https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/latestvideos/pub-jwb_201709_12_video.
a few things about this video:.
it's very nice that they managed to host a convention for the russian brothers and sisters, and that they all got fed.
The round face, bald head, centre of picture (and attention), and smirk when he says "maybe not a coincidence" (wink): he gives the appearance of a spoiled child.
I wonder what his background is. Are his parents JWs? Are they still alive? Does he have siblings? Is he married?
https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/latestvideos/pub-jwb_201709_12_video.
a few things about this video:.
it's very nice that they managed to host a convention for the russian brothers and sisters, and that they all got fed.
As previously noted, the most interesting part of the video to me was where Sanderson says he was tired in January so booked a summer holiday to Finland 🇫🇮 with friends. Do the GB make such travel plans on a whim? Nice to know the lifestyle the GB enjoy. Sanderson apparently made an astute choice when he began taking the emblems in his 20s or so. Think of the other non-anointed bethelites his age stuck in dead end jobs. It's a system that rewards narcissism or lying or both.
i've picked up from several replies to posts here that the org has stopped using the term "worldly" as it applies to people.
this must have happened after i left.
would someone be so kind as to explain the "rationale" behind this shift?
Hang on, I think I might have mixed it up with another JW phrase.
There was a WT article saying JWs should stop using the term "the Society" in everyday conversation. (Always a very amorphous JW phrase/concept, with overlapping references to the Watchtower as a legal entity, the Governing Body as spiritual leaders, and the "new world society")
Which phrase I think has become less common as a result, but not totally died out.
just wondering how many others (when you were still in the org) would try and listen to the meeting programmes from the perspective of a newly interested person visiting for the first time?.
i know that i did this, and most times i did, i found it disturbing!
it was not just the "in-house" language and terminology that was odd, but also the actual doctrines, and method of 'teaching' that was odd!.
The unrealistic presentations are pretty odd. Everyone knows they are unrealistic and often joke about it. But it raises the question, what's the point?
"Do you think God will make the world better?"
And the elder conducting the meeting says:
"Wow that was a very receptive householder you had there." Everyone laughs and they go on to the next unrealistic presentation.
What's the point?
i've picked up from several replies to posts here that the org has stopped using the term "worldly" as it applies to people.
this must have happened after i left.
would someone be so kind as to explain the "rationale" behind this shift?
I think there was a specific direction to stop using it in the last 10 or 20 years. But don't ask me where.
There are some JW words that are commonly used in conversation that are rare in the literature. Even the term "the truth" is seldom used in the literature but is very common in speech.
hiya peeps.
in my comedy routine i am keen to add some audio of the worst things jws have said in talks.
tight pants tony.
Gerrit Loesch saying getting an education is like shooting yourself in the head.
where they stand is a strange mixture.
yes, they don't agree with abortion and homosexuality, they believe in the bible and wear skirts and ties to church .
but in many ways they're liberal.
On the politics, at least, among those who are willing to express an opinion, there is good evidence to show JWs are overwhelmingly supporters of the Democrats.
Given the high proportion of black and Hispanic JWs this shouldn't be too suprising.
Specifically: 75% "independent" or "other", 18% Democrat, and 7% Republican.
See the figures graphically depicted and compared with other religious groups here.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/23/u-s-religious-groups-and-their-political-leanings/
hi all.. for many years now, i have been writing letters to bethel in new york and london.
i have also written to the charity commission, the bbc and more to highlight the harmful teachings and policies of the watchtower society.
i realise that some may view this as futile and understand why they might feel this way,; especially considering the pharisaical stonewall-like attitude displayed by the leadership of watchtower.. some reasons i do so is because i feel that constructive criticism is essential in helping to bring about change.
Watchtower may possibly be more open to suggestions now that they are in a weak position financially and organisationally. Old attitudes die hard of course, but with new circumstances you never know.
I've sometimes wondered how an enquiry would be answered that included two questions: 1) I have some assets I want to know how to donate and 2) have you considered stopping shunning because it harms people and pushes people away rather than attracting them back. Cynical? I suppose. But why not? It's not as if they are immune from cynicism in their own dealings.
hi all.. for many years now, i have been writing letters to bethel in new york and london.
i have also written to the charity commission, the bbc and more to highlight the harmful teachings and policies of the watchtower society.
i realise that some may view this as futile and understand why they might feel this way,; especially considering the pharisaical stonewall-like attitude displayed by the leadership of watchtower.. some reasons i do so is because i feel that constructive criticism is essential in helping to bring about change.
Letters are powerful. You never know who will read them or what effect they will have. They take on a life of their own.
Plus we sometimes assume everyone knows what we do. Or that people high in the organisation have "heard it all before". It's not always true. Sometimes people can have astonishing blind spots. And Watchtower seems to be an organisation that particularly lacks introspection and self-criticism.
I agree with you completely that Watchtower can and must change. Especially shunning. The rest will follow if that one reform is made.
Good luck.
years ago on one of my last witnessing trips i left two magazines with an intelligent looking woman with a lovely house.
she gave my a donation and we carried on.
after 45 minutes she tracked us down at another house and returned the mags to me saying we "hate homosexuals and are preaching hatred..." she looked very upset and i was shocked by this and because someone actually bothered to read the magazines i just left!
Good for you. Homophobia is untenable in this day and age. JWs will need to reform on this issue, or rightly be shamed for their ignorance.
