Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Anna

  1. So then predators were created with eyes that look ahead so they could focus on prey, and herbivores were created with eyes on the side of the head so they could keep a better watch for those predators.
  2. The reason why I said what I did in that post was to highlight that "a little molestation" leads to "big molestation" unless the "little molestation" is stopped. What happened to me was nothing really. It did not traumatize me, and I was on good terms with my uncle. I doubt I would ever think of bringing something like that to the police, and my mum obviously didn't think it warranted it either. And to let you know, my mum was a tigress when it came to protecting me. Then in my reply to you I said: I mentioned that elsewhere too. No one thinks child sexual molestation is ok. And no one thinks "a little molestation" is ok either (that is why I said something, and that is why my mum handled it). If my uncle had been a Witness, and not my uncle, my mum would have gone to the elders and told them what happened.The the perpetrator would have probably made some excuse, or shown remorse, got a warning and a slap on the wrist. He would probably never dare to do anything like that to me again. The pertinent question is, would he do something like that to someone else? And if he did, would that someone else report it? And if they didn't report it would the "little molestation" lead to "big molestation"? That is the problem. I have no idea if my uncle molested someone else. He was my aunts second husband and had grown children. It probably didn't cross my aunts mind. I don't think it crossed anybodies mind, that other children could be in danger. Its because that's not how these things were generally perceived or understood. I am not making excuses. That's just how it was. In a similar manner, elders in those days were not aware that others could be in danger. They probably thought that a warning was enough to ensure it would not happen again. We now know the likelihood of something like that happening again is high. Yes, unfortunately it does appear that way. But to be fair, I would put both on the same plane. Child molestation is abhorred as much as the accusation of being tolerant of it, or hiding it. Especially when felt it is not justified (the accusation).
  3. That was not the impression TTH gave me. Nor do I think that's the attitude of JW leaders. I think it's ignorance of how child sexual molestation really works, and naivete regarding "repentance" is what has caused all the doo doo.to happen.
  4. Jesus’ followers have limited authority in every way. The authority given to them by Jesus is to look after the sheep in their care, not lording it over them, to keep the congregations morally and spiritually clean, and encourage them in the work Jesus commanded (preaching the good news). Also they were to provide spiritual food at the proper time. This did not mean re- inventing scripture or experimenting and then being dogmatic about the interpretation unless its proved crystal clear. If the holy spirit had authority to “make” people do things, then people under its influence would never make any mistakes. It does not have that authority. Holy spirit only works if the person is willing to be molded by it. We know mistakes have been made in interpretation and organization. Obviously Holy spirit was unable to influence that. The organization itself does not like the word dogmatic being applied to it because of its negative connotation. This is because imperfect humans do not have the right to be dogmatic about anything really.
  5. I know what you're saying, it's just that a hand on the inner thigh or rear end, if done deliberately, is usually just the beginning, and is like a test leading to other stages. Maybe the degree of molestation should be categorized in stages? Stage one: hand on inner thigh and buttocks, stage two: ........and so on. The thing is, if the molester gets away with stage one (no one reports it, or the victim doesn't stop it) then you know for sure it will lead to stage two, and if that's not reported to stage three etc. So in my opinion, at least, it doesn't matter at what stage the molester gets caught or reported, because really it's about the potential, or goal of the molester, the actual "gravity" of the act is merely contingent on carrying on until he gets stopped. I consider my uncle (non JW) as molesting me when I was 13. I was wearing a t-shirt with some logo on it across my chest. He took his finger and begun tracing the writing and then at the end he tweeked my nipple. It all happened so unexpectedly that I didn't even think of moving. At the end of it I knew it had been deliberate because of the nipple thing. However, I nipped that one in the bud (no pun intended) by going straight to my mum reporting what had happened. My mum went straight to my aunt, and my aunt went straight to my uncle. Needless to say, that was the last time he touched me. I hate to think what could have happened had I not said anything....
  6. Dogmatism: "the tendency to lay down principles as incontrovertibly true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others". So I think Jesus had the right to be dogmatic because he had authority from God to lay down principles, and he didn't need to consider evidence or opinions of others for the same reason. However, in areas that didn't demand it, he did consider others, and at no time was he arrogant and haughty. Arrogance and haughtiness are negative synonyms of being dogmatic. Same goes for the apostles, but of course since they were imperfect, they didn't succeed as Jesus did.
  7. I thought I already gave you an answer to that, that of course God knew, and therefor Greenlees couldn't have been appointed by God using holy spirit. Claiming one thing and actually doing it are different. And we have already established God is not deceived. Once again, by that reasoning the Pope has been appointed by God. If the Pope qualifies by doing God's will according to the Bible, seen and unseen by human eyes, then yes.
  8. Kind of like "he endeavored to avoid being dead". But he didn't always succeed. You are what you are until you're not. I don't think so, more like "some people just can't help themselves"
  9. And of course there is the: “But if ever that evil slave says in his heart, ‘My master is delaying, and he starts to beat his fellow slaves and to eat and drink with the confirmed drunkards, the master of that slave will come on a day that he does not expect and in an hour that he does not know, and he will punish him with the greatest severity and will assign him his place with the hypocrites. There is where his weeping and the gnashing of his teeth will be". Matt 24: 48 - 51 That would keep me awake at night!
  10. Anyone who wishes to share their opinions, personal experiences, (or the experiences of others) they had with Fred Franz, can do so here!
  11. Because that kind of gossip travels fast! Yes, very dogmatic. Obviously this was when they "didn't succeed" in not being dogmatic. I didn't say they were never dogmatic.
  12. I did assume that someone knew he had done something in the past, but that it was believed he was changed and would never do it again in the spirit of 1 Cor 6:11. I have noticed this is one of the reasons why in the past pedophiles ended up molesting other victims besides the original victim. Elders assumed the person was "cured" and would never do it again. Well known by whom? I've said what happened in gory detail in earlier posts. Missed that. Correct. But the holy spirit was not deceived. Well, in a manner of speaking, since holy spirit is not a person but a force. I do understand it is a manner of speaking, since holy spirit is not a person, as I mentioned above. You obviously meant it as a metaphor as well when you said it "was not deceived". By the same token, it can be said someone is appointed by holy spirit even though it was merely written directions that were being followed. Since God used holy spirit, his force, to inspire people to write down His directions, when appointing overseers, elders do so according to those directions. Doing so correctly is contingent on the honesty of the one being appointed, and the astuteness of those doing the appointing. If the person actually qualifies, then it can be said they were appointed by holy spirit as per Acts 20:28 "Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God...."
  13. Ok, well that's what I wanted to clear up. I thought you said in. Of course it was. Disagree. It was insinuated, but never official. Your opinion. I think you are reading too much into it. Jesus said to keep on the watch because you do not know the day when it's coming, so yes, logically one would have to stay alert. But Jesus also gave signs when the disciples asked him when, and Jesus said when these things occur, (the signs) you will know he is near at the door. So when one sees the sign, one is merely led to a logical conclusion that the "end must be approaching". In any case, what is the objective of someone who says the end is approaching? Is it to help rouse and warn people to become alert so that they can be ready and "found by him spotless and unblemished and in peace" ? Why would Jesus be upset and warn about false prophets and those saying "the due time for the end has approached" unless these people were doing it with evil motives, such as those pretending to be Christ's followers but really are ravenous wolves. I do not believe this applies to the org. Perhaps that is what Schroeder meant when he said "that Bible verse does not apply to us".
  14. It might sound mealy mouthed, but it's hardly deception. They tried hard not to be dogmatic, but they didn’t always succeed. Sometimes they did well and were not dogmatic, and sometimes they didn’t do well, and were dogmatic. I believe they endeavored to avoid being dogmatic. But obviously didn't always succeed.
  15. You know that, do you? You're wrong. I told you earlier: Greenlees was a pedophile in 1964 when he was appointed a Director, and before that according to one of his child victims, Mark Palo, who has put his story online. Greenlees was 72 when he was forced off the GB. Pedophiles don't start up at age 72 -- they just keep doing what they've long been doing I don't know it, I am being logical about it. Why would anyone knowingly want to appoint a practicing pedophile? I agree. But as you say, he was appointed director in 1964, and then as GB in 1971. So it could have been believed he was cured. I don't know what happened in 1984 when he was forced to resign. But whatever it was led the rest to believe he wasn't cured after all. I thought I had already agreed that if Greenlees was a pedophile when he was appointed director, and then later GB member, the holy spirit had nothing to do with it, that he was appointed by men who were evidently deceived. And I thought we had already discussed the "mechanics" of how holy spirit works.
  16. Thanks for those references. I obviously must have read some of them, especially the ones from the 80's and I am aware that our mothers would say we would never go to school, that Armageddon would be here by then. This was nothing new to me since we were saying this almost since the founding of the JWS. What I was questioning was the specific date 2000. That Armageddon would come in that year, in the same way as was insinuated for 1975. "Within the 20th Century" is open, and just because 15 year old Samuel "visualizes something happening in 2000" doesn't mean we had to think it will happen exactly then, lol. Samuel is 48 today, probably with kids, maybe a grandad, and probably still a JW. I know plenty of people who visualized something happening, and nothing happened, and they are still visualizing it. But, everyone in their right mind yearns for good things, and Jesus told his followers to "keep on the watch" and Peter "await and keep close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah". As for the society setting specific dates for the end, 1925 sticks in my mind, for which Rutherford apologized, and 1975, which was not official anyway. And 1914 of course....
  17. I don't remember anything being said about the year 2000. It must have been very obscure. All I remember is it worried computer programers a little, and got people's panties in a twist.
  18. By saying "how much", I did not mean quantity at a given time. I meant how many times hs would be given over a period of time. So correction: "how often or how many times it would be given"
  19. The spiritual food can only be what is in the Bible. But obviously, this is not what you’re talking about, but rather the interpretation of the Bible. The Bible says it’s good for setting things straight …so man of God is completely equipped for every good work. This concerns the basic teachings, as you say: "To be good, not lie, love your neighbor, to preach Kingdom, not have idols ....and similar". If that was all there was, then it would be a much thinner book. I don’t know, what percent is here of the basic teachings? I have not looked into that, but let’s say it’s 50% of the Bible. So that leaves the other 50% that concern other things. Should we say that there is no use for that other 50%? What is for example the use of the book of Revelation? It’s a “A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place”. Would it be of any use unless it was understood? Verse five (of ch1) goes on to say: “Happy is the one who reads aloud and those who hear the words of this prophecy and who observe the things written in it, for the appointed time is near”. You can’t observe it unless you know what you are looking at. That’s great because not only is it a highly symbolic book, but its chapters and verses are not always in chronological order! It’s a real challenge to interpret the riddles that are in it. Have the JWs done this perfectly. No, I don’t think so. We have changed how we understood a few things already, and some we still don’t understand. Does that mean we should stop trying to understand, and just ignore it? The same goes for the rest of the prophetic Bible books, such as Daniel etc. They are there for a reason. Does it mean JWs didn’t get enough holy spirit if they made mistakes in some interpretations? Don’t forget the holy spirit does not work on our terms. God is perfectly in control of holy spirit and knows when and how much to give, it’s not up to us to judge. The Bible is full of examples where it appears that God’s servants were not getting help from God. Think about Joseph, all the things he had to go through before finally things worked out for him. I would not expect it to say that. It would be out of character of all the other scriptures. It stands to reason that there should be a centralized system of direction. As you say, organizationally it’s doing very well, but your problem is with the spiritual aspect. Why should that be a problem though? Jesus said that the shepherds were to feed his sheep spiritually. It started of as one congregation. But now it’s thousands. You just have to look at it that the whole world of JWs is one big congregation, being fed by shepherds that happen to be in Warwick. You are putting too much emphasis on 8 imperfect men, whilst what you should be looking at is the arrangement which has a Biblical basis. Congregations are not autonomous spiritually. All JWS are one big congregation. What about interpretation? There has to be a centralized tenet of belief. Otherwise no one would be able to identify Jehovah’s Witnesses by their beliefs. Every religion has their doctrine by which they can be identified. Jehovah’s Witnesses hope to have a doctrine based exclusively on the Bible, free of pagan influences, and as close to the 1st. century Christians as possible. As for complicated prophecies, well, that is a work in progress, but that should not be a deterrent.
  20. @AlanF I am just a few more posts away from putting a bullet in my head. Alan says to himself: "good, that's the intention. Natural selection at work.... with a little help"

  • 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.