by DS211 36 Replies latest jw experiences
Absolutely searcher,
the "missionary" levy should pick up at least a cool 12 million, conservatively speaking.
I have this feeling that the last couple of wt articles will lead to some aspect of tithing
given that it wasn't mentioned. Conspicuous by absence I reckon
jtg
Wait and if youre a missionary dont u have to be aboe to pay for yourself? That was just given in one of the KMs the kast few months
I love the comment on volunteers...i almost threw up....they are slaves. A kind brother woukd pay one his due for work rendered.
i am so sick if this brochure, it disgusts me...and its put forth as the "congregation Bible Study" each week...hello? Wake up theyve just said the publication is equal to the Bible....oops
.
Cross-referencing: The Original Quote (1879)
.
“We have sent out about 6,000 copies (...) of “Zion’s Watch Tower” as samples. This we cannot continue to do, because first, it is expensive, (...)”
.
From the beginning on it was all about money — no matter how they twist and turn it.
.
Just look up the definition of "solicit" in Webster's dictionary..... BATS, awesome link! That really adds a new dimension. They are the masters of selective quoting!!
DD
Thanks BaTs!
Nice,I caught the same thing last night! Not only that but the youngish conductor went on about how even through the Great Depression in the 30's the work has always been voluntary. I whispered to my wife that that is just not accurate. I believe they changed the policy as a result of the Jimmy Swaggart situation in '89! The article was certainly deceptive, but the comments by the conductor and the audience were even worse. Just like in Orwells 1984, inconvenient facts of the past are forgotten. They love to say how the voluntary donation work is PROOF of Jehoveers blessing.
Not only did they used to charge for the literature, but the policy when they stopped charging was to ask for a donation. Can you post the whole quote from the brochure in it's context please DS211?
Jimmy Swaggart situation in '89
What exactly was this situation? I know what happened to Jimmy in the late 80's, but how did that influence the Society's decision to stop charging for literature? I always just assumed they stopped charging for publications for tax purposes.
