steve2: is there some way this can be presented so that it is crystal clear what was actually in the demonstrations and what was added?
i guess some will think it should be obvious - but this is where misunderstandings arise because we end up wrongly attributing something to jw organization that was never said.. circuit assembly theme: maintain love for jehovah!.
note to speaker: warmly encourage young ones to prove their friendship with jehovah by observing his commandments and defending his standards.
We all know that there are many male and female gay folks that are baptized JWs so why just focus on the female gays.?
Because the people that write the demos are middle or old aged men.
I would bet money that a sister facing a JC for homosexuality will be forced to divulge details to a level that no brother would do.
steve2: is there some way this can be presented so that it is crystal clear what was actually in the demonstrations and what was added?
i guess some will think it should be obvious - but this is where misunderstandings arise because we end up wrongly attributing something to jw organization that was never said.. circuit assembly theme: maintain love for jehovah!.
note to speaker: warmly encourage young ones to prove their friendship with jehovah by observing his commandments and defending his standards.
@smiddy - no...
steve2: is there some way this can be presented so that it is crystal clear what was actually in the demonstrations and what was added?
i guess some will think it should be obvious - but this is where misunderstandings arise because we end up wrongly attributing something to jw organization that was never said.. circuit assembly theme: maintain love for jehovah!.
note to speaker: warmly encourage young ones to prove their friendship with jehovah by observing his commandments and defending his standards.
@sparrowdown - I can't imagine a meeting of the writing dept planning the RC talks is any different to any other male only meeting. You have a bunch of guys in a room talking about illicit sex... how long before someone brings up some girl on girl action?
steve2: is there some way this can be presented so that it is crystal clear what was actually in the demonstrations and what was added?
i guess some will think it should be obvious - but this is where misunderstandings arise because we end up wrongly attributing something to jw organization that was never said.. circuit assembly theme: maintain love for jehovah!.
note to speaker: warmly encourage young ones to prove their friendship with jehovah by observing his commandments and defending his standards.
All this is is yet another example of the WTS putting propaganda out there to make the R&F feel better about being essentially homophobic. It's not about supporting diversity and encouraging new members from all parts of society - it's about wrapping up their prejudice with some pretty paper that makes it all seem so nice.
The fact that the parcel still contains a present of judgement and exclusion is lost amidst the cooing over the Kath Kidson pattern and pretty bow.
i know some has been posted about leah remini and her split from scientology.
i just wanted to add after finishing it last night, it is a must watch for questioning jws...every episode has familiar situations and parallels that will make jws really think (or squirm).
watch it with someone you want to wake up!!!!
Cheers - I have VPN software so I'll stream it. It would be nice to watch it with the missus and see what impact it has, especially as we are into series 2 of The Path as well!
i know some has been posted about leah remini and her split from scientology.
i just wanted to add after finishing it last night, it is a must watch for questioning jws...every episode has familiar situations and parallels that will make jws really think (or squirm).
watch it with someone you want to wake up!!!!
Does any one know if this is available in the U.K.? I can't find it on Netflix, Amazon or Now...
http://avoidjw.org/2017/02/stephanie-fessler-v-watch-tower/.
stephanie fessler v watch tower.
stephanie fessler was brought up as a jehovah’s witness by her parents, jodee and kevin.
Sad to say but I think the WT lawyers will put a lot of pressure on the parents as to why they did not report the abuse themselves. We all know WT culture can cloud judgement but I am still a bit surprised there was no disclosure by the parents given it's not that long ago.
one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.
it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.
christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.
Great post Cofty. I wish your succinct explanation of atheism and use of the scientific method could be an obligatory "read this first" for anyone about to comment on a thread such as this.
one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.
it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.
christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.
I have found myself incredibly ill-equipped to navigate the moral maze of right and wrong, black and white with the countless shades of grey in-between thanks to being a Witness, even though I have always been relatively liberal in my views.
Witness thinking gives you the answers. Abortion - wrong. War - wrong. Sexual activity outside marriage - wrong. Blood transfusions - wrong. I thought I had reasons but ultimately those reasons were based on a position that the rest of world cannot afford to take because life is simply not black and white.
Take the doctrine away and those reasons become highly suspect. One cannot afford to let a decision be the result of dogma, tradition or reasons that ignore reality. You have to consider context, relativism and things like the greater good.
As Witnesses one can sit in an idealistic ivory tower, pontificating on why something is wrong whilst the rest of the world actually gets on with trying to balance all the variables and make choices that suit the collective best interest.
It is a direct result of this that it is so, so difficult for a Witness to logically consider an argument rationally, weigh it up, look at the pros and cons and go beyond doctrinal rhetoric. Instead, they sneer at "the world" and it's inability to be perfect, pouring their disdain on noble efforts to look for solutions to very difficult problems as a waste of time. Instead, they trust that somehow God is going to sort it all out and you can just sit back, take the good from society whilst condemning every effort made to inject a little bit of progress into society.
anybody have any ideas where they are going with the "new light" they have been pushing last week and this week?
for instance in this weeks study article one section reads:.
in years gone by, we believed that jehovah became displeased with his people because they did not have a zealous share in the preaching work during world war i. we concluded that for this reason, jehovah allowed babylon the great to take them captive for a short time.
Very good point bibeexaminer but completely irrelevant to a Witness since it only matters that there were some people trying to do the right thing. It didn't matter that they were wrong about so many things, continued to be so for many years and introduced further wrong teachings over the following decades - they were apparently the best of a bunch of people also trying to do the right thing. Jehovah had to choose someone and it was Rutherford - which when you think about was a good call. After all, the last time he had actually chosen a leader and inspired him to commune directly and be given The Actual Truth look how that turned out - the bloke cocked up and he had to keep a whole nation wandering around the desert for 40 years. Far better to stand back and let them flounder for the next 100 years, unable to even work out their own history let alone explain what mankind's future will be.
