Posts by Mary

16

CNN doc 'Holy Hell'

by Worldling9 in

i just saw the documentary 'holy hell' on cnn, about a cult called buddhafield.

it was a small group but has existed since the 80s and still has a few followers.

classic cult stuff, much of which i found eerily familiar.

CNN doc 'Holy Hell'

by Worldling9 in

i just saw the documentary 'holy hell' on cnn, about a cult called buddhafield.

it was a small group but has existed since the 80s and still has a few followers.

classic cult stuff, much of which i found eerily familiar.

I watched it. While there were some obvious differences, there were also quite a few similarities with the cult we escaped from. The isolation, the exclusivity, the shunning of family who are not members and the fact that you were not allowed to question any of the leaders whacko doctrines, sounded all too familiar.....

15

Is this an "all-time" Low?

by Je.suis.oisif in

i just wanted to vent, nothing more.

my aunt died in edinburgh last week.

her obituary facilitates adding candles & personal messages.

Mary

Actually, this is not unheard of. Some Witnesses will do ANYTHING to get their hours in, no matter how low they have to sink. Here's a case that happened last year in Florida that the media picked up on:

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - A local father who wishes to remain anonymous sent Action News Jax a copy of a letter sent to his family's church.

The letter read in part: "Sorry about your loss. I read about it from the obituary."

Jehovah’s Witness literature was attached to the letter.

“In a time when a family is grieving they need to be surrounded by family and friends. That's not a time for a person to proselytize their views,” the father said.

He tells me it's the second time his family received a letter like this. He said something similar came to his home in January shortly after he lost his daughter.

"We found a tract from the Jehovah's Witnesses, which I found horribly inappropriate,” he said.

The most recent letter was signed by an Eva Robinson.

Action News Jax reporter Katie McKee tracked down Robinson and spoke with her on Thursday.

McKee: “What is the overall purpose of them getting this pamphlet if they belong to a Presbyterian church?"

Robinson: "That doesn't matter. We are not trying to change anyone's religion. We are just simply encouraging."

Robinson was apologetic when told a family was angered and offended by the letters.

"I’m sorry. I meant no harm,” Robinson said.

Robinson said she frequently sends these letters to families listed in obituaries. She said this is first time she has heard of someone having an issue with it.

"I think it just reflects upon her leadership, which is unfortunately interpreting scriptures in a very shallow way,” the local father said.

137

Mouthy has Passed Away

by Simon in

jw
friends

update on mouthy (grace gough)this is graces granddaughter.

i wanted to send an update that today my beautiful grandmother passed away - surrounded by friends and family.

- may 22 1927 - sept 2nd 2016. mouthys_granddaughter.

Mary

Yes, I just received a phone call from Mouthy's daughter telling me that Grace had passed. I had spoke to her a few months ago and I could tell she was going downhill. Her daughter said that they'll be an announcement in the Kitchener-Waterloo Record and the Montreal newspaper, so I'm not sure of the date of the funeral yet.

Mouthy was the first ex-Witness I met in person and I loved her from the start. She had a wonderful sense of humour and would do anything to help others. She had had a difficult life from the start but always had a smile on her lovely face.

Rest in Peace dear Grace. I'll miss you.

49

Are the GB very intelligent men with higher than average IQ? Or are they stupid men who were put in their position by sheer “LUCK”

by John Aquila in

are the governing body of the wt wickedly smart with extremely high iq or are they leaders of the wt because they were at the right place at the right time.

(in other words, pure luck )-think lottery.

ive seen them talk in jwtv and you can never convince anyone in the whole world that these guys are in the same category as someone smart or cunning like jim simons who founded renaissance technologies or bill gates.

Mary

I think they somehow managed to 'Pull a Homer'

13

Woman sues JWs - Mom's inheritance, 300 000$ signed over to JWs 1 week before her death!

by StephaneLaliberte in

this article is written in french: .

http://gatineau.rougefm.ca/info-gatineau-ottawa/2015/08/08/elle-donne-son-heritage-aux-temoins-de-jehovah-sa-fille-depose-le-dossier-en-cour-superieure .

the mother, who passed away in the spring of 2015, signed a new will just one week before her death, while she was dying, in which she made the jws beneficiary of her 300 000 $ dollars inheritance.

Mary

This is exactly what happened to my uncle (my mom's brother-in-law). His step-mother (who had no children of her own) left everything that my uncle's dad had to the Organization despite the fact that my uncle had looked after her and looked after her very well for all the years after his own father died.

It's hard to say whether she did this simply because she was a evil nasty bitch (which she definitely was) or because she thought it would score brownie-points with Jehovah.

29

Is there a Child Molester on the Governing Body?

by TTATTelder in

great report by abc on the abuses in jw-dot-org land.... i hope it opens a "floodgate" of future news reports and exposes.

if you ask yourself, "why hasn't the watchtower leadership changed their policy on the 2 witness rule?

if one or more persons on the gb has victims out there that can't come forward because of the 2 witness rule, then that would explain the permanent road block to policy change that is obviously in place.

Mary

"...If you ask yourself, "Why hasn't the watchtower leadership changed their policy on the 2 witness rule?", here is the simplest explanation in my opinion: There are molesters in the leadership of the organization, namely the GB..."

In all honesty, I've never read or heard anything to suggest such a thing. I think a far more likely explanation as to why they don't want to change their Neanderthal policy is because they've always had a very 1950s mentality towards child abuse: don't ask and don't tell, plus they've always been drunk on their own power and no one--especially ex-Witnesses and the media (which of course is being run by Satan) is going to dictate how they run their ~~business~~ religion.

I don't believe that they purposely want children to be molested, but when they had to choose between the welfare of the children and the Organization's reputation, they chose the latter which was of course, a huge mistake and certainly not the moral thing to do.

The quandary they now find themselves is this: If they change the policy due to (worldly) public pressure, then that would certainly give the impression that 'Christ's Brothers' were in the wrong and that is something they will never admit to, no matter what the evidence shows.

It would also put them on the same level as the Catholic Church---that 'false religion' that the WTS has pointed the finger at for decades for doing the exact same thing: protecting pedophiles, and again, that is something they will never concede to. At least the Catholic Church has publically apologized and is trying to make amends. The WTS has simply dug their heals in deeper and are now saying that all these court cases against them are nothing more than "apostate lies".

These guys live in an ivory tower and don't seem to understand that the decades of sweeping scandals under the carpet is over for them. With the advent of the internet, "there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed." If they were smart, they'd do a complete overhaul of this policy, do a public apology and compensate the victims. Their behaviour so far means that I wouldn't want to hang from the end of a rope waiting for this to happen.

14

Disfelowshipping / Expelling

by freein2004 in

the insight book volume 1 page 788 uses matthew 5:22 and acts 10:28 as biblical support for dfing and shunning.. thoughts?

hopefully someone upload the insight book page here.

i don't have the means.. i should have said that basically the top paragraph in the insight book is supporting shunning because the israelites shunned the man of the nations and tax collectors?

Mary

Thanks for nice comments! I'm not on here too much anymore (first joined 13 years ago!). I had my project on Randy Watters website at one point, but I know he re-did his site and I'm not sure if it's still up there or not. Barbara Anderson also had a link for it on her website. Whether or not she still does, I don't know. I'll see if I can find out and let you know. (although some parts of it might be outdated now--like the 'generation' doctrine. I think it's been changed at least twice since I did the project in 2008).

16

New donation arrangement in action locally

by respectful_observer in

recently they announced at my hall that a large donation had been made to the local congregation-- nearly $100,000.

they then proposed a resolution that we continue our new(ish) practice of only keeping enough money on hand locally for monthly expenses, and send the entire amount of this large donation to the watchtower society.

aside from the fact that our congregation has already sent well over a half-million dollars to the wt in the last 12 months, i don't understand the motive of the person who made the donation.

Mary

Doesn't surprise me really. Big Brother wants as much cha-ching as they can possibly get their grubby greedy hands on because someone's got to pay for all these multi-million dollar lawsuits that keep getting levied against the Borg. Who better to pay than the local congregations!

While I don't know if it's written in stone, I remember about 10 or 12 years ago at one of the (last) circuit ASSemblies I went to, they came up with "a new resolution". The gist of it was that they would pledge to send X amount of dollars to Crooklyn even if there wasn't enough left over to pay the bills for having the assembly. Everyone would just have to pony up some more $$$.

It sounds like this is the consensus at the congregation level too. Despite the fact that your KH obviously needs major repair work done, the elders are given some not-so-subtle hints that Jehovah will bless them more if they send all that money to headquarters. So unless whoever gave that money specifically stipulated that it was to be used at the congregation level, in all likelihood, that's exactly what's going to happen.

14

Disfelowshipping / Expelling

by freein2004 in

the insight book volume 1 page 788 uses matthew 5:22 and acts 10:28 as biblical support for dfing and shunning.. thoughts?

hopefully someone upload the insight book page here.

i don't have the means.. i should have said that basically the top paragraph in the insight book is supporting shunning because the israelites shunned the man of the nations and tax collectors?

Mary

I did a project several years ago about the problems with many of their doctrines and disfellowshipping was one of them. I'll paraphrase some of what was in my project below:

"The practice of disfellowshipping members and not speaking to them might appear to have support from the scriptures, one needs to take a look at both the culture and religious practices in Judaism and in the early Christian congregation to fully understand what the scriptures are saying.

The primary scripture the Society uses for justification in this doctrine is found in 1 Corinthians 5:11 which says:

“But now I am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.” [1]

The scripture cited above in 1 Corinthians is clear that a person with whom the congregation should not mix company is one who is:

1) "called a brother" (that is, one who professes to be a member of the congregation); and those who:

2) practicing fornication, greed, idiolatry, reviling (insulting), habitual drunkenness, and/or extortion (theft).

Here we need to know what the customs of fellowship and worship were practiced by first-century Jews and Christians (keeping in mind that Jesus and his apostles were Jews.) They lived according to the Jewish lifestyle and customs of their day. Jesus taught in the synagogues, kept the Jewish holidays and lived the life of a Jew; He was also called "Rabbi." Matt.26:25; 26:49; Mark 9:5; 11:21; 14:25; John 1:38, 49; 3:2, 26; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8

There were two kinds of association for religious worship amongst first century Jews:

1) The public meetings, such as those at the temple and in the synagogues which anyone was allowed to attend.

2) The intimate private gatherings of the different sects (in Judaism for example, there were the Pharisees, Sadducees, Zealots and Essenes). Christians and Jews participated in both. Since the Christians at that time did not have a public meeting place that they could call their own, they used both the Synagogues and also met in private homes, usually over a special meal with prayer.

Christians were instructed to "greet" one another with a kiss. (Rom.16:16; 1.Cor.16:20; 2Cor.13:12; Ti.3:15; 1Pet.5:14) When Paul sent his "greetings" in a letter to the Christians in Thessalonica, he asked that the brothers be greeted with a "holy kiss" on his behalf. (1Thess.5:26) This was a custom both amongst the Jews and Christians of the first century, it had a special significance of close companionship amongst those who were related either by blood or by their faith.

Clearly, Paul did instruct Christians to expel from the congregation fellowship those who were purposely practicing willful sin. The expulsion would naturally exclude them from being greeted by the identifying "holy kiss," as well as not being allowed to share in meetings and the meals for Christian worship and prayer.

However, Paul's instruction did not prohibit normal conversation or witnessing to former members. Nor were the guilty party barred from attending worship in the temple or the synagogues. Jesus, the apostles and Paul, along with the rest of the Jews, worshiped God both publicly in the temple and synagogues, and privately with small groups in various homes. (Acts 5:42) It was from the private Christian fellowship for worship that sinners were excluded.

What of the scripture that says: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.” The above scripture is not talking about those who had been expelled from the Christian congregation. If you read verse 10 it is clear that it is talking about someone who does not “acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.”

This included Jews that rejected Jesus and people of the nations worshipping other Gods. Yet the Watchtower stance is to apply this only to Jehovah's Witnesses. The meaning of the phrase “never receive him into YOUR homes” should be understood in the context of the hospitality of first century Jerusalem. Since Christians held congregation meetings in their homes John possibly felt that inviting a denier of Christ into a home could be viewed as sharing worship with non-Christians. Likewise the term to never “say a greeting” to him needs to be understood in light of first century practice. The Organization claims that even saying “hello” to someone who had been disfellowshipped was prohibited:

“John here used khai´ro, which was a greeting like “good day” or “hello.” (Acts 15:23; Matthew 28:9) He did not use Aspa´zo Amai (as in verse 13), which means “to enfold in the arms, thus to greet, to welcome” and may have implied a very warm greeting, even with an embrace. (Luke 10:4; 11:43; Acts 20:1, 37; 1 Thessalonians 5:26) So the direction at 2 John 11 could well mean not to say even “hello” to such ones.”

This article claims the word khai’ro is used to forbid a simple greeting, instead of aspa’zo mai which means a more affectionate embrace, enfolding in the arms, kiss, greeting or welcome. Of course, the average Witness is going to take this at face value, which is unfortunate because Strong’s Concordance defines the two words as just the opposite of what this Watchtower is claiming:

5463 chairo {khah'-ee-ro} 1) to rejoice, be glad 2) to rejoice exceedingly 3) to be well, thrive 4) in salutations, hail! 5) at the beginning of letters: to give one greeting, salute

783 aspasmos {as-pas-mos’} 1) a salutation, either oral or written

By applying the word khai’ro to the quote at 2 John 11, it is clear that the early Christian congregation did not completely ignore such ones. While they would not have ‘greeted them with a holy kiss’ or display an overly zealous greeting, it is obvious that they would have greeted the person in a courteous manner.

If the scripture at 2 John 10 were observed literally by Jehovah's Witnesses, they would be obliged to never to speak to anyone other than another Witness in good standing. Yet Witnesses work with people with various backgrounds including Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Atheists.....none of whom believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Why are they allowed to speak with these people, yet are obliged to shun life long friends and even family members when they get disfellowshipped?

How did Jesus say one expelled from congregation should be treated? Far from cutting the person off completely, Jesus encouraged kindness:

“Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations ['Gentile' in some translations] and as a tax collector.”

The instruction was to bring up the matter of sin first between the two individuals alone. If the sinner repented, there was no need to carry the matter further. If the sinner was not repentant, then one or two others should be sought for witnesses. If the sinner remained unrepentant, only then, as a last resort, should it be brought before the entire congregation (not privately with the "elders"). If, after all that, the person still would not listen, he should then be treated the same as Gentiles and tax collectors. In other words, Christians were to treat former members just like anyone else who was not a member of the congregation. To be treated like a "man of the nations" (which is to say, a Gentile or foreigner) was far from being shunned. Jewish people worked with, associated with, transacted business with, and preached to Gentiles. As for "tax collectors," Jesus ate and associated with them. Matthew was a tax collector. Tax collectors were not popular, but they were not shunned.

The ironic thing about the Organizations’ view of disfellowshipping, is that they do not ‘practice what they preach’. For example, Jehovah's Witnesses do not disfellowship greedy persons. They often do not disfellowship people who regularly get drunk unless their conduct becomes so outrageous and publicly-known as to bring reproach upon Jehovah's Witnesses.

They do not disfellowship people for many of the things which they themselves class as "idolatry" (for example: materialism, worshipping an organization, etc.).

On the other hand, Jehovah's Witnesses do disfellowship and shun people for:

Celebrating a birthday, Christmas, Easter, or other secular holidays (even though the founder of the religion, Charles Russell saw no problem with celebrating such days); discussing personal views of the scriptures with anyone if your viewpoint differs from with the Governing Body says is ‘truth’, Independent study and discussion of the Bible that brings Watchtower doctrine into question (even though the scriptures specifically tell Christians to “make sure of all things, possession of literature written by former members, going public with evidence that the Organization has covered up acts of pedophilia over the years (as in the case of Barbara Anderson) attending a service of any other church or religious organization, authorizing a blood transfusion, even to save the life of a child.

It should also be noted that nowhere in the scriptures does it indicate that either Jesus or his disciples were ‘disfellowshipped’ by the Pharisees from Jewish fellowship, for promoting ideas that differed from what the Pharisees taught. They were hated by many for sure, but they were never shunned.

Ironically, the Organization likes to use the example of Diotrephes as:

“A man mentioned by the apostle John in his letter to Gaius. In addition to being ambitious, proud, disrespectful of apostolic authority, rebellious, and inhospitable, Diotrephes tried to hinder those desiring to show hospitality to the brothers and to expel these from the congregation”

In actuality, Diotrephes was being reprimanded for attempting to disfellowship “those desiring to show hospitality to the brothers” by expelling them “from the congregation”.

Both Brother Russell and Judge Rutherford were more lenient towards doctrinal disagreements, as they realized that trying to force all believers to think alike on doctrine is what originally caused the “great apostasy” in the first place:

“Satans organization sails under the high-sounding name of "Christendom". It boasts of a membership of over 500,000,000 persons. Its members are in bondage to creeds, customs, rites and ceremonies; they dare not disown these or criticize or expose them. To do so would bring down on their heads taunts, reproaches, disfellowship and persecution. Many thousands of the Lords people are held in these denominations as prisoners, afraid to express their disapproval of the creeds, methods and customs of the organization.” [1]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Watchtower 1930 October 1 p.301