by TheListener 77 Replies latest jw friends
I think you are more of a unitarian, darcy, than a JW. You are far too independent a thinker to be a JW, even though you consider yourself one.
bebu
PS: Welcome to the board. You express yourself honestly and articulately. That is unusual for a practicing JW.
dear Satanus,
has the thought occured to you that you could search your whole life and not find what you're looking for because you refused to consider that what God says is the truth? like it or not.
how many times has God put that stumbling block in front of you? how many times will you stumble over it?
you see Paul, and other "preachers" l as being judgemental? How about, he was GIVEN this age of grace to teach you, because he cares about you.
you are right about this tho....there are none so blind as those who will not see.
love michelle
Darcy...Have you acquired any studies since becoming a JW? If so what book are you using to teach the Watchtower doctrine?
I went back and read the Lord's Prayer after reading your post, thinking about the 'will' issue.
It says, let your will take place, as in heaven, also upon earth. So, question is, what has Jehovah done in heaven... thing that came to mind was Satan and his demons got thrown out. The 'wicked' removed. And that seems to be the underlying promise of everything in the scriptures with regards to prophecy. Forget the disputes about how it's actually supposed to happen, it's all about getting the bad people/creatures away. Who those bad people are is what Jehovah decides, but if you really don't want to be one of them, well as we've been discussing, the Bible puts forth much advice on how to avoid that stigma in God's eyes.
Second thought. You mentioned he, God, doesn't seem to want to do much with the individual. And that makes sense, because he has nearly always worked through an organization. The priests with the Israelites, the kings, the judges, all that hierarchy. Early Christians and their congregations and brothers and "traveling brothers" like Paul. And then the dispute for today, which organization is God using today? Also, there are all the scriptures that talk about worshipping with others. From Jesus (I think) who said where two or three are gathered there are enough to Paul in Heb. 10:24, 25 and David in Psalms 22.22 "I shall declare your name to my brothers, in the middle of the congregation i shall praise you." So organization is important to our Almighty. But again, much dispute over which one he is using.
Hmm... I can't read your post while I write this so I can't remember the other things. Oh oh, the faith and works... I wanted to add that works must be important because James says without them, faith is dead. Myself, I'd compare it to having an animal. You can say you love that animal as much as your want, but if you don't feed, care, and pet the creature adequately, then your words are empty. And you can see the application that would have to faith and works.
Oh, and I wanted to thank you for being reasonable with your questions, and not asking me to defend decades old literature with wrong or screwy stuff in it. Things change. Forget WTS, try science. That's always changing, and you don't see people going to astrophycicist's asking them to defend disproven theories from the 1950s. Some science hasn't been proved wrong, and it's Very old (like Newton), so we keep it, but the stuff that turns out wrong gets shucked. Otherwise you aren't a progressive organization.
i was raised a jw. Because of my transcience in the past year, I've turned over most of my calls. However, last summer I started a study with a lady in the Bible Teach book, and now that I'm finally going to be in one place for a while, I'll probably be using the Bible Teach book now too. However, depending on the person and their agenda, plans may change.
See the reply to Listener, I give my feelings on need of organization. I'm not opposed to what Jehovah or WTS requires of me. I don't always care for the words used to describe it "willing subjection" "willing slaves"... ech, however that's what it is, I suppose.
Erhm, the wheat and the weeds. Well... WTS could be right. For now, i'll go with what they say. The fact they haven't been 100% right in the past just doesn't inspire rebellion in me. I've known two sisters who were of the annointed. One is very very old and all she cares about is her grandchildren, and once she grabs your hand you aren't getting away, but I know all of her kids and most of their kids, and we're friends. (Hah, there's this huge joke about me marrying one of her grandsons, cute kid, but marriage?... oh dear) And the second traveled the world with her grandmother as a child, had passed out Watchtowers on the Red Square at 12. She's also gotten her doctorate in theology for writing a 80 pg. thesis on her experience in the organization. An absolutely amazing woman. The annointed, if they're earnest, put much effort into the work and earn respect from everyone. If one of them were to abuse his/her title and try to use it to push others around, they'd probably still be treated respectfully, but I doubt people would really mean it. However, since they are of the annointed, I am sure they feel more than ever the need to imitate Jesus and the attitude displayed on the night of his death when he washed his disciples feet. Jesus showed he would take the lead in humility, and not be overbearing with titles, and it was via that humility that he really did gain the loving support and respect of his disciples.
To avoid the punishment.
A really simple illustration would be the teacher who walks out of the room, mischief takes place, and the teacher comes back in and pronounces, 'If you were apart of this, you're getting suspended' Now if you're innocent and you don't speak up, then you're presumed guilty, but if you can demonstrate innocence, then you receive "salvation" and are not suspended.
To avoid the punishment.
darcy: asking me to defend decades old literature with wrong or screwy stuff in it.
Just an FYI, and you can ask any elder whether this is true without fear of any reprisals, old doctrine that has not been specifically changed is still current doctrine. You seem to think the date on the article affects the organizational validity of the doctrine. That is not the case. Please dispel this false understanding about the organization in which you are trying to interest your neighborhood, please ask an elder whether what I wrote is true.
It doesn't matter whether the doctrine is from 1879 or from 2005, if it is the latest published understanding and is unchanged, it is valid organizational doctrine. Don't worry, you aren't the only female Jehovah's Witness that knows next to nothing about how the male-dominated organization views its own doctrines. Keep reading, keep posting, but most of all...determine whether what we say is true or false. If we are telling the truth, it doesn't matter whether we left a specific organization or whether we were never a part of it...it also doesn't matter whether you are comfortable or not.
If you teach someone lies because you failed to check it out thoroughly for yourself, will you be able to correct it after they have been sucked in? I was unable to in three instances and I cannot escape my feelings of culpability. I hope you do not suffer similarly one day.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
Forget WTS, try science. That's always changing, and you don't see people going to astrophycicist's asking them to defend disproven theories from the 1950s. Some science hasn't been proved wrong, and it's Very old (like Newton), so we keep it, but the stuff that turns out wrong gets shucked. Otherwise you aren't a progressive organization.
Comparing the world of science to the JWs.... If I proclaim a theory that is in opposition to currently accepted scientific thought, I am not shunned by the scientific community. I am of course expected to provide evidence for my assertions, but scientists willingly accept criticism of even their most cherished ideas, so long as evidence backs up the claims. What would happen if, during your next "Talk Number 4" assignment, you proclaimed from the platform that "Jehovah's Witnesses joined the UN's DPI as an NGO for a decade, and annually promised to support and promote the UN's ideals" (assuming, for the moment, that people in the audience would understand the acronyms & the significance of your statement)? What would happen? Your elders would pounce on you as soon as the meeting ended, if not before. If you "stubbornly clung" to your position, you would be summarily disfellowshipped from the congregation for "apostasy", or at least "causing divisions". Would they examine any evidence you provided? Would they eagerly try to see whether what you said was the truth? Or would they call you an "apostate" and try to muzzle you? Pick any topic for which there is solid evidence where the JWs are wrong--607 BCE, 474 BCE, blood transfusions, the existence of a 1st-century "governing body"...any topic. If you "stubbornly cling" (language from the elder manual) to such ideas, you will be disfellowshipped. What doctrine will change in the January 1 2007 Watchtower? Or 2008? or 2009? Something will change between now and then. Something that the JWs teach will be dropped at some point in the future. But, if you vary from even one point from "current truth", and proclaim it to others, you will be disfellowshipped. Doesn't matter what evidence you have, if it doesn't come from the "slave", it is "wrong", even if it is right. You are "running ahead" of the organization, and will be disfellowshipped. I have no problem with changing doctrine. In fact, it is a good & healthy sign, in and of itself. However, the forced acceptance of doctrine & doctrinal changes, enforced by the threat of shunning and losing contact with all friends and family, is what I have a problem with.
I dunno, Darcy, sounds like works, works, works, works and more works.
Where does grace come in?
Do you think you EARN eternal life?
"Faith without works is dead" refers to spiritual fruit; no fruits means no REAL faith.
This doesn't mean works= faith; simply evidence of such....
