Posts by menrov

77

How would you define RELIGION, and why?

by Fernando in

"judge" rutherford defined or classified all religion as "a snare and a racket" in his books "religion" and "enemies".. after rutherford's death in 1942, his protege, watchtower vice president, and aclu darling, hayden c. covington, in the early 1950's, for reasons of legal expedience and supremacist aspirations, suddenly converted the watchtower into a religion.. this was done alongside one of the most audacious, spurious and longstanding swindles of the us legal system.

this involved twisting philippians 1:7 and misrepresenting the watchtower's true nature, objectives and activities.. .

this meant that it became necessary for the watchtower to suddenly reclassify and redefine religion (w51 1/15 p. 43 new legal booklet well named; w51 8/15 p. 511 questions from readers; yb75 p. 161 part 2 "for gladys bolton...").. two new watchtower classifications were suddenly created: "true religion" and "false religion".. now "true religion" meant "true beliefs" whilst "belief" in ever changing watchtower doctrine was equated with the one "faith" of scripture.. all this while the watchtower increasingly and maliciously truncated, obfuscated and hid the liberating full "good news" (or unabridged gospel) of scripture, which it lyingly claimed (in court) that it was actually "defending and legally establishing".. how would you have defined religion before learning ttatt?.

menrov

Religion is a way of life, based on beliefs and organized by rulers.

Not much different from Capitalism or Communism.

39

Faithful Slave Appointment: What are the assumptions of Watchtower Matthew 24:45-47 Eschatology?

by Vanderhoven7 in

text: matthew 24:45-47.

45 “who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time?

46 it will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns.

menrov

@Rattigan350, I agree with your own assessment: you fail to see....many things I may add.

Who is the 'we' in your comment?

12

Update on Russian ban

by raymond frantz in

https://www.jwupdates.com/post/four-jehovah-s-witnesses-sentenced-to-seven-years-each-in-russia.

the following is an update in relation to the russian ban on jehovah's witnesses as it appeared on reuters on the 30th january .

jan 30 (reuters) - a russian court has sentenced four jehovah's witnesses to seven years each in prison after finding them guilty of coordinating extremist activities, according to a spokesman for the religious group.. .

menrov

whether one agrees or disagrees with the Russian ban, but it is in my view not smart nor scripturally correct to continue you religious activities. Jesus left a town where he was not welcome. Oh, true, the WT is superior to Jesus.

16

2024 Addendum to Shepherd The Flock Book-and February S-147-Announcements And Reminders!

by Atlantis in

jw
friends

2024-01 addendum to shepherd book.. 2024-02-s-147-february announcements and reminders.. .

zipped folder.. .

https://www.filemail.com/d/mcrweztlglnoheb .

menrov

I believe the change in their donation policy is related to the rules regarding collection of or asking for donations. I guess the WT does not want to adhere, pay for the license (in some cases), register, provide transparency etc.

Then again, they said they would never ask for donations, right?

5

Belgian court decision

by vienne in

https://bitterwinter.org/the-ghent-saga-ends-belgium-cassation-court-confirms-that-shunning-is-lawful/.

menrov

I understand the decision. The impact would be too big if it would be forbidden. Jewish organizations will appeal as others, incl. Non-religious organizations.

It's difficult to define a general definition of shunning. In my view, it might help to apply the same practice to JW's. Shun them where possible so they can experience the impact themselves.

The bad practice in WT land is that the leaders want to enforce their shunning practices on all its members and there are consequences if you do not comply. It therefore becomes an enforced practice and not a voluntary application of the practice. But very hard to use this in a court case.

The peculiar thing is the shunning is not something that Jesus instructed. It's a human practice to protect their own interest. Create a short movie (like the one shown during a convention about not responding to a text message) and share on social media. It will have far more impact and not illegal.

4

Bible based faith peculiarities

by menrov in

looking back on what i accepted to believe at the time, i now realize how peculiar some of things were:.

- people talking to a snake.

- killer of brother, who was recognized for his great offer, walks free and protected.

menrov

Cain and Abel indeed. If you read the story, only conclusion is: you can get away with jealousy based, premeditated murder.

Well, about s*x, you are probably right😉

4

Bible based faith peculiarities

by menrov in

looking back on what i accepted to believe at the time, i now realize how peculiar some of things were:.

- people talking to a snake.

- killer of brother, who was recognized for his great offer, walks free and protected.

menrov

Looking back on what I accepted to believe at the time, I now realize how peculiar some of things were:

- people talking to a snake

- killer of brother, who was recognized for his great offer, walks free and protected

- first humans knew how to make children without any instruction, compared to how teenagers are informed about sex

- the biggest opponent of the Almighty God was free to move around, whereas eating from a forbidden fruit was so wrong, that all suffered severely

- a flood did not remove evil, so what was the purpose to kill all men, women and children

In general, to believe in an unseen, unheard deity and made believe that you can ask anything (but never see results), that the deity loves you (but apparently not all humans as many suffer innocently) ....

And now, I am warned that I can be deceived via social media by people you do not know, receive emails from strangers and other unsolicited contacts.

By contrast, millions of people dedicate their lives and resources to a deity they never met, cannot touch, see or hear and is only known from letters of people they have never met and of whom little to nothing is known.

Isn't that peculiar?

57

Lines you would never hear from a Jehovah's Witness

by Ron.W. in

a slightly tongue in cheek, but also serious roundup of jw speak and why trying to reason with them is like trying to chip through concrete with a plastic spoon.. how many can you think of??.

elder: 'yes.

i read through the material you asked me to at your judicial meeting - you're right we're both in a cult!

menrov

Cheers

Bless you

Congratulations with your promotion

Why don't you stay home today and enjoy some time with your husband/family

55

If JW is not the truth, then what is the true religion?

by TxNVSue2023 in

even though i'm disfellowshiped ( & i belive wrongfully so).

i still belive this is the truth.

i have been d'f for about 8 months now and working on reinstatement.

menrov

None at all

81

Acts 15:29 - "keep abstaining from blood"

by aqwsed12345 in

for a christian, only the moral commandments of the old testament are binding (as they cannot change), but the various liturgical, social, and other so-called casuistic laws no longer apply to them.

this includes dietary habits, such as the prohibition of pork or fat, as well as the prohibition of blood.. take a look at the following verses: mt 15:11, mk 7:15-19, acts 11:7-9, 1 tim 4:3-5.. the jehovah's witnesses say that, yes, but in the acts of the apostles (15) the consumption of blood, idol meat, and strangled animals is also prohibited, meaning the new testament still forbids it.

for catholics, the council of florence settled this issue, stating that this apostolic regulation was only a temporary measure to facilitate agreement between jews and gentiles in the early church.

menrov

@easyprompt, you are funny with your conclusion and by reading something in my words that is not there. Christian believers trust the bible. I simply refer to their book. Does not mean I have the same belief.

I can read. If I read the bible, it does not mean I am a believer.

In that book, I cannot find a sentence from Jesus that says that eating blood is a sin. Paul was aware of the tension between Jews and Gentiles, also regarding their different views or customs regarding blood. His steer to both groups was to not use blood as they were used too. This is not a law, nor a reference to deadly sin. Same as marrying in the Lord, a statement from Paul. Does this mean that if you do not marry in the Lord you commit a deadly sin?

All above analysis based on the bible, not because I believe in it but simply as a reader.