Jehovah's Witnesses do not inflate their numbers. (there are rare, but insignificant exceptions)
I tend to think that apostates may be exaggerating their numbers...
slimboyfat
JoinedPosts by slimboyfat
-
44
WT inflating their numbers?
by Fatfreek inthere have been posts here that indicate the kh building work may be slowing in the u.s., and that there is consolidation of the congos going on.
if that is true why don't we see the society's published numbers on the decline?
my next question is, heaven forbid, you don't suppose they're inflating the membership numbers do you?
-
-
-
58
WHO IS JOHN GALT? (A survey on Ayn Rand)
by Terry insince its publication in 1957, atlas shrugged has sold more than five million copies.
perhaps a measure of the book's continuing influence may be estimated from the results of a survey conducted jointly by the library of congress and book-of-the-month club in 1991. the survey asked readers which books had made a difference in people's lives.
the results found atlas shrugged placing second only to the bible.
-
-
slimboyfat
John Galt came from Irvine in Ayrshire and wrote crap prose.
-
126
607 date
by Cordelia inive just left the jws well got dfed a month ago!
but family want me back so im trying to prove to myself that it isnt true, top get the strength not to go back,i heard the 607 date may be false, can anyone show me about that, i know exactly what the jws say and cant believe the intial date is wrong, is it?
-
-
slimboyfat
I am interested in most things JW. I have just finished Furuli's new book, and it sucked the life out the subject for me.
I just wonder why people think this is so important.
Technically it does 'underpin' everything Jehovah's Witnesses believe about authority among Witnesses and all that. I understand the mechanics of that. But I just don't buy it either. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that they have the truth because they believe that they teach the truth (duh). They believe that Jesus picked them because they had the most things right in 1919, or 1918, or whenever. But at the end of the day, when Jehovah's Witnesses eventually drop the 1914 thing, they will still insist that they are God's chosen people because they teach true doctrines. That is why both Jehovah's Witnesses and apostates are wrong to focus on this date. Better to just get straight to the beliefs and evaluate them - because that is the true basis for Jehovah's Witnesses sticking with the 'channel'.
Ask any ordinary Witness why they believe it is the truth. How many uncontaminated by apostate propaganda will say that believe it is the truth because Jesus picked them in 1914? A few old fuddy duddies maybe - but the majority would simply say that they believe it is the truth because they are convinced by the things they teach now. The details of when they were 'chosen' and aspects of prophecy are fluid and can be altered by Witness leaders to fit around that basic premise.
1914/607 is a non-subject
-
126
607 date
by Cordelia inive just left the jws well got dfed a month ago!
but family want me back so im trying to prove to myself that it isnt true, top get the strength not to go back,i heard the 607 date may be false, can anyone show me about that, i know exactly what the jws say and cant believe the intial date is wrong, is it?
-
-
slimboyfat
I find this subject soooo boring.
607 => scream
-
21
To God We Are Dedicated...
by FMZ ini used to love hearing this song at the conventions, everyone singing..
but dammit, now it's in my head, and i just realized that it sounds kinda like the imperial march from star wars.
and it sounds great when you hum it and desk-drum a beat to it..
-
-
slimboyfat
I like that song too.
-
21
To God We Are Dedicated...
by FMZ ini used to love hearing this song at the conventions, everyone singing..
but dammit, now it's in my head, and i just realized that it sounds kinda like the imperial march from star wars.
and it sounds great when you hum it and desk-drum a beat to it..
-
-
slimboyfat
... at baptism.
-
61
"Theocratic Warfare" - An Apostate Strategy?
by slimboyfat inwho here had ever heard of this so-called 'doctrine' of "theocratic warfare" when you were a jehovah's witness?
who has not heard of the so-called doctrine now that you are an apostate?
so why have witnesses never heard of 'doctrine', yet apostates seem to promote it as the last word on witness standards of honesty, integrity and decency?
-
-
slimboyfat
SNG,
Jehovah's Witnesses sing the song about 'loyal submission' in which the old-fashioned phrase 'theocratic warfare' occurs, but the point is that they clearly and simply DO NOT attach the same meaning to it as apostates have deceivingly claimed. Some apostates, like Bergman, have made their reputation on slinging out this falsehood about 'theocratic warfare' being a 'license to lie' to willing JW-haters who love to lap it up. It is dishonest and everyone should disown it.
Do Jehovah's Witnesses now believe that all non-Witnesses will die at Armageddon? This is not clear. Since the goats change in 1995, Witnesses have promoted strongly the idea that Jesus will make the final judgement and that Witnesses cannot be sure who will be saved and who will not. Back in an old question from readers (maybe from the 1960s, or thereabouts) there was actually a statement that non-Witnesses who have not heard Jehovah's Witnesses' message may be saved. I know that more recent statements in the 1980s said bluntly that you need to be in the 'ark' (orgnaisation) to be saved, but even these are not unequivocal, since it seems aimed at people who have heard about the Witness message but have not fully responded by becoming active Witnesses. Such statements never also stated, as far as I am aware, that all non-Witnesses will be killed - even those who have never been given the opportunity to respond. So Witnesses are not being as dupicitous as apostates commonly claim when they supposedly fail to explain to outsiders that they expect absolutely all non-Witnesses to die in God's judgement. Is an apostate being any more truthfull when he says that Jehovah's Witnesses believe that all non-Witnesses will die? I am not so sure. Both parties present the issue in the way that puts their own point of view (pro- or anti-Witness) in the best light. This "theocratic warfare" strategy that apostates engage in against Jehovah's Witnesses is a travesty because, all things considered, Jehovah's Witnesses are on the whole remarkably honest people. Apostates do their cause no good by trying to distort these matters. Indeed, Bergman's testimony on this 'doctrine' has rightly been thrown out of court. When apostates make up such obviously facile complaints against the Witnesses as this so-called 'doctrine', they should not be surprised that they find it hard to get a proper hearing from society when they have areas of geniune complaint!
-
61
"Theocratic Warfare" - An Apostate Strategy?
by slimboyfat inwho here had ever heard of this so-called 'doctrine' of "theocratic warfare" when you were a jehovah's witness?
who has not heard of the so-called doctrine now that you are an apostate?
so why have witnesses never heard of 'doctrine', yet apostates seem to promote it as the last word on witness standards of honesty, integrity and decency?
-
-
slimboyfat
Who here had ever heard of this so-called 'doctrine' of "Theocratic Warfare" when you were a Jehovah's Witness?
Who has not heard of the so-called doctrine now that you are an apostate?
So why have Witnesses never heard of 'doctrine', yet apostates seem to promote it as the last word on Witness standards of honesty, integrity and decency? The answer is simple: apostates made the whole thing up!
Of course, old Witness publications, mainly from the 50s and 60s, did talk about something called "Theocratic War" - but it patently did not mean what apostates later twisted it to mean. Witnesses faced difficult situation in Nazi Germany and especially Communist countries that meant that they felt they would conscientiously have to lie to some in authority in those lands to protect themselves and their brothers. Yet apostates have twisted that simple and honest pragmatic measure and made it into something sinister - almost as if Jehovah's Witnesses promoted lying in general! What a lie that is! What a travesty against those honest people. Apostates should be ashamed of themselves when they promote such a distorted picture of such a gentle people.
The worst of the lot has to Bergman, who has written the most wicked tract claiming that Jehovah's Witnesses apply some general "Theocratic Warfare" and use this to justify lying in court. He even quotes a sister out of context as using the 'doctrine' to lie to the police - an act condoned in the Watchtower. What he fails to mention in his booklet is that this sister lived in Nazi Germany and that the 'police' with whom she was dealing was in fact the Gestapo! I am sure some Witnesses and lawyers have lied in court (like many other in such situations I am sure some Witnesses would stop at nothing to keep their children - is that so unusual?) - but to pretend that it is part of some wider strategy or 'doctrine' is just plain dishonest!
Let us call an end to this "Theocratic Warfare" of apostates!
-
8
Letter from Society, They want more $$$$ for CO's and DO's
by buffalosrfree inletter read from "our bros in bethel" they want $8.50 per, now for supporting do's and co's, you know that the cost for health insurance and car insurance have gone up yaddy yaddy yaddy.
they as usual are telling the congregations what they want them to donate.
of course this is all voluntary, what a load of s**t we want your money they should have just said.
-
-
slimboyfat
I think we already did this story... only it was $8.00 from each publisher, not $8.50 an hour.
-
47
Was I Disrespectful to Dr Singelenberg?
by slimboyfat inas some may know, richard singelenberg is a dutch anthropologist who studies jehovah's witnesses.
he has produced academic articles and reviews on issues ranging from the 1975 disappointment and child custody cases to jehovah's witnesses in nazi germany and the history of the blood doctrine.
sometimes he sides with apostates and sometimes he sides with the witnesses on controversial issues (though i personally suspect the former impulse is greater than the latter).
-
-
slimboyfat
what does that stand for?
back to the topic?