Noble Berean

Just now, Gone Fishing said:

Let the courts decide.

They already did.

Why are they not respecting the superior authorities? How does giving this namelist violate our beliefs?

This really puts a bad mark on Jehovah's name. It's concerning to me that more and more people are coming to associate the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses with child abuse.

Well @Nicole I think my response is completely reasonable and meaningful. As you said, JW wouldn't participate in the pagan holiday of Dia De Los Muertos which is celebrating dead ones who are roaming the earth as ghosts. Yes I am aware that in Latin culture worship of the spirits is common. But a tribute that honors a person's LIFE is not objectionable. 

2 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I think I may have something mean to you long ago when you first came online here. I take it all back. 

The loyal brothers in the bunker video didn't exactly blow away the invaders with their tommy-guns, did they?

 

That's in the unrated edition... 

@TrueTomHarley yes our desire to be "slow to anger" and not loving violence sets us apart. It doesn't make sense from a worldly perspective!! Although I don't judge a Christian that carries a gun, I think of how Jehovah God asked the Israelites to go into battle with no weapons. What a message sent to the nations that God has a people that rely on HIM and not physical weaponry. I think of the future when nations will turn violent against us. Will we think this is our fight? No. Jehovah says vengeance is his. Jehovah will protect his people pure from the bloody violence of this world.

Just now, Nicole said:

@Noble Berean that is not the subject in question 

 

It relates to it. You're saying a tribute is idolatry. Is honoring a dead loved one idolatry? 

Honestly, I don't think you're being very sympathetic to these individuals. Their daughter is dead and now you're attacking their character as Christians? If this was any other person on earth...these questions would sound ridiculous. These tributes probably give them joy, because they remember their daughter living and singing...maybe they think of the paradise with her. 

On 5/29/2017 at 7:09 PM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I have carried weapons all my adult life, and my biggest crime was driving around a barricaded road when I knew the road construction to be completed, and good ( I designed roads for a living for many years...), and I got a ticket that cost $240.

Although my arsenal may scare the timid, I do NOT "live by the sword", and never have.  I even take spiders outside, assuming they are lost, so they do not starve to death.

Peter was being admonished not to GET INTO A BATTLE,  offensively,  and after he demonstrated that he was NOT going to let Jesus be murdered by an illegal night time mob (by cutting off the ear of the slave of the High Priest...) ... WITH THE SWORD HE WAS COMMANDED TO BRING WITH HIM ...  Jesus said the DEMONSTRATION was enough ... an ear cut off bleeds like a faucet turned on.

It has always been common knowledge that I "carry", and so far, to the best of my knowledge, in a half century, it has never stumbled ANYONE, even Elders who asked me about it, and in three different congregations throughout the U.S.A., I was called into "Room 101" before the triumvirate and questioned.

The last time it went something like this ...

"Um... Brother Rook, it has come to our attention that you carry a gun....um... is this true?"

"Yes, it is."

"Um, er... Brother Rook, uh.. are you carrying one now?"

"Yes, I am."

This is where they don't know what to say next ... there  are looks all around, and then after a pause,  they stand up, I stand up, they extend their hands, thank me for my time, and we all go out into the main Hall and go about our business.

When I go into a new Congregation, those elders that don't know I carry a firearm, I hand a prepared letter informing them that I do ... and it has NEVER, anywhere in the USA, created the SLIGHTEST ripple or complaint from ANYONE, in over 50 years. 

I have had elderly Sisters ask me about  security for them, and I always advise them NOT to be armed, as you have to have a certain mindset to use weapons responsibly.  

If you are scared of the responsibility, best to be a victim, than make someone else a victim by your own hand.

When we returned to the KH after Field Service, I did go to the trunk of my car and gave her a child's baseball bat I kept there, and explained how NOT to use it for self-defense ( a whole other story) ...

I agree with the Society's position that Elders, Ministerial Servants, and those in authority should NOT be armed ... I have yet to meet an Elder, etc., that could handle the responsibility necessary, or have the mindset.

I disagree with the rest that creates a mindset of cowardice.

I am un-apologetically NOT a sheep ... I am a Sheepdog, and all that implies.

It's even my job to protect Snowflakes, who think 7 minutes to an armed policeman  is faster than  a 1700fps defense, 30 feet away.

.

 

 

Out of curiosity...do you have privileges in the hall? Legally I don't think the elders can tell you not to carry, but I imagine this would interfere with your ability to take on a role in the hall.

I have no issue with a JW carrying a gun on their own time, but I don't know if I care for it in the KH. The KH is our safe, sacred space provided by Jehovah. If someone goes in and commits violence, they are attacking Jehovah on his holy ground. I put my full trust in God that justice will be served if someone "touches his eyeball". We should return good with evil--not evil for evil. We are in many ways "sitting ducks" (did you see the videos of KH invasions by police in Russia? Please look at how calm and respectful the JWs were) but we put our trust in Jehovah to make things right. That's a witness of faith for the world to see. Furthermore, are all JWs mentally qualified to carry a gun in the hall? What if a JW--angry about a counsel or judicial decision--decided to take vengeance into his own hands? 

@Nicole why? Don't parents honor their dead children by putting flowers at a gravestone?

57 minutes ago, Gnosis Pithos said:

If truth be told. Abraham Quintanilla is NOT a "witness" nor has he promoted himself in that way. The only witness in that family is the mother. So, whether or not he is promoting idolatry in a worldly sense, is a moot, point.

Where are you getting that information?

@JW Insider in all seriousness, is there any clear, scriptural evidence for a two-part presence?

30 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Good point!

I think the usual answer is: just wait, it will happen. His presence is invisible, so the "manifestation" is at the culmination of his presence before the judgment.

Do you honestly think any non-JW cares that Selena's parents have participated in tributes of her? 

"Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence" (2 Thessalonians 2:8).

I understand that Jehovah's Witnesses believe Jesus Christ presence began back in 1914. I also understand that JWs believe the clergy of Christendom represent the Man of Lawlessness. However, if that is the case, why have the clergy thrived since 1914? Shouldn't they be brought to "...nothing by the manifestation of his presence"?

On 11/1/2017 at 11:07 PM, JW Insider said:

I do not believe that we are still waiting for an additional specific fulfillment of the man of lawlessness, before the day of Jehovah can arrive. (2 Thess 2).

Just to break it down. JWs believe:

1. The MOL is exclusively Christendom's clergy
2. The presence of Jesus Christ began in 1914 and the MOL/clergy were revealed by the preaching work of JWs
3. Since the presence has begun already, we are now waiting for the "generation" to be sealed in heaven

If any of those variables are incorrect, then the whole framework fails and we have to start from scratch.

1. The MOL "...sits down in the temple of The God, publicly showing himself to be a god" (2 Thess 2:4). Are we to believe that in 1914 Christendom was the "temple of The God"? 
2. If Jesus Christ presence began in 1914, how can it be said in the Bible: "For just as lightning flashes from one part of heaven to another part of heaven, so the Son of man will be in his day" (Luke 17:24)? Also, since 1914, have the MOL/clergy been done "...away with by the spirit of his [Jesus Christ] mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence" (2 Thess 2:8)? The clergy are still very much thriving post 1914.
3. The original 1914 "generation" died off. This has lead to the GB developing a new theory on the generation (two overlapping groups) after 100 years of maintaining the other theory. Is there clear, Biblical evidence for this new theory or was it created to maintain an outdated theory?

These are some points that appear to discredit the framework of JWs. 

@Israeli Bar Avaddhon @JW Insider it seems as though anointed Christians have been demoted to a minor role in the organization today. My question is: What role will the anointed play in the time leading up to the end? When are all the anointed sealed in heaven?

15 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

A son of a Governing Body member was handling the Watch Tower's Public Relations department just before J.R.Brown took over that position. He said that these particular two items were the two items that, if changed, would resolve 90% of our public relations problems. (This was just prior to the child abuse debacle which J.R.Brown was immediately thrown into.) I suspect people understood him to be saying he disagreed with our position on these issues, but I don't recall him ever saying that. He was fired from the position anyway.

I would agree. That's usually what's brought up in anti-JW articles as a way to say the religion is a cult.

1 hour ago, Anna said:

But one has to be mindful of the fact that if the GB were too lax about certain things we could end up just like every other denomination of Christendom, whose clergy tickle their ears,  and be of the mind that it doesn't matter where we belong since the "church of Christ resides in each individual anyway" ....It seems like it is the Church's cop out for not keeping the congregations spiritually and morally clean like the 1st Century Church was,  and as you know, JWs are trying hard to be like the 1st Century church...

Yes, there is a balancing act that is necessary. I don't agree with the organization becoming tolerant of everything, but I think matters like the rejection of blood transfusions and shunning df'ed children are crossing a line of control. I just can't stand behind those things. It violates my Bible conscience. I know that puts me in a bad place in this religion.

20 hours ago, Anna said:

Well, the answer to that I guess is if you don't agree with their scriptural interpretation you go and find a religion that you agree with. So really, the ball is still in your court. You don't have to believe anything they say. But I know what you mean. However, how would that work in a practical way....that kind of doctrinal democracy?

I don't want to leave the organization. There's many things I admire about it. I just don't understand why every JW has to be in 100% agreement with all GB directions. I don't think the organization would descend into chaos if more matters were treated as conscience decisions. There are already areas of conscience like entertainment and the religion hasn't fallen apart over that.

I think a lot of non-religious people do not want their children participating in sports like football and hockey. Too many reports of concussions that cause permanent brain damage and pain. As Christians, school sports just take away too much time from our faith. Coaches demand practices whenever they see fit. That doesn't mean JWs can't play sports on their own time. In fact, many JWs I know organize intramurals.

5 hours ago, John Houston said:

And as I understand my reading the scriptural account of how things began, Jesus was the one having insight, correct? He then taught ones who would go and teach others. He chose 12 close associates who had intimate knowledge, that the others did not have, and even among this group there were some who knew things that the rest did have privy to. Yet they were in union with the love that Jesus stated would be the identification mark of his true followers. These chosen ones, were given certain responsibilities of leadership, trained to do so from the beginning. We all know there has to be such leadership. Are theses ones, the 7 the only ones with this insight? No, by my last count, there were over 8 million of us in that unity of love as Jesus stated at John 13:34,35. We are all on the same page. Yet remember when the fish and bread was fed, how was it done? A run up on the baskets by the hungry people, or organized? Did not Jesus give it to these 'leader' and they passed it out among the people? Would you have turned it down because it came to you this way? Or are you humble enough to accept and let our imperfections take a back seat, because we are trying our very best to leave this plane of existence, either Heavenly or in the new world after the dust settles.

I for my part want this food, I am hungry and if theses 7 men are the ones with the responsibility to feed us let's eat. If they have squandered the responsibility, who will hold them accountable, us? Where have you read in Bible accounts that the people have successfully changed what was wrong theocratically in Jehovah's service? Did not He take care of things always? Patience, my friends. Love and patience. Eat and take in the spiritual food being served. Our studying of the Bible will show us if there is such deviation that many are searching for. This is Jehovah's organization, not theirs, they are custodians while here on earth. Jesus is the head, correct? If that is correct, then he is aware of all the misgivings everyone here sees! That is what humors me. Many forget that variable many times when the debate things having to with things that do not belong to them! We are not stockholders, we have no dog in that fight. Our own personal salvation is at stake, not theirs. What happened to Korah? I and my family are trying to serve Jehovah and his Son is set up as King. I pray to be among the many who will be there. The sanctification and vindication of Jehovah's name is what is paramount, even for Jesus. Nothing else matters! Comsider and pray about this. Good day, my friends!

I think the issue is not that people are taking the lead. That's understandable. The issue is that the GB has total, unchallenged control over scriptural interpretation. What scriptural basis can be used to defend that? Is there evidence that the apostles behaved this way?

56 minutes ago, Gone Fishing said:

???? What on earth for????

@Gone Fishing He's probably referring to the Man of Lawlessness Prophecy in 2 Thessalonians 2:11:

"That is why God lets a deluding influence mislead them so that they may come to believe the lie, in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness."

3 minutes ago, Israeli Bar Avaddhon said:

People of "noble mind" are those who carefully study the scriptures. The Bible was written for all mankind. The Bible teaches that if you seek truth with constancy and impregnation, you find it - Proverbs 2: 1-5
Each of us, individually, has the duty to study the Bible.
Judgment will also be a personal thing.
If any of you prefer to believe that they are always "the others" to study and dig for you, you are free to believe it.
Unfortunately this is not what the Bible teaches.
If you think that every topic should be tested with the scriptures, okay.
If, on the contrary, you think you do not have to study, look for and understand why "there are other people in charge of doing so", I'm sorry for you.
Perhaps one day you will find that the Bible encouraged you to study and understand it personally.

I have nothing else to add because these conversations are a waste of time.
Those of noble mind, such as the Bereans, will seek in the Bible if an affirmation is true or false

"Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions to see whether they originate with God, because many false prophets have gone forth into the world" (1 John 4:1).

14 minutes ago, John Houston said:

Each one here, those who have been part of the brotherhood and those who have stepped outside, each deeply trust the truth of the scriptures, inspired of God, correct? So when Daniel stated that only ones having insight will understand the knowledge he had sealed for release during these last days, whom do you think would have such INSIGHT? All of us seeker of true knowledge? Or a certain select group, that would guide other seekers, like the Ethiopian eunuch needing guidance and said so? Teachers need students, and vice versa. All of us was not about to gain insight, some would like Jesus spoke at Matthew, his disciples knowing what he taught, would in fact turn around make other disciples teaching theses ones the things to observe, what he has first taught them. These new one had no insight at first, right? Where would it come from? They had to be taught,correct? Self-taught? Jesus himself where 2 or 3 are gathered in his name he is there, goes against being self taught doesn't it? That is just common sense!

So are you suggesting that only 7 people in the world have the correct insight on the scriptures?