The Watchtower, Adult Study Edition, Volume 2, Article 1: Questions From Readers

by sd-7 132 Replies latest members adult

• 

  djeggnog

  @sd-7:

  In ancient times, it is evident that objects of an idolatrous, immoral nature were designed for use in sexual immorality.... Yet, even confronted with clear Bible counsel to avoid the use of sex "toys"....

  I knew from the outset that what you had written had not come from any of our publications, but, unfortunately, there are those who would read your post -- perhaps someone might print it out and say that they obtained an "advance copy" of a QfR article that had not yet been published -- and be persuaded to believe that the use of a vibrator, a condom, a book (on sexual fulfillment) or whatever might be construed by someone as a "sex toy," constitutes porneia in any form that could give an "offended mate" (what exactly does an "offended mate" mean?) scriptural grounds for divorcing their mate. I recall there being only one scriptural ground for divorce, but the use of sex toys wasn't that reason.

  And why on earth would any elder be interested in what a married couple might be doing or need to do in enjoying sexual intimacies with their own marriage mate? While there are elders that would and have poked into matters that are the private domain of a married couple that they may have found to be sexually provocative or whatever, but their business is to keep the congregation clean and a discussion about sex toys cannot be confused with a discussion about uncleanness where married couples are concerned.

  It's clear to me that this slur against Jehovah's Witnesses was written by someone that imagines something either risqué or maybe sinister about sexual relations between a husband and his wife, and if you happen to be the author of this piece, then I'm referring specifically to you, @sd-7.

  @djeggnog
• 

  sd-7

  Dear Johnny,

  We appreciate your inquiry. Such usage of The Watchtower--Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom would be showing a spirit like that of Esau, who despised spiritual things. We strongly encourage you to prayerfully readjust your thinking with the help of your local body of elders.

  Your brother,

  sd-7

  cc: Johnny's body of elders
• 

  sabastious

  And why on earth would any elder be interested in what a married couple might be doing or need to do in enjoying sexual intimacies with their own marriage mate?

  DJ, read Crisis of Conscience by Ray Franz. He explains how interested the Watchtower was in the sexual intimacies within their marriages. Also you can just read old Watchtower's for yourself.

  -Sab
• 

  sabastious

  Dear Johnny,

  That's pretty awesome, btw.

  -Sab
• 

  sd-7

  Well, djeggnog, unless 'The Watchtower' has an 'Adult Study Edition' that I don't know of, then it should be obvious that this was a joke. Here's what a slur against Jehovah's Witnesses looks like:

  "Jehovah's Witnesses are ignorant, self-righteous cult members."

  That would be a slur. This, on the other hand, is a parody. If you've read the long history of Watchtower articles, you would see that scriptures can be used to justify whatever the Governing Body of the time sees fit to use them for. I don't find that funny at all, personally, because people have literally died as a result of the abuse of scripture as a means to an end, that end being power, money, and maintaining the cloak of authority that the Governing Body apparently needs for whatever reason.

  Obviously, this article could never actually happen, though I've heard plenty of stories of elders asking sexually invasive questions of men and women during their committees, which one hears enough to safely establish it as being a common practice. With the power to do that, frankly, an article like this is really not entirely implausible.

  And why on earth would any elder be interested in what a married couple might be doing or need to do in enjoying sexual intimacies with their own marriage mate?

  Why indeed? It is clear that you need to do more research on this issue. That is something that certainly has happened and probably still happens. Obviously that would be wrong, but history does show that the Society sanctioned that level of elder interest in marital intimacies, particularly regarding certain sex practices between marriage mates. No, elders did not ask people if they were having oral or anal, of course not, I'm not suggesting that. But these issues certainly were brought to their attention somewhere along the line, be it in the past or in the present.

  If someone decided to print this out, they would (or should) probably realize it was a fake from (1) the subject matter, which the Society wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole, (2) the absence of a date or page references, and (3) from the comments from this and previous threads recognizing that it is not a real article. If they can't figure out that this isn't real, they've obviously never read a Watchtower, and if not, why are they here?

  Speaking of which, why are you here? Missed the July 15, 2011 Watchtower, have we? How about obeying the direction of the faithful and discreet slave class by not posting on an apostate web site? Such loyal obedience will serve to protect you from losing Jehovah's favor.

  --sd-7
• 

  zoiks

  Fun stuff, sd-7!

  djeggnog- It's called parody. Go on, now...get a life. Shoo!
• 

  pirata

  And why on earth would any elder be interested in what a married couple might be doing or need to do in enjoying sexual intimacies with their own marriage mate?

  @djeggnog

  w83 3/15 p31. indicates that a married couples sex lives are of limited interest to the elders (and this is the latest instruction on the matter, as far as I know):

  A mate's enforcing perverted acts, such as oral or anal sex, within the marriage would not constitute a Scriptural bassi for a divorce that would free either for remarriage.

  As already stated, it is not for elders to "police" the private marital matters of couples in the congregation. However, if it becomes known that a member of the congregation is practicing or openly advocating perverted sex relations within the marriage bond, that one certainly would not be irreprehensible, and so would not be acceptable for special privileges, such as serving as an elder, a ministerial servant or a pioneer. Such practice and advocacy could even lead to expulsion from the congregation.
• 

  sd-7

  Thank you, pirata. Specifics. Chew on that, and wash it down with some eggnog.

  --sd-7
• 

  steve2

  The pompous, pseudo-authoritative writing style of the Watchtower has been drilled into your head over the years for excellent purpose. You may like to get one-up on the irritating and delusional "Eggnog" by submitting your article direct to the Watchtower "writing department" for publication. JW readers drawn to provocative questions can then avidly devour its starchly lifeless recommendations and - as seems to be the case among JWs - promptly ignore its multiple frownings.

  The image of confining the pleasuring one's spouse to the "marriage bed" is a strangely difficult one to eradicate: I cannot imagine what such a bed looks like - let alone what it does to one's spouse.
• 

  the max

  SD7, YOU have to have been at brooklyn, I take my hat of to you SIR, If you posses that inate ability to write in that style, YOU will go far , seriously, dont restrict your talents to making us laugh,( MY WIFE HAS ALREADY HIDDEN HER RABBIT ) , get out there man, you are one seriously funny guy. I thought it was a serious post. Humour kills everything, HA HA HA !!!