Is this new donation arrangement for real? (page 16)

OnTheWayOut

This is HUGE! I am not quite sure how huge, but HUGE!

WTS is seizing probably hundreds of millions of dollars but also showing itself to be seizing control. I can't quite put my head on what this means.

Witness My Fury

Is there a scan of the actual letter yet or did i miss it?

confusedandalone

I hate to be a wet blanket but I highly doubt that this letter will really cause some form of mass concern amongst the RandF.

I would love for it to take place but look at what emeth has stated... that same flawed logic will be employed by every company man in the place and spread to others.

Now if in some odd way which I know it will never happen that they do decide to sit with family heads and go over their tax returns... that might cause a shake up. This letter not so much

neverendingjourney

I can't quite put my head on what this means.

It's bizarre. The trend had been away from exercising control from HQ, likely in response to sexual abuse lawsuits. They didn't want liability flowing upward. This new arrangement bucks the trend.

Just thinking back to my old hall, I don't see how this arrangement changes anything. The friends would likely try to step up their game, but after a few months things would return to normal. The elders would do some hounding, but at the end of the day these people are not well off and you can't squeeze blood out of a turnip. The elders won't make the difference up out of pocket. The only way this sticks, at least with respect to the poorer congregations, is if they step it up and set a standard or minimum sum directly in the WT literature.

label licker

I still can't understand the hall we were in just gave a neighboring kingdom hall five thousand dollars out of our halls account and borrowed another fifteen thousand from society. A grand total of twenty thousand dollars was given to the neighboring hall so they could build a new hall. My question is what happened to the money they made selling their old hall and why did our hall donate twenty thousand to them? Fifteen of that borrowed from society to help another hall? Where's the money from the hall that was sold? Society owns all the halls and this is just not adding up.

hoser

what will happen when a publisher moves to a new congregation ? Will they be asked how much they are willing to donate?

never a jw

It looks as if the GB (or the leaders, whoever they are) want to push people out. Less people means less real estate needed, and therefore it can be sold and turned into cash. Cash is easier to hide or disappear in the disbursements journal.

OUTLAW

for me nothing will change.... every month i make contributions to 4 different funds

the Kingdom Hall Construction Worldwide/the Local Congregation/the Worldwide Work.....emeth

.....................I`ve got to get this Money to the WBT$!!..

....WBT$ GB Rock Star Pope Anthony Morris Is Flying to Hawaii..

.........................He Needs New Shoes And A Suit!..

.......

........................................................................................................ ...OUTLAW

skeeter1

You can't squeeze blood from a turnip.

The JWs I know don't contributed much, at all, to the Kingdom Halls. They either can't or they won't. They see the WTS problems, and are putting tmore & more of their trust in Jehovah instead of man.

never a jw

"Much of this need is in parts of the world where the cost of property and building materials is high"

Much...much..much Where have I seen this word before? where, where. Now I remember, Watchtower November 2011, public edition, page 27.

Don't you love how the Watchtower carefully chooses words to deceive. Just like in the former context the WT wants the reader to interpret MUCH as most, when in reality is actually very little. See the statement below to defend 607 BCE (or 1914):

“Clearly, much of the astronomical data in VAT 4956 fits the year 588 B.C.E. as the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar II” (WT 11/11 public, pg 27)

Because I have taken the time to research the subject in detail, I can assure you that "much" in this case means 6/36 or less than 17 % using generous criteria, or 0% using strict criteria.

Instead of being specific, the writer uses much to imply "most" when they know darn well that it actually means "very little"

The growth of the WT s in countries where land and materials are dirt cheap, Developed countries are losing converts.

Is this new donation arrangement for real?

Share this