Was There A Specific Event That U Remember-- Realizing It Wasn't The Truth?

by minimus 51 Replies latest jw friends

  • uninformed
    uninformed

    The 'generation change' really tore me up. In my youth, I used to say that if they ever changed 1914 that I would really examine them with a disposition to leave.

    Therefore, I was mentally on the way out in 1997 when the WT made the following statement:

    ***

    w978/1pp.10-11ServingLoyallyWithJehovah’sOrganization***

    8

    Still, Jesus loyally supported the temple arrangement. From childhood, he attended the festivals at the temple and often taught there. He even paid the temple tax—although he was not really obligated to do so. (Matthew 17:24-27) Jesus commended the poor widow for putting "her whole living" into the temple treasury chest. Shortly thereafter, Jehovah permanently cast off that temple. But until then, Jesus was loyal to it. (Mark 12:41-44; Matthew 23:38) God’s earthly organization today is far superior to the Jewish system with its temple. Granted, it is not perfect; that is why adjustments are made at times. But neither is it riddled with corruption, nor is Jehovah God about to replace it. Never should we allow any imperfections we perceive within it to embitter us or move us to adopt a critical, negative spirit. Let us, rather, imitate the loyalty of Jesus Christ.—1 Peter 2:21.

    When I read that statement, "...nor is Jehovah God about to replace it" all I could think of was the attitude of the Jews at the time that Christ was alive, and their attitude of invincibility.

    I turned to my wife at that moment and said, "Its over".

    At that moment I was PO in Luling, Texas and it took me 7 more horrible years to make the break. The UN thing finally gave me the courage to look them in the eye and tell them to go screw themselves (of course in a civilized way).

    Brant

  • Quentin
    Quentin

    Onan

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In the BiblicalBook of Genesis, Onan (Hebrew: ??????, StandardOnanTiberian? ? nan ; Strong) was the second son of Judah. [1] Certain interpretations of the narrative concerning him have led to the use of the term onanism to refer to masturbation.

    According to the text, after Yahweh had killed Onan's older brother Er, Judah asked Onan to have sex with Tamar, Er's former wife, so that the offspring could be declared Er's heir. [2] The narrative implies that Onan didn't object to the sex itself, but performed coitus interruptus, spilling his seed upon the ground, so that there wouldn't be any offspring he couldn't claim as his own; [3] the passage goes on to state that for this act, a displeased Yahweh killed him. [4] The deaths of Onan and Er are among the few deaths that the Torah doesn't describe as being caused via an intermediary, such as plague or the Angel of Death.

    According to biblical scholars, the description of Onan is an eponymousaetiological myth concerning fluctuations in the constituency of the tribe of Judah, with the death of Onan reflecting the dying out of a clan; [5]HYPERLINK \l "_note-5"[6] Er and Onan are hence viewed as each being representative of a clan, with Onan possibly representing an Edomite clan named Onam, [7] mentioned by an Edomite genealogy in Genesis. [8]

    The text emphasises the social and legal situation, with Judah explaining what Onan must do and why; the plain reading of the text is that Onan was killed because he refused to follow instructions. Scholars have argued that the secondary purpose of the Tamar narrative, of which the description of Onan is a part, was to either assert the institution of levirate marriage, or present an aetiological myth for its origin; [9] Onan's role in the narrative is thus as the brother abusing his obligations by agreeing to sexual involvement with his dead brother's wife, but refusing to allow her to become pregnant as a result. Emerton regards the evidence for this as inconclusive, though classical rabbinical writers argued that this narrative describes the origin of levirate marriage. [10]

    However, other early writers focused on the spilling seed, and the sexual act being used for non-procreational purposes; one opinion expressed in the Talmud argues that the death penalty was only imposed because of it. [11] This interpretation was held by several early Christian apologists, Jerome for example arguing:

    But I wonder why he the heretic

    Jovinianus set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children? [12]

    Clement of Alexandria, though he does not make explicit reference to Onan, similarly reflects an early Christian view of the abhorrence of spilling seed:

    Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly

    ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted [13]

    To have

    coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature [14]

    Many Christian groups, especially Roman Catholicism, have subsequently cited the Onan narrative as justification for bans on both masturbation and coitus interruptus, and since Medieval times have also used it to justify a prohibition against contraception. However, the Leviticalregulations concerning ejaculation, whether as a result of heterosexual intercourseHYPERLINK \l "_note-14"[15] or not, [16] merely describe it as something that brings about ritual impurity; rather than ordering capital punishment, it only insists that the man wash themselves afterwards, implying that masturbation wasn't a major crime.

    I'm sure Leolia, Narkissos, or other of our more astute posters could elaborate on this story....I've always viewed it as a back drop for the Tamar story....

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit