a friend in need

by OldSoul 604 Replies latest members private

• 

  OldSoul

  Shadow,

  Again, I appreciate your candor. I do not know many active elders who would have been willing to discuss this as openly and honestly as you have.

  shadow: However many wrongfully df'd not only blame the humans, they also take it out on Jehovah and then do become unfaithful (Luke 17:1).

  I will not let anyone take my integrity away from me. I will be reasonable (yielding) to that point, but no further. But I remain at a loss for how to work "freeness of speech" into the equation without being disfellowshipped. I see no indication of Jesus "waiting on Jehovah" to vocally, and in some cases physically, correct wrongdoing that he personally observed in the earthly organization of his day. When I mentioned that to my father he says, "But that was God's Son. You are not God's Son."

  I readily agree, of course. But if Christ is my exemplar, then doing what he did the way he did it is not wrong. Paul appears to have the same view of correcting the earthly organization with great freeness of speech, equal freeness to that with which he preached. Paul also invites us to imitate him, even as he imitated Christ. In fact, this trait of very forcefully correcting Jehovah's visible organization was evidenced in both of the only two humans the Bible directly invites us - from the lowly sheep to the Zone Overseers - to imitate.

  Can any visible organization at any time remove authority and instructions Jehovah has given with Jehovah's blessing?

  I recently (within the last six months) had the pleasure of receiving an elder's praise for how I handled a call I accompanied him on. The woman was asking who we believed our mediator to be. The brother stammered and hedged a minute before I spoke up and said, "I have one mediator between myself and God, a man, Christ Jesus." The lady of the house beamed when I showed her the scriptural proof. After commending the way I handled it the brother corrected my accuracy of statement. "We," he patiently explained, "do not have a mediator with Jehovah. We are not in a covenant relationship with him."

  I answered with complete freeness of speech, was completely honest, and played mute when the brother counseled me on the point. I felt like crap restraining my freeness of speech. I worked counter to the holy spirit by biting my tongue and it ate me up. But I knew that if I pressed the point one question would lead smoothly to another and I would be invited to attend a Judicial Committee - one that I would never go to. (1 Corinthians 4:1-5)

  Paul said, "You are not cramped for room within us ..." (2 Corinthians 6:11,12) But I am cramped for room. And it isn't in my own tender affections that I am cramped. It is in a burdensome Pharisaical organizational structure that has no more of God's blessing than did the Pharisaical arrangement of Jesus' day. While the Kings were willing to do Jehovah's will, he used that structure and blessed the arrangement they devised. But as soon as the Kings ceased strictly adhering to his commands ... you know the rest.

  You mentioned that Jesus went along with some festivals and customs, but were these not also the law of the land? Was not the "fence around the law" also law? Does that not mitigate his involvement in those activities, to a degree? As far as I can determine, he did not go along with any customs or traditions that violated his conscience or that would encourage others - by his visible example - to break God's laws or work contrary to Jehovah's principles.

  Respectfully,
  OldSoul
• 

  a friend in need

  shadow ... you have a pm
• 

  toreador

  Interesting thread. I had no idea it was still going.
• 

  stevenyc

  Oldsoul,

  When Jesus disbanded the Israel leadership, it was because they had been entrusted with Jehovah?s message, by Jehovah and misused them / taught the wrong things / got caught up in definitions / misleading / false prophecies etc. Maybe, instead of asking for scriptural proof of Jehovah requiring a physical international corporation to do his work you could ask: If Jesus was to return today, how would He react to his new physical organization? Were they using what he had entrusted them with correctly, would he be pleased or be required to repeat his actions of disbandment?

  I was under the impression; please let me know if this is incorrect, that after Jesus took away the responsibilities of Jehovah?s original chosen people, and he demonstrated that mankind could not look after Jehovah gifts because of inherent sin. That only He could fulfill this task. That only through him could we gain salvation.

  If this is so, why are we destroyed at Armageddon for not following the sinners of the Governing Body? Yes, they are sinners. We are all sinners. Members of the Governing Body have also been disfellowshiped.

  It seems to me that the supreme rule of the GB is a slap in the face to Jesus. I know that statement will turn the stomachs of some people. However, the GB is going to have to answer for their decisions and opinions in their own rendering of the scripture.

  Have I got this wrong?

  Steve.
• 

  OldSoul

  stevenyc: If Jesus was to return today, how would He react to his new physical organization? Were they using what he had entrusted them with correctly, would he be pleased or be required to repeat his actions of disbandment?

  I want to make sure I understand your question. Let me rephrase it and see if this is what you mean: Since Jesus obviously did not think of the Pharisees as Faithful or Discreet and he overturned that earthly arrangement, and since the modern day organization has so much in common with the Pharisees, would Jesus think that this organization is Faithful or Discreet, or would he overturn it as it stands right now?

  Have I got the correct understanding of your question? If so, it is a very thought provoking question. I think you should let Shadow answer it for you.

  stevenyc: Have I got this wrong?

  In my opinion, no. I haven't seen anything to indicate that you have it wrong. But I have no organizational authority beyond what any baptized publisher (lowliest sheep next to irregular or inactive) would have and have fewer insights into what goes on behind closed doors than shadow does. I think his response would be more meaningful.

  Respectfully,
  OldSoul
• 

  OldSoul

  afin: shadow ... you have a pm

  Is afin actually an Organization? spy? Will shadow succumb to the direction of his SUPERIOR "good-for-nothing slaves"? Will afin clue shadow in to scriptures that support the answers since he isn't swine?

  The Shadow Knows! Muahahahhahhahahaha!
• 

  Sunspot

  afin: shadow ... you have a pm

  Is afin actually an Organization? spy? Will shadow succumb to the direction of his SUPERIOR "good-for-nothing slaves"? Will afin clue shadow in to scriptures that support the answers since he isn't swine?

  The Shadow Knows! Muahahahhahhahahaha!

  WHERE are Ghostbusters when ya NEED them????

  I actually sat here and rolled my eyes when I read that about the PM. Secret maneuverings? Making sure they get their stories straight? More Theocratic Warfare afoot?

  Hmmmmmmmmmm.....................?

  Annie
• 

  OldSoul

  Annie: I actually sat here and rolled my eyes when I read that about the PM. Secret maneuverings? Making sure they get their stories straight? More Theocratic Warfare afoot?

  Annie, I don't think so. Just my personal opinion, mind you, but I think shadow is nothing like afin. Shadow is sincere and considerate, tries to establish his faith on the Bible, speaks from the Bible as his authority and the source for his viewpoints, and is what he claims to be - an "unconventional" elder. I would be surprised if the PM wasn't a wrist-slapping and a virtual trip to the corner.

  Probably takes the form of, "There is no need to go further with this brother (euphemistic reference to me as an apostate). It is obvious he has made his decision. He is unreceptive to counsel." Or some variation on that theme. Anyone who has questions beyond the direction of the Slave (there's an oxymoron) is automatically unreceptive of counsel. And that is the reason the issue must be challenged. The cramping for room is within the Organization.

  Of course, that is purely speculation. Afin may have been apologetic to shadow for having given such a bad witness. Shadow has already proven he trusts that I am receptive to reasonable arguments based on the Bible.

  Respectfully,
  OldSoul
• 

  stevenyc

  oldsoul,

  Yes, well nearly. This is my question: Usage of ?faithful and discrete slave? is irrelevant because this is a parable. When the Governing Body uses it, well, they highjack it, this is why I enjoy your TM Patent Pending. The ?faithful and discrete slave? are the 144000, not the Governing Body. At least that?s my understanding. Let me know if I have this wrong. The 144000 do not make the rules; the Governing Body makes the rules. Once again, let me know if I have this wrong. The 144000 are the invisible heavenly rulers; they are not the physical people here. The physical people here only have faith that they will become part of this heavenly organization, going to be anointed. Once again, let me know if I have this wrong. As the physical people who have faith of becoming part of the heavenly class are sinners and capable of error and transgression, and as we have seen in history have made errors, and false teachings;

  Why would Jehovah require an earthly corporation to demand his bidding without question?

  Why did Jesus remove the earthly arraignment of law and rules, if we now have to apply laws and rules at the consequence of being destroyed at Armageddon for not following the sinners of the Governing Body?

  Maybe shadow could help me here?

  I sincerly ask these questions, not to be argumentative, but for clarity.

  Steve.
• 

  shadow

  shadow: However many wrongfully df'd not only blame the humans, they also take it out on Jehovah and then do become unfaithful (Luke 17:1).

  I will not let anyone take my integrity away from me. I will be reasonable (yielding) to that point, but no further. But I remain at a loss for how to work "freeness of speech" into the equation without being disfellowshipped. I see no indication of Jesus "waiting on Jehovah" to vocally, and in some cases physically, correct wrongdoing that he personally observed in the earthly organization of his day. When I mentioned that to my father he says, "But that was God's Son. You are not God's Son."

  I readily agree, of course. But if Christ is my exemplar, then doing what he did the way he did it is not wrong. Paul appears to have the same view of correcting the earthly organization with great freeness of speech, equal freeness to that with which he preached. Paul also invites us to imitate him, even as he imitated Christ. In fact, this trait of very forcefully correcting Jehovah's visible organization was evidenced in both of the only two humans the Bible directly invites us - from the lowly sheep to the Zone Overseers - to imitate.

  You have some good points, ones that I have also pondered. A contrast can be made with the attitude displayed by David when dealing with Saul. (Ps 4:4, though not sure of timing on this one). Certainly many examples could be supplied to bolster your argument.

  How about a pragmatic look at this situation? You boldly speak out against what you see as error (incidentally, would you admit the possibility of error on your part as well?) and injustice. You are invited to a JC & df'd. At this point 99.9% of JW's (probably including at least some of your family) will no longer listen to you or have anything to do with you. Most other people you meet will not care a bit about what you have to say about JW's. Without a meeting schedule, your Bible study begins to fall by the wayside or perhaps you seek out another religion that will have its own version of corrupt human authority and likely fail on many points of essential criteria for God's approval such as Isa 2:4. Would you say that anyone's situation has improved enough to justify your actions? If, as a result of your actions, the faith in God of your wife and children are destroyed, would it be worth that price? Some of this reasoning could no doubt be spouted by individuals of other religions which takes us back to the necessity of endeavoring to perceive what the essential criteria are from God's viewpoint.

  Can any visible organization at any time remove authority and instructions Jehovah has given with Jehovah's blessing?

  Those particular actions would not get Jehovah's approval but history shows that it does not lead to immediate rejection by Jehovah.

  I recently (within the last six months) had the pleasure of receiving an elder's praise for how I handled a call I accompanied him on. The woman was asking who we believed our mediator to be. The brother stammered and hedged a minute before I spoke up and said, "I have one mediator between myself and God, a man, Christ Jesus." The lady of the house beamed when I showed her the scriptural proof. After commending the way I handled it the brother corrected my accuracy of statement. "We," he patiently explained, "do not have a mediator with Jehovah. We are not in a covenant relationship with him."

  I answered with complete freeness of speech, was completely honest, and played mute when the brother counseled me on the point. I felt like crap restraining my freeness of speech. I worked counter to the holy spirit by biting my tongue and it ate me up. But I knew that if I pressed the point one question would lead smoothly to another and I would be invited to attend a Judicial Committee - one that I would never go to. (1 Corinthians 4:1-5)

  Paul said, "You are not cramped for room within us ..." (2 Corinthians 6:11,12) But I am cramped for room. And it isn't in my own tender affections that I am cramped. It is in a burdensome Pharisaical organizational structure that has no more of God's blessing than did the Pharisaical arrangement of Jesus' day. While the Kings were willing to do Jehovah's will, he used that structure and blessed the arrangement they devised. But as soon as the Kings ceased strictly adhering to his commands ... you know the rest.

  I think the discussion about the mediator is largely a question of semantics and trying to dwell on these fine points is not real profitable. How about the Jew who was born in 62 BC and died in 3 BC. What was he supposed to do? How about Simeon and Anna in Luke 2? Were they unfaithful if they did not speak out against the Pharisees?

  You mentioned that Jesus went along with some festivals and customs, but were these not also the law of the land? Was not the "fence around the law" also law? Does that not mitigate his involvement in those activities, to a degree? As far as I can determine, he did not go along with any customs or traditions that violated his conscience or that would encourage others - by his visible example - to break God's laws or work contrary to Jehovah's principles.

  But there were customs that did not violate his conscience and did not break God's law, so he went along with them.