Conscience individual and collective

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, Witness said:

You are not aware of the many accounts, I suppose, of anointed who have approached the elders saying they are anointed, yet the elders say they aren't?   How many "mentally imbalanced" anointed are told they are not anointed and cannot partake?

I am not aware of "many accounts" but if we're honest, I'd bet that most of us here know of at least one case in any average sized congregation. I just wrote up a related experience of a sister who I think no one would consider mentally imbalanced, but who was told to hold off a few years partaking in public because awareness of her "calling" was causing distress for another sister who was then only one in that congregation who partook. I just removed the long-winded version of the experience because it's too easy to figure out who these ones were.

[TrueTomHarley]

2 hours ago, Anna said:

The funny thing is I actually have no idea what CC is talking about.

It’s usually true with me too

[Srecko Sostar]

10 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

14 hours ago, César Chávez said:

Forget what other people might perceive, it's your own conscience that God sees. God, is NOT going around and saying, whatever a member of Christ Church thinks and does wrong, the entire congregation or the entire church will suffer, its consequence.

So this destroys the idea of 'collective conscience'.   And it proves the idea of individual conscience. 

Unfortunately, we have some examples in which God does not punish the individual who has wronged, but the entire nation. This is easy to notice in the examples of the kings of Israel. One of the prominent events is when the people are counted, by the king's order, even though it was forbidden to do so. Thus, none of the individuals opposed the king’s command. Their individual conscience was suppressed by the king's command. After all, people feared for their lives if they disobeyed the king.

Parallel? JW members are willing to suppress their conscience because of GB’s “commands”. The existence of a “Collective Consciousness”* is often so strong that it threatens an “Individual Conscience” of person and prevents her/him from acting on his own sense of good and bad.

*“Collective Consciousness” - in context of this phrase, it denotes/refers to rules and standards set by prominent members (leaders) of how followers should behave and what standards they should follow. Deviation from them brings condemnation of the collective, because the collective consciousness  is formed in accordance with the set rules.

The change of rules in a group does not happen because of the "troubled conscience of an individual", but because of intellectual-doctrinal-ideological reasons. Eg. excommunication was an inconceivable way of dealing with individuals in WTJWorg (article in Awake 1947). The conscience of the individual was subject to the rules tailored by the leaders of the collective. As leaders changed their decisions, the “Collective consciousness” on the same issues also began to change.

Determining what is good and what is evil has ceased to be a privilege of God, back in Eden. Because God himself concluded there: "now man has become like us and knows what is good and what is evil." - Gen 3:22
In the case of WTJWorg, the individual agrees to the third model. He renounces his own right to determine the good and evil provided by Adam and Eve, so he decided to leave that right, not to God, but to people who claims to represent God.

PS - We also introduce a "new" terminology: “collective guilt”. Who is to blame for obeying the king's bad command? These are close associates (lower hierarchy- aka elders) who were to carry out the (wrong) command to count the people. Who bore the consequences of the proceedings? According to the biblical account everyone in the country. Why couldn’t a “judicial council” be formed to consider the matter and make a fair decision? Why did they wait for God to pass a "judgment", when they could prevent the process of "counting the people", on their own, and/or when they could "punish" the king for his bad decision, after counting, on their own?

[TrueTomHarley]

14 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

would appear that 'the faith' of JWs is in the things seen, not unseen. Those things seen being the GB and the massive amount of real estate that the W/t own. 

Every so often I should probably repeat the following, though none of it sinks in:

It is part of the package. If God is worth his salt, he will provide adequate human leadership. He will not leave his worshipers rudderless, each prey to whatever worldly trends are cresting in their particular time and area. He will provide adequate shepherding. Go to the world of churches if you want rudderless, if you are content with each one simply building his own personal relationship with God, and enjoy whatever “unity” you find there.

Jehovah’s people will cut their shepherds some slack, just as was necessary in the first century, because they are human. But they also recognize that these ones will be relentlessly attacked simply for the Christian shepherding work that they do.

 

[Srecko Sostar]

29 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

Was Paul ever afraid to die?

I suppose not, but he probably had fear about what would people talking about.  

38 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

Galatians 2:2, 3) . . .. 3 Nevertheless, not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, although he was a Greek

This could mean that the issue of circumcision was resolved in two different (Timothy vs Titus) ways and that the dilemma around it was still a stumbling block.

40 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

Are you still accepting JWI hidden messages to you?

This is the second time you have mentioned @JW Insider and me in a non-existent context. What is your problem? :))

[xero]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Every so often I should probably repeat the following, though none of it sinks in:

It is part of the package. If God is worth his salt, he will provide adequate human leadership. He will not leave his worshipers rudderless, each prey to whatever worldly trends are cresting in their particular time and area. He will provide adequate shepherding. Go to the world of churches if you want rudderless, if you are content with each one simply building his own personal relationship with God, and enjoy whatever “unity” you find there.

Jehovah’s people will cut their shepherds some slack, just as was necessary in the first century, because they are human. But they also recognize that these ones will be relentlessly attacked simply for the Christian shepherding work that they do.

 

I've been musing on the educational sanitation of late such that we are even more unified than before w/regard to teaching. Part of me is annoyed as I loved conducting the book study in my own home (for over ten years) so I could go off topic w/questions and have a lot of fun. But I can see how that was generating a cult of personality and division of sorts as people would talk about how things seemed to be done differently and people would comment among themselves as if they were trading baseball cards as to who had the best book study.

Plus the so-not-camera-ready-and-not-slick GB goofiness seems to just emphasize how Jehovah simply HAS to be behind this if THESE are the geniuses behind it all. The organization necessarily has to have a certain homogeneity about it if it's not to become a farm raising "superfine apostles". People now and in the first century were looking to follow men and lets face it, some of the brothers we've met have been quite brilliant and clever and it's hard to NOT want to follow along w/their cleverness. BUT that's not helpful w/regard to unity and peace in the congregations. I'm reminded of Paul saying to the Corinthians "I decided not to know anything among you except Jesus and him impaled". (I only wish I could keep all this in mind). 

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, César Chávez said:

Are you still accepting JWI hidden messages to you?

There is a scene in a Netflix show I just watched a few days ago where "Reporter Jack" asks Jerry Rubin a loaded question containing a false supposition, and Jerry Rubin answers: "You've posed that question in the form of a lie."

It's a variant of a classic example often used as a joke. I.e., "Do you still beat your wife?"

If person answers with the reflexive "No, of course not!" then the person who asked still has one "Aha!" jab left, even though it was based on a lie in the mind of the questioner.

For the record, I have never beaten my wife, and I have never sent a hidden message to Srecko. And I have never emailed Srecko, or privately messaged Srecko. Now, when a person becomes obsessed with finding a mistake, it's usually better not to answer questions that are posed in the form of a lie, because the questioner will merely look for loopholes still available to them in the answer. (Such as "Aha! He didn't deny telephoning him!" or "He didn't deny inserting hidden messages into the regular forum responses directed to him.") Of course, they may also pretend that a non-answer is an admission of guilt, which is the reason I went ahead and answered the "lie."

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

On 3/26/2021 at 2:56 PM, JW Insider said:

I am not aware of "many accounts" but if we're honest, I'd bet that most of us here know of at least one case in any average sized congregation. I just wrote up a related experience of a sister who I think no one would consider mentally imbalanced, but who was told to hold off a few years partaking in public because awareness of her "calling" was causing distress for another sister who was then only one in that congregation who partook. I just removed the long-winded version of the experience because it's too easy to figure out who these ones were.

Who thought they had the GOD GIVEN or CHRIST GIVEN right to tell her not to partake of the emblems ?

In my opinion, if you were there at the time and you said nothing then you are just as guilty as that one whom gave the ORDER  not to partake. Remember clearly what Jesus said. 

Matthew 25 :40

 In reply the King will say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

45 Then he will answer them, saying: ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of these least ones, you did not do it to me.’ ⁴⁶  These will depart into everlasting cutting-off, but the righteous ones into everlasting life.”

JWI 'Just wrote up a related experience'  as if it was just writing about today's weather. Do you people not see the importance of such things concerning the Anointed ? 

The other thought is, that if the other sister was distressed then maybe she needed to examine her own heart condition as to why she would be distressed. 

[JW Insider]

25 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

The other thought is, that if the other sister was distressed then maybe she needed to examine her own heart condition as to why she would be distressed.

I'd say it was more of a mental condition, referring to the metaphorical difference between heart and mind. I am just admitting that the elders likely made a mistake, probably because they assumed that neither of these were truly anointed, because of traditional conditioning around previous teachings. (Assumptions about the "Replacement doctrine," "seniority," worthiness, etc.)

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

16 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Every so often I should probably repeat the following, though none of it sinks in:

It is part of the package. If God is worth his salt, he will provide adequate human leadership. He will not leave his worshipers rudderless, each prey to whatever worldly trends are cresting in their particular time and area. He will provide adequate shepherding. Go to the world of churches if you want rudderless, if you are content with each one simply building his own personal relationship with God, and enjoy whatever “unity” you find there.

Jehovah’s people will cut their shepherds some slack, just as was necessary in the first century, because they are human. But they also recognize that these ones will be relentlessly attacked simply for the Christian shepherding work that they do.

 

This whole comment above is so funny that it's hard to know where to start to answer it. I presume Tom is on the wine or vodka or something. 

Of course Tom will now provide proof of God's true guidance and give names of the organisations that God used from the year 100 through to 1800. Tom will now show how God was using specific organisations when, ops, That Russell guy, he said there was no need of an Organisation, and he had plenty of people agreeing with him it seems. 

Tom also deliberately tries to hide the FACT that I am NOT Anti- organisation. Even governments are organised to a degree. Families are organised. Businesses are organied. So too, religion will be organised. 

Let's quote Tom here " If God is worth his salt, he will provide adequate human leadership."

Yes Tom, God will provide a True Anointed remnant to replace ALL false religions in good time, before the Judgement comes. 

Quote "Jehovah’s people will cut their shepherds some slack, just as was necessary in the first century,"

Yes well. the blind leading the blind. Catholics will probably cut the Pope and the priests some slack too. 

But please give me 5 examples of this 'first century' slackness, where the 'followers' cut their leaders some slack. 

Quote "But they also recognize that these ones will be relentlessly attacked simply for the Christian shepherding work that they do."

No, JWs are so blind that they believe the things they are told. Most JWs do not do research into things such as CSA. They do not research scripture from an outside viewpoint. They believe that their leaders are the ones to follow without question. And most JWs easily give up their conscience to follow orders. 

Sorry to be so blunt, but when you talk rubbish then you have to be open to a reply. 

[TrueTomHarley]

3 hours ago, César Chávez said:

Let's see if I can make it clear for dimwits

Well, this point you have made clear any number of times.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

15 hours ago, César Chávez said:

Does it destroy the collective? I'd say you have a profound way of theatrics. You, think, God is going to punish your former congregation for the disgusting things you do now? Before you answer that, don't drink or take meds that will make your brain dull.

 

Another joke from CC but he actually hangs himself with his own rope here. God will punish me as an individual BECAUSE I have an individual conscience. God will not punish the congregation for my sins because God will not be using collective conscience.