Yeah, I wish Eggnog would look at things realistically as well.
What does this mean? That you (and Essan) think that "you guys" tend to "look at things realistically"? No, you don't. And to be specific here, I thought it telling that you didn't know what it meant to be "led by holy spirit."
However I don't think he'll remove his " teacher hat " because he thinks he's right and is not in the mood, or is not trained to be humble - he's trained to have the answers. I doubt he'll acknowledge he's wrong- when he thinks he's right.
My hope is that you will accept the fact that (a) If the Bible is the truth and (b) I both believe and stick to just those things that the Bible teaches (and not also put faith in unscriptural man-made concepts), then that would mean that each one of the things I might say as they relate to the Bible is the truth. If I should opine something having to do with the history of Pastor Russell and be mistaken, it would be tantamount to me believing that the woman in the 1977 PG-rated (also R-rated) movie, "Saturday Night Fever," that put the question to John Travolta's character ("Tony"), "Are you as good in bed as you are on the dance floor?" to be Justina Machada ("Vanessa Diaz," Six Feet Under), instead of Fran Drescher, whose appearance in Saturday Night Fever was her acting debut as "Connie" with a Brooklyn accent (which accent btw Drescher seems to have totally discarded after the movie, after which Drescher went on to star for several years in a tv sitcom ("The Nanny"). I believe Drescher to also have been among those doing a line dance to "Night Fever," but my point here is that Saturday Night Fever was released 33 years ago and it makes no difference to me if you agree with me that Drescher looks like Diaz, or if this was Drescher's acting debut or if I've got the character names in the movie wrong, and since Russell died in 1916, it may make a difference to you, but it makes no difference to me what Russell may have believed before he died 94 years ago, or what he may have believed in 1874, or 42 years before his death, as to when Jesus' invisible presence began. Jehovah's Witnesses believe his invisible presence began concurrently with the composite visible sign that began to appear in the year 1914.
It is currently held that the 35th president of the US, John F. Kennedy, was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, by Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22, 1963, but it has also been held by many conspiracy theorists that Kennedy was assassinated by more than one gunman. I don't know what you believe to be true, but I believe Oswald alone murdered our 35th president, and if you should know now or should you in the future discover evidence proving me to be wrong about Kennedy having more than one assailant, so what? Kennedy is dead. Russell is dead. The only thing that is going to change this fact about these two men is the resurrection, whether it should be here on earth or in heaven. IOW, if I should be mistaken and you are correct about 1874, I'm ok with you being right and with me being wrong about such a trivial matter.
The man was led my holy spirit, and it is not like the holy spirit got the date wrong, but an imperfect human that was neither infallible nor inspired by God to determine the correct date using the dates that had been determined by Adventists (like Balbour) from the Bible -- that is, if 1874 should be the date that Russell calculated to be when Jesus' invisible presence would begin -- got the date wrong. Jehovah's Witnesses believe 1914 to be the correct date when the invisible presence of Jesus began and we teach accordingly. At that time, Russell saw no problem with ecumenicalism, but 96 years after Russell's death, Jehovah's Witnesses do not subscribe to ecumenicalism at all, so if you foolishly want to judge us for what things Russell may have believed before his death some 96 years ago in connection with ecumenicalism, I believe in calling a spade a spade, and I recognize religious bigotry when I see it, and that's ok, too. It was foretold that many antichrists would appear during the last days saying, in effect, "Where is this promised presence of [Jesus']? (1 John 2:18; 2 Peter 3:4)
A woman named Susan Smith is now serving a 30-year sentence somewhere in South Carolina for drowning her two children back in 1994, after confessing some nine days later to having falsely accused a nondescript black man for carjacking and kidnapping her two children. Smith is a white woman that used the script used to accuse nine black teenagers back in Huntsville, Alabama, of raping two women. The two women -- Price and Bates, the latter a minor -- were white and financially strapped as were many of the people in Huntsville at the time, and while Bates was a teenager, Price was a married woman separated from her husband, and these nine teenagers were convicted in Scottsboro, Alabama, during four separate trials (1931-1937) of raping both Price and Bates. The accusation was also false, but while Bates recanted her story, Price never did recant her story. It would appear that Smith took a page from the Scottsboro trials hoping to deflect or divert attention from herself by using the prevailing anti-black prejudices that were in existence back in 1994, a diversionary tactics that continues to persist in a so-called "post-racial" Islamophobic anti-establishment, anti-black America.
What it clear based on my read of many of the messages posted to this forum from those that have been disfellowshipped or have disassociated themselves from God's organization, and also from those that are in "fade" mode and so will soon be defecting from true Christianity (once they come to terms with their being shunned by family members and friends for disowning Jesus, and become disloyal toward he and Jehovah, who sent Jesus forth is that much religious bigotry exists toward Jehovah's Witnesses today. (Matthew 10:32, 33, 40) However, what may be surprising to these antichristian forces is that when the Bible refers to "antichrists," it is not really referring to Roman Catholics or Protestants at all, but to anti-Jehovah's Witnesses that may have left our ranks to join Catholics or Protestants in their anti-God movement, using their knowledge of the truth to advance anti-truth doctrines, things like the trinity, the immortality of the human soul, evolution and natural selection.
Jesus explained that it is Jehovah that is glorified when we prove ourselves to be Jesus' disciples, which we do by bearing fruit. (John 15:8, 16)
The faith of many of Jehovah's Witnesses is so shallow, superficial, that those in whose hearts the seed of the word of God has been planted only embrace God's word "for a season," and lacking "depth of soil" and due to the deprivation of a sufficient amount of living water to grow their faith, they become easily stumbled by these antichristian forces that were supposedly "in the truth," and they end up falling away. (Matthew 13:5, 6, 21; Luke 8:6, 13)
The faith of many of Jehovah's Witnesses in whose hearts the seed of God's word has been planted is often lost because Bible study is neglected as the anxieties of life end up taking priority, causing personal Bible study to be neglected so that their faith doesn't grow, but becomes stagnant, and they end up losing interest in Jesus' message that they might be saved and they fall away. (Luke 8:12)
The faith of many of Jehovah's Witnesses in whose hearts the seed of God's word has been planted becomes choked by the "completely choked" by the "anxieties of this system of things," the "pleasures of this life" and "the deceptive power of riches" so that eventually no time is devoted to growing their faith through a regular study of the Bible. (Luke 8:14; Mark 4:19; Matthew 13:22)
Those that "retain [the word] and bear fruit with endurance" are those that become Jesus' disciples and prophets of God, who will receive as their reward the satisfaction and the joy of knowing that they are unselfishly helping people to gain life that they, too, might obtain "a prophet's reward," and "a righteous man's reward," because they, like those brought the good news to them, have received the word with joy, and with endurance they "go on bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the accurate knowledge of God." (Matthew 10:41; Colossians 1:10)
But how can I explain the real impact of Jesus' message to you folks here that think yourselves to be both worldly wise and spiritually wise, those that decry the injustice of mere imperfect and uninspired men courageously and unselfishly sharing the unpopular message about God's kingdom with others, while endeavoring themselves to be led by God's spirit in all things based on an intense study of God's word and their having obtained over the years a progressive understanding of God's word? Why, if the interest of you or your parents had not been piqued by the message than began to be proclaimed during the latter part of the 19th century by Pastor Russell and continued to be preached until now, hardly none of you here would likely be accusing Jehovah's Witnesses of using the Bible to break up families for your "Jesus" would not have brought a figurative "sword" into the lives of your family. That was a different Jesus though. (2 Corinthians 11:4)
The real "Jesus" -- the Lord Jesus Christ, who was sent by God to preach about the heavenly kingdom of God and how we can inherit eternal life in the earthly realm of that kingdom -- did bring a sword upon the earth, and as many of you now know firsthand, Jesus said that he had "[come] to cause division," to divide "a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a young wife against her mother-in-law." (Matthew 10:34, 35)
Jesus came to unite families, but not in the worship of "the god of this system of things," the one that started the rebellion in Eden, "who is misleading the entire inhabited earth," the chief one that is responsible not just for "the veil" that is draped upon mankind like a blanket, "the envelopment that is enveloping over all the peoples, and the woven work that is interwoven upon all the nations" -- sin and death -- but for the spiritual blindness that exists among mankind. (2 Corinthians 4:4; Revelation 12:9; Luke 2:32; Isaiah 25:7)
No, but he came to unite families in the worship of the only true God, which means, as Jesus stated, that "a man's enemies will be persons of his own household," and mind you not because Jehovah's Witnesses are making their own family members their enemies. No, but family members themselves, including those who were formerly Jehovah's Witnesses, have made Jehovah's Witnesses and "those related to [them] in the faith" their enemies. (Matthew 10:36; Galatians 6:10)
Now while it may seem strange to those worshipping God in trinity or to those that are otherwise worshipping "the ruler of this world" that Christians would have greater affection for their Lord than for their own family members, Jesus made the case that "he that has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and he that has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. He that finds his soul will lose it, and he that loses his soul for my sake will find it." (John 16:11; Matthew 10:37-39)
This is what a Christian signs onto when he or she becomes a Christian, and anyone that is called either a "brother" or a "sister," who "is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner," becomes a friend of the world, a friend of Satan's, and any that "wants to be a friend of the world," the Bible clearly says, "is constituting himself [or herself] an enemy of God." (1 Corinthians 5:11; James 4:4) Indeed, shameful conduct, foolish talking, obscene jesting are among the things do not befit holy people and Christians know well that none of these things are becoming to a Christian.
Anyone that speaks against their brother makes himself or herself puts themselves in the judgment seat of God and makes themselves a judge of God's law. (James 4:11) Those here on this forum that speak "abusively of glorious ones," that is, the local body of elders and the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses, who are charged by Jehovah Himself with the responsibility of shepherding "the flock of God" are those that are "disregarding lordship." (1 Peter 5:2; Jude 8)
All of these things that I am saying here are plainly set forth in the Bible, so why do them? The efforts to exploit one's family members "with counterfeit words" so that they might find fault with God's decision to use imperfect men as shepherds indicates that they are part of the sect of the antichrist that has "[disowned] even the owner that bought them," and if any of you here are found among such person, you will certainly not escape God's judgment. (2 Peter 2:1-3)
Why, not even the angels of God, who are "greater in strength and power" than we human beings, would dare to bring an accusation against those that are taking the lead in God's organization "out of respect for Jehovah," but the angels know that those of you that might be doing these things have no leg on which to stand for exhibiting such ungodly conduct and contempt for their God. In the 16th century BC, Jehovah chose Moses, for example, an imperfect man, to lead his earthly organization, the nation of Israel, from Egypt through the Sinai desert to the land that God had given it in Canaan, and God went on to have recorded for the benefit of later generations (ours!) the experiences of this nation as well as of their dealings with Him and with one another, many of which things serve as warning examples to us "upon whom the ends of the systems of things have arrived," including what happened when some of them murmured against Moses and "lifted themselves up above the congregation of Jehovah." (1 Corinthians 10:11; Numbers 16:1-3)
He probably will go away and do more research - but NOT with the motive to analyze his beliefs - it will be done to prove us all wrong. And a sincere Christian may be sincere , like him, but he can be mind controlled just the same in that sincerity. And it might be too much for him to deal with the WT society being wrong about the " generation " or last days existing. It would jeopardize his entire belief system and hopes for his alleged " future ". I think that is why he has trouble admitting it.
I know the truth. I'm in no way like you when it comes to having a knowledge of the truth. I'm not someone that talks about having a "belief system" and disregards the future of mankind under the Millennial Reign of Christ Jesus as an "alleged 'future.'" You won't ever hear me espouse the unscriptural concept you espoused here in a previous post that when someone is led by holy spirit, "it means they are a spiritual person within themselves." You are really the one that is totally ignorant of what God's word teaches and yet it would appear that you think you can bluff your way through this discussion that we've been having here.
@caliber wrote in response to @djeggnog:
You want a question (I thought you could reason on my statements without needing a question.. you are simply used to the Wt system of question ..answer... why can't you pick up my points without a question ?? you are not at a Watchtower study !!here !!
@djeggnog wrote in response to @caliber:
No, I'm really not here to play stupid games like the one you describe here in your post with anyone. If you thought I was a clairvoyant, you're got another think coming.
@djeggnog wrote in response to @Mad Dawg:
Now I've never been a clairvoyant and I have never claimed to be such either here or elsewhere, so I thought it was a stupid thing for @caliber to have said to me when he said that he thought I could "reason on [his] statements without needing a question," when the statements that he had quoted in his post were not his statements at all, but were [statements] lifted verbatim from the Salvation book.
DJ .. inform yourself about" learning styles"
Why exactly should I inform myself about such? Something fundamental to every discussion that you might have is this: Ask a question, for only then might you rightly expect to receive an answer. Now it's possible that you might not get an answer to your question, but you will have at least done it the right away. I'm repeating myself here, but you cannot expect someone else to be clairvoyant.
But you believe the hope of living forever on a paradise earth to be a false hope, and you believe the interest of Jehovah's Witnesses in trying to determine what it was Jesus meant at Matthew 24:34 by the words "this generation" to be a case of the WTS trying to control the lives of Jehovah's Witnesses, but how so?
So, you want to split hairs between someone saying things about WTS and applying them to "Jehovah's Witnesses" because you are sure the two are mutually exclusive? I think that's what you are saying.
No, this is not what I was saying. I was not splitting any hairs. I was simply acknowledging @flipper's opinion that the belief of Jehovah's Witnesses as to living forever on a paradise earth to be a false hope, and making acknowledgment of his opinion that the interest that Jehovah's Witnesses have in understanding the Bible, including the meaning of Jesus' words at Matthew 24:34 regarding "this generation," is how the WTS seeks to control the lives of Jehovah's Witnesses and asking @flipper, "how so?" It seems though that decided he was not going to respond to my question and he didn't do so.
That is not so. It is WTS and it's Governing Body that is determining the meaning and the JW's are falling in line behind whatever they say.
You're mistaken. I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses and, as such, I have as much input into the discussion as to the meaning of "this generation" at Matthew 24:34 as anyone else in the association of Jehovah's Witnesses. If you had it in you to ask, then it's likely that you would have already learned that anyone can contact the WTS in writing or on the telephone and share whatever their study of the Bible has uncovered. The "faithful and discreet slave" do this all of the time, and so do many of us of the "other sheep" since we are all of us united in worship of Jehovah.
If you have never asked how it is you could give you own input to this particular issue, or any other issue for that matter, then you probably wouldn't know that you could do this and how you should go about doing this. I'm telling you now that no one in this organization 'falls into line behind what someone else says.' We all have opinions, but no one runs ahead and teaches anyone according to not-agreed-upon opinions, for in that case we would not be speaking in agreement. (1 Corinthians 1:10) Let me just put it this way: Brothers and sisters, as well as those on the outside that want to submit questions for consideration by the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses may always write a letter or make a telephone call.
The individual members may be fine wonderful people, but when put together in a group they are servants of WTS. So while you are looking for loopholes to separate the two, you are missing the forest staring at the trees.
You're mistaken in what you say here. Jehovah's Witnesses are servants of Jehovah God and disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. You are free to believe what you want to believe, but I'm here telling you that you are mistaken.
Did you know that Jehovah's Witnesses can all of them stop attending meetings at the Kingdom Hall at any time they wish to do so, can stop engaging in field service activity of all sorts, including the pioneer and missionary work, at any time they wish to do so and not one of them will be subject to disfellowshipment for doing so? You make it sound as if Jehovah's Witnesses are being forced to be Jehovah's Witnesses, but this is not true at all.
I could discuss how YOU cannot even openly post on this forum without being subject to a judicial committee and possibly shunning by JW family and friends unless you bend over apologize for your brazen actions to 3 elders.
I suppose you could and I'm willing to have that discussion whenever it is you're ready to do so, because what you say here is simply not true. If a Judicial Committee would be formed based upon your posting messages to this forum or to any other forum, that would be totally ridiculous and an assertion of authority that the local body of elders do not have over anyone. I recently read a post from someone here on this forum how one elder allegedly asked a publisher if they masturbated, which is an inappropriate question on so many levels, and the fact that this elder had asked such a question should have been reported to the body of elders for resolution, and to other elders if no real resolution of the matter should follow the report.
We simply cannot have elders working their own will out and lording their authority over the rest of their brothers and sisters, who are not rank-and-file members of a club of some sort, but are, like the elders, disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ and fellow workers with God, making up their own rules and making inquiries as to transform the Kingdom Hall into confessionals. What the WTS has suggested about posting to internet forums or bulletin boards like this one are suggestions, but not orders. Elders needs to be disciplined from time to time, but if you do not say anything and are the kind of person that believes everything that you hear, then it is likely that you will be one of those "[putting] faith in every word." (Proverbs 14:15)
Let's just focus on the teens and young adults who got baptized as children. If they do just "stop" all the engaging in various JW activities and manage to avoid being disfellowshipped, they are still "forced to be Jehovah's Witnesses."
No one is forcing anyone to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses. This is a lie and for anyone to suggest such a thing is to care nothing at all about the truth. Look! I am not going to be able to personally undo the decisions of any of the elders, nor would I be qualified to do so without knowing the facts associated with these baptized children of whom you speak here that you say are being "forced" to be Jehovah's Witnesses, because I do not know what you mean.
If one should be a baptized servant of God, whether he or she be yet a child or an adult, he or she is one of Jehovah's Witnesses, and if any one -- be he or she a child or an adult -- should be forced to get baptized, a letter to the PO first should get the situation resolved. If not, then a letter to the CO would then be appropriate for no one is ever forced to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses. Absolutely no one.
They are not free to OPENLY visit another church, buy a lottery ticket, vote in politics, give or receive blood, join the military, read certain books, get a job on a tobacco farm, or etc. etc. etc......
I don't know that you are here voicing an objection to the Bible's prohibition on blood transfusions, when, first of all, the Bible makes clear that blood is sacred, and that it was precious blood that God had put on His altar that we might obtain a release from condemnation to sin and death, and it is upon our exercise of faith in the merit of Jesus' blood that we can be saved.
As to a Christian's voting or joining the military, Christians are neutral with regard to the political conflicts that exist in any nation of the world, so we would not want to be providing assistance to any of the human governments that will soon be replaced by the kingdom of God by Christ Jesus to perpetuate them as if our participation in them would perhaps render Satan's rulership less effective or make God's kingdom unnecessary.
It certainly would not be appropriate for a Christian to pick up a weapon, even if it were an "basic training" exercise where no one's life was put in harm's way, for Christians have no desire to learn war or to kill anyone in the name of their nation against any other nation. (Isaiah 2:4) Jesus stated that anyone that should "take the sword will perish by the sword." (Matthew 26:52)
You want to visit another church, buy a lottery ticket, read Playboy magazine, work at a tobacco farm or a blood bank or smoke a cigarette, consider the question: Do any of these things you want to do work harm to one's neighbor? I'm not sure what you're asking me here, so please come back and clarify this portion of your question here.
Many of those things, maybe they don't want to do. But there is a long exhaustive list. They are not free to disagree with anything on that list if they want to avoid the DF/DA and maintain relations with their JW family. They are only free to hide their true feelings or suppress their life to stay a JW in name only.
I say that this is just nonsense. It seems to me that you are expressing some real fears here, and I can only imagine what you and others might be feelings, but "imagine" is all I can do, because this is all just nonsense. In Christendom, the threat of eternal torment in a hellfire used to keep the timid in line, but among Jehovah's Witnesses, no one is threatened in any way with being disfellowshipped or feeling they need to become a disapproved associate in order to maintain relations with their Christian brothers and sisters.
Now if anyone is hiding their true feelings or suppressing some aspect(s) of their way of life as you say in order to remain in good standing in the congregation, that's a problem that can and should be addressed by, again, writing a letter to the PO. I said this before, but I didn't explain why I am suggesting that a letter be written. It may be obvious, but I'll just put it this way: A letter should have a date on it and you should give it the PO on that day or as soon as you can thereafter (e.g., by mailing it) and you should also retain a copy of the letter you will have sent or delivered in person to the PO.
That letter is a record of the communication, and it should contain specifics, such as the who, the when and the where and the how as appropriate. Often I advise children, even unbaptized publishers to write a letter and to deliver it in person to the PO (so the child would need to know who that is in the congregation). None of the elders are perfect, and neither am I, but that letter is a perfect communication, even with misspelled words in it, that can help to establish the facts should a Judicial Committee be required to resolve an issue involving so many things that I will not go into here that can be the subject of such letters. Not one of us can read another's heart, but we can read a letter, and the dates in a letter can prove to be very important details.
In the past I have read some of the messages here that pertain to children that have been touched improperly touched by someone, and here's the point: What elders ought to know, but may not be thinking about at the time, is that if a report has been made against someone 5, 10, 15 years ago by someone (e.g, a child, for example, but it could also be an adult) and a second report is made, not by the same individual that reported the misbehavior, but by a completely different individual, maybe in a completely different congregation, the two-witness rule is satisfied and a Judicial Committee might be formed to investigate the report. I'll leave it there.
Go ahead and split hairs in what I said, blame the parents or the child if you must- but the essence of what I said is true. WTS allows and even encourages parents to get their children baptized at ages pre-teen and teen- before they really know what they will believe. Then they hold them accountable for the rest of their lives for that decision.
Everyone that becomes a baptismal candidate is interviewed and if the decision is made to baptize and that baptismal candidate is, in fact, baptized in symbol of their dedication to Jehovah, they get a "white robe" the same as everyone else that has become one of Jehovah's Witnesses in this same fashion, and, yes, they are accountable for the rest of their lives (which hopefully will be for an eternity!) for that decision.
But you are suggesting that the WTS encourages parents to force their children to be baptized and this is not true. I won't ask you to proof a negative though, so I'll leave it to you to pursue this line of inquiry in a future post if you should decide to do so.
@flipper wrote in response to @On The Way Out:
Good points you make. The WT society IS in control of Jehovah's Witnesses and what they believe, how they run their lives, and decisions they make. The two can't be [separated] without the rank and file witness suffering [shunning] repercussions- even if he or she is NOT disfellowshipped.
@flipper wrote to @djeggnog:
Did you hear that Mr. Eggnog ? Even inactive JW's who stop attending meetings or going out in service are treated the same as if they are disfellowshipped by other JW family members.
No, I didn't hear that.
We are not allowed even though inactive and not attending meetings to get involved in ANY of the things OTWO mentioned without suffering further shunning.
What things? BTW, I didn't agree with many of the things that @OnTheWayOut wrote in his post, so I need you to please be specific.
My son and I are treated as such by my JW daughters, regular pioneers - ages 23 & 22 . They are CONTROLLED by fanatical views and over zealous self righteous propaganda to do so by the WT society.
What "propaganda"? I resent this remark. No one among Jehovah's Witnesses is intentionally lying or seeking to mislead anyone. You state that you believe your daughters are being "controlled by fanatical views," but I don't believe you. Got any proof of such that you are willing to share with me here? Your choice.
Would you call them a fine example of christianity ?
If you are referring to your own daughters, who you say are both serving as regular pioneers, I'd have to say, yes. If you are referring to something else, then you question is unclear and I don't want to have to try to make a second guess as to what it is you were really asking me about here (and I won't).