More lies on jw.org re inactive faders.

by nicolaou 34 Replies latest members private

• 

  nicolaou

  A new article on jw.org asks the question; How Many of Jehovah's Witnesses Are There Worldwide?

  It kicks off with the statement, "We count as Jehovah’s Witnesses only those who are actively preaching the good news of God’s Kingdom each month."

  So, as we aren't actively preaching we aren't Jehovah's Witnesses. If we aren't Jehovah's Witnesses why would any congregation or body of elders believe they have authority to impose sanctions or request a judicial hearing with us?

  The article concludes by forcefully restating it's original premise; "By contrast, we count as Jehovah’s Witnesses only those who preach to others and who report that activity"

  Don't bother thinking you can use this to avoid being disfellowshipped though, the truth is much simpler. They are lying . . again.

  If they really don't count us as Jehovah's Witnesses they presumably aren't holding any files or personal information about us. Yeah, right.

  A velvet glove for the public, an iron fist for the members.
• 

  MrsR-Awaken

  I hate service... I rarely go preach, I make up excuses to not go so does that make me not a Jehovah’s Witnesses?? I wish it was like that, I guess being baptized doesn't count then!!! Lol but really that's a bunch of baloney
• 

  smiddy

  Jehovah`s Witnesses speak with a forked tongue, they speak out of both sides of their mouth ,so when you challenge them on what they say they will then quote the opposite thing they also said .

  The Australian Royal Commission was frustrated trying to unravel what the Jehovah`s Witness Policy was on anything , simply because they had conflicting points of view , adjustments , new light , etc.,in so many different publications , mags, books, booklets , KM , brochures , pamphlets ,letters from the G.B. ,etc.etc.

  It was a quagmire for them to try and get through .It`s no wonder the average J.W. really has no clue what they really believe , apart from Armageddon is just around the corner , everybody except J.W.`s will be destroyed ,Abstain from blood , { the average J.W. has no knowledge of the intricate nature of fractions & what is acceptable & what is not , or even why they are accepting fractions from donated blood by people in the world.]

  I thought that if you did not report fs in a 6 month period you were classed inactive ,so that comment from the OP that if you miss a few months especially 6 months , you are no longer classed as a J.W.

  But then as I have pointed out above there will be something somewhere that negates that statement in their

  publications .

  smiddy
• 

  nicolaou

  Smiddy, my mind went to the 6 month period too. Wouldn't that be nice? Quit meetings and service and manage to avoid the elders for just 6 months then you're free!

  If only.

  It used to be a bit like that before the dissension and crackdown in Bethel in the early 80's. That all changed once they'd kicked Ray Franz to the kerb.
• 

  TheOldHippie

  I think you should consider that the artcle deals with counting and the resulting numbers in the YB.
• 

  KiddingMe

  So how does elderly, infirmed or shut in JW's that can no longer report time figure into this?
• 

  tiki

  So what....if you are a witness you have to prove it by passing in a piece of paper with some numbers on it every month. Then you are part of the count. If they counted all those who were ever dunked they'd show bigger membership numbers.....but then there are those who are kicked out.....waste of time to try to statisticize the whole shebang
• 

  stillin

  This reminds me of how they calculate "meeting Attendance." There is a head count, which includes babies, visitors, inactive ones etc. this number is compared to the number of active publishers and, voila! 100% meeting attendance has been attained!

  the truth is that the active publishers take turns skipping meetings but the babies pick up the slack.
• 

  compound complex

  What of those who are actively engaged in reverse witnessing? It may not be door-to-door, but it is fervent, it is heartfelt, it is effective.

  Does reporting such activity here on this forum count in any official capacity?

  CC
• 

  nicolaou

  I think you should consider that the artcle deals with counting and the resulting numbers in the [yearbook].

  I'm aware of that TheOldHippie, what difference does it make? If anything, by making it the standard for their official report they are only strengthening the argument that inactive faders are at least de facto not Jehovah's Witnesses perhaps even 'de jure'.