Posts by TonusOH

48

"Jehovah God"

by Jeffro in

the expression "jehovah god" has always seemed strange to me.

even when i was a jw, i found the term awkward, and never used it myself.

both words are nouns intended to be synonyms of each other, unless the name "jehovah" is being used as an adjective, which is also weird.

I think it's a way of adding honorifics to a person, to demonstrate just how great their stature is. With the idea that god is the ultimate being, it gets a bit out of hand, what with being called Almighty God, The Almighty, Jehovah God, Our Lord Jehovah, and so on.

I'd like to see a competition to see who could come up with the most over-the-top description. "Lord Jehovah God the Almighty, God of Armies, Ultimate Bad-Ass, Best God ever AND Best Human ever, Father of the Universe and Everything in it, the Best at Everything and -apologies to Moses- the Most Humble Being Ever to Exist."

12

Watchtower July 22 - JWs being interrogated need to muzzle their mouths

by Listener in

the watchtower has printed a disturbing article about self control and gives this instruction to the r & f .

self-control also allows us to remain silent when opposers try to trick us into revealing things that could endanger our brothers and sisters.

this might occur when we are being interrogated by the police in a land where our work is banned or restricted.

TonusOH

They are aiming this at anyone who might leak info to exJWs, which then gets broadcast on YouTube and Twitter and Reddit, etc. They're not just reminding the loyal membership to be on their guard, they are warning everyone not to leak embarrassing or incriminating info to 'opposers,' who are eager to use it to discredit the organization.

And, as with anything they try to teach, the lack of self-awareness is always present:

Although difficult to hear at first, a friend's honest comments are what will benefit us in the long run.

"But don't you even think of offering an honest comment to an elder or --heaven forbid!-- a GB member. Just keep telling us how awesome we are... or else."

32

“This generation will by no means pass away.”

by Fisherman in

for argument sake let’s assume that this verse should apply to 1914. what are your thoughts on generation?.

TonusOH

Actually Russell predicted 1914 would bring on Armageddon or the end of human government.

Yes, and the WTS rewrote its history to make it seem as if he'd made one prediction and it had been right on the money. That is what I referred to in my second paragraph. They also whitewashed much of Rutherford's missteps, either relegating them to the memory hole or changing them so that they seemed much more relevant and accurate. I just think that they can revise a lot of their history to suit their purposes, but 1914 is the one they just can't let go.

32

“This generation will by no means pass away.”

by Fisherman in

for argument sake let’s assume that this verse should apply to 1914. what are your thoughts on generation?.

TonusOH

I think they cling to 1914 because they have turned it into a legit prophetic moment in their history. The story they tell is of Russell discovering that 1914 would be the beginning of the last days and, lo and behold, World War 1 begins and a narrative is born. That narrative is easy to package and distribute: war begins, the world goes into decline, the only possible salvation is the kingdom of God with Jesus at the helm. Without the war, it's really just another end-times prophecy that does not convince anyone.

Even now, when it's pretty easy to find out that Russell's predictions were many, that none of them amounted to anything, and that only by radically changing one of them did the WTS create the 1914 'prophecy', they do not let it go. To do so undermines the strong narrative that they used successfully for so long. The farther we get from 1914, the tougher it gets to prop it up, but I think they're too far along to try and salvage it now.

I'm curious what they will do. I still think they will try to ignore it and minimize it as quietly as they can, hoping to cling to the credibility it once gave them but never actually having to face up to it.

3

Running the US is as easy as riding a bike ...

by LoveUniHateExams in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r96ibqzbwj8.

worst.

president.

TonusOH

Although it's not like he could suffer any brain damage ...

A good thump to the head might even be beneficial, in his case.

Although I'd rather it happened to whoever is making policy decisions through him. The "insider" books that will be written after he leaves office will probably start a bloodbath of unimaginable proportions.

11530

It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

by Newly Enlightened in

original reddit post (removed).

TonusOH

I think a great exJW channel would be if they made "bad lip reading" videos featuring Stephen Lett.

32

“This generation will by no means pass away.”

by Fisherman in

for argument sake let’s assume that this verse should apply to 1914. what are your thoughts on generation?.

TonusOH

I think this is where we would apply Ockham's Razor. If someone spoke to me today about something that would last "for a generation" I would assume a fairly broad timespan, depending on the context. I'd guess 20-50 years, but not longer than that.

But I think it's fair if there is a consensus that, in the time Jesus' words were spoken, the term he used may have had a different connotation. Is this the case? I'm guessing that a person in that moment, hearing that phrase, would expect that the 'end' would come in their lifetimes. Is there a commonly-accepted explanation for a longer term than that?

16

Dear Female ExJWs

by Simon in

jw
friends

judging by some forum comments and tweets, it seems like some female exjw's feel they are being ignored or excluded from things.

i thought i'd share my views.

what could possibly go wrong .... first, i think it's unfair to post and judge people based on a private chat shared without permission and posted without context.

TonusOH

In the past, I've been an admin/mod/owner of one forum or another, so I can sympathize with Simon having to tackle an issue like this before it gets out of hand. It can be thankless work, but sitting back and saying nothing can be worse. A potential lose/lose situation. I'd like to add that I appreciate the work he's done keeping this forum going for more than twenty years. That's impressive.

And I say that because I have the luxury of being able to ignore controversial discussions or posts if I choose. I've mellowed a lot over the years and have learned which drama I need to deal with and which drama I can safely ignore. I generally try to treat people well and be as easygoing as I can, with the understanding that I can't please everyone but I can decide who to engage. It's not always the best approach, but it keeps my stress levels very low. And I am pretty happy with that.

29

The Genesis 3:15 woman.

by Fisherman in

genesis 3:15 says that the woman’s seed would be in enmity with the serpent’s seed.

although the bible reveals that the woman’s seed is jesus and christians that go to heaven with christ, it does not identify the woman directly.

we at jw believe that the woman is symbolic.

TonusOH

Maybe it is a mixture of the literal (actual beings, god and jesus) and the metaphorical (the wife of god is a representation of a group or organization). It's possible that the seed is not an individual, but an organization or ideology which is personified by an individual. Thus, god is the literal individual who takes action, and jesus and the woman are representations of who god is and what he stands for.

I think the concept holds up until the NT, when an actual and literal Jesus appears, the son of an actual and literal woman who gives birth to him.

19

Beards- just told by an elder

by dothemath in

i know this subject has been talked about lots over the years, just thought i would share a recent finding from canada.. while visiting with a group of friends, an elder (don’t recall how the subject came up) mentioned the local body had voted to allow brothers with beards be allowed to give talks from the platform.

(it was a very close vote).

the direction given was for each congregation to decide for themselves if that is now acceptable.. so some congregations will be for, and for many it will not.. it’ll probably be a long time before we see any pictures on the watchtower where they’re allowing this though..

TonusOH

Another (very OPTIONAL) division-causer.

That was my thought as well. It demonstrates the folly of an organization that demands strict, unquestioning obedience suddenly telling its followers to make up their own minds. Most are so conditioned to expect to be told what to do, that they look down upon those who exercise their newly-granted freedom. Imagine creating an atmosphere of resentment and jealousy over something as pedestrian as facial hair.