Freeman is right. Whenever the elders call to determine whether or not you remain a faithful Jehovah's Witness, it is not your belief in Jehovah or in Christ that they are investigating. The critical question for them is whether or not you still believe that the Watchtower Society represents God's only channel of communication. If you question this or even express doubts about it you will probably be invited to attend a meeting with the elders at the Kingdom Hall to "readjust your thinking." Many times this meeting actually turns out to be a judicial meeting.
The elders act more like spiritual policemen than they do loving brothers. And those in the congregation will avoid you if just a rumor has brought suspicion on your standing in the congregation. And it has been my experience that rumors are often initiated by the wives of the elders who always seem to be privy to confidential matters in the congregation.
SOJ: There is a vast difference between the party line of the Watchtower and the reality of what really occurs.
THE MOST IMPORTANT DOCTRINE IS: THE RESURRECTION HOPE.
Think about it...
So said SOJ...........I guess it is to dubs because they will all see their families and friends die...before dying themselves.......without realising to WTS promises.......just like the generations that were duped in the early 1900s, mid 1900s, late 1900s etc. etc.
ISP
THE MOST IMPORTANT DOCTRINE IS: THE RESURRECTION HOPE.
Think about it...
Well, SOJ, how WRONG you are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
the most important doctrine is believing in God and Jesus and believing in the bible, PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
anything after that is a BONUS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Watchtower dangles a carrot in front of all of you and you fall for it.
but for JW's it's strictly about THEMSELVES, what will Jehovah God do for me ?
I don't care about anything just give me life on a paradise earth and I'm happy, spoken like a true brainwashed JW.
does the Watchtower ever have their priorities backwards.
Wouldn't one think that if a Jehovah's Witness really believes that his disfellowshipped relatives are going to die at Armageddon that it would be more reason for them to associate with them now?
Does the Watchtower Society really think that shunning brings a person to repentence? Rather, doesn't it build a resentment against a cruel and uncaring organization?
Is it reasonable that a group of old men who have no families of their own (Governing Body) should make decisions which divide other families and bring much sorrow and pain upon them?
So as far as loyalty oaths, does anyone know the exact current wording of the baptismal questions? Meaning the two they ask during the baptism talk where everyone is supposed to yell "YES!" so everyone can hear. Kind of skipped that talk at the last assembly...
Can anyone really picture the early Christians including this loyal oath to the organization as part of the baptism procedure? It is obviously an attempt of the Watchtower Society to elevate its own position of importance along side that of Jehovah and Christ. And,as I recall, this was the mistake that Satan made.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Watchtower has substitued itself in the many roles that belong to Christ alone: Savior, Judge, Mediator, Priest, etc... What a rude awakening it will have when Christ says: "Get away from me you workers of lawlessness. I never knew you at all."
Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization
That's the part where you are supposed to walk out of the auditorium.
If you "read between the lines", the question really doesn't ask about you understanding that baptism IDs you as a JW in association with the "spirit-directed" publishing corporation, but actually, you are supposed to understand the consequences with what having that identity will bring to you in your life going forward!
Is it possible that this inclusion in the baptism ceremony was really a legal ploy of the Watchtower Society? With the increase of lawsuits against the organization, could this be used as evidence to prevent a person from claiming damages from the organization that he took a vow to support?
Perhaps, I'm just being too cynical. But it did occur to me that the Society's motivation could be more than just the obvious "loyalty oath" apsect.
