My whole family faded out. If people choose to follow the rules of this cult, which is so "high school" what children do to one another in a school yard, is very pathetic. And yes I have some family stuck in and lost friends. But who needs friends like them, they are not true friends.
1985 and baptism...I wish I had read this before today
As an accountant I've handled lots of contracts. I do not think those questions constitute a legally enforceable contract, no matter what the watchtower's lawyers say.
1) Mutual consent. Witnesses could make a good case they entered into the contract under duress. Certainly a child cannot enter a contract.
2) Consideration. There needs to be a mutual exchange of value between the two parties. You agree to sell me your car for a hundred dollars. I get a car you get $100. What does the R&F Witness get for selling his soul to the publishing company?
3) Capacity. A person has to understand what they are entering into. See my comment about duress. They also ensnare people who are in the midst of some sort of crisis. This can void a contract.
4) Legality. You can't contract to do something illegal, like say withhold information about CSA in you congregation.
Obviously the WTBS uses this talk about a contract to flog their membership into compliance. Where is a copy of this contract, with signatures and all that? A contract doesn't have to be in writing, but if it isn't how do you prove what it says?
It is an oath, not a contract.
Boy Scout & Girl Scout clubs also speak oaths, which in some cases, is enforced punitively.
Children have also spoken oaths in secular courts under the penalty law.
Society, in general, rarely objects to children commiting to an oath.
WT will continue to exploit this as long as secular governments tolerate it; and even if religious protections were revoked, WT would probably defy as part of "theocratic warfare"
Like the old hypocritical preachers said: "Religion is a snare and a racket!"
Anybody recall what the Baptism questions were in 1960 when I was baptized ? And what argument / discussion , I could have with a JW at my door ?
Bring em on I say.
I was baptized in 1986, so I took the new "oath."
As for the legality of it, please notice that your oath involves you 'understanding' that the JWs are "God's spirit-directed organization." Tell me... which court would recognize that? Or how would you convince the court that the WTS is in fact God's spirit-directed organization?
That's not going to happen. This is not a legally-enforceable contract. The wording was changed because the GB wanted to insert itself between the individual and God, which is what they have been trying to do for decades. They're not claiming a contractual authority, they are claiming a divine one. No court would accept that claim as part of any litigation.
smiddy, the two baptism questions in 1960 were (The Watchtower, July 1, 1956, p.407) :
1) Have you recognized yourself before Jehovah God as a sinner who needs salvation, and have you acknowledged to him that this salvation proceeds from him the Father through his Son Jesus Christ?
2) On the basis of this faith in God and in his provision for salvation, have you dedicated yourself unreservedly to God to do his will henceforth as he reveals it to you through Jesus Christ and through the Bible under the enlightenment of the holy spirit?
In view of The Watchtower, July 1, 1955, p.411, it was not unusual to be reminded in the baptism talk that you were not symbolizing your dedication to a man, or to an organization, but in the name of the Father, the Son and the holy spirit.
It is an oath, not a contract. - Smiles
Totally agree. And I don't see anything immoral at breaking an oath when
- You're a minor and unable to understand the ramifications of that oath.
- You made that oath not knowing information that would have impacted your decision
- The other party to who you made your oath has not upheld their end of the bargain. ex: the generation that will never die; Significant changes in their beliefs and practices since I was baptized.
The WT is God to practicing JW's for all practical purposes.
So very true. The sad thing is, they openly admit it and yet the sheeple are to willfully ignorant to see what is right in front of their own eyes.
Whom do Jehovah's Witnesses bow down to? To Jehovah, or to the governing body?
This is a direct quote from their Revelation book (bold is mine):
*** revelation chap. 12 pp. 63-64 par. 19 “Keep On Holding Fast What You Have"
19 From 1919 onward the anointed remnant, following Jesus’ example, launched into a vigorous campaign of declaring abroad the good news of the Kingdom. (Matthew 4:17; Romans 10:18) As a result, some of the modern synagogue of Satan, Christendom, came to this anointed remnant, repented and ‘bowed down,’ acknowledging the slave’s authority. They too came to serve Jehovah in union with the older ones of the John class. This continued until the full number of Jesus’ anointed brothers was gathered. Following this, “a great crowd ... out of all nations” has come to “bow down” to the anointed slave.
I also was baptized before 1985 while I was a minor, but from what I have read in other forum topics of this web site, the WT (at least the USA branch) will not grant an annulment of the baptism if a baptized JW applied on paper for any task in the organization while an adult. For example if a JW applied for auxiliary pioneer service, regular pioneer service, or Bethel service, while one was age 18 of over in the USA, then the WT would say the person voluntarily chose to increase one's JW responsibilities while one was an adult and thus wanted to remain a JW. Likewise if one accepted an appointment to be a ministerial servant while one was age 18 or over, or even continued to do responsibilities in the Kingdom Halls (such as handling the microphones) after one became 18 years age. It was announced in my congregation when I was age 19 that I had become a ministerial servant, though no one had asked me if I wanted to be a ministerial servant. Furthermore, prior to the announcement to the congregation no had told me I had been appointed as a ministerial servant. When I asked an elder why I became appointed as a ministerial servant without first being asked if I wanted the appointment he said the overseer (I think he said the circuit overseer) said that is the policy. He also said people can turn down the appointment after it has been made. I didn't turn down the appointment, but if I had been asked beforehand I might would turned down becoming appointed.
the words "spirit directed" have been taken out of the oath. Not sure when. If the wording was changed so as to prevent legal actions against them, then they had to have known they weren't doing something right. I remember when they df someone they announce that the person no longer had conduct befitting a Christian.