Response from the Society

by Sirona 31 Replies latest jw friends

  • hillary_step

    Hello Mulan,

    If Sirona is in the UK it does not surprise me that she recieved a personal reply from the WTS. I have found that the Branch in Britain understand its publishers thinking much more than Branches in NA.

    Your average Brit. would certainly not stand for their questions being diverted to the elders and would cause as much an issue over that, as over the purpose of their letter!

    Kind regards -- HS

  • California Sunshine
    California Sunshine

    Sirona, you are my hero, for having the nerve to ask questions of the GB.

    HS, You are a wealth of info and I appreciate your posts.

    malcom, You are a great reminder of why I am no longer a witness and why I'm glad I wised up so long ago. Didn't Jesus say you would know his deciples by their "love"? I thank you for your fine example of that. PS Maybe a night class on spelling and grammer might help you too (only a suggestion).


    minds are like parachutes--they only function when open.

    In a world of peace and love, music would be the universal language...Thereau

  • outnfree


    You already figured out and posted the same things I saw when I read this response, so I'm only posting to say "Thank you for sharing."

    Now, I'm going to rate this thread as to it's importance, because I think your original letter and this reponse will be very valuable to newbies and lurkers.


    When the truth is found to be lies
    and all the joy within you dies ...
    -- Darby Slick, Somebody to Love

  • ISP

    Good one Sirona!

    Thanks for keeping us advised.


  • Sirona


    They did send a copy to the elders!!! lol. Actually I got in pretty big trouble over it. Two elders visited, after which they left in disgust saying I was influenced by the devil, then an elder returned with the Circuit Overseer. On that visit, I bit my tongue so that I wasnt DF'd. To give him his due, he was much more respectful towards me than the local elders were.

    Hillary Step:
    I wrote to Brooklyn, New York. I was that annoyed, I went to the top! My response was from New York too.

    Thanks everyone for your comments! Im glad it helped

    ** **

  • DIM

    this really baffles me. They did the NWT in the late 50's, early 60's yet provide a document from 1978 as proof as to why they inserted "jehovah" into the greek text. amazing. here's a paragraph from the november 15th, 2001 watchtower on page 8 in the article "the new world translation appreciated by millions worldwide" that shows just how sneaky they are about this:

    Another outstanding feature of the New World Translation is its use of God's personal name, Jehovah, in both the Hebrew and the Greek portions of the Scriptures. Since the Hebrew name for God appears nearly 7,000 times in the so called Old Testament alone, it is clear that our Creator wants his worshipers to use his name and to know him as a person. (Exodus 34:6,7) The New World Translation has helped millions of people to do so.

    a sick, twisted paragraph. so sneaky. it is apparent that they KNOW they are wrong about inserting God's name into the new testament. They just need to do it to support JW doctrine.

    i'm sick and tired of hearing things from uptight-short-sighted-narrow minded hypocritics. all i want is the truth just gimme some truth - John Lennon

  • Sirona

    Hi DIM

    Good points! I didnt think of that! It wasnt another edition was it?

    They are very, very sneaky about the Gods Name thing. They always always state that the OT has Gods name. All those pictures of the tetragrammaton are ALL from the Old Testament. Then they use that to justify it being in the NT.



    ** **

  • bluesapphire

    Standard letter. Similar responses as to several letters we exchanged a couple years back. And of course, they are the ONLY ones doing Jehovah's will upon the earth. How could you doubt that dear?

  • bluesapphire

    PS, Sirona, I forgot to say that they always seem to forget that their claim that the Tet was removed by the end of the 1ST CENTURY. This means that there was actually NO CANON at that time. The canon was formulated with final authority in the 4TH CENTURY -- by an "apostate" church (according to them).

    So, according to their reasoning, the same apostates who removed the Tet from the New Testament, yeah, the same ones who formulated the Trinity doctrine, those anti-Christs are the ones who gave them their canon of the Bible!

    This was basically the gist of my correspondece with them and THEY HAD NO ANSWERS! They sent me copies of meaningless and irrelevant articles and asked the same question, which basically means, "Who else looks like us, acts like us, smells like us - except for us? So follow us because we're us...."

  • bluesapphire


Share this