you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
Actually, the question was raised if df'd ones could hang out together. They were told yes they could.
Where was it raised? And this response?
I’m pretty sure the elders’ book, and/or letters have said that DFed people should not talk to each other, and that if they did it was evidence of lack of repentance.
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
There is a very real danger that they could start hanging out together and be each other's support group.
Have they officially lifted the ban on DFed people talking to each other? I guess some people may take it as implied, but it’s not explicitly stated. This is the way “reforms” can tend to get out of hand and go beyond what was originally intended.
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
As I read it a JC is not convened at first, but the final paragraph states that if the minor is unrepentant then he must be “removed from the congregation”. Whether that implies a JC at that later stage or not, the outcome is the same.
Arguably no one was already 100% shunned because elders spoke to disfellowshipped people and family were allowed necessary contact. So 100% shunning was never a thing anyway, and the current shift in the policy appears marginal. Maybe it will be further loosened, but as explained in the recent broadcast and letter it only amounts to greetings at the meetings.
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
The sticking point in the Norway case was apparently the shunning of children. The new policy still allows for the shunning of children, albeit after some extra effort to avoid that outcome, and with the concession of greetings at the meetings. If that is the new position and it is properly explained then I doubt that is enough of a change to reverse the decision in Norway.
the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
in regard to his humanity after his death
Neither the phrase nor the concept “in regard to his humanity” occurs in Philippians 2, nor anywhere else, which is kind of the giveaway that it’s not biblical.
But supposing it did say that, then Jesus’ humanity would be deified along with his divinity. There would be no human Jesus left.
No matter how you squeeze it the Bible doesn’t bend to fit the shape of Trinity dogma. At every turn the NT text demonstrates that the Trinity was a later development that the Bible writers knew nothing about.
the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
The Bible writers didn’t seem to know anything about any distinction between human and divine natures. For example Eph 1.17 talks about praying to the “God of our Lord Jesus Christ”. If Jesus is ‘Lord as respects his divinity’, then this verse says that even the divine Jesus is subject to God. That makes sense from a JW perspective because God is always greater than Jesus, not just in certain verses, or only as respects his ‘human nature’. God is always God to Jesus. The Bible writers knew nothing about the Trinity or the dual natures theory of Christ which was not developed until centuries later.
i am sure we were all shocked at the governing body update #2 with the unusual and impulsive changes set forth.. i am an insider at whq, and when i was on reddit and in communication with avoidjw i explained to the best of my ability that the approach on disfellowshipping was going to change based on the new light at the 2023 agm, that the jubilee rumor was false, and there were going to be changes on how jws approached disfellowshipping in response to the norway situation if it didn't turn out in watchtower's favor.
the decision came because of a legal blow to watchtower, not because "holy spirit" wad directing a faithful slave, who is going to become the "evil slave", more explanation on this soon.. everything i stated came true.
i left reddit exjw community due to the immature and mentally unstable nature there, and yet as has been the case my words came true.
Agreed neat blue dog. This may be an insider of some sort but also apparently a bit of a kook. The part about sex looks like bizarre motivated wishful thinking.
Instead of making a list of a few plausible changes mixed with lots of flights of fancy, it would be more useful for the “insider” to give some sort of indication of how he arrived at the “inside” information, and exactly what information he gathered.
Because he sounds like someone who possibly had access to some interesting information but has padded it out with 90% imagination for a good story.
burning heretics alive was a common practice in medieval europe.
i cannot begin to imagine the depravity of the mind that invented this cruelty, let alone the inhumanity and callousness of those who carried out the act.
sometimes an individual would take pity on the victim and hide gunpowder among the wood faggots to hasten their death.. there is only one way to make this scenario even more depraved, infinitely depraved in fact; and that would require magic powers.
Universalism is the belief that ultimately everyone will be reconciled with God and saved. This view has a long history in Christianity and makes good sense of many NT texts too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_universalism
Apocatastasis is the related belief that all of creation will be restored to perfect harmony with God with no exclusions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocatastasis
Again this view has much to recommend it from a biblical and rational perspective.
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
I don’t think Armstrongism is a good analogy for Watchtower in the current situation. It was basically a family run business that got into trouble, and a few in the leadership who were converted by Evangelicals as a group. They did this while attending an outside biblical studies course. None of these conditions apply to JWs and the chances of the GB doing the same are near zero. The reforms the GB are enacting are practical and policy level. There is no indication they intend to alter their core beliefs in a Protestant evangelical direction as the Worldwide Church of God did. Most people have only read about the Worldwide Church of God and its fallout. I’ve attended services of the continuing body Grace Communion International and some of the splinter groups. I’ve talked to the people - quite an interesting experience as some of them are not totally on board with the evangelical reforms in the continuing body, especially over the Trinity. They were different than JWs in significant respects, and what happened is not a guide to what will happen at Watchtower.
i’ve not been paying close attention to watchtower developments, but talking to a jw yesterday it occurred to me the society (yes, still use that term - old school) have been sending out mixed messages in recent years.
from what i gather, a few years ago the gb announced that during the great tribulation jws would be required to preach a “hailstone message of judgement” which involved telling people it was too late for them to repent and they were definitely going to be destroyed.
there were hints that this could be very soon, “any day now” preaching could stop and the hailstone message come in, kind of thing.
Scholarly articles certainly do cite sources that are a hundred years old, if what they are looking at is what people believed a hundred years ago. It’s cited as a primary source.
