Prayers of non-JWs are not heard!

by ozziepost 18 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  plmkrzy

  Hey there Ozzie,

  I always thought that was another one of those "custom" things that the WTS took to the moon. I wonder why they didn't site at least one scripture with that? hummmm. I gotta look up the scripture and read what comes before and after it now to see why. As soon as I can remember where the the scripture is . But if I am remembering correctly, the head covering thing was simply an old custom of "respect" for the head of the house, in so many words. It had nothing to do with being heard by God.

  But on the other hand, if they turned on another light in the future, then the poor women might lose the last form of recognition they have. Even if it does reguire putting a doylee on the head. It's the only time inside the congergation and even out side the congergation when a women is treated "ALMOST" like a complement.

  plum
• 

  refiners fire

  Hey oz.

  When I was doing the old Watchtower reading scanning thru pages and pages of material a night I learnt, after a while,to spot patterns, and, among those patterns, to note arguements that didnt have any scripture citation. Or they might have quoted scripture in support of their argument but its from the Psalms. A sure sign of something shonky!

  What you call "mans reasoning"!

  Edited by - refiners fire on 5 July 2002 5:19:21
• 

  biblexaminer

  The CO poked fun at the ancient Jews for making laws, laws, laws.

  "You couldn't walk on tha grass on the Sabbath because you might knock off some seeds on the tips of the blades of grass and that would be threshing and threshing is not allowed on the Sabbath"

  All the good folks laughed it up, yet I bet they had a twinge of conscience, thinking 'hey... that sounds like a Watchtower rule'....
• 

  MacHislopp

  Helklo Ozziepost,

  excellent comments from you and all the others.

  Just ...onother man made rule.

  Another point: few lines further down on the same

  watchtower it is written (about a young baptized son)

  the following: " She may feel that he is not yet sufficiently

  capable and may choose to offer prayer herself."

  Now, the WBTS Inc., did write sometime ago that

  only baptized members have: "...unlimited acced to Jehovah

  through the prayer...".

  So capable of making a life dedication to Jehovah God,

  but "...not yet sufficiently capable..." to pray to Him???

  Greetings to you all,

  J.C.MacHislopp

  sufficiently
• 

  Faraon

  >Now, the WBTS Inc., did write sometime ago that only baptized members have: "...unlimited acced to Jehovah through the prayer...".

  Didn't you read the fine print from the WTBS (Watch Tower Bullshit Society)?

  Disclaimer:

  Jehovah will not listen to male members leading a prayer without a coat and tie, or women when there are male publishers present. This will cause a temporary disconnection.
• 

  plmkrzy

  Maybe the poor unbaptized boy should just tell the sister not to bother because he has "Sprint" now.

  That might make a good commercial

  No more static!
• 

  Lieu

  Doesn't it say that a woman's hair is her head covering?
• 

  plmkrzy

  Only if she doesn't cut it. Don't know if thats shoulder length or what.
• 

  ozziepost

  I think the text we are refeering to is found at 1 Corinthians 11:5-8.

  There are two schools of thought on this passage.

  One is that it's to be taken literally, and that Paul's diection is not to be taken just for his time, but for ours also.

  The other school of thought, that Ozzie subscribes to, is that scripture must be read in context. So Paul's words had a temporary cultural significance. In his time, a woman taking off her head covering in public and exposing her hair was a sign of loose morals and sexual promiscuity. Paul says she might as well have her cut off or shaved off. The shaved head was a sign of disgrace.. So Paul's message was: show respect for your husband by covering your head during public worship.

  Cheers, Ozzie