respectful_observer

Joined

• started 28 topics
• posted 1,004 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by respectful_observer

• 
  104

  KM (Elder School) Brief Highlights

  by XBEHERE in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  besides the usual drivel there were a couple interesting things.

  1. an entire 1 hour discourse on helping our children become little innocent martyrs for the wt via.

  their flawed and unreasonable blood doctrine.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  XBEHERE, SIAM, or anyone else that can clarify by their attendance at the KM School, my questions below?

  It was stated that:

  "...even to the point of listing for a series of questions that the other elders would ask if a child of an appointed man were to have children go to college. They did a total 180 on their "policy" and are 100% against higher education in any form"; and

  "There are 10 questions that elders were asked to write down to review an appointed man's qualifications. If your kid goes to college there is a likelihood that you will be removed."

  1. Could you post the 10 questions that the elders were asked to write down? I'm eager to see how they differ from the set of questions printed in the Elder book that are required to be asked of those who are newly appointed. I'm curious to know why they didn't want those particular questions put into print as being officially from the WTS.

  2. Was the message of being "100% against higher education in any form" more severe (or more specific) than the direction provided through the COs to elders via the letter about a year ago? My recollection was that the appointed man's qualifications may be called into question if his child attended a 4-year program away from home, or if the student's chosen 4-year major didn't have a direct connection to a specific job skill/trade. I would be interested to see if they've either:

  a.) added firm rules to these parameters, or

  b.) if they've issued further/new direction regarding ANY higher education, including 2-year programs, or attending a 4-year program while remaining at home.

  Thanks,

  R_O
• 
  30

  As Far as JW's and Thanksgiving go...

  by OnTheWayOut in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's one of the most confusing holidays to jw's.

  it doesn't specify who to give thanks to, it's a u.s. holiday that is semi-patriotic and semi-religious but not necessarily either one.. i suppose jw's should go out of their way to avoid giving thanks this thursday so jehovah doesn't get pissed at them for being so slightly normal worldly and maybe accidentally smite them if armageddon starts this thursday..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  @ james_woods: "I think they are just stick-in-the-mud control freaks and cannot stand seeing anybody have a good time."

  I think you're onto something! I often wonder what would be said should a bunch of young Bethelites start celebrating Festivus on December 23rd in their rooms...having Festivus poles, "the Airing of Grievances", "Feats of Strength", etc.

  I can only imagine the scriptural references telling us why it's wrong: sacred poles are bad, we should hold our tongues, wrestling the head of the house shows disrespect toward the family arrangement and thereby disrespect toward Jesus as head of the congregation.

  Sorry, I hope this doesn't hijack the thread, but whoever it is on this forum who writes parody QFR's....I'd love to see him/her write one up as to why it would be improper for Christians to observe Festivus.
• 
  30

  As Far as JW's and Thanksgiving go...

  by OnTheWayOut in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's one of the most confusing holidays to jw's.

  it doesn't specify who to give thanks to, it's a u.s. holiday that is semi-patriotic and semi-religious but not necessarily either one.. i suppose jw's should go out of their way to avoid giving thanks this thursday so jehovah doesn't get pissed at them for being so slightly normal worldly and maybe accidentally smite them if armageddon starts this thursday..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  I think it all depends on the area where you live. I've encountered some JWs who wouldn't eat a turkey on Thursday just out of principle. But I know of plenty (myself included) who have no problem with that. In fact, my Wednesday night and Thursday morning will be spend prepping a large turkey and all the sides for guests-- elders and pioneers included. No one's dressing up like Pilgrims or American Indians (that I know of), but we all realize it's a perfect day to enjoy everyone's company and that it doesn't matter what type of food we eat. It just so happens that turkey is a very economical way to feed a large group...and what do you know, they were on sale at the grocery store this week!

  I think it speaks to an issue that arises on this forum fairly often-- that for as many "fundamentalist" JWs that are out there, there are an ever-increasing number of JWs that see the dangers of being consumed by hard-and-fast (pharisaical) rules that frankly are difficult (or impossible) to support from the Bible. Just as long as my guests wash up to the elbows before they eat, my conscience will be clean...
• 
  17

  any active or inactive jw from Massachusetts

  by TheLoveDoctor in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  any active or inactive jw from massachusetts.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  Born in MA and have lived here most of my life.
• 
  51

  Has there, or are there any normal pro-WT members on this forum? As in mentally stable, anybody?

  by miseryloveselders in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  first off, forgive me if i'm guilty of being judgemental.

  i got my own fair share of mental problems.

  it goes without saying that a bunch of us on this forum are misfits and freaks.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  @ leavingwt...Do you believe that WT is 'God's Oragnization'?

  .........................

  I think I read that question out of a book somewhere once! LOL!

  Seriously though, I come here strictly to observe (hence my screen name). I try never to inject my own thinking or feelings on spiritual matters into the conversation. Those that do and feel it's helpful to themselves and others, I respect them. For those that don't, I respect them as well.

  That's one of the wonderful things about this forum, it allows people from every point on the spectrum to speak as they truely wish.
• 
  51

  Has there, or are there any normal pro-WT members on this forum? As in mentally stable, anybody?

  by miseryloveselders in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  first off, forgive me if i'm guilty of being judgemental.

  i got my own fair share of mental problems.

  it goes without saying that a bunch of us on this forum are misfits and freaks.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  Wonderful, thanks for the clarification and insight into your view!

  I'll classify myself as "an active JW who's normal and somewhat active on the board." (I keep very up-to-date with it, but only occassionaly feel the need to weigh in.)
• 
  51

  Has there, or are there any normal pro-WT members on this forum? As in mentally stable, anybody?

  by miseryloveselders in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  first off, forgive me if i'm guilty of being judgemental.

  i got my own fair share of mental problems.

  it goes without saying that a bunch of us on this forum are misfits and freaks.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  Sorry, I had interpreted "active JWs on this board" as meaning that they were "active JWs" in the congregational sense rather than the frequency of posting.

  I didn't see any overt reference is MLE's thread title and post to the frequency of posting, only phrases like "...members on this forum...", "...does it go without saying that the only people on this board...", "I'm yet to see a proJW on this board who's somewhat normal...", "... the makeup of this board...", etc.

  MLE could you clarify?

  Sab, if I inferred incorrectly, I respectful withdraw myself from consideration as a "normal active JW on this forum".
• 
  51

  Has there, or are there any normal pro-WT members on this forum? As in mentally stable, anybody?

  by miseryloveselders in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  first off, forgive me if i'm guilty of being judgemental.

  i got my own fair share of mental problems.

  it goes without saying that a bunch of us on this forum are misfits and freaks.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  Hmmm...I would consider myself normal, credible, and mentally stable. I'm educated, professionally employed, well-liked, and socially involved with the JWs that I know.

  I am an active JW and don't consider myself "on the way out" in any sense of the word. Do I think that everything and everyone is perfect in the organization? No. Do I think that there are plenty of crazy people in it that follow it in cult-like fashion? Yes. Do I think everyone in it is like that? No.

  I would agree that anyone who comes here to be actively "pro JW" may be a bit touched in the head, since most others arrive here precisely because they are unhappy with some aspect of "the Org". What good does it come here to debate someone who has such a fundamentally opposite viewpoint on this religion? It seems too often to disolve into personal attacks and name-calling.

  I simply find it interesting to see the different perspectives represented on this board-- call it intellectual curiousity.
• 
  25

  Is the WT going to move on this leak?

  by wheelwithinwheel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm sure the legal, public relations and other depts.

  are all asking the gb how to handle this situation.

  and i'm convinced the gb is scratching it's head trying to decipher j's spirit direction in all of this.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  Personally I'd be surprised if any news organization would have interest in this. I could be wrong, but something that affects 0.5% of the population usually doesn't make for awfully compelling news.

  I imagine that the WTS will still continue its efforts to remove it from file-sharing sites, but that's about it. Perhaps a reminder letter to each CoBE, and maybe a stern reminder during the CO visit and the elders' meeting at the SAD/CA, but nothing else.

  For the WTS, it only becomes a big deal if they start treating it like one. The more action they take-- or the more they say-- the more it will take on "urban legend" status in the organization. It's in their interests to simply downplay the importance of it to everyone.
• 
  35

  What is "Brazen" conduct according to new 'Shepherd the Flock of God' book

  by TastingFreedom in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  what is brazen conduct according to the watchtower?.

  here are some references from the new flock book:.

  they have really pushed the envelope to bundle a bunch of things into one really evil word.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  respectful_observer

  "Consider other examples: ....there is strong circumstantial evidence and there may be elements of brazen conduct. The innocent mate's conscience may allow [him or] her to choose to divorce and remarry; the elders would not take action against [him or] her for making this decision."

  Wow... this is a change (I know first-hand it's gone back and forth over the decades). Oh, how my life would have been different. What a difference just a couple of years makes.

  Reading this probably just ruined my day.