Anna

Yes, that is better put, and I have heard brothers say this. Of course we aren't going to hoard any money because we know what the scriptures say about that. But that wasn't really what I was talking about. It was more to do with it being Jehovah's direction. But then JWI will probably remind me that since we are a faith based organization, then anything we do will ultimately be seen as God's direction, even if something isn't.. I don't really have a problem with that. What I don't like seeing is this being used as some kind of tool to make people acquiesce, or as a kind of passive aggressive manipulation by some, or as a cause for being judgemental. ie. If you don't obey, you must be less spiritual than me. With so many unbalanced individuals around, this could cause unnecessary stress I think. What I'm trying to say is I would prefer if it was presented as it really is: a sound financial decision which "makes better use of donated funds" and in order for it to work, your cooperation and support is needed and appreciated, and thank you. 🙂 That’s not what I had in mind. In fact every Witness knows that the GB is not Jehovah. But they also know that the Bible talks about obeying those taking the lead, i.e. the elders in a congregation which includes members of the GB since they are also elders. Do you have something against that scripture? I don't need your approval 🙂

All the redrawing and reshuffling of boundaries and the sell off of some Kingdom Halls and the merging of some congregations is probably because a few financial experts were finally allowed to sit down and ascertain the efficiency (or lack of) of the way Kingdom Halls were being used. They called it equalizing. When I hear brothers say that obeying the restructuring, and cooperating with moving to different halls is obeying Jehovah, (was also in a video) I can't help wondering why they don't just say it's because it saves money. Why bring Jehovah into it and make people feel like they're sinning against Him if they don't cooperate.

No new light, just the elder's opinion, and not a very good one at that. It still stands that Jehovah will be the judge as he knows the reasons and circumstance.

I had in mind the Cedar, which I think is tree 1 @TrueTomHarley Which books is this from?

No Allen....I mean Tom. Revision is a good thing. The problem is when we state something as fact one year, and then change it the next. One thing is building on an idea, pretty much the way technology and the medical field develop, but another is completely changing ones mind. The equivalent is maybe what psychologists do, they seem to change their minds, one time they say it's better to let a child do what it wants, and then when negative results are reaped, they say it's better to discipline a child. A kind of trial and error approach. Similarly, when what JW's teach does not work out, then we try the next "theory". Think generation.

True. We do however have a positive and negative connotation. In the case of someone obsessed with criticizing an organization made up of mostly good people, doing good things, that is a negative connotation of the word obsession. On the other hand, being "obsessed" about doing JHVH's will would have a positive connotation. In general though obsession seems more negative that positive, therefor zeal in this case would be a better choice in my opinion. Of course you can also be zealous for the wrong thing (apostle Paul when he was Saul). And then there is the perfume 😀 Yes, all people are sinners and can do horrible things. We all know that. His obsession is unreasonable because he isn't going to change people is he? Plus half the things he says are false, and badly argued. As an example, he puts down the Witnesses for not joining the rest of the world in support of LGBT groups, clearly something condemned by God. Then again he doesn't care what God thinks, as he is a self proclaimed atheist....

Can an obsession be counted as mental disease? According to the dictionary one of the synonyms of obsession is mania, and the dictionary defines mania as: mental illness marked by periods of great excitement or euphoria, delusions, and overactivity. Further, the synonyms for mania are: madness, dementia, insanity, lunacy, psychosis and mental illness, among a few. If we are going to use the man whose name is a type of tree as an example, then we can see he fits the bill quite well as he is completely obsessed, totally consumed with the JW's. Not even sure he has a regular job because all his time is taken up by making videos, writing his blog and doing research.

There would be no need for this question if "Christianity" was as it was in the 1st century; pure and unadulterated by pagan beliefs and pemissive morals. There would also be no need to be called Jehovah's Witnesses, or Jehovah's organization.

Baptism is only possible for those who have made those initial steps first. Obviously, not every single person on earth will have been given the chance to even take the first step. Therefor the WT statement cannot apply to those people, but it applies to those who are able to take the steps leading to baptism. That is the context.

It most certainly does: "This means trying to motivate people to make the truth their own by applying what they learn, dedicating their life to Jehovah, and getting baptized. Only then will they survive Jehovah’s day".— Obviously getting baptised cannot apply unless they have first made the truth their own, applied what they learn, and dedicated their life to Jehovah.

Well no, of course we do not most of the time. We take our queue from Paul and others who were not that direct either. This is what I was trying to say, that in context, the WT is not making the point that only baptised JWS will be saved. It is saying that you can't sit on the fence because if there is nothing preventing you from getting baptised and you don't get baptised, you need to realize (in this context) that if you don't ,it will cost you your life, as oposed to someone who is ignorant of baptism. So those who we contact at the carts are ignorant of this requirement, so the WT statement does not at that point in time apply to them.

The problem with 'only baptised Witnesses will be saved' is that in the stream of time there will always be someone who is not baptised yet either because they are too young, immature, mentally incapable, or working towards baptism. So this admonition in my opinion is to be understood to mean that just like the eunuch told Philip "what prevents me from getting baptised" and he got baptised, so a Christian would not avoid or postpone baptism if there is no good reason to do so. Also, I am sure there will be many who have never been given the chance to get baptised (India, China, Arab states etc.) and they will survive Armageddon on the merit that Jehovah reads their heart and will give them a chance to prove themselves later, and those who are informed, but keep sitting on the fence, ought to realize that they need to make a decision because the last step, baptism, is necessary.

The cheek! (British expression)

In my opinion I wouldn't necessarily say answering, or investigating opposers claims constitutes hanging out with them. To quote J. Reuben Clark "If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought be harmed". We should be confident that our beliefs can stand up to scrutiny, if we don't have that confidence, then that is a problem.

At the 7 billion point mark it looks quite boring.