class constituencies and concrete questions? Building consensus as opposed to assuming pre-existing blocs? And can they move beyond “disruption” and gain power and effect change in the way the most influential Civil Rights leaders like MLK and Bayard Rustin envisioned? (It is a little discussed fact that the most pressure against civil rights leaders on a national scale began when MLK and others expanded their outreach to create broader coalitions.) The gut-level response of the neoliberal antiracists to this question has so often been a resounding “No!” In fact, very often, these ideas are dismissed as somehow “implicitly racist” in themselves; very often they are slandered falsely as “class-reductionist.” Very often analogies to movements of the past are shouted down with “We’ve been there done that!” and sometimes even “Nonviolence is not the answer!” Serious concerns about the short-term consequences of rioting or the long-term evolution of anarchistic tendencies, concerns about supposedly “good” policy outcomes or tactics, are dismissed as “lacking empathy” for the causes or for “genocide” or “existential threats!” Not only is none of this the case, I would argue, but these “counterarguments” and insistence on hyperbolic rhetoric are little more than masks for a race-essentialist, identitarian, neoliberal class politics. They are a “class reductionism” of their own! They constitute a politics whose practical consequence is the division and further subdivision of the working masses and the (smaller) middle class. And this politics is neatly aligned with a large section of the ruling class’s agenda and the agenda of their capitalist/imperialist lackeys in the Democratic Party. So co-opting (by Democrats, so-called “anti-Trump” politicians, Hong Kong separatists, cops, the rich, etc.) is not only a “risk” movements of this kind face; it is a direct result of the kind of decentralization and class politics it espouses and represents. This is just an inevitable invitation to co-optation! It is therefore predictable that almost the entirety of the media apparatus (both corporate news media and manipulated social media), including much of the elites that own and operate them, all show sympathy for or outright endorse these protests. Should this not be looked at with suspicion? A significant section of the ruling class elite has for decades wished for diminishing the role of the State in education, services, and policing — precisely in favor of privatization and profit. The ruling class near-unanimously supports both the corruption and the dismantling of labor unions generally, a key factor in the disenfranchisement of people of color and the sharpening of inequality! Like it or not, the AFL-CIO (which has been attacked both rhetorically and now evidently a targeted burning of an AFL-CIO building during riots last week) and police unions (many of whom are people of color) are part of that picture too, issues of entrenchment and racism aside. So initial solutions that might be effective would have to see any tactics and organizing within this broader context and have a strategically calculated, long-term vision. Anarchism (in the general sense I defined above) must be rooted out, as it is a pitfall of real organization. Dismantling a specific system like police militarization or mass incarceration is alright so long as there is unity on how to do it, what to replace it with, how to maintain that new order, and how to maintain momentum and accountability to the working class majority. Unfortunately, I do not yet see these features. Some good may yet come out of it, such as the punishment of officers involved in needless brutality and killing, many reforms at the state or municipal level, and a profound change in the bravery and political consciousness of our nation’s people. (Good only when limitations are understood and change can be effected without violence/suffering for others.) The same was said of the rise of BLM in 2014-2016. But the fear is that this will not result in any drastic change to the status quo nor will it build any strategic momentum. Indeed, many of the BLM leaders from 2014-2016 appear themselves to have been assassinated! I haven't looked far enough into this, but even "reputable" (traditional) national news sources have made this claim about Ferguson, Missouri BLM organizers. I believe the alternative implied by this critique is somewhat obvious, at least in broad outline. Attempts to effectively solve the most issues would need to start with wide, broader-spectrum, and centralized membership organizations accountable to the working class. They would need to start with a clear set of strategic, attainable policy goals with a vision toward building momentum. Unfortunately, there are deep-rooted oppositional forces and predictable reactions from the ruling class to be watched for, and defended against. So there should never be violence of course, although this is typical of ruling class reactions when cornered. But infiltration and sabotage and false flags are even trickier to watch for. They would need to bridge as many gaps as possible, rejecting essentialisms, rejecting the quasi-religious narratives of “Original Sin,” (not in a religious sense, but the idea of unrequited guilt over slavery, lynchings, civil rights abuses, etc.) rejecting hyperbolic or exclusionary rhetoric, and rejecting the politics of the PMC and the ruling class.
  33. 3 points
  34. 3 points
    I am generation of communist era, and i am generation of post communist era. I am affected with feudalism. And capitalism too, because they invented private property and market economy philosophy. Oh no, private property and market economy draws its roots from "paganism". And all what have "pagan origins" are forbidden for Christians aka JW members. Well WTJWorg must reconsider their Legal Status, because of "pagan origins" of secular laws. :)) But i am also affected by US Civil war, and affected by volcano Vesuvius, especially after the 79 AD eruption. :)) All what was written (and we inform ourselves about it) about every events in the past and present make us to be "generation of that something". :))
  35. 3 points
    My older brother and I visited a house in service (in Missouri) in 1964 where a 104 year old man remembered the civil war and told us about how his relatives died, how two of their three slaves ran away, and how he remembers his father coming home from the fighting when he was about 5. We returned several times to offer him the magazines nearly up until the time he died in about 1966. I am so glad that I can say I am part of the U.S. Civil War generation. You say I am stuck on the date 1914, when I should be stuck on the generation of 1914. But you also say that you understand my thinking because "neither do I accept 1914." That inherent contradiction of yours says a lot to me. It says that the reason I don't accept that this generation is in large part because I don't accept 1914. The corollary, of course, is that the reason people accept the stretching of the generation to as much as 180 years, is because they accept 1914. In other words, this stretching of the definition is only true for people who accept 1914. If I accepted it, then whatever people say in support of it will always be true, even if it would otherwise be false. 😊 As you showed, the staggered generation is from some starting point and can go 90 years back and 90 years forward, for example, for a total of 180 years. Therefore those who discerned the sign in 1914 could have been born up to 90 years before, and lived to up to 90 years after. I have no problem with the 180 years of a staggered generation. The generation that discerned a sign in 1914 could run out as late as 2004 (or 1994 if they had to be at least 10 in 1914 to "discern," or 1989 if they had to be at least 15 in 1914 to be "anointed"). Also, tt was not me who said that the generation was about anointed persons who could discern the sign in 1914. Brother Splane was the one stuck on that 1914 date. By the way, I think it's revealing that Brother Splane didn't consider this new "generation" theory very seriously before presenting it. Otherwise he would not have used a scripture in Exodus that doesn't support his view, and he also would likely have noticed that his chart has a glaring error on it. It shows that "this generation" is passing away well before the great tribulation starts, when the entire point is that the great tribulation can't happen before this generation passes away. It depicts only anointed who are not part of group one or group two living at the time the great tribulation begins. To me, it's just a mistake, but it shows that he took his focus off the scripture that shows the exact opposite of what his chart depicts. I believe 100 percent in the generation of 1914, and that it could represent as much as 180 years worth of a staggered generation. There were grandparents and great grandparents who could perceive the signs of war and pestilence during that WW1 period. Their children and grandchildren and great grandchildren who were also alive and growing up in 1914 could go on living for another 90 years or so, too. They can all legitimately be called a part of that generation, even though it's already a stretch to say that "the generation" is still alive when 95 percent of it had already died before 1990. This is why I mentioned the civil war generation above. You are part of the post WW2 generation, and you were also alive when persons saw the Civil War. Therefore if there were anointed brothers alive during the civil war, you are part of the Civil War generation too. You will probably claim that I am being ridiculous, but it is to help us think whether there is any point at which we would have balked at this explanation. If, by special mightiness, you are still alive in 2042 and the end has not come by then, does the existence of the FDS and the preaching work mean that you are still in the 1914 generation no matter what? At what point in the future, if any, would the definition no longer be valid? 2033, 2042, 2050?
  36. 3 points
    This is what I meant, about Furuli loosing sight on his spiritual knowledge. When you combine secular education with that of spiritual education, people tend to be influenced by an obscured view. Once again, Jesus had no formal education in order to understand. However, there are many that will use Furuli's point of view to bluster their own stance against an organization they find themselves conflicted with. It serves no purpose to stay with such organization since in god's eyes, you have drifted away, and serve not as a crutch but a spiritual undesirable.
  37. 3 points
    I think nearly everyone accepts that staggered generations exist. The staggered generation might even include people born more than 90 years earlier than the point identified (1914) and more than 90 years after the point identified (1914). I believe you might have even commented on a chart about a year ago that was included in a post to prove that we SHOULD accept "staggered generations" in the expression "this generation." The problem is that you start out making claims about the generation of 1914, and say that there are 180 years worth of staggered generations from 90 years prior to 1914, and 90 years after 1914. That's fine. But you don't have the right to just move the starting point to around 1992 instead of 1914. When you account for persons being 10 years of age to "discern" 1914, then the staggered generations, as you showed yourself, could range from perhaps 1814 to 1904 to 1994. (With variations depending on how old people need to be in 1914, or with a "proper" age of anointing.) But the Watchtower doctrine uses some (unintentional?) sleight of hand to move that starting point of the staggered generations from around 1904 to around 1992. This way it can start an additional 90 years or so, beginning around 1992 or so and therefore it can for another 90 years or so from there (up to about 2082 if necessary). 1814 to 1904 to 1992/4 to 2082/4. This means that your staggered generations have been changed from a total of 180 years to 270 years. What's to stop them from being defined as 360 years, or more, if that ever became necessary. 1814 to 1904 to 1994 to 2084 to 2174, etc. (And we certainly hope it would not be necessary.)
  38. 3 points
    Ah. So the real headline to be taken from the Rolf book, obscured by 50,000 wet dream malcontent internet pages, is “Top Norwegian Awesome Scholar Proves that CSA Hysteria Against Jehovah’s Witnesses Is Bogus” In writing this headline, I hesitated to use the word ‘proved.’ Had he really done that? But then I deferred to the words of the other scholar on this forum, 4Jah, who said of Rolf’s book (without reading it): “I think this gentleman and his book proves the point I'm making here.” In fact, it ‘proves’ just the opposite. In a roundabout way, Rolf brings his gift to the altar. Are legal machinations against the WT on account of how they viewed elders in the 1940s? Or are they about sensationalized investigations of CSA? Put Rolf on the stand as star ‘expert’ witness for the defense—after lauding him as Moses descending with the tablets, opposers can hardly say that he is delusional—and knock the legal ball out of the park. In view of this service, compromise with Rolf. Appoint a panel to look at the GB’s doings. Get a few of the helpers. And, for balance, an impartial outsider or two like myself or @Arauna (you keep out of it JWI) We’ll have this ship righted again in no time.
  39. 3 points
    This is err premise. Sorry. What was built from the start (my start was in 1975) WT publication teaches how generation is 70-80 in length and is literally connected with the year 1914 as start point to be able to count when "signs" will culminate in Armageddon. Because of that JW's are/was put in "corner" with this. "Overlapping" invention is just try how to get out of the corner.
  40. 3 points
    Of course. I agree that the Bible says nothing about 1919, NY, or the Governing Body. But it's a belief based on the supposed fulfillment of prophecies as these same persons understand the prophecies. I didn't respond to 4J because he had to turn this into a "lie" instead of an "interpretation." I agree, though, that the interpretation is so ingrained that they weren't careful with the wording at all. Also, as I've said before, just because Matthew 24:45 isn't a source that "prophesies" such a work as is taken on by the GB, it doesn't mean it isn't a "fine work." Or that it should not be appreciated. It's just that we have to be alert to always remember that all of us stumble many times, including the GB, so we should always do our Christian duty and test anything and everything they say, and if our consciences differ, to always obey God as ruler rather than men.
  41. 3 points
    Furuli's Introduction and Chapter 1 are important as a foundation to the topic, but we can skip them for the purpose of a discussion. We'll go straight to Chapter 2 which starts out with a summary "review" that I have copied below. Furuli opens up the discussion with the words I put on the left, and I'll add some comments on the right. They are color-coded to match up which paragraphs are being commented upon. THE FAITHFUL AND DISCREET SLAVE -REVIEW In Matthew, chapters 24 and 25, the presence (parousia) of Jesus from 1914 to the great tribulation is mentioned four times, and his coming (erkhomai) as the judge in the great tribulation, at the end of his presence, is mentioned eight times. The faithful and discreet slave is mentioned in Matthew 24:45-47. The previous view of the GB was that the coming of the master (v. 46) occurred in 1918, and the slave was appointed over all his belongings in 1919. These belongings included the branch offices, the Kingdom Halls, and the preaching work. The present view is that the coming (v. 46) is future and will happen in the great tribulation. Then the slave will be appointed over all the belongings by receiving a heavenly resurrection. This new view excludes any connection between the coming (v.46) and the presence of Jesus. Nevertheless, The Watchtower of 2017 says that the slave was appointed in 1919 to give God's servants spiritual food at the proper time during the presence of Jesus. But no evidence has been given for this claim. Luke 12:35-44 discusses the faithful steward, the discreet one, which, according to the context, is the same as the faithful and discreet slave in Matt 24:45. One slave was put in charge of a master's household to give the other slaves literal food at the appointed time. Such a slave is mentioned in Luke chapter 12, and when he faithfully is giving the other slaves food when the master returns, thus doing his job, he will be appointed over all the belongings of the master. The situation is the same in Matthew 24:45-47. That the slave gives literal food to the other slaves is his job. When he is doing this job faithfully when the Lord arrives in the great tribulation, he will be appointed over all the master's belongings. The focus is on literal food and not on spiritual food. Thus, "the slave" refers to individual Christians who are faithful when the master arrives and not to a class of persons. In Matthew 24:48-51, the wicked slave is mentioned. The GB says that Jesus is not saying that a wicked slave will come, but points to the possibility; this is correct. However, neither in Luke 12:42 nor in Matthew 24:45 is Jesus saying that the faithful and discreet slave will come. But Jesus asks who the faithful and discreet slave will be. In other words: "Who will fill the role of the faithful and discreet slave in the illustration of Jesus when Jesus comes as the judge in the great tribulation?" The whole setting in Luke 12 and Matthew 24 is:"Who will be on the watch when Jesus comes as the judge"? Furuli still supports the idea that the "parousia" began in 1914 and goes on until the "erchomai" (Judgment Day). Most Bible scholars believe that the "parousia/ synteleia/ telos/ erchomai" are all nearly synonymous, which coincidentally results in the same outcome as Furuli sees here. That's because the FDS illustration is specifically tied to the erchomai and there is no specific to to the beginning of the parousia. Furuli is setting up to show how the doctrine got "confused" over time, and pieces of the interpretation are still based on older versions of the doctrine which are no longer consistent with parts of the new version. That's because the doctrine began when the erchomai was not "Judgment Day" but a judgment based on Jesus "coming in 1918 to inspect the temple." After the FDS passed the test in 1918, they were then appointed over all his belongings in 1919. Those belongings were said to be the properties and purview of the WTS. (I think that Kingdom Halls weren't added to this list until around 2006.) It's not like the GB hadn't thought if this, because (as Anna pointed out in the other thread) they are now only supposed to be appointed as FDS prior to the "full reward" which allows for an appointment in 1919, it's just that there is no specific scriptural reason any more to place this appointment anywhere between 1914 and the future erchomai (Judgment). Furuli's logic has started to weaken. He's right, of course, that there are no longer any scriptural reasons here to point to 1919, except to fit the GB's own view of themselves. There is no more reason to pick 1919 than 1915, 1935, 1972, or maybe even 33 CE. But nothing excludes a 1919 date either, even if one doesn't believe an invisible presence and kingship started in 1914. However, if Furuli really still believes in 1914 as he says he does, and he expects a single generation in which a preaching work occurs in the midst of trials and tribulations, then why not provide an FDS specifically or that special generation? If 1914 works for Furuli, then there is some logic to appoint an FDS shortly after that generation begins. Nothing to see here. This is fairly obvious that Luke 12 gives the same illustration with exact same idea and only a few words added or changed. I personally agree with this. Jesus was talking about persons who have a responsibility to do a job, that of giving literal food to the rest of the slaves in a household when the master is gone. A slave who is handles such a responsibility faithfully can expect a reward. Especially because it would be so easy to slack off and take advantage while the master is away. It doesn't have to be a prophecy about "spiritual" food It's not a prophecy. It's an illustration just like others Jesus made about readiness. Furuli is not giving credence to the WT idea that this must be a prophecy because it's found in Matthew 24 and Luke 12. Also, it starts out with a "who is" which has been taken to be a command of sorts to go out and identify who is meant here. Furuli seems to treat it like any other illustration, as if reminding us that we don't automatically create a type/antitype out of the carcass and the eagles in verse 28. We don't automatically look for a pregnant woman class and the nursing baby class from verse 18. Who really is a householder that will know in advance when a thief is coming to break into his house? (v44) At first it appeared that Furuli was agreeing with a linguistic reason from Greek that the WT uses to downplay the possibility of an evil slave coming. But this is really just agreeing that there is nothing definite here about a wicked slave coming. And this is paralleled with his view that this illustration is also not saying anything definite about a faithful slave coming, either. That's a surprising turn, but I suppose it's really like Luke 11:11 saying "Who really is the father who will hand his son a snake when he asks for a fish?" It makes a teaching lesson, not a prophecy about when such a situation will prove true. Furuli treats it as if Jesus is saying what he said in Luke 18: (Luke 18:8) Nevertheless, when the Son of man arrives, will he really find this faith on the earth?”
  42. 2 points
    Totally agreed with you 4jah4me, the society has a huge database, and no matter how much pretty words they write in their magazines or how much people (JWs) like to make excuses for, the fact is that they are still covering it and we had a taste of it here in Australia. The funny thing is that the society has an organised committee for HLC around the world and thats a proof that Jehovah God is with them (according to JWs interpretation) to uphold their man made rules of the blood doctrine but for child sex abuse they cant be bothered to have one small committee to safe guard children 😆😆😆.
  43. 2 points
    Wow Tom, that was a long reply! At first I thought it was JWI 😂. I am just playing, no disrespect to either of you, I do the same I know, especially when I get in my rant mode. Gotcha! I think you meant that Jehovah will raise up a prophet like Moses in reference to Jesus, the future Messiah. Which shows that Jesus became the "greater" Moses. What does that make the GB? That is why I don't think they can be viewed as Moses. Jesus already filled that role. We both agree they have some similar tasks in leading the people organizationally, and providing Bible literature, but as for having the status of being Jehovah's "mouthpiece", (or similar) I am not so sure about that. Many friends do think that, probably because the GB in the past have referred to themselves in that way. Is it any wonder then that some have this idea that the GB are more than what they actually are. And this can create problems, and has created problems where people leave the Truth because of this erroneous understanding. You inadvertently point out the problem: (in bold) Those in the crowd might be less inclined to view things that way if the GB were NOT behind a curtain in the first place. And saying things like "we are Jehovah's mouthpiece" and "we will give you instructions that may not make sense from a human stand point" do not help. But I agree with this though: I write supportively, as a apologist. Rolf writes as an investigative reporter When I said the above, I was not comparing you to Furuli. By publications I meant the WT etc. I meant you could write them. Anyone with some intelligence and Bible knowledge could. My example was to show that the spiritual food provided by the GB is nothing that isn't there already (in the Bible). Just made more understandable and applicable in practical terms, which you could do as well. (in fact as we know, the writing department does all this, the GB merely proofread and put their stamp of approval on it). So how can it be said that God is communicating through the GB, (the FDS) if it's nothing new, and if you could do the same? That is what my argument was about. But you already explained what you meant. Thanks (blushing modestly). No but seriously, it has done me some good too, I feel the same way: Just gives you a broader view. I think any and all knowledge is beneficial, whether to deter you from doing bad, or encouraging you to do good. But then am I reasoning like Adam? Why would he want to eat from the tree of knowledge? Hmmmm..... That's off topic, but maybe it could make an interesting topic! I thought you quit that long ago. I have. There is no point. Maybe Reddit is different and compels you more to respond. I don't read Reddit. There is only one apostate forum I check on every now and again just to see if there is anything new. Not in their reasoning, that's the same old, but they are the first with leaked videos etc. That forum is more like a club where people of like mind associate. It helps them to cope with what they've left behind as they find encouragement from people of like mind and situation. If there is a JW club, (not here, I mean JW-Talk) you know there has to be an ex- JW club too. Yes. And poor Amber. I do actually feel sorry for her. (bold mine) "Why wasn't she better prepared for the contrasting view"? Yes, it may have helped. But have you ever wondered why the likes of me, you, JWI, Arauna, Outta Here, ComfortMyPeople, b4ucuhear, JTR and others, although we have become familiar with the "contrasting view" we have not gone "rogue"? I have though about this quite a bit and my opinion is that those who fall away, do so not necessarily because they find out something "shocking" and thus lose faith, but because they find out something that gives them an excuse to fall away because they were already subconsciously that way inclined. Amber was unhappy in her marriage. I think overall she was not content with her life, hence looking for something different (China). Then comes along a charming kindred spirit that "opens her eyes" to the wonders of another world outside the JWs. She falls in love. And there you have it. The perfect end to a concoction to finally do what she really wanted. I can't speak for the others, but I have no need for any of that. I suppose I have matured enough now to see through these things. And yes, really making the Truth your own is key. Ok, I don't want do a Peter here and say we can never be stumbled and fall away, we can, but I would hope it would be a temporary lapse like it was with Peter. We are all weak in varying respects....but what is there outside of Jehovah? A brother asked the other week for us to imagine for a moment how we would feel if suddenly Jehovah stopped existing. I know how I felt. Is that perhaps another key to understanding why some leave and some stay despite man's (GB) imperfections? Got to go, will continue later.
  44. 2 points
    I'll say one thing again :- You have to be an ex- 'JW' to KNOW how the Elders and the CCJW works. Just reading info' about JW Org does not give a person the real insight. Unfortunately Space Merchant THINKS he knows the CCJW / JW Org, but he doesn't. No matter how much you read about something it does not match up to personal experience. Some of us do not just rely on news media reports, we actually know what the CCJW is like first hand.
  45. 2 points
    The early tabernacle/tent housed God's spirit. In that sense, He resided among the people. The "living stones" also "house" God's spirit. They become the dwelling of God. 1 Cor 3:16,17- “Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst? f anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for God’s temple is sacred, and you together are that temple.” We know God's spirit is not locked in one place such as a literal heaven, but can be everywhere. 1 Chron 17:5-6 "I have not dwelt in a house from the day I brought Israel up out of Egypt to this day. I have moved from one tent site to another, from one dwelling place to another. 6 Wherever I have moved with all the Israelites, did I ever say to any of their leaders whom I commanded to shepherd my people, “Why have you not built me a house of cedar?”’ The WT teaches that the 144,000 ruling "over" a people on earth requires being seated above them....literally. Christ spiritually does "rule" over his anointed body members, as the head of the body. Yet, it is one spirit that flows through those members. They are "one" in spirit. “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. John 17:20-23 God will reside with His children on earth through the dwelling of His spirit - through the Body of Christ/Temple of "stones" - "144,000" “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and He will dwell with them. They will be His people, and God himself will be with them and be their God” Rev 21:3
  46. 2 points
    Hello Space! I can notice how You and @Arauna thinking differently about "past, history". Arauna don't want to bother herself about WTJWorg history, and not about my history on this forum. But you do save "records" about other people, what is for praise. :)))) You are not like JW elders who must destroy all notes and records about past cases they handled while were dealing with people. :))
  47. 2 points
    Nah, you screwed it all up. But behind the scenes, I contacted JTR and he made it right for you. “Is he doing more ‘heavy lifting,‘” he said. “Is he ever!” I replied. I haven’t seen Tucker and I haven’t yet read your post thoroughly. I will. One thing that I noticed: I spoke to a retired military man in field service who told me how he had felt a great sense of responsibility for those under his command. For some reason, in these racially charged days, you always have to say if someone was white or black. He was black. He spoke to how in police recruiting today a military background was a large factor—sometimes the only factor—that was taken under consideration for hire. This was true even of those who had had serious discipline problems. “You don’t think that if they are discipline problems in the military, they might not be ideal for civilian policing?” he said.
  48. 2 points
    True. Just keep in mind, Jesus appointed and commissioned the apostles and the apostles commissioned others to be Elders. Therefore, Jesus is the head of the congregation and true Christians are the church, while spiritual leaders are part of that church. The Watchtower GB do not consider themselves above the brethren, they preach and teach alongside the brethren. They understand their place, and glorify God for sending his son to be our savior. This is why, they understand they will be held more accountable if they lead God's sheep astray. They honor that responsibility, they don't run away from it. They will not deny Jesus 3 times just because of internal pressure or outside influence. They are God's servants to the end. Therefore, a weak link does no good to a structure. A building will fall when the foundation is weakened by poor construction. The reason God demands loyalty upon faith. For this reason, you shouldn't confuse the rhetoric of outsiders.
  49. 2 points
    Not if he is part of the "beloved" one, which he is.(Rev. 13:1,2). The other one he would like to see removed... "decommissioned". (Rev. 13:11,12) I see you missed that part in my post.🙂
  50. 2 points
    1 Thess 5:1-3

  • 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.