The King of the North was the Soviet Union
What was the truth when you joined the Org?
by JH 27 Replies latest jw friends
-
95stormfront
The King of the North was the Soviet Union
You mean......it's not anymore ????
[/facetiousness off]
-
littlerockguy
The preaching work was to be completed in the 20th century.
-
upside/down
"Millions now living will never die"....
1986- The International Year of......drum roll please....PEACE & SECURITY! (gasp!)
This "system" will collapse on it's own within twenty-five years if Jojoba doesn't do it. That was said in 1980...do the math.
Ressurected ones won't have belly-buttons.
Elders are "princes"...
That the "truth" would "set me free"...when in fact it enslaved me.
u/d
-
forsharry
Yeah, I remember talking to a girl that I was close to when i was in the organization. She was still on-again off-again in the religion when she called and told me (this had to be 98-99) that the society had changed their definition of 'generation' and that it didn't REALLY mean the 1914 generation after all. I mean "Woops! My Bad!"
My only response to her was, "And you still believe it don't you?" The convo miraculously shifted after that.
-
Mulan
The superior authorites, in Romans 13, before 1962, were taught to be Jehovah God and Jesus Christ.
Then they changed it and it became the governmental authorities.
-
fullofdoubtnow
When I joined in 1983, armageddon was "just around the corner", HAD to come in the 20th century. By the mid 90's it was "right in front of us". Now it's 2005, still no armageddon, and I get the impression not many in my former kh are expecting it any time soon.
I think the "Generation" change in 1995 shook quite a few as well, especially the older ones in our hall, and the gradual relaxation of the blood doctrine had us wondering a bit.
It seems to me the only doctrines they aren't prepared to alter their stance on are the cruel ones, like shunning those who leave.
-
PoppyR
You know what I could never understand, and this has not changed, so sorry if it's off topic! They say Jehovah has 'lovingly' allowed all this time to pass so that more people could be saved, and last week the brother said.. look around, how many of us would not be here if the end had come 10 years ago!!! And i just couldn't believe he said it cos 10 years ago our hall used to be full, and now it's half empty and most of the people that regularly go are the old ones. There are very few young families going along now. And when I voiced this to my OH he said.. well it's a time of testing so the ones that survive are really worthy... so is that fair on the person that has JUST got baptised when someone else served 30 years then got tired???
-
TD
I remember when it was taught that the "Great Tribulation" had started with WWI, had paused, (been "cut short") but would shortly resume again with greater force. This was changed in 1970 when the "Great Tribulation" was "relocated" in time as an event entirely in the future.
This is one of the things that makes the "generation change" such a joke.
When the "great crowd" was first "identified" in 1935 it was thought that this group had already "come out" of the great tribulation.
When the view on the "great tribulation" was changed in 1970, they didn't abandon the "great crowd" doctrine. Instead they taught that the "proximity" of the "great tribulation" (Very soon -- within one generation) was what had made the identification possible in 1935.
This "joined" the "Generation doctrine" to the "Great Crowd doctrine" like conjoined twins. You can't get rid of one without "killing" the other.
-
happyout
All the flip flops on how to treat those who are inactive. Friendly one day, shunned the next, kinda confusing, you know?
Also, the generational change really killed me. I kept thinking I would get my family back in about the year 2000 when it would be obvious that the 1914 generation was gone, but I obviously didn't take into account that they are a big huge organization planning things out years in advance to maintain their membership.
Also, the many changes on should a woman scream if she's raped. If she doesn't, is she guilty of adultery or fornication? Someone posted a great thread about that a while back.
Happyout