Posts by djeggnog

98

New here

by Tuber in

jw
friends

hey all.. .

thought i'd introduce myself.. .

first, a disclaimer: i'm an athiest.. .

djeggnog

@Tuber:

I never said I want to stop my stepmother being a theist, I want to stop her being a Jehovah's Witness.

I see. How do you imagine that you will be able to accomplish this? By taking a crash course in theology a la ex-Jehovah's Witnesses? I've read some of the "advice" that others have been given you here and someone advised you to become an undercover Bible student so that you will learn in stealth at least some of the major teachings of the Bible, teachings that some here have suggested are in reality the major teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses that are not based on Bible at all.

I don't think your having an ulterior motive to accept a Bible study with Jehovah's Witnesses to be a bad idea at all. Under ordinary circumstances, I would be willing to study the Bible with you, but what no one told you, our publications aren't really designed with atheists in mind, and I'm pretty sure that many of those giving you advice would have mentioned this had they paid closer attention to the things that those that studied the Bible with them would have told them (or should have told them). The majority of the people to whom Jehovah's Witnesses preach in the world are familiar with the Bible, and by this I'm talking about theists that might fancy themselves as being Christians, Muslims or Jews.

Your stepmother seems a bit tied to our publications, so that she might quote from our publications extensively whenever she speaks to you, but I make adroit use of the Bible, from which I will only be paraphrasing in what I am saying to you in this response. From what you have written in this thread, your stepmother doesn't speak to you as I believe she ought to speak when she knows that you are an atheist. An atheist comes to the Bible having no belief in God, so it would be daunting for most Jehovah's Witnesses with little or no experience attempting to study the Bible with an atheist to do so since our literature is designed for the most part to appeal to those that either believe that God exists or is an agnostic that believes the existence of God to be a possibility. You are free to think I don't know a thing about atheists though, but I'll still be competent in what things I say to you.

Watchtower publications teach that all other religions, to the extent of all other [denominations] of Christianity even, are being used by Satan to lead people away from the "one true religion".

This is what the Bible teaches. I won't quote the Bible texts here since I'm not sure that you have the same appreciation that I do as to the infallibility of God's word and its truthfulness. The Bible teaches, for example, that God raised Jesus, a man that was put to death, from the dead on the third day after his execution. Because Christians believe what things the Bible teaches, they accept this teaching on faith in the Bible, which they believe to have been written under divine inspiration, but you couldn't be expected to believe that a dead man came back to life after having been dead for parts of three days rose from the dead.

Although the earth may have been existence for many thousands of years, perhaps aeons, the Bible provides a history of mankind that only dates back to a little over 6,000 years, and because Christians hold the Bible to be inerrant, they would have no difficulty rejecting the idea that man evolved from primates as a result of evolution (based on the Darwinian premise of natural selection) or rejecting as absurd the notion that man has been walking around on this planet for 10,000, 50,000 even 100,000 years or longer, believing as we do that the human race began as the result of the direct creation of Adam and Eve by God. If you should decide to accept a Bible study with one of Jehovah's Witnesses, this point will be made using the Bible and you will, of course, be free to reject what you read in the Bible as incredible.

Watchtower publications teach that "true christians" don't accept blood transfusions. I worry about what would happen if my step mother or one of my little sisters were to be put in a situation where a blood transfusion was necessary to save their life.

I've never seen such a statement in any of our publications. The reason Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions ought to be because of what the Bible teaches as to the sacredness of life, and how they learned from the Bible that blood represents life, which is why God put blood on animals on the altar in the first place to represent the life of the human being that provided such to atone for his or her sins, which animal sacrifices, mind you, foreshadowed the perfect human sacrifice of Jesus whose shed blood for the sins of mankind. Just as God had commanded Noah, one of the eight survivors of the global deluge about which the Bible teaches, to pour out blood so as not to eat unbled meat, the command to abstain from blood is incumbent on Christians to obey because, as I just stated, blood represents life and so is sacred.

However, this prohibition on blood transfusions doesn't extend to the use of blood fractions, since such are derived from the four major components of whole blood four (4) components of whole blood(i.e., plasma, white cells, red cells and platelets), and so the transfusion of same would not be the same as transfused blood, and thus not regarded by some Jehovah's Witnesses as being a violation of God's law, so it is a matter of conscience for the Christian to decide to accept the transfusion of such blood products as some Christians might find it to be repugnant to accept one or more blood fractions in connection with the medical treatment they might receive.

From blood plasma, for example, are produced various fractions, such as clotting factors VIII and IX, to treat hemophilia, albumin for massive bleeding and liver failure, and to treat burns; also Tig to treat tetanus and HRIg to treat rabies; as well as globulin to provide passive immunity after exposure to certain diseases. From platelets, are produced fractions like IPF (immature platelet fraction) and TPO (plasma thrombopoietin). My point here is that Jehovah's Witnesses have no problem accepting blood fractions.

Gasoline, for example, is a component of crude oil, but plastics that come from crude oil would be a fraction since it is a byproduct of crude oil. That plastic bottle of water from which many of us drink today would be a crude oil "fraction," which hardly resembles what it was before it was processed from it into plastic and no one would point to such a plastic bottle littering the highway as crude oil, would they?

Here's the point I want to make though: The risks associated with the use of blood in connection with the transfusion of blood and blood products far outweigh the benefits that one hopes to obtain. When asked whether there are any risks associated with a patient's receiving a blood transfusion, Aryeh Shander, M.D., Chief of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Englewood Hospital and Medical Center in Englewood, New Jersey, responded: "Absolutely. If you can't demonstrate benefit, all you are offering the patient is risk."

So, then, my question to you, @Tuber, would be: How much risk would you be willing to accept for yourself? How much risk would you be willing to subject one of your own children that a doctor wants to give a blood transfusion? Is 50% risk too high for you? How about 25%? 10%? 5%? 1%. To most Jehovah's Witnesses, a 1% risk is too high for them to subject their children to the invasion of their immune system by a blood transfusion. I realize that you specifically had the lives of your two half-sisters in mind, but to how much risk do you think your stepmother ought to subject them?

Watchtower publications label those who disagree with their teachings as apostates, and state they must be disfellowshipped and shunned.

Yes and no; disfellowshipped, yes, but shunned, no. Many Jehovah's Witnesses will and do shun disfellowshipped persons, but not all of them do, for Christians are scripturally required to cut off spiritual association with the disfellowshipped individual, which means we would not associate spiritually with them while they are in a disfellowshipped state, and would avoid unnecessary social contact with the disfellowshipped person for as long as they remain in a disfellowshipped state, but if we should see someone not disfellowshipped for apostasy at meetings, we can greet them, talk to them, arrange to give them a ride to meetings at our Kingdom Halls, even have meals with them.

While the elders in a congregation do speak consolingly to disfellowshipped individuals all of the time, it's true that some Jehovah's Witnesses decide on their own to shun and have nothing to do with the person, which is his or her choice to do, and I'm sure it hurts the feelings of the disfellowshipped individual, but (1) shunning is not the policy of Jehovah's Witnesses, and (2) the feelings of those that do shun disfellowshipped persons may change should he or she be reinstated as a brother or as a sister. However, if one has been disfellowshipped for apostasy, Christians do not greet such apostates, talk to them, arrange to do anything at all with them, including having a meal with them.

Now you might think such treatment to be cruel, but Jehovah's Witnesses are more concerned with what God thinks about the individual that is being disciplined to not take lightly their obligation to live up to their vow of service, their dedication. Our hope is that they will repent of the wrongdoing that led to their being disfellowshipped and seek reinstatement soon, but we also realize that it does takes longer for some to return to their senses, if they return at all. While disfellowshipped, the individual is still our brother or sister, and should they be reinstated, they are not rebaptized since disfellowshipping doesn't sever the vow that they made to God at baptism to do his will.

You may not understand the need for Christians to live by the moral standards outlined in the Bible, including our abstinence from blood, but adherence to Bible standards is protecting us from many of the loathsome diseases that non-Jehovah's Witnesses are experiencing, like genital herpes, Herpes simplex, HIV/AIDS, human papilloma virus (HPV) and Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpes virus (HHV-8), things that are rarely contracted by Jehovah's Witnesses, young and old alike, and usually only plagues married Witnesses when one of them "cheats" on his or her spouse than it does those who are unmarried (although it is unfortunate that some of our children that have disobeyed God and their parents have quality of life issues as a result of such disobedience).

Watchtower publications quote scientists and other sources out of context, making it seem like they support watchtower teachings when they do not- this is nothing short of deception.

Please cite an example. I don't care to hear unfounded allegations that you read somewhere, maybe here on JWN or in that book you mentioned you were in the process of reading. What scientist did Jehovah's Witnesses quote in any of our publications, who was taken out of context to make it appear as if they either supported the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses or supported some point being made in one of our publications. Your statement sounds like one of those boilerplate allegations that apostates make against Jehovah's Witnesses, but if you prefer to believe this allegation to be true, then don't bother citing an example. I'm only interested in hearing what you can prove and I'm certain that you won't be able to do so.

The WTS has foretold the end of the world numerous times, each time this has proven false. So they are the very definition of the false prophets the bible tells of... the bible they supplant with their own teachings.

So you, an atheist, are now thinking that you are qualified to tell me what things the Bible teaches about false prophets? Really??? I didn't self-identify here as an atheist; that would be you, for I'm one of Jehovah's Witnesses and I don't mind telling you that I'm qualified to teach others what things the Bible teaches more convincingly using just the Bible than can many Jehovah's Witnesses that must rely upon our publications to assist them. Is it me that needs a Bible study or would that be you?

When did Jehovah's Witnesses ever predict the end of the world? If you are able to provide a citation that points to the prediction of a specific date when the end of the world was to come, something that would constitute proof, I'd be interested in seeing it. Again, this is just another one of those boilerplate allegations that apostates make against Jehovah's Witnesses, but, again, if you prefer to believe this allegation to be true, then don't bother citing an example, for I'm only interested in hearing what you can prove and I'm certain that you won't be able to do so.

@djeggnog wrote:

Personally, I believe in people being permitted to make their own choices, and what some might view as indoctrination someone else might view as intense vigorous training, especially if we are talking about adults and I assume that your stepmother is an adult and you do not begrudge her right to make our own choices in life no more than you would appreciate someone else trying to dictate the choices you make for your life. As an atheist, I would think reading anything that relates to religion would be rather difficult to comprehend, but you cannot learn about the religion to whom your stepmother belongs by reading the viewpoints of folks like Raymond Franz, the author of Crisis of Conscience or Don Cameron, the author of Captives of a Concept (Anatomy of an Illusion), since these men are opposers of Jehovah's Witnesses and cannot be trusted to provide an unbiased explanation to you of the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses as someone like myself who is actively one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I invite you to put your questions and concerns to me.

@Tuber wrote:

You say these men are biased against the Jehovah's Witnesses, but from everything I see, they have good reason to be. And I think it is fair to say they are no more biased against the WTS than the JWs are for the WTS. The JWs and WTS change their stance on doctrine, then try to cover up the changes... at this point in the discussion, the JWs/ WTS do not come across to me as particularly trustworthy.

Ok.

Also, please don't say things like "as an [atheist] I would think reading anything that relates to religion would be rather difficult to comprehend".

You may not have meant to come across this way, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but it makes you sound... well, since I am trying to be civil, let's say it makes you sound rather rude.

Listen carefully: I do not apologize for the statement I made that you found to be decidedly rude; it was not my intent to be rude to you and I don't care to be rude to anyone. However, I do apologize to you for what I can see, now that you've brought to matter to my attention, as a bit condescending, though it was not my intention to be condescending (or, as I just said, rude). You said a few things in this last post that weren't kind, and were arguably rude, but you're going to have to grow a thicker skin, ok? I'm not deliberately trying to be rude to you, but if I should say something that makes you cry, you are going to have to man up.

Believe it or not, @Tuber, I am being civil toward you, but I'm civil toward everyone. If you thought you could join a thread here on JWN and dictate what and how I say here, or dictate what anyone else says on here, you should give serious consideration to logging out immediately and never coming back, for <whisper> some here use profanity and will clown you and won't care to nurse your feelings with a little tenderness </whisper>. There are no children on JWN.

@djeggnog

98

New here

by Tuber in

jw
friends

hey all.. .

thought i'd introduce myself.. .

first, a disclaimer: i'm an athiest.. .

djeggnog

@Tuber:

First, a disclaimer: I'm an [atheist].

Having said that, for anyone on here who holds a belief in the bible, I'm not here to attack you.

I'm here because I need help.

I work overseas, and my stepmother and two little half sisters are being steadily indoctrinated into the JWs.

I had been hearing bits and pieces from other family members, but today when I was on facebook, I saw not just some generic christian post from my stepmother, but this:

Religion has been mankinds biggest problem world wide throughout history. Jesus said to love God and one another even your enemies not kill, maim and persecute. [ [Matthew] 22:37&38]

I am currently reading Crisis of Conscience, and have been lurking around here for a while reading up on the WTS.

I don't want to be seen as directly attacking the religion or organisation and end up being a "tool of satan", but I would like to say something to plant a seed of doubt in her mind.

Unfortunately subtlety and tact aren't my strong points when it comes to religion.

If anyone has any suggestions for an appropriate reply, or on a larger scale, how to combat the indoctrination, I would really appreciate it.

(From what I hear, she is [committed] to 30 hours a month field service, so she is already in pretty deep).

You quoted Matthew 22:37, 38, for the proposition that "Jesus said to love God and one another even your enemies" and "not kill, maim and persecute" them, but Matthew 22:37, 38, doesn't say this, but at Luke 6:27, 28, Jesus did urge his followers to 'continue to love their enemies, to do good to those hating you, to bless those cursing then and to pray for those insulting them.' But Jesus began by saying, "But I say to you who are listening," meaning that he wasn't speaking to everyone, he wasn't speaking to atheists, but only to those that were listening to him.

It seems evident to me that your stepmother believes that Jesus was speaking to her so why would you want to get in the way of what she believes as a theist? Would you want someone else trying to interfere with your right to believe that there is no sovereign Lord of the universe, no Creator, no God? Many of the folks here on JWN will tell you that they believe in God, but what they believe in this regard doesn't threaten in any way your right to believe what it is you have chosen to believe, does it? If there is something about Jehovah's Witnesses you don't like, other than the fact that they believe in God and engage in field service activity as a part of their sacred service to God, why not share those things with me and I will answer your questions?

You indicate that you have been lurking here on JWN "reading up on the WTS," and that you have also been reading the book, Crisis of Conscience, but I wonder if you happened upon any of my posts. Many of the posts here on JWN are posted by folks that were formerly Jehovah's Witnesses, and of those that are still actively Jehovah's Witnesses, many of these are hypocrites that are faking it, pretending to be Jehovah's Witnesses when their heart is far removed from the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses. I am actively one of Jehovah's Witnesses, so maybe this message will provide a point of view that you have not yet read through the many messages that you have read here on JWN.

You mention that your stepmother has committed to volunteering some 30 hours/month in field service, which Jehovah's Witnesses view as engaging in sacred service to God as far as their formal worship is concerned, which is roughly 7-1/2 hours per week and much less than the 40 hours/week what Olympic gymnasts spend in perfecting their craft, so that your stepmother spends roughly 130 hours less time engaged in sacred service to God with the hope of pleasing God that I understand an atheist like yourself would consider to be fanatical than gymnasts spend putting their bodies through grueling training sessions with the hope of winning an Olympic medal, which hope the world doesn't seem to regard as being fanatical and maybe you don't either.

Personally, I believe in people being permitted to make their own choices, and what some might view as indoctrination someone else might view as intense vigorous training, especially if we are talking about adults and I assume that your stepmother is an adult and you do not begrudge her right to make our own choices in life no more than you would appreciate someone else trying to dictate the choices you make for your life. As an atheist, I would think reading anything that relates to religion would be rather difficult to comprehend, but you cannot learn about the religion to whom your stepmother belongs by reading the viewpoints of folks like Raymond Franz, the author of Crisis of Conscience or Don Cameron, the author of Captives of a Concept (Anatomy of an Illusion), since these men are opposers of Jehovah's Witnesses and cannot be trusted to provide an unbiased explanation to you of the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses as someone like myself who is actively one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I invite you to put your questions and concerns to me.

@Cameron_Don:

I would recommend "Captives of a Concept." It focuses on the organization's most important teaching - "the Society is God's organization" - which is based on their interpretation of the most important Scripture in their theology - Matthew 24:45-57

I don't agree with you that Matthew 24:45-47 -- I realize you typoed in what you wrote to @Tuber, since (a) Matthew chapter 24 contains only 51 verses in it and (b) in your own book, Captives of a Concept (Anatomy of an Illusion), which you claim to have been "derived" from Ray Franz' book, Crisis of Conscience, when imo it is a restatement of Franz' book, you include in your list on page 7 "Matthew 24:45-47" as being an "important term," and, for some unknown reason -- cluelessness, I think -- you go on to describe this Bible passage as being "the most important Scripture in Watchtower theology because its claim that it is 'the only true religion' is based upon the way they interpret this passage." Who exactly is the "it" to which you refer that claims to be "the only true religion"? You cannot possibly be saying that the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society claims to be "the only true religion"? I don't believe so.

In your book, you describe yourself as having been one of Jehovah's Witnesses, someone that formerly served as an elder, so I have to believe that you cannot really be saying that you believe the publishing corporation that is staffed by Jehovah's Witnesses claims to be a religion, a religious body of any sort, which is pretty much what you are saying, even if it wasn't your intention to do so, with this reference to "Watchtower theology." So who is the "it"? I'm just guessing here, but I believe by "it" you were referring to Jehovah's Witnesses as a religious body that claims the form of worship that it advocates as a Christian group to be "the only true religion," for no one that has ever been one of Jehovah's Witnesses would claim that they were members of the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, unless they were staffed and housed there, right?

Personally, were I attempting to complete a form regarding my religious affiliation, such as at a hospital, I would check the box next to the designation, "Jehovah's Witnesses." I wouldn't expect there would be a box next to "Watchtower," or "Watchtower Bible & Tract Society," as if it were contemplated by the form maker that either of these would designate someone's religious affiliation. You having formerly been one of Jehovah's Witnesses might be acquainted with the phrase "Watchtower people," but I'm sure you also know that "Watchtower people" was a euphemism for "Jehovah's Witnesses."

I don't know if you would self-identify by checking the box next to "Christian," if such a box existed on such a form, or if would check the box next to "Jehovah's Witnesses" and write in "ex," or if you would just check the box next to "Atheist," but once one has made the decision to leave the light to become swallowed up by the darkness of a world that God has commanded to repent by obediently following the lead of the man that he appointed as Lord and Christ, it wouldn't make much difference what box one has checked, right?

It might be argued that the most important Scripture, not "in Watchtower theology," but according to my reading of the Bible is found at Romans 10:6-10, which scriptural passage speaks of the "'word' of faith" that Jehovah's Witnesses preach every day, which you should have been preaching, but clearly you weren't motivated from the heart to exercise faith for righteousness, so your public declaration, which may have been heard by some, was void as far as your salvation was concerned. I'm sure right now, were you to read Romans 10:6, 7, that you would have no clue as to what the apostle was there referring. Most active Jehovah's Witnesses couldn't explain using their own words the point that Paul makes at Romans 10:6, 7, which are preliminary to what he says in the entire passage at Romans 10:6-10, but at least they are still actively associated with Jehovah's Witnesses and so will eventually come to understand this passage fully.

Be that as it may, they do acknowledge Jesus, not as some dead guy that said some nice things, but as their personal Lord, and they are the ones that make public declaration of their faith in Jesus as their living Lord, who God raised up from the dead as a guarantee that the day appointed for this man -- this living Lord -- to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness has indeed been set by God. In fact, Jehovah's Witnesses are the only ones today that are out there explaining to people that the "appointed times and the set limits" to which the Bible speaks that were established by Jehovah for the dwelling of men were made by decree in order that mankind might not only seek God, but find him, that is to say, that they might find what God's will is for them, that they might repent of their present life course as humans alienated from God and turn around, by making their minds over through Christ so that they might become reconciled to God. (Acts 17:24-31)

Your comments to @Tuber here in plugging your book is shameless as if your words in that book to the effect that your former religion is based on Matthew 24:45-47 have any more weight than your words here on JWN to this effect are ridiculous. In chapter 2 of Captives of a Concept, which is four pages in length, you provide as an important note to the reader "[f]or the purpose of this study," on page 18, that "it is only necessary to understand their interpretation of this passage of Scripture—not to agree or disagree with it." You then go on to write that "[w]hether it is Biblically correct doesn’t matter. The only concern here is if it is historically correct," as you then go on to give us your review of God’s Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached, a 416-page book encapsulated in four pages of your book to help folks to understand our interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47. Right.

What you wrote seemed to me to be a dissent to what you read in chapter 17 of the God’s Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached book, entitled "The 'Slave' Who Lived to See the 'Sign,'" as to an event that Jehovah's Witnesses spiritually discern occurred in the spring of 1919, but contrary to what you ascribe to Frederick Franz, the then president of the Society and the uncle of Raymond Franz' (how sweet!), this chapter wasn't just the belief of the Society's president, but represented the belief of Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide, and none of Jehovah's Witnesses believe what you describe in your book as having occurred in 1919 to be "The Most Important Event in Watchtower History," and we still don't!

You view the truth as being a Russell vs. Rutherford vs. Knorr vs. Franz kind of thing, a trivial dispute, but the truth is a Jesus kind of thing. Evidently you want the readers of your book, like @Tuber here, to believe what Jehovah's Witnesses believe and teach to be a matter of we embracing the beliefs of these dead men, but Jehovah's Witnesses embrace the teachings of Jesus Christ, our living Lord, no matter what you believe and teach.

You sound to me like Ray Franz so I consider you to be one of his disciples (and there are many of Franz' disciples here on JWN), a disgruntled bitter man that cannot accept the fact that God had set an appointed time when those that have not become reconciled to him will perish from the face of the earth. If you cannot repent, if you are unable to change your current course in opposition to God's will, then you already know what the future holds for you, and that's too bad for you. You cannot undo the work of God; your book may the excuse for which some were looking to leave our ranks.

Your book targets weak-minded individuals and those that are spiritually immature, and you may, in fact, be successful in drawing these disciples of Jesus to yourself. Good for you, but you have to also know they will die along with you. The truth, @Cameron_Don, is that those obedient to God's will are those that will survive Armageddon and become the nucleus of the new earth; those disobedient to God have already been condemned and will not be saved. It's that simple.

@djeggnog

43

The imperfections of the elder

by outsmartthesystem in

outsmart - you keep mentioning the imperfections of the elders....and how people need to overlook them because we are all imperfect and we need to learn what true humility is.....etc etc.

dj - if this is what you believe to be true, then you are mistaken, because even though jehovah's witnesses are directed by holy spirit, we have at times 'gotten it wrong.

dj - i can agree that jehovah's witnesses are god's mouthpiece today, that we do speak for god.

djeggnog

@outsmartthesystem:

You appear to be having some posting issues as well.

At least I'm not the only one

Actually, no. What I do know is that, relative to myself, you are the newbie here, but there is really no need for you to have to speculate about this. Just make sure when making an inquiry that it is in the form of a question.

I believe I indicated in my repost that there were a few remarks that weren't included in Post 457; Post 461 is a reposting of Post 457, which contains these added remarks. I'm sure I don't know why your Post 41 was so chock full of repetitive text, but I do know that despite the mea culpa in your Post 42 as to "a whole lot of stuff at the end" of your Post 41, I think many people were annoyed when they tried to read your Post 41. I plowed through it anyway and hope that the lurkers here will appreciate my responses to your Post 41, even if it should turn out that you don't or won't appreciate them.

The three posts (458, 459 and 460) that contained the words, "(Duplicate message)," were intentional so that my repost would appear at the top of Page 3 of this thread instead of at the bottom of Page 2 of this thread, since I'm pretty sure no one would enjoy scrolling down past your lengthy Post 41 just to read my response to it. (Well, @cskyjw.sun, who introduces the concept of "mental depression," and @cantleave, who picked up on your comment about Muslims and Mormons, didn't seem to mind scrolling down past both your lengthy message and mine, but it's clear to me that neither of them bothered to read and/or couldn't comprehend what things I had written in response to your message in mine.)

Since you're the newbie here, you could have just asked, rather than assumed, whether I had experienced "posting issues," but just so you know, I had none of such at all; to my knowledge you're the only one that did. If such issues persist on your end, then you might want to send a PM to @Simon or @Lady Lee. If you should decide not to post a definitive response to my Post 461, that's fine. Like I said in my previous message, I think we're done anyway.

@djeggnog

43

The imperfections of the elder

by outsmartthesystem in

outsmart - you keep mentioning the imperfections of the elders....and how people need to overlook them because we are all imperfect and we need to learn what true humility is.....etc etc.

dj - if this is what you believe to be true, then you are mistaken, because even though jehovah's witnesses are directed by holy spirit, we have at times 'gotten it wrong.

dj - i can agree that jehovah's witnesses are god's mouthpiece today, that we do speak for god.

djeggnog

(Duplicate message)

43

The imperfections of the elder

by outsmartthesystem in

outsmart - you keep mentioning the imperfections of the elders....and how people need to overlook them because we are all imperfect and we need to learn what true humility is.....etc etc.

dj - if this is what you believe to be true, then you are mistaken, because even though jehovah's witnesses are directed by holy spirit, we have at times 'gotten it wrong.

dj - i can agree that jehovah's witnesses are god's mouthpiece today, that we do speak for god.

djeggnog

This is a repost of my previous post, to which I manually added a few remarks that were not a part of my original dictation (where indicated in red).

@outsmartthesystem:

[T]he FDS feels that they have the authority to "extend" the bible. They say that it is bible based but is it? Where does the bible say that buying a raffle ticket to help raise money for cancer is a form of greed? It doesn’t. The FDS made "extensions" to include that. Where does the bible say that a man should not have any "privileges" if he grows a beard? Where does the bible give the authority to disfellowship someone who refuses to curtail their association with a disfellowshipped person? The list of "extensions" is practically endless.

@djeggnog:

Neither did I say that you knew the members of the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses personally. I'm not cognizant of there being a problem with the governing body, but this doesn't mean that you have one or more gripes against these men yourself....

You come off as if you know the members of the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses personally, so that [if] there are things in particular that, say, Theodore Jaracz, Stephen Lett or Gerrit Losch have said to you, [things] over which you have gripes, then why not take a pen and paper to one of them to let them know your feelings[?]

@outsmartthesystem:

Exactly how did I come off as though I knew the governing body members personally? Did I mention [anyone] by name? Did I relate any personal experience? No. My "griping" was in regard to the governing body as a whole and I tried to make that clear. You said in your opening line "neither did I say that you knew the members" thus indicating that you finally understand that I do not know them. Yet immediately after that admission….you continue to ramble on with a pointless employer/employee example.

You made yourself quite clear, which was the reason I provided that example, especially considering the fact that you are a hypocrite that is only pretending to be in the truth because you are in fear that were your family members in the truth to learn that you wear two faces -- one face at the Kingdom Hall and the other face here on JWN -- then they would be forced to end their familial relationship with you. My point to you is that if you don't know these men personally, then it's a cowardly move on your part to be spreading your opinions of them, as gossip, to me, to the rest of those here on JWN.

For example, if you have something against me, a complaint of some sort, and you are telling everyone else about this complaint you have against me, except approaching me directly as to the gripe you have against me as Jesus instructed us to do to gain our brother when we perceive that he has committed a sin (Matthew 18:15), then it is clear that you don't want to resolve the issue with me at all. You would rather spread gossip, slander me, disparage me, which exposes a character flaw in you, a sin on your part, a desire to magnify my perceived faults in the eyes of others in order to persuade them over to your point of view that they might also find fault in me as did Satan when pointing out one of Jehovah's perceived faults to Eve, rather than growing a spine and doing what makes for peace between us by approaching me directly.

Your telling me and others here in this thread about your gripes against all members of the governing body, and gossiping, slandering, disparaging them without specifically naming anyone, is either an attempt on your part to solicit support from active, inactive or former servants of Jehovah for your cause to make your brothers and sisters disgruntled for the same reasons that you are disgruntled and to turn them away from serving Jehovah, and/or an act of cowardice on your part. Frankly, upon reading your gripes in this thread, I am convinced that you are a coward.

@outsmartthesystem:

Again…..being still baptized and having family still involved in this cult, do you really think that picking up a pen and paper and writing all of my beliefs and issues out and sending it in to NY will possibly have a good ending? I will get a "loving" letter back in the mail that proves none of my accusations wrong….rather..it will only reiterate the governing body’s stance on the issues. The local elders will be CC’d and they will want to talk with me. If they talk with me and I agree with what they say then YAY! An imaginary sheep has been saved. If I continue to disagree, I may be subject to disfellowshipping. Great plan, DJ!

It is evident that you have a gripe with someone, that "someone" being the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses, so why haven't you confronted any member of the governing body with your gripes? I don't care what your gripes might be since I believe all of them to be imperfect human beings that are doing whatever they can that is humanly possible for them to do as a central body of elders to ensure that Jehovah's Witnesses are spiritually equipped to spread the message regarding the good news of the kingdom to as many people as possible before the end comes.

Maybe you have one or more ideas that would be an improvement on the way things are being done now, but your griping over one or more decisions on which they have signed off because you don't agree with those decisions or because you do not know the basis upon which these decisions with which you don't agree were made would make sense if these gripes were actually directed to one or more members of the governing body.

Like, if you knew how Theodore Jaracz, a member of the governing body voted on, let's say, how disfellowshipping should be handled in the local congregations, and you didn't agree with his vote one way or the other -- perhaps because your reading of the Bible suggested an approach be taken much different than Jaracz' approach to administering discipline in the congregation – then it might not make a lot of sense for you to be getting into the face of another member of the governing body, like, say, Stephen Lett, when he may not have even voted the way that Jaracz voted on the matter, right? But if you don't know how Jaracz or Lett or Gerrit Losch or Samuel Herd or whomever voted on whatever matter that has gotten your panties in a twist, then how can you know if your gripe is being appropriately directed to the governing body member(s) with whose vote you disagreed?

In the above, you speak of your "being still baptized" -- as if it were even possible for someone that has been baptized to be un-baptized -- "and having family still involved in this cult," which I take to be an admission on your part that you have no desire to leave the "Jehovah's Witness cult," which is, of course, your decision to make, but it does seem strange that you would be here telling me about some of the things that make you hate the very cult from which you refuse to separate yourself because you have family still in it.

Be that as it may, my viewpoint is Jehovah's viewpoint in that he drew you to him and handed you over to his son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who has never lost anyone that Jehovah has given him, and I am your brother despite your apostate views that are pretty much the same apostate views that were espoused by Ray Franz as may have been cauterized by Don Cameron's Captives to a Concept, which book, along with Franz' Crisis of Conscience and In Search of Christian Freedom books -- were written exclusively with active and inactive Jehovah's Witnesses in mind, many of them weak-minded, but mostly those with weaknesses in their faith, which make them easy targets to be indoctrinated with what some here have referred to as "the truth about the truth." In fact, you and I are able to communicate on a level that most professed Christians cannot begin to do because Jehovah has taught us so many things.

You may have gripes, but I don't need to hear any of them; you are disgruntled, but I'm totally fine knowing as I do -- and as you know, too -- that we are all of us imperfect, and that we all of us have shortcomings. Following baptism, we both came to belong to a teaching organization, where some of the things that we might teach others can affect us – bite us in the butt, so to speak -- if we should ever begin to think ourselves to be superior, not just to our brothers and sisters in the faith, but to the man or woman that has no intention of obeying the word of Jehovah and getting baptized. Either write a letter and send it, and prepare yourself to deal with the consequences that could follow once the local congregation is made aware of the concerns you expressed in it to our governing body elders, but the hypocrisy you were telling me about in your still attending meetings when you are really an apostate ought to end. Why be two-faced and deceive your own family into believing something about you that isn't even true when you can be just be honest with your family and with yourself, and take a break?

Make no mistake about it: You have been indoctrinated and there is nothing that you can do short of submitting to a lobotomy to unlearn the accurate knowledge that you have obtained as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. You want to unlearn the knowledge of God by indoctrinating yourself with apostate teachings of Franz, but even these apostate teachings require that one have obtained a knowledge of God in order for them to have any success. I'm sure you didn't know this, so I'm now telling you so that you cannot say that you didn't know. You know me as being one of Jehovah's Witnesses, which I am, so I won't tell you that I am also a representative of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, for this might be too much information for you to digest, but I would advise you to get out of your head, move to a new town where you can attend meetings at a new congregation, and tell your family that you will be away for awhile, but you will keep in touch and let them know how you are doing. Here a few things that might give you the closure you need so that you can be what you really want to be, but without the hypocrisy that I know you must abhor:

With your being in a new town and attending a new congregation, you will be free to come and go as you please, no one in the new congregation will ever come to see you until you should tell the elders in your new congregation that you are going to be making their congregation your congregation, in which case they will be sending a letter to your old congregation. You do not have to comment at any of the meetings you decide to attend nor should you engage in the field ministry, especially since there are things you know it would not be honest for you to teach anyone since you have doubts as to the veracity of certain things that Jehovah's Witnesses believe, such as Franz' and Cameron's doubts as to "who really is the faithful and discreet slave" is also one of your doubts.

This "break" from whatever was your previous routine at your old congregation may give you the time you need to decide whether or not you are going to do God's will despite the fact that there are imperfect men that you do not really think to be spiritual men are serving as a central body of elders. In this way, you won't have to suffer the scrutiny of your new local congregation that you suffered at your old local congregation, nor will you be compelled by anyone to preach the word like some hypocrite when you yourself don't believe most or any of it.

Your family ties won't be severed or be in any jeopardy unless, of course, you should give your family reason by what you say to them, either on the telephone or face-to-face, to believe you are not living as someone that is "in the truth," and hopefully you will come to realize before the great tribulation that you are much better off in the truth, even though you might have to be benched after you have introduced everyone to your two-, five- or nine-year-old daughter born out of wedlock to a pretty women you met three, six or ten years ago at a party, who hates your guts because you won't vote or you don't support the concept of gay marriage or you're not as comfortable as she is as a Baptist or a Lutheran or a Seventh-Day Adventist with tithing or with singing the national anthem or with the lyrics to the popular church hymns.

If your "significant other," as one's unmarried lover might be called today here in the US, should be a political activist that feels she was deceived into falling in love with someone that is still one of Jehovah's Witnesses and for this reason refuses to marry you, even though you have told her hundreds of times over the years that you aren't one of Jehovah's Witnesses any longer, and that, besides she and your daughter, you have confirmed your love for only Jesus as your God, and not Jehovah, which she also refuses to believe, then you might get "benched" for a year or two if you should decide to begin actively associating with Jehovah's Witnesses again, should a reproof or disfellowshipping action follow, but at least you will have come back on your own terms, that is, because you want to be back and this time because you don't want to put your family ties with your significant other and your daughter in jeopardy being the hypocrite that your significant other won't allow you to be as a condition to her actually marrying you (finally!).

You see, no one trusts a hypocrite and no one will knowingly marry one. BTW, if family members in the truth should want to enjoy non-spiritual fellowship with you, your significant other and your daughter should a decision be made to disfellowship you for a time, they are certainly free to do so just as they are free to say "Hello!" to a disfellowshipped person they run into at the market or at the doctor's office where their boss is your doctor, for it is only spiritual fellowship that is discouraged when someone has been disfellowshipped.

You might believe that I can speak to anyone I wish whether the individual is in a disfellowshipped state or not, because you may believe that only elders are privileged to do so, but contrary to popular opinion, Jehovah's Witnesses do not shun anyone that is in a disfellowshipped state unless he or she should be one that spreads apostate views in view case we won't even say a greeting to such individuals. It is unloving to shun someone that has made a mistake, but it would be wrong to treat the disfellowshipped individual as if he or she were not disfellowshipped so as to carry on conversations of a spiritual nature with them at spiritual gatherings or in our homes when such individuals are present considering that such persons have been removed from all spiritual association with us.

@djeggnog:

As the Lord Jesus Christ is the head of the Christian congregation, you are mistaken to believe that you can check the hand of our king to tell him what things you don't like about his leadership over the remnant of his own congregation, especially considering the fact that all mature Christians recognize the fact that he appointed the faithful and discreet slave over all of his spiritual belongings in 1919 or whenever it was that he and his father, Jehovah, came to his temple to judge the work that his followers here on earth were doing at that time. Our growth demonstrates God's blessing is with the work that the slave has done since 1919, considering the Bible example of how Achan caused God's blessings to be hindered upon his people in Jericho, when he decided to steal from Jehovah. (Joshua 6:19; 7:1-26)

Of course, if you're not spiritually mature, then you won't be able to make the connection here in the [account] in the book of Joshua with the blessings that Jehovah's Witnesses have had in connection with their spiritually activities since 1919, so I'm hoping that you are able to take my point that it doesn't much matter whether or not you personally approve of the work that Jehovah's Witnesses have been doing and are currently doing, or the work that the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses have done and are currently doing. We are seeking Jehovah's blessing on our efforts, even if whatever we are doing doesn't meet with your approval. We are working out our own salvation.

@outsmartthesystem:

Yes I am referring to that direction. As mentioned before but you seem to have difficulty remembering, I am still in theory a baptized witness. And as mentioned before, my family is still involved in the cult, so yes, I have a vested interest in their mind control and spirit-lacking teachings.

So…..the GB doesn’t govern with man made laws? OK. Just wanted to make sure.

I am not checking the hand of Christ. I am challenging the authenticity of the GB’s claims that Jesus chose them (technically their predecessors). Please provide some proof that Jesus appointed Rutherford and his minions in 1919. If you can do so, then I may actually believe that Christ is actually your head and that he directs your organization. Your growth demonstrates God’s blessing is being bestowed? Really? How about the Mormons? They’ve really grown in the last 100 years. God must really be blessing them. How about Scientology? Islam? All are growing....

I thought it was clear to what I was referring, considering the fact that I had not mentioned Scientology, LDS or Islam; I thought it was clear that I was referring to the growth of Jehovah's Witnesses, since it was foretold that 'the little one would become a thousand and the small one would become a mighty nation in its own time.' (Isaiah 60:22) I have faith that God has used men like Pastor Russell and Judge Rutherford, despite their many faults, to take the lead in accomplishing the work that needs to be done "in its own time," which had led to the growth of God's organization, but there is no need for you to believe this to be true. No other religion on earth is preaching the good news of God's kingdom as Jehovah's Witnesses have been doing for more than 100 years, which is why I have concluded that indeed God has blessed the efforts of "the small one" and continues to bless his "little one" today.

You asked me to provide to you "some proof that Jesus appointed Rutherford and his minions in 1919" as if such would prove to you that Jesus is the head of his congregation, as if such would be regarded by you as proof that Jesus "directs [my] organization." At an annual meeting of the Board of Directors of the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society that took place on January 6, 1917, Rutherford was nominated and elected to serve as president, which had been president-less since Russell's death on October 31, 1916. We believe that just as Jehovah's spirit had been on Russell until his death to champion the Bible truths that the prophet Daniel had foretold would "become abundant" during the time of the end, that this same spirit was operative upon Rutherford, Russell's successor, as well. (Daniel 12:4)

You were taught by Jehovah, and you were formerly one of Jehovah's Witnesses that is still "in" (but not really!) and are now a counterfeit Christian, but, even so, you are one of the few people that can understand what I said in the previous paragraph and what I'm about to say in the next paragraph, and it would be derelict on my part were I not to say the following:

Those of us that have studied the Bible and are spiritually mature believe these two imperfect men -- Russell and Rutherford -- to have been anointed by and sealed with God's spirit as a token in advance of their heavenly inheritance as adopted sons of God, sanctified by Jesus' shed blood that have been taken into the kingdom covenant made by Jesus with them and with the rest of his spiritual brothers that served as "ambassadors substituting for Christ" to become corulers with Christ in the kingdom, and that these men were charged with gathering together "the things on the earth," Jesus' "other sheep." (Ephesians 1:9, 10, 13, 14; 2 Corinthians 5:20; John 10:16)

Having said this, why did you never learn, why did you never come to understand, what Paul meant about all mankind being sinners that fall short of God's glory? (Romans 3:23) If Rutherford should have said something with which you do not agree, if the governing body has said something with which you do not agree, why is it so hard for you to forgive these men, your brothers, their shortcomings "from the heart," or don't you want God to forgive you your shortcomings? (Matthew 18:35; Mark 11:35)

Rutherford may have misspoken several times and so have we, many times; the man we knew or read about is dead. Jesus taught us to give others their shortcomings. Paul wrote that we should be willing to 'put up with one another and forgive one another freely if anyone has a cause for complaint against Rutherford.' (Colossians 3:13) Ok, Paul didn't mean that we should forgive just Rutherford, but I'm sure you get my drift.

You've allowed yourself to become indoctrinated with the trifles brought to your attention by "men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth," because of paying more attention to the opinions of Ray Franz and Don Cameron than to God's word of truth, and this penchant you have for being judgmental and expecting others to live up to standard by which it is an impossibility for imperfect humans to live really needs to be put in check. In comparing our shortcomings to "straw" and "rafters," Jesus indicated that it would be in 'the measure by which we measure out our brother's shortcomings that our own faults will be measured out.' (1 Timothy 1:4; 6:5; Matthew 7:1-5)

Don't stop at Rutherford; forgive the members of our governing body, too, and show them some respect for they are glorious ones that aren't perfect. Stop speaking abusively of these men. (Jude 8)

You don't believe any of these things to be true, which in my mind makes you spiritually immature, for after you had been washed clean with Jesus' blood -- precious blood -- you have come to view your baptism with disdain, have joined the ranks of those that have returned to their own vomit and are now engaged in the work of enslaving those that had escaped this world's defilements by enticing them to roll in the mire with you. (2 Peter 2:18-22)

Now some believe that Jehovah's Witnesses ought to believe exactly the same things that Rutherford believed when he was alive here on earth as if we should ignore evidence to the contrary if any such evidence should come to our attention. It is often the case that after something has been published that the widest scrutiny is given to such published statements, and that these publications are what give rise to the many letters that the Society receives daily from readers making inquiry as to their veracity, or which expose errors that have required corrections be made.

For example, Judge Rutherford, who passed away on January 8, 1942, completed his earthly course believing that Pluto was the ninth planet in our solar system, but fast forwarding some 64 years after Rutherford's death, Jehovah's Witnesses today have made adjustments as have non-Jehovah's Witnesses in that we no longer accord planetary status to Pluto, viewing it as a dwarf planet. Similar, Rutherford passed away with an understanding of what Jesus meant by "this generation" at Matthew 24:34 that was different than what Jehovah's Witnesses today speculate as to what Jesus meant by this phrase, and so, since Jesus himself didn't know the "day and hour," we cannot be 100% certain as to what Jesus meant.

In Rutherford's day, Jehovah's Witnesses believed Jesus was referring to the lifetime of people when he referred to "this generation." Today, we now know that this was a mistaken viewpoint. The masthead in the Awake! dated November 8, 1995, proved to have unintentionally misled some into believing that, contrary to what the Bible teaches, we actually did know the "day and hour" for it read, "Most important, this magazine builds confidence in the Creator's promise of a peaceful and secure new world before the generation that saw the events of 1914 passes away," and based on how we understood Jesus' words at Matthew 24:34, many regretfully concluded that Armageddon would have to arrive before the oldest of Jesus' anointed servants had passed away.

Today, that masthead reads, "Most important, this magazine builds confidence in the Creator's promise of a peaceful and secure world that is about to replace the present wicked, lawless system of things." The masthead in the Awake! wasn't designed to deceive anyone, but was designed to build confidence that the end is near, and not to make folks grab their date calculators as if, contrary to what Jesus stated at Matthew 24:36, it were possible for one to determine the "day and hour" that Jesus himself didn't know.

Since we realize that Jesus had employed a bit of hyperbole in this verse, we now believe that Jesus' reference to "this generation" referred to the sign of his invisible presence during which his anointed brothers living contemporaneous to this generation of the sign. We cannot be dogmatic, but we believe that those of Jesus' brothers that were living when the generation of the sign began in the year 1914 as well as those of his brothers that are alive when the generation of the sign ends when Armageddon arrives is what Jesus meant when he said that "this generation" would not pass away before all of the things that Jesus indicated would occur in his prophesy about the conclusion of this system of things had taken place.

@outsmartthesystem:

Now then…you say that the GB (or Jehovah’s Witnesses) does not make law. Let’s go back to the whole beard thing.... Remember….the topic here is the GB and THEIR failed prophecies. Try to stay on track, please. I’ll give you an example. Here is a quote from your spiritual granddaddy Mr. Rutherford, "....

Of course you will not refer to this as a failed prophecy....

The accusation of adding to the bible should not be taken literally. If anyone would understand not taking things too literally (your belief of the rich man and Lazarus) I would think it would be some like yourself. You know….a "mature Christian". That is why I mentioned that Apr 15, 2008 article.... The bible does not prohibit birthday celebrations….but the FDS does....

Now that I think about it….there is one area of the bible that comes to mind that the Witnesses added. Take a look at Colossians 1:16 and 17. It is very clear why the NWT has the words [other] inserted. But please tell me where….in the original Greek writing is the word "other" found? Yes….the word "other" is found in brackets thus indicating that the original text did not include it…..but…if the original text didn’t include it then why did they feel the need to put it in there aside from making it match their theology?

I had asked you to provide proof of something that had been added to the Bible, and you replied by telling me again about some failed prophecy articulated by my "spiritual granddaddy," and rules promulgated by the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses regarding men not wearing beards and about the procurement of raffle tickets being unacceptable and the celebration of birthdays and the fact that in the Bible, at Colossians 1:16, 17, the word "other" was added to the text within brackets, and you went on to quoted something you read in a Watchtower article, but, first, I don't regard any of these things as proof, and second, let I told you before, I don't care to discuss with you what any Watchtower article says to you.

If I didn't write the article and no one on the governing body wrote the article – likely it was someone on the Writing Committee that did – then you would have done well to have written a letter to the Society and requested an explanation for that with which you disagree. I didn't personally assist in producing the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, but if you were able to read koine Greek, then you would know that adding "other" to Colossians 1:16, 17, in the NWT is no different than the word "he" that was added by the NWT translators and by the King James Version translators at John 8:24.

It is obvious to me that you are clueless on this subject, but here you are pretending that you can school me on what constitutes tampering, such as Comma Johanneum found in the KJV, which is a real example of tampering with the Bible text. (1 John 5:7). This is what I do know: Elders should be accorded "double honor" by those who aren't appointed as such, and even if you should disagree with the opinion of the local elders or of the central body of elders that make up our governing body, on what basis do you reject their authority, by Christ, to carry out their duties in God's household? (1 Timothy 5:17)

I fear that you never learned how "you ought to conduct yourself in God's household," which stands in "support of the truth." (1 Timothy 3:15) Consequently, you actually think that this kind of input – these gripes of yours – will help the local elders and the central body of elders (the governing body) to carry out their responsibilities toward God, toward Christ, and toward the flock? If the local body of elders, for example, should issue a "decree" to the effect that, when leaving the Kingdom Hall, the friends not turn left, but instead turn right in order to facilitate an orderly flow of cars leaving the parking lot and avoid the attendant delays caused by those turning left, in view of the fact that God's word exhorts Christians to "be submissive" to the elders, such a decree wouldn't be an "extension" of the Bible by any stretch of your imagination, but God's arrangement. (Hebrews 13:17) If you were to decide not to be submissive and should make the cars behind you in the parking lot wait until you are able to make that left turn, so that you ignore the decree, this would be a case of your failing to adhere to God's arrangement, even if you don't think so.

Just as we read that there were "decrees that had been decided upon by the apostles and older men" (Acts 16:4) in God's congregation back in the first century, before you were even born, there were "decrees that had been decided upon" by Russell and Rutherford, and depending upon your age, maybe even Nathan Knorr, but I fear that you never learned how to stay in your place. When you decided to join our ranks, what gave you the impression that we were in a quandary over matters having to do with grooming or with gambling or with established doctrines that were already being taught when you first joined our ranks as a publisher of the good news?

It's really hard talking anything that you say here seriously here because of your contempt for duly-constituted authority; you are disrespectful, not just in what you say to me, but in what you say about our governing body. (3 John 9) But there you are, sitting with those who are really Jehovah's Witnesses, at meetings, a hypocrite hiding in plain sight and below the proverbial radar of the local body of elders, deceiving everyone into believing you to be someone that you really aren't, including your own blood relatives.

@djeggnog:

You have here quoted from something you read in a Watchtower article, but I don't care to discuss what this Watchtower article says with you. It is evident from what you say here that you are of the belief that the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses, who merely represent the faithful and discreet slave, are, in fact, the faithful and discreet slave, and that [you] are also of the belief that our governing body believes it has authority to "'extend' the Bible."

@outsmartthesystem:

Why do you refuse to discuss the article with me?

I would be delighted to defend any article that I write that should appear in the Watchtower, but you haven't identified any such article, nor would you be in a position to know who writes what articles, but suffice it to say that someone that sits on the Writing Committee writes the articles that appear in the Watchtower.

@djeggnog:

If anyone desires to buy a raffle ticket, he is free to do so; if anyone desires to wear a beard, he is free to wear one. If anyone feels he must continue his association with a disfellowshipped person, that's ok; he is free to do this as well, but in his engaging in any such conduct when admonished not to do so, he is not submitting to God's arrangement, and this is the point. It doesn't matter that the proceeds from the raffle ticket sales will benefit cancer research when there will be no sickness or death under God's kingdom. At Luke 9:60, Jesus also admonished his followers to "let the dead bury their dead, but you go away and declare abroad the kingdom of God" since God's kingdom will eliminate cancer and all diseases that are the cause of death, pain and sorrow. (Revelation 21:3, 4)

@outsmartthesystem:

Who says it is God’s arrangement that people not buy raffle tickets and that brothers not have beards? Those are not decrees in the bible or even principles that could be stretched into a decree.

No, no. These are decrees that had been decided upon" by the central body of elders that Jehovah's Witnesses recognize as their governing body (Acts 16:4), and these decrees are based on Bible principles, principles with which you either do not know or do not agree. It is God's arrangement that the elders in the Christian congregation would be the ones taking the lead and speaking the word of God to the congregation, and all of those in God's household ought to "be submissive" to them, even if we may not want to be submissive. (Hebrews 13:7, 17) You should already know these things, so if you don't know them, then you're ignorant and you need to get to know these things. (1 Corinthians 14:28) You may wish to dispute for some other arrangement, but the congregations of God have no other arrangement. (1 Corinthians 11:16)

@outsmartthesystem:

That last post of mine printed a whole lot of stuff at the end which is nothing more than a repeat of previously posted stuff. I'm not sure how to delete it now that it is posted. Sorry

No worries. Recall that I dd tell you in a previous message that I wouldn't be responding to repetitive questions, and many of the questions in your last message made your message ridiculously lengthy due to such repetition. I also told you that I will not discuss something you read and thought you understood in our publications. I think we're done.

@djeggnog

43

The imperfections of the elder

by outsmartthesystem in

outsmart - you keep mentioning the imperfections of the elders....and how people need to overlook them because we are all imperfect and we need to learn what true humility is.....etc etc.

dj - if this is what you believe to be true, then you are mistaken, because even though jehovah's witnesses are directed by holy spirit, we have at times 'gotten it wrong.

dj - i can agree that jehovah's witnesses are god's mouthpiece today, that we do speak for god.

djeggnog

(Duplicate message)

43

The imperfections of the elder

by outsmartthesystem in

outsmart - you keep mentioning the imperfections of the elders....and how people need to overlook them because we are all imperfect and we need to learn what true humility is.....etc etc.

dj - if this is what you believe to be true, then you are mistaken, because even though jehovah's witnesses are directed by holy spirit, we have at times 'gotten it wrong.

dj - i can agree that jehovah's witnesses are god's mouthpiece today, that we do speak for god.

djeggnog

(Duplicate message)

43

The imperfections of the elder

by outsmartthesystem in

outsmart - you keep mentioning the imperfections of the elders....and how people need to overlook them because we are all imperfect and we need to learn what true humility is.....etc etc.

dj - if this is what you believe to be true, then you are mistaken, because even though jehovah's witnesses are directed by holy spirit, we have at times 'gotten it wrong.

dj - i can agree that jehovah's witnesses are god's mouthpiece today, that we do speak for god.

djeggnog

@outsmartthesystem:

[T]he FDS feels that they have the authority to "extend" the bible. They say that it is bible based but is it? Where does the bible say that buying a raffle ticket to help raise money for cancer is a form of greed? It doesn’t. The FDS made "extensions" to include that. Where does the bible say that a man should not have any "privileges" if he grows a beard? Where does the bible give the authority to disfellowship someone who refuses to curtail their association with a disfellowshipped person? The list of "extensions" is practically endless.

@djeggnog:

Neither did I say that you knew the members of the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses personally. I'm not cognizant of there being a problem with the governing body, but this doesn't mean that you have one or more gripes against these men yourself....

You come off as if you know the members of the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses personally, so that [if] there are things in particular that, say, Theodore Jaracz, Stephen Lett or Gerrit Losch have said to you, [things] over which you have gripes, then why not take a pen and paper to one of them to let them know your feelings[?]

@outsmartthesystem:

Exactly how did I come off as though I knew the governing body members personally? Did I mention [anyone] by name? Did I relate any personal experience? No. My "griping" was in regard to the governing body as a whole and I tried to make that clear. You said in your opening line "neither did I say that you knew the members" thus indicating that you finally understand that I do not know them. Yet immediately after that admission….you continue to ramble on with a pointless employer/employee example.

You made yourself quite clear, which was the reason I provided that example, especially considering the fact that you are a hypocrite that is only pretending to be in the truth because you are in fear that were your family members in the truth to learn that you wear two faces -- one face at the Kingdom Hall and the other face here on JWN -- then they would be forced to end their familial relationship with you. My point to you is that if you don't know these men personally, then it's a cowardly move on your part to be spreading your opinions of them, as gossip, to me, to the rest of those here on JWN.

For example, if you have something against me, a complaint of some sort, and you are telling everyone else about this complaint you have against me, except approaching me directly as to the gripe you have against me as Jesus instructed us to do to gain our brother when we perceive that he has committed a sin (Matthew 18:15), then it is clear that you don't want to resolve the issue with me at all. You would rather spread gossip, slander me, disparage me, which exposes a character flaw in you, a sin on your part, a desire to magnify my perceived faults in the eyes of others in order to persuade them over to your point of view that they might also find fault in me as did Satan when pointing out one of Jehovah's perceived faults to Eve, rather than growing a spine and doing what makes for peace between us by approaching me directly.

Your telling me and others here in this thread about your gripes against all members of the governing body, and gossiping, slandering, disparaging them without specifically naming anyone, is either an attempt on your part to solicit support from active, inactive or former servants of Jehovah for your cause to make your brothers and sisters disgruntled for the same reasons that you are disgruntled and to turn them away from serving Jehovah, and/or an act of cowardice on your part. Frankly, upon reading your gripes in this thread, I am convinced that you are a coward.

@outsmartthesystem:

Again…..being still baptized and having family still involved in this cult, do you really think that picking up a pen and paper and writing all of my beliefs and issues out and sending it in to NY will possibly have a good ending? I will get a "loving" letter back in the mail that proves none of my accusations wrong….rather..it will only reiterate the governing body’s stance on the issues. The local elders will be CC’d and they will want to talk with me. If they talk with me and I agree with what they say then YAY! An imaginary sheep has been saved. If I continue to disagree, I may be subject to disfellowshipping. Great plan, DJ!

It is evident that you have a gripe with someone, that "someone" being the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses, so why haven't you confronted any member of the governing body with your gripes? I don't care what your gripes might be since I believe all of them to be imperfect human beings that are doing whatever they can that is humanly possible for them to do as a central body of elders to ensure that Jehovah's Witnesses are spiritually equipped to spread the message regarding the good news of the kingdom to as many people as possible before the end comes.

Maybe you have one or more ideas that would be an improvement on the way things are being done now, but your griping over one or more decisions on which they have signed off because you don't agree with those decisions or because you do not know the basis upon which these decisions with which you don't agree were made would make sense if these gripes were actually directed to one or more members of the governing body.

Like, if you knew how Theodore Jaracz, a member of the governing body voted on, let's say, how disfellowshipping should be handled in the local congregations, and you didn't agree with his vote one way or the other -- perhaps because your reading of the Bible suggested an approach be taken much different than Jaracz' approach to administering discipline in the congregation – then it might not make a lot of sense for you to be getting into the face of another member of the governing body, like, say, Stephen Lett, when he may not have even voted the way that Jaracz voted on the matter, right? But if you don't know how Jaracz or Lett or Gerrit Losch or Samuel Herd or whomever voted on whatever matter that has gotten your panties in a twist, then how can you know if your gripe is being appropriately directed to the governing body member(s) with whose vote you disagreed?

In the above, you speak of your "being still baptized" -- as if it were even possible for someone that has been baptized to be un-baptized -- "and having family still involved in this cult," which I take to be an admission on your part that you have no desire to leave the "Jehovah's Witness cult," which is, of course, your decision to make, but it does seem strange that you would be here telling me about some of the things that make you hate the very cult from which you refuse to separate yourself because you have family still in it.

Be that as it may, my viewpoint is Jehovah's viewpoint in that he drew you to him and handed you over to his son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who has never lost anyone that Jehovah has given him, and I am your brother despite your apostate views that are pretty much the same apostate views that were espoused by Ray Franz as may have been cauterized by Don Cameron's Captives to a Concept, which book, along with Franz' Crisis of Conscience and In Search of Christian Freedom books -- were written exclusively with active and inactive Jehovah's Witnesses in mind to indoctrinate them with what some here have referred to as "the truth about the truth." In fact, you and I are able to communicate on a level that most professed Christians cannot begin to do because Jehovah has taught us so many things.