a few seconds ago this hit the net todayhttp://jwvictims.org/conventions-kingdom-halls-relief-funds-and-other-financial-scams-and-schemes-of-jehovahs-witnesses/.
conventions, kingdom halls, relief funds, and other financial scams and schemes of jehovahs witnesses.
jehovahs witnesses often note that at their meetings (like church services), they dont pass a collection plate.
It could be wishful thinking that Sam Herd got that Rolex as a gift. Without asking him, we'd have no way of knowing. But the fact is, at the very least he must have some very rich friends. But no, they're making some serious cake, apparently, and I recall Ray Franz saying that GB members would take vacations that the ordinary JW can only dream of.
But that's a very good article. Bravo.
--sd-7
so this may 2015 study edition...i know you guys have talked about it already, but wow.
this is classic.
mostly i like to revel in the presentation of these changes.
So this May 2015 Study Edition...I know you guys have talked about it already, but wow. This is classic. Mostly I like to revel in the presentation of these changes. The wording is so classic WT.
"For many years, our publications have explained that the name Gog of Magog refers to Satan after he was thrown out of heaven." So if anything went wrong, it was the publications' fault, not ours. Those books just got up and wrote themselves.
Blah blah, "So we understood that Gog must be another name for Satan. However, there were some problems with this explanation."
Let's read that again. "However, there were some problems with this explanation." Imagine saying that to someone in the congregation. That's the quickest way to end up in front of three elders. Also, THE PROBLEM IS IT'S WRONG! Just say it! It was wrong. I think it's just, the way they go about explaining the problems, it really makes it sound like the earlier understanding was written by complete idiots. I won't comment on that, nor do I need to. I'll let the Watchtower do so:
"But how could Satan, who is an invisible spirit creature, be eaten by birds and wild beasts? How could he be buried on earth? The Bible clearly shows that Satan will be thrown into the abyss for 1,000 years. He will not be eaten or buried."
"But if Satan is Gog, this means that Satan would have to mislead himself."
Only the Watchtower writers could be guilty of such horrible use of logic and actually throw people out of the congregation who see "problems with this explanation."
It further underscores the fact that they have no idea how to understand the Bible. You can pick just one of any number of Bible verses and, searching their publications, you could find three or more different "explanations" for the same verse, all contradictory, all written by the same divinely chosen 'faithful slave'. Matthew 24:34, Matthew 24:45-47, Romans 13--multiple explanations for just a handful of verses. If they don't understand these--as is abundantly evident by their constantly finding "problems" with their own prior explanations--then we have little reason to believe there are no problems with their explanations of the thousands of other Bible verses they claim to know the truth about.
I also just have to marvel at just how many changes have been made in the past 10-15 years. Thanks for the timely reminder to avoid the girl-on-girl porn, by the way. I've had to turn off or skip so many episodes of 'Game of Thrones', you know? Anyway, I hope you've got better things to do on a Saturday than read this. If you did, though, thanks for reading.
--sd-7
"jehovah your god...treats none with partiality."--deut.
10:17.. "impartiality is one of jehovah's endearing qualities.
" <--yes, between that and his tendency towards genocidal warfare, i don't know what makes me love him more.
"Jehovah your God...treats none with partiality."--Deut. 10:17.
"Impartiality is one of Jehovah's endearing qualities." <--Yes, between that and his tendency towards genocidal warfare, I don't know what makes me love him more.
"What does it mean to be impartial? It involves being fair, free from having or showing bias or favoritism." Fair. Like condemning an entire race to death for the actions of two people. Letting people beat and murder your favorite son to save the same aforementioned race from your own punishment!
Free from showing bias. Like not preferring one nation over all others for the majority of human history, for instance.
So...I'm trying to figure out how exactly Jehovah even remotely fits this definition.
"Hence, one who is impartial will pay due regard, not to an individual's outward appearance or circumstances, but to his or her character as a person." <--So can we explain again why wearing a sportcoat and slacks at a meeting if you have a talk is generally frowned upon by people imitating the 'impartial' God? Or why women shouldn't wear pants? For the same reasons said God doesn't qualify as impartial. He's not, and they're not.
Fair. Like forbidding any audio or video recording of judicial committees held in secret, for example.
I could go on, but it's clear that neither the Watchtower nor their god can be properly called impartial.
--sd-7
i've been dating a jw girl for about 4 years and we've recently had a lot of issues with the fact that her family doesn't like that i'm not a jw.
i've been looking into the religion and am interested in it.
but is it wrong to join just so i don't lose her?
You might want to look up the posts by a member here SD7 and take what he did as an object lesson.
--So I have become "a proverbial taunt and a saying"! I've finally made the big leagues, boys!
--sd-7
P.S. Out4good4 is right. It'd make for good reading--no, GREAT reading, I promise. You'll vomit rainbows, man! RAINBOWS!
'no one has greater love than this, that someone would lay down his life for his friends.'.
many have been hurt by the practice of shunning.
family members, [former?
How would I even be around to give my life for theirs--they're shunning me, remember? So the answer is: that's either impossible or improbable. If by some chance the scenario arose, well, the truthful answer is: no more or less than I would give my life for anyone else. And I wouldn't give my life for most people. So probably not.
--sd-7
not on the front page, not in the study articles, but carefully camouflaged in the questions from readers on page 18 (watchtower march 15, 2015).
you can bet most jws wont even read it..
there is no apology...just the usual excuses..
This article will have no meaning to most JWs other than a curious sort of history. Its implications, however, are potentially HUGE. I'm talking practically any of the various teachings they've held to, including 1914, could be demolished by the very argument they're using here.
After all, given that the Bible doesn't clearly identify the Kingdom/God's sovereignty as an antitype of the giant tree in Nebuchadnezzar's dream, we need not conclude that the seven times were anything but a lesson to humble Nebuchadnezzar. Of course they'll never use the argument this way, but they could. It gives them an out, and all they have to do is use it whenever the right time for it (ie. when it's most useful to their purposes) arrives.
The curious thing is, that while they specifically mention some examples of antitypes they used, they DO NOT include references/footnotes to the overwhelming majority of the articles they mentioned. (So the average JW is not going to bother trying to look them up.) Instead of going into detail about what the Watchtower articles specifically said, they preferred to use outlandish examples from Origen, Jerome, etc. People who were NOT Jehovah's Witnesses, who were members of 'Christendom'. Given that such men's ideas would be considered as decidedly false, that tells you a lot about how such 'antityping', to coin a word, is being viewed here.
And it goes even deeper than that. Not limiting a particular story's meaning to just the anointed also potentially paves the way--at least in theory--for making major changes to this two-class system. The great crowd are already domestics, a place previously held by anointed. This could--could--be used to justify some other imaginary 'privilege' being assigned to the great crowd, like actually considering them as 'God's children' as well, for once. Not likely, but still possible.
So rather than admitting their own teachings were "far-fetched", they use that term about Christendom's writers (the aforemention Origen/Jerome/etc.), thus deftly avoiding calling attention to their own religion's obviously outlandish teachings. It was a bait and switch. They were talking about their own literature, but then changed the subject under examination to false religious teachers. If you're paying attention, though, this can be summed up by saying "Fred Franz was a false religious teacher, and that's why we don't teach what he taught anymore." Fascinating. It's a great read, if you're up for a laugh.
Wow. Times really are a-changin' in Watchtowerville. These guys might even approach the same zip code as admitting a mistake one day. ... Naaah!
--sd-7
i've been dating a jw girl for about 4 years and we've recently had a lot of issues with the fact that her family doesn't like that i'm not a jw.
i've been looking into the religion and am interested in it.
but is it wrong to join just so i don't lose her?
It looks like this question has been well-covered. I'll just say, from personal experience, that you will have a choice to make. She will never love you more than her beliefs. She will throw you under a bus for them. You can choose her beliefs if you want, but that, and that alone, will be the only reason she will ever claim to love you.
You're wasting valuable time, unfortunately. Let her go no matter how painful it may be. Better to do so now than to suffer later. Trust me. I know. Your life is mostly ahead of you. This girl will leave you behind in a heartbeat.
--sd-7
"do not be loving the world or the things in the world.
"--1 john 2:15. wt comments: "satan's system seems to be permanent and real.
nevertheless, one day it will come to an end.
"Do not be loving the world or the things in the world."--1 John 2:15
WT comments: "Satan's system seems to be permanent and real. Nevertheless, one day it will come to an end. Nothing that Satan's world has to offer has permanence."
Not sure if there's an unspoken juxtaposition here: if Satan's system seems permanent and real, then Jehovah's system seems...unstable, in a state of constant change, and unreal? And if nothing Satan's world has to offer has permanence, then that explains the need for all those excellent Watchtower real estate deals worth hundreds of millions of dollars. It's never too late to get into the real estate market, people. The Society is just participating in Satan's "going out of business" deals, that's all! This old system is a lot like real estate, in fact--you've got to get rid of it before the value goes down too low!
And it seems like "the heart is treacherous" (Jer. 17:9) must be the only scripture in the Bible; it gets used for practically every scenario in which one might be tempted to think about something beneficial to oneself. Want to buy a new car/house, get a better job? The heart is treacherous. But not so treacherous that the Society needs to provide financial statements to show what they're doing with the donations or anything. Their hearts are obviously incorruptible in matters of finance. We have to show full trust in those appointed to take the lead, remember? Only your heart is vulnerable to treachery, not theirs.
"Therefore, should we not 'keep testing whether we are in the faith, keep proving what we ourselves are' by honest self-examination in light of what we study in the Bible? (2 Cor. 13:5)" 'Honest self-examination' can never be done in light of the Bible alone, but it is assumed that the writer of this article will never have to say that, his audience already knows. Any honest self-examination without Watchtower literature--or at least Watchtower interpretation of scripture--is automatically 'dishonest', 'haughty', 'independent thinking', and so on. So this should read "...by honest self-examination in light of what we study in the [Watchtower literature]?"
Identifying traits of a cult:
--Fear of the outside world/Satan
--Guilt/shame followers against improving their financial status
--Fear of imminent apocalypse
Until next time...
--sd-7 (I'm also an identifying trait of a cult, apparently, but this is really meant as a signature of sorts...)
wt comments, 4/29/15: .
"does this mean that as long as there is no clearly stated law from god, we can just follow the ways and standards that we are brought up with and that are common in our area?...
[quoted prov.
Data Dog--I particularly appreciate your Man Without Fear avatar there.
1) Perhaps we would get along well. I'm glad to reconnect with you guys.
2) There it is. I read the Bible a lot, and the more I did, the more I saw that something was wrong. Mostly in the extreme attitudes promoted by those taking the lead, the extreme things said in assembly and convention talks. And the literature...simple reading comprehension goes a long way with all that.
Magwitch--who knew? Bright socks. Well, if only they were wool dyed reddish purple, you'd be okay, am I right? Ha!
CloseTheDoor--Beards. The most sinister of Satan's snares regarding grooming. "O if only this hair didn't naturally grow out of my face! Then I would praise you forever."--Psalm I just made that up, verse 3.
--sd-7
i find it hard to believe that adults on this forum make such a big deal about not celebrating birthdays, x-mas, easter, halloween, etc, etc, etc.
i grew up as a jw kid and it actually made me feel good, being different from the other kids in school.
we went to meetings.
These holidays are only human traditions. I never missed them because I never really knew them. My parents gave me plenty of good things regardless. I have very little desire to do holidays because it's something people do for no apparent reason to me. Family, chocolate candy, costumes, gifts, turkeys, etc.--these are things available to you throughout the year, apart from not being able to get days off to see all the family together, I mean. Big deal.
What bothers me is the stolen TIME. Stolen time I could have used to get proper rest or to do my homework on midweek meeting nights and Saturday mornings. People I avoided out of fear because they were different from me. How do I know if I missed out on a lifelong friendship or meeting the love of my life? I'll never know that. Countless hours spent in reading and internalizing information that was not only false but misleading and abusive.
Deprived of gifts? No. Of time, of a proper, healthy, nurturing childhood? Yes.
--sd-7
