Blondie's Comments on the 1-18-2015 WT Study (HOLY) (page 2)

Mary

"...Of course, none of us should feel pressured to devote many hours to the ministry just to be able to turn in a larger report of our share in the field service...."

Smiley Smiley Smiley

blondie

Ditto that, Mary. The WTS likes to shift the problem to the rank and file.

JW GoneBad

Par 5 contains a lame and idiotic line of reasoning with regard to not associating with family members or others who have been disfellowshipped.

What in the "hale" does the account of Aaron's sons' death have to do with shunning and disfellowshipping?

The connection and lesson that the WTBTS is desperately trying to teach here is soo laughable!

Para 5 was as far as I got in this study. When it was read out at the meeting and disfellowshipping was applied to Aarons son's situation, I had to read the full quote from Leviticus 10:1 - 11 to see how it can be connected. Part way thou WT study para 5 it says "What a test of faith it was for Aaron and his family not to mourn their dead relatives!". WHERE in this Bible passage does it say this?. Infact Lev 10:6 says the exact opposite. "Your family—all of Israel’s house—will mourn the burning the Lord has done. The revised NWT is a bit foggy with this vs, the original NWT and all other translations I have checked all comfirm that Aaron and his family were to mourn the death of Aarons sons. This is an extreme case of how the WT twist the meaning of the scriptures in an effort to prove teachings that they are holding onto. So sad. And the average JW would just lap this nonsence up.

prologos

Thank you blondie and all to spare us the agony of having to wade through all this ourselves.

goingthruthemotions

OMG....this makes my stomach hurt....just keeps solidifying my wifes cult mind.

if i could turn back time

konceptual99

I note that they completely ignored the bit in the passage of scripture about Aaron's sons that said the rest of the people would mourn for them. The edict was just for Aaron, presumably because of his status as a priest.

_Morpheus

Nice thoughts and summary blondie.

Am i the only one who caught the subtle trick they pulled in para 8? Note this quote:

"More than 30 times, the laws found in Leviticus are credited to Jehovah. Moses acknowledged this and did what Jehovah commanded him to do. (Leviticus 8:4, 5) Likewise, we should always do what our Sovereign, Jehovah, wants us to do. In this regard, we have the support of God’s organization."

They very directly equated obeying the organization with obeying the law given to moses, meaning the bible. This isnt new of course but its the subtle way they did it, very smoothly and sly so that the mind of a witness makes the associate between the two but its not startling enough to make them sit up and say 'woe wait a minite!'.

In paragraph 13 we have this absolute spritual gem(!):

"Our sacrifices of praise are personal offerings voluntarily made to God because we love him. (Matthew 22:37, 38) But we have been asked to report our activity in the ministry."

Double speak at it best!!! Notice the implication of the first sentance.... 'You are on your own. We didnt ask you to do this. We arnt responsible for what you do or how you it or the laws you break while doing it". " Personal offerings" "voluntarily made". Then the next sentance undermines it all. "BUT" (and every witness knew there was a but comming) we have been asked to report our activity. Notice the implication.. 1) its expressly implied that there will definatly be activity since they didnt say "if you have activity". 2) because you are expected to report your activity you are of course being judged by what you report. Otherwise why put your name on it? Why not do it annomously?

Farther down in para 13 notice the subtle tricky again played:

" Jehovah’s precious servants who have certain limitations can still submit a report. "

It is very directly linked that if you dont turn in a field service report you arnt precious. It is also very directly linked, via the precious sentances, that you report had better be substantial amd more than 15 min if you arnt in nursing home.

Notice the guilt used in closong para 13:

" So, then, is it really asking too much of us that we report our share in the preaching work"?

Wow. Nobody ever said it was "too" much nor does the society in anyway address a concern of "too much". Rather we question why it is nessary at all. Why the god of heaven and earth who knows all NEEDS us to turn in a specific field service report with our names on it to know what we did. Perhaps that should have addressed and not some straw man about it being 'too much to ask'.

There so much more subtle manipulation but it infiriates me to have to read this crap in order to dissect it. Credit blondie for being able to handle this week after week!

stillin

I guess if Jehovah kills your sons you pretty much have to shun them. Not much choice in the matter.

paladin1

At JW.ORG web site I read this. 'Are Jehovah's Witnesses Trying to Earn Salvation by Their Door-to-Door Ministry?' No. We engage regularly in our door-to-door ministry, but we don't believe that we earn our salvation by doing such work. (Ephesians 2:8) Why not?

This is not what we hear at the meetings.

Blondie's Comments on the 1-18-2015 WT Study (HOLY)

Share this