Diary of a thinking to return ex-Jw

by reniaa 223 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  BFD

  What am i gonna receive in the Champaign Room.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUA-2UMKx5s

  BFD

  ps- Happy trails Rainy!
• 

  wifekeepsmeinit

  Bring the light: I appreciate the love, I know you have the right heart condition when you want to lead me into Everlasting Destruction.

  My wife gives me anything I want in the Champaign room. The elders are very aware of what we do in the Champaign room but have been too spineless to do anything about it, namely because they cant prove from the Bible that anything is wrong.

  Thats the difference between my wife and I, and the hard core JW. We beleive in the Bible not the WT Magazine, as the WT rag is only a tool in order to help you to come to an understanding of the Bible. WT magazine says that it is just a tool and Its all about balance. So thats they way we take it, and we try to ignore all of the WT doctrine that contradict previous WT magazines. Its just tool. Thats what I keep telling myself, and I get to continue enjoying the yellowbrick road with my family.

  Im assuming many are unbalanced. no pun intended
• 

  reniaa

  hi wifekeepmeinit, in many ways i agree with you, I am interested in Jw because of the bible not the wts which is like you say just a tool,

  I don't mean to stir people, I've only had chance to do about 4/5 replies on this topic because of my busy life but I seem to have that effect, it isn't deliberate i'm sorry if my honest opinion on CofC upset people I would just prefer a more modern read of an EX-GB experiences in current times.

  I am not avoiding deeper issues just I haven't even started my refresher study yet so relying on 10 year old memories and whatever I can quickly research on the internet and my own personal reflections on the issues at hand.

  I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me in fact I expected it, I only took issue with those calling me a current Jw and accusing me of lying which I think anyone would say something about, I've laid myself open to critisism by mentioning i'm pro-witness atm so am proud of how honest i've been, it would have been easier to be just a lurker and say nothing.

  I will address the hebrew 1:8 scripture, is it saying Jesus is God? well after researching it on internet last night the jury seems to be out, it's quoting from an OT psalm scripture which is saying a human king is God which is using the God term to denote how people view the king not saying he is actually Almighty God, and from a number of sources all say same thing that both ways of translating it are correct both the NWT and KJ lol confusing, So i wouldn't say this is a defining scripture that can be used either way.

  To be honest my non-believe in trinity is more because of jesus's own personal words he always kept himself separate to God and would not of approved of us putting him in Gods place and I think I can safely say you will find no scripture were jesus is saying otherwise.

  Also a personal thought and this is completely personal is..... how can Jesus sacrifice for us mean anything if he was actually God, the point was he was a separate individual that made the sacrifice out of love for us and his father, even if you argue he was separate on earth if he just tempory seperate it still lessens the sacrifice but if he's always been separate and made the decision conscously both before and after that for me makes his sacrifice for mankind unique and far more powerful and loving beyond anything, lol not sure if I made any sense there, it's hard to put it into words.
• 

  Eyes Open

  reniaa, As far as I'm concerned, you can post as much positivity about the WTS as you like here as long as you don't mind it being responded to. I do not question your motives - I don't know you.

  lol haven't really had chance to read any books suggested yet it's early days

  Make time. The one I suggested (see my previous post) is not a big book, but it is vitally important for fundamentalist Christians to read. If you read that and then go back, I will at least be satisifed that I was able to pass on the information to you and that you had some other input on correctly reading the bible. Don't rush - this is important for you and your children.
• 

  reniaa

  hi Eyes Open thank you for your recommendations I will look at it if I can find it on ebay to buy lol, but thankyou for the info, I think you'll find most of my replies are bible focused and i view the wts as a useful but imperfect tool :)
• 

  jwfacts

  You did say though that you are not interested in being a JW for the WTS, but for the Bible. You really are looking at the wrong organization in that case. The WTS claims the Bible was written primarily for, and can only be understood by, the Anointed, and that Jesus is mediator for these leaders alone.

  Watchtower 1979 April 1 p.31 "So in this strict Biblical sense Jesus is the "mediator" only for anointed Christians."

  Watchtower 1979 November 15 p.27 "They recognize that they are not spiritual Israelites in the new covenant mediated by Jesus Christ, nor part of the "chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. … To keep in relationship with "our Savior, God," the "great crowd" needs to remain united with the remnant of spiritual Israelites."

  United in Worship p.111 "Special attention was being given to making up the government that would rule mankind for 1,000 years, and nearly all the inspired letters in the Christian Greek Scriptures are primarily directed to this group of Kingdom heirs-"the holy ones," "partakers of the heavenly calling."

  Watchtower 1974 June 15 p.376 "Also, it is to the spirit-anointed Christians who will rule in that kingdom that most of the Christian Greek Scriptures is directed, including the promises of everlasting life."

  Watchtower 2002 February 1 p. 23 "All of this should impress upon the minds of the other sheep why the Christian Greek Scriptures focus so much attention on Christ and his anointed brothers and their central role in the outworking of Jehovah's purposes. The other sheep therefore consider it a privilege to support in every way possible the anointed slave class while awaiting "the revealing of the sons of God" at Armageddon and during the Millennium."

  
  

  Regarding the Nature of God - this debate has raged for 2000 years, which shows it is not a clear cut issue. There are numerous understandings regarding Jesus relationship with the Father, of which the Trinity is just one viewpoint. It is likely you will stick with the teaching you are most comfortable with, just as most people born Catholics believe the Trinity as that is what they were raised to be most comfortable with.
• 

  Eyes Open

  How to Read the Bible: History, Prophecy, Literature - Why Modern Readers Need to Know the Difference, and What It Means for Faith Today at Amazon Used and New A few pounds and hours invested in consideration of a scholarly view of the literature in the bible will hopefully open up your eyes to what your faith should be based on.
• 

  reniaa

  Good morning Jwfacts

  you make valid points on the wts, a part of what i will be exploring in my future studies is if they are correct in all this 'anointed' 'great crowd' stuff, It doesn't help that other christian faiths avoid exploring the future aspects of the bible and just say we either goto heaven or hell, The bible talks a lot on what we can aspect on heaven and on earth and these do need to be addressed not ignored or else why did they get written about? but are the wts correct in how they interpretate it, I'll be honest I have yet to explore this issue deeply but i certainly will :)
• 

  Eyes Open

  In response to your desire to study what the great crowd is, can I recommend The Theology of the Book of Revelation (New Testament Theology), Richard Bauckham.

  Yep, another book and more time reading/studying. But that's what you gotta do if you wanna get things right.

  I'd still suggest reading the other one by Steven McKenzie first, though. All the best to you with your studies - post back if you think any of us can help.
• 

  reniaa

  hi eyes open

  the reviews on this book are not promising :S I always check reviews first :)

  How to Read the Bible: History, Prophecy, Literature

  From Austin Cline,
  Your Guide to Agnosticism / Atheism.
  FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now! Guide Rating - The Bible is one of the most important and influential books in Western civilization; despite this, few people have much detailed knowledge of it or even know how to read it properly. This is partly due to a decline in classical education, but also partly to a failure of religious leaders to teach people how to approach the text properly. Unfortunately, the prospects for improvement are poor.

  Title: How to Read the Bible: History, Prophecy, Literature - Why Modern Readers Need to Know the Difference, And What It Means for Faith Today
  Author: Steven L. McKenzie
  Publisher: Oxford University Press
  ISBN: 0195161491

  Pro:
  • Clear explanations of the genres used in the Bible
  • Good discussion of how to understand the intentions of the authors of the texts

  Con:
  • Does not explain why the biblical authors’ intentions are the only or best basis for interpretation of literature

  Description:
  • Exploration of how to read the Bible through the intentions of the authors
  • Argues that the biblical writings cannot be disconnected from their cultural origins
  • Disputes common, literalist readings of the Bible

  Book Review

  Interpretation is always a complicated task, one which involves interaction between the text, the reader’s expectations, and the intentions of the author. How these elements play off against each other help determine the reader’s understanding of what the text is supposed to mean — either in general or specifically for them.

  To help people approach interpretation of the Bible in a more informed manner, Steven L. McKenzie has written the book How to Read the Bible: History, Prophecy, Literature - Why Modern Readers Need to Know the Difference, And What It Means for Faith Today. McKenzie’s basic thesis is relatively simple: we can best understand what a biblical text means by understanding what the author originally intended, but since we don’t have access to the author’s original notes or interviews, we have to rely on circumstantial evidence in the text itself. One important but often ignored clue is the genre of the text itself: all textual interpretation depends in part upon what a text’s genre is, and this has to include biblical texts as well. We can’t reasonably interpret the Bible without our interpretations being informed by how a text’s genre (historiography, wisdom literature, apocalyptic literature, letters) structures and informs the content.

  McKenzie’s writing, research, and arguments are all very strong — but does he actually accomplish his goals? That’s harder to say.

  Liberal religious believers will likely read this book and nod in agreement, finding confirmation for what they were already thinking as well as support for their positions. Conservative religious believers may be less sympathetic, disagreeing at almost every point of McKenzie’s arguments. Why the difference?

  The key, I think, will lie with disagreements over the basic premises. In the first place, conservative believers won’t always agree that humans are the original authors of these texts — and even where they are somehow the “author,” ultimately it is God’s intentions which count, not the human hands which God guided. There is no way to respond to such objections from within McKenzie’s argument.

  In the second place, there is reasonable basis for disagreeing over what role the authors’ intent should be accorded in the first place. Just because the author intended a book to be read in one way a thousand years ago, does this constrain us to read it in the exact same manner today? Perhaps a biblical text was intended as biting commentary on the politics of its day, but couldn’t it be read now as providing spiritual insight on the nature of humanity?

  How to Read the Bible: History, Prophecy, Literature

  The same is true of any ancient text: Plato may have had one intention in writing any particular dialogue, but philosophers today aren’t bound to adhere to that intention when interpreting the meaning and significance of the ideas today.

  McKenzie is correct in his criticism of those who insist that these texts have to be read as literal histories and/or as being about our own time. Such insistence can legitimately be described as misreading, but it is arguable that McKenzie is making a similar error when he insists that biblical texts must be read according to the intentions of their authors.

  McKenzie’s purpose is to provide readers with a way to accept biblical stories that can’t be literally true, thus preventing them from dismissing the Bible entirely. In this I’m sure he will succeed — but that’s a relatively narrow purpose without much lasting impact, I suspect. It might have been a more interesting work had he explored a variety of ways to read biblical texts with the intent of demonstrating that the literalist approach, while not completely invalid, is by no means the only or best approach for most of the Bible.

  hmmm I am not sure I want to undemine my literal faith in the bible, My dislike of becoming an atheist/agnostic is that I really don't want to be stuck without the hope.