i believe the gb's takeover of the fds was an illegal coup - not illegal relative to the laws of land, but illegal according to jw "laws" or doctrine.. according to jw doctrine, the fds is god's channel of communication between heaven and earth.
before the coup, the fds was defined to be all the anointed on earth, and the gb was part of that group and merely the spokesman for the group - individual gb members having no more authority than non-gb members of the fds.. however, a few years ago, the gb, independently of the other members of the fds, decided that it alone was the fds.
that, to me, was an illegal overthrow of the body (fds); it was a coup.. suppose the u.s. president decided that he has all power, and that he removed the powers of the u.s. congress.
The " all partakers are the slave , equal parts of the body of Christ " always sounded contrived. The change from "all the remnant" to "brothers in Brooklyn" was only affirming reality. Where wt went too far is demoting all pre -1919 Christian writers from the ranks of the F&DS too, -- Apostles, Paul, Luke, James and all.
That is why there is no more "Bible" in the WTB&TS, organ, jworg. not only are many of the present partaker flaky, bible writers/characters were too.
i believe the gb's takeover of the fds was an illegal coup - not illegal relative to the laws of land, but illegal according to jw "laws" or doctrine.. according to jw doctrine, the fds is god's channel of communication between heaven and earth.
before the coup, the fds was defined to be all the anointed on earth, and the gb was part of that group and merely the spokesman for the group - individual gb members having no more authority than non-gb members of the fds.. however, a few years ago, the gb, independently of the other members of the fds, decided that it alone was the fds.
that, to me, was an illegal overthrow of the body (fds); it was a coup.. suppose the u.s. president decided that he has all power, and that he removed the powers of the u.s. congress.
elaborate? yes: Using the words of David Splane. He upheld the life data of F. Franz as a standard for anointed overlappers. F.F. died in 1992 at the age of ~99 and after 78 years of partaking since and before 1914, the start date of the generation. A similar partaker overlapping Franz, would live to ~2070 (1992 +78), and be 46 years old today. Given that D. Splane allowed that older partaker exist (or partook earlier in their lives), and future improvements in healthcare, these facts would easily push that figure to 2075, understanding too, that the end of the anointed generation happens at the beginning of the Great Tribulation, well ahead of the end run of Armageddon. 2075 it is
i believe the gb's takeover of the fds was an illegal coup - not illegal relative to the laws of land, but illegal according to jw "laws" or doctrine.. according to jw doctrine, the fds is god's channel of communication between heaven and earth.
before the coup, the fds was defined to be all the anointed on earth, and the gb was part of that group and merely the spokesman for the group - individual gb members having no more authority than non-gb members of the fds.. however, a few years ago, the gb, independently of the other members of the fds, decided that it alone was the fds.
that, to me, was an illegal overthrow of the body (fds); it was a coup.. suppose the u.s. president decided that he has all power, and that he removed the powers of the u.s. congress.
Of course , because Brooklyn backdated this appointment to 1919, it was passed off as a fait accompli, already in force since 1919, and by making the generation anointed, it gave the general partakers a consolation prize, they are the timepiece for the end, 2075 really.
because he was shunned by his customers?.
even if repentant, a person could be disfellowshipped for an "offence" that had created notoriety in the community. This seems not to be the case with the Wall affair, two occasion of drunkenness? ask the Glen How crowd about Covington.
i'm just curious to get people's views on this.. the bible students seem to start of as quite a liberal group under charles taze russell, albeit he had some whacky teachings going on.
obviously things began to change under rutherford.
but what decade did it become abundantly clear that the society was indeed high control religion or even labeled a cult?.
When Frederick Franz proclaimed in Yankee Stadium, that pets should under no circumstances receive blood transfusion.
because he was shunned by his customers?.
Ruby OC: You could do business with a shunned one but, once you walked out of his place of business, you couldn't go and have coffee with him/her. You were restricted
was Ray Franz not disfellowshipped for having dinner with his disfellowshipped employer?
Is not business often done over dinner?
i happen to be cruising around the net and stumbled upon this question on a different forum.
how do jw's answer jesus words in john 6:54 today?.
"whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and i will raise them up at the last day.
Jws might argue that the bible was written for the anointed, and those listening to Jesus sayings in John 6, were of the [later] anointed generation of his day.
Ignoring the fact that it would be only one flock, eating one food, not the two tier Christianity that wt invented in the 1930,
i happen to be cruising around the net and stumbled upon this question on a different forum.
how do jw's answer jesus words in john 6:54 today?.
"whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and i will raise them up at the last day.
The convoluted wt teaching is, that the partaking of the remnant gives the "anointed" the right to "everlasting life" on earth (like the second Adam) ,--but then they have to sacrifice that privilege for the better hope of immortality in heaven.
That explanation does not address the fact though, that the non-partaking "Other Sheep" sooner or later will have to partake too, in order to have everlasting life like Adam, and be resurrected.
wt has never put those 3 steps in one sentence, because it too would expose their error of confusing the new covenant with the one for the priesthood and kingdom rule, and highlight the command to eat, drink all of you, not anointed yet.
1) god gives more wisdom to solomon to become the wisest ever lived on earth.. 2) using this “higher”wisdom, he solved a problem involving two women who claimed ownership of a child looking at the facial expression of the dishonest woman.
* his ruling revealed that ‘a loving mother would not permit her child to be killed’ (1 king 3:27).
this ruling reportedly rooted at the “higher wisdom” given to solomon by god actually backfires on god whose core quality is love and yet he sent his son to be murdered for the betterment of mankind—a thing which no parents can teach their children because it would shock them.. 3) if jesus really came to be murdered and thus “to take away the sin of the world” (john 1:29), he would have used his superhuman skills to explain this incomprehensible teaching (killing the innocent removes the sins of the sinners).
Dw: "..All soldiers who die in the battlefield are innocent. More like killing the innocent to save our.."
No they are not, they go into battle with the express intent to kill. That is particularly true of invading armies, or worse deliberately attacking civilian targets. following such orders.
Post script: the chain of truth in the opening post is anchored in the talking snake story, without that hook, there is no loss, no buying back what was lost. The logic is lost on me.
i bring this up because like me i sure many of the men who was kids in the wt cult got their first taste of what a nude women looked like.
it was the adolescent male sex education for most of us.
one friend i had who's dad was a elder told me they always had playboys in his house because his dad subscribed to them.
right. I would be devastated if my daughters would be drawn into his entourage. Sex might be mighty fun, but it also has served to cement families together and care for the offspring, if done right, messy as it hopefully is, between permanent partners.
