leaving_quietly

Joined

• started 82 topics
• posted 1,676 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by leaving_quietly

• 
  56

  My JW mom is now willing to "listen" to our side...Need advice pls

  by 2pink in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my husband and i (both born in jws with extended family all "in" except for one of my sisters who left when we did) left the church 5 years ago.

  we did not fade, we just didn't believe it anymore, told our families so and left.

  obviously, big drama in our family after this, messy feelings, etc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  IF you can have a conversation about Romans 6, I find that the best line of reasoning is this:

  If our sins are acquitted at physical death, then every person, every... single... person..., up to this moment in time that has died is acquitted of their sins. That means that the blood of the Christ has NO EFFECT on ANYONE that has died in the past. Not the apostles. Not the disciples. Not faithful Israelites that died. Not faithful Christians since then, but ONLY operates toward those CURRENTLY living.

  Obviously, this makes no sense. It does not square with what Paul wrote eariler in Romans:

  God presented him as an offering for propitiation through faith in his blood. This was to demonstrate his own righteousness, because God in his forbearance was forgiving the sins that occurred in the past. - Rom. 3:25

  It stands to reason that people who died before Christ came along did NOT have their sins acquitted at death, otherwise, there would be NO NEED for forgiveness of those sins. Thus, the understanding that the Society has CANNOT be correct.

  This point was actually driven home to me by a very humble person I met in the field ministry one day. She said, basically, 'If our sins are acquitted at death, then why in the world did Christ die for us to begin with?'
• 
  56

  My JW mom is now willing to "listen" to our side...Need advice pls

  by 2pink in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my husband and i (both born in jws with extended family all "in" except for one of my sisters who left when we did) left the church 5 years ago.

  we did not fade, we just didn't believe it anymore, told our families so and left.

  obviously, big drama in our family after this, messy feelings, etc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  marked.... great responses, Splash!
• 
  56

  My JW mom is now willing to "listen" to our side...Need advice pls

  by 2pink in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my husband and i (both born in jws with extended family all "in" except for one of my sisters who left when we did) left the church 5 years ago.

  we did not fade, we just didn't believe it anymore, told our families so and left.

  obviously, big drama in our family after this, messy feelings, etc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  The latest WT has an article (Nov, I think), a conversation with a neighbor, explaining 1914. In it, the JW says Daniel often didn't understand what he was writing and uses a verse from Daniel 12 to prove it. It's out of context because it was a different vision than chapter 4 at a different time of his life. Had nothing to do with the vision in Daniel 4

  This is a recent example for you.
• 
  21

  Question to any practicing JWs

  by Mr. Falcon in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i ask you to consider this scenario:.

  a devoutly born-again christian man, who strives to live every facet of his life in accordance with what is written in the gospels, spends all of his time helping the poor, reading his bible cover-to-cover, living an austere life and genuinely feels that his life is motivated by his love of christ.

  a real christian in practice, both public and private.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  This is a great thread for any type of reader, those stuck in, those out, those lurking. It gets right at the heart of the REASON the JW religion exists in the first place.

  leaving_quietly, they'd probably point you to a recent hard-liner article in a Watchtower, which has become increasingly hostile in its tone as of late.

  Yes. Yes, they would. My response, if they are amenable to getting a response, would be to point them to what Christs' words at Luke 9:49,50: "In response John said: “Instructor, we saw someone expelling demons by using your name, and we tried to prevent him, because he is not following with us.” But Jesus said to him: “Do not try to prevent him, for whoever is not against you is for you.”
• 
  21

  Question to any practicing JWs

  by Mr. Falcon in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i ask you to consider this scenario:.

  a devoutly born-again christian man, who strives to live every facet of his life in accordance with what is written in the gospels, spends all of his time helping the poor, reading his bible cover-to-cover, living an austere life and genuinely feels that his life is motivated by his love of christ.

  a real christian in practice, both public and private.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  "It doesn't matter how good, how sincere, how much they help the poor, how much they believe in the bible, etc they are, if they aren't part of Jehovah's visible organization which the bible clearly says is through a faithful and discreet slave, then they will die at armageddon."

  I think I would counter with: Can you show me anywhere that says the "domestics" must eat the food distributed by that slave or else die at Armageddon?
• 
  21

  Question to any practicing JWs

  by Mr. Falcon in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i ask you to consider this scenario:.

  a devoutly born-again christian man, who strives to live every facet of his life in accordance with what is written in the gospels, spends all of his time helping the poor, reading his bible cover-to-cover, living an austere life and genuinely feels that his life is motivated by his love of christ.

  a real christian in practice, both public and private.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  As a JW, I would answer "No", or what sir82 said, "Jehovah is the judge."

  As a non-JW, I would answer "yes" for these reasons:

  First, everyone is ELIGIBLE for the benefits of Christ's ransom. Everyone. It's up to each person as to whether they will do what Christ says to do or not.

  That said, Paul refused to preach the way JWs preach. Romans 15:20,21: " In this way, indeed, I made it my aim not to declare the good news where the name of Christ had already been made known, so as not to build on another man’s foundation;  but just as it is written: “Those who received no report about him will see, and those who have not heard will understand."" So, this man in your hypothetical situation, should not even be approached by JWs since he is ALREADY a believer. So, JWs, in preaching where Christ has already been named, run the risk of subverting peoples' faith.

  Christ gave the command to "Go and make disciples." Of whom? Based on the context, of himself. JWs do NOT make disciples of Christ. That isn't their aim. They view themselves as rescuers. In one of this year's Circuit Assembly programs, they drive this point in and state it's their commission, based on Proverbs 24:11: "Rescue those who are being taken away to death, And hold back those staggering to the slaughter." So, JWs preaching some other doctrine could actually make THEM ineligible. Why? Because while they are preaching, they are not doing what Christ commanded, to make disciples of him and teach people to observe ALL HIS commandments. This, in my opinion, is disobedience. They are going beyond what Christ said to do, and, in fact, actually NOT doing what he DID say to do.
  
  As for "spirit and truth", it's hard to worship with "truth" if truth is constantly changing.
• 
  8

  THE WBATS AND THEIR CONSTANT HEADACHE SINCE 1914!

  by ADJUSTMENTS in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the wbats and their gb have done some major pr damage control with the "old" new light of the overlapping generation in 2010, and the recent new light of the fds arrangement in 2013, it has helped stave off some of their bleeding.

  i can remember at the time when it was first announced it went completely over my head, i didn't even bat an eye or loose a step.

  i just didn't understand at the time (not completely understanding jw doctrine and chronology, and just what the jw cult leadership bets on for the rank and file when releasing new light) how critical of a so-called "adjustment" that was, until several years later and being able to finally see some old light through research and connecting the dots.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  It is interesting to see the hype and frenzy over stuff recently. One elder told me yesterday, "Jehovah's chariot is really speeding up." I reminded him of the 1975 fiasco and that we're seeing a similar hype and frenzy. You know what he told me? He agreed, then said his father went through that same hype in 1942 and sold EVERYTHING because the end was so close back then. I doubt he'll see the problem that arises from this.

  I think for many JWs, come November, there's going to be a lot of people in a big depression. I don't know.... I was too young to remember 1975, but this hype and frenzy is just weird. At least people aren't selling everything they have this time around. Just a lot of busy-work, you know, that 7th day march around Jericho. (I don't know where that started, but it was mentioned in my cong. too.)
• 
  53

  Paranoia of today's WT study!

  by stuckinarut2 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the wt study for sept 7th just breeds such a spirit of paranoia!.

  using old biblical references just so as to prevent anyone from using critical thinking skills and analysing the "truth".. then using incorrect, leading reasoning to paint any who "think outside of the box" of the org as "apostate".... pure manipulation!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  Unfortunately for many of us, this article serves to further alienate our families, (e.g. our spouses) from us. Even the mention of some conflict of scriptures with WT sets my wife off as I found out a couple weeks back. I won't go into details, but it was sure hard to remain calm and remember how very, very, very deep the indoctrination is.
• 
  83

  PART TWO of AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE BY A PRACTICING JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

  by Sparks in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  while you are sitting there reading this, there are literally hundreds of thousands of young males and females all over the world [ mostly in america / canada and england] sitting in their grotty little smelly bedrooms or flats, designing computer viruses that they will up-load onto web-sites to cause anonymous innocent peoples computers to malfunction.

  these creeps spend literally weeks,months or even years hoping to make a computer viruses that will get into peoples computer bios to completely destroy their computers.

  they never see the peoples anger, frustration and distress.... the damage can cost each person about 1,000 [ $1,660.74 ] or more to replace a basic new laptop or tower.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  I'm confused. Sparks joined and started posting 11 years ago. Then nothing for awhile, then 7 years ago, one thread started. But, 7 days ago . . . well, this isn't the same Sparks as back then, is it? Total turnaround, if so. Hijacked account perhaps? New user, same username? Reusing defunct username? Call me curious.
• 
  75

  Anyone else notice the new Terms of Use on jw.org?

  by leaving_quietly in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i first noticed it today... slides up at the bottom.

  i wonder why they felt the need to do this?

  this is just silly for a religious website..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  leaving_quietly

  So please explain for us NON computer geeks what this means...Is the crux of the matter, do not cut and paste from JW.org because they can find out who we are and potentially sue us? Or something else?

  You pretty much got it. It's a legal notification that their content is copyrighted and it is illegal to use anywhere else. The legitimacy of that claim and of fair use laws isn't my area to comment on. I'll leave that to the lawyers.

  That said, the point of my OP isn't that they have a Terms of Use. Most websites do. And most have some strong-arm language in then to attempt to ward off copyright infringement. I get that. The point of my OP that the Terms of Use is now 'in your face'. It comes up when you go to the site at the bottom. They purposely draw attention to it. This is what I'm not getting. It just seems really strange and definitely uninviting. But that's just me.