My latest letter to the org and their reply (page 2)

serafin

well,

this was back in the late 80s, im sure they are done with it...i will ask my mother if she recalls...anyone here does?
serafin

hawkaw

Alan,

That was an excellent and well thought out post. I never thought of how the "apostate teaching" crap makes them "inspired".

As always, thanks

hawk

I was baptized in the late 80's in Canada and never had to fill out a questionnaire and sign it????? Pre-baptismal prep consisted of answering the three part Questions for Baptism at the back of the Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry book -- with three different elders.

My info on the exact text of the questions for baptism is in another account's filing cabinet. But the second one is something about "Do you understand that becoming a Witness means you are part of Jehovah's spirit-anointed organization?" Beyond Jehovah's Witnesses.com has a paper on the change on questions in 1985, for those who care to investigate.

outnfree

Tanalyst

"appreciate"
I see they still love that word.I was so burned out reading that word in their publications in late 70's, as they used it everywhere.When I'd hear that word on TV I'd think they were JW's too.

"permitted them at times to be in error"
Of course God permitted them,if he didn't permit them fire & sulfur would have consumed them. Somebody has to fulfill Christ's words of "False Prophets".

MacHislopp

Hello uncle_onion,

a very interesting reply from the
WTS branch in England.

I posted sometime ago a comment on the w. 1.4.1986 QfR
concerning "difellowshipping and apostates", and I do agree
with Alan F. statements:

"They said, "The Governing Body and those under its direction used to write the material in the publications are merely diligent Bible students. They have never claimed to be inspired or infallible, but merely published the results of their intense Bible study for the benefit of others." This is a good example of the GB's wanting to have their cake an eat it too. While the statement that they have never claimed inspiration or infallibility is technically true, in that they have never flat-out claimed such, it is entirely misleading because for all practical purposes they have indeed made such claims.

In practice, the Society declares that anyone who publicly disagrees with their teachings is an apostate. Now, according to the Society, what is an apostate? For one thing, an apostate is anyone who publicly disagrees with Society teachings, so that's not very helpful here. For another, an apostate is anyone who has abandoned God or "God's organization", so that anyone who repudiates the teachings of "God's organization" -- the JW organization under the leadership of the Governing Body -- is an apostate. In simple terms, anyone who disagrees with the teachings of the Governing Body has abandoned God and his organization and therefore is an apostate. So in practice, anyone who disagrees with the results that these "merely diligent Bible students" come up with, or with the published "results of their intense Bible study", they declare "apostate". Such "apostates" who are not JWs are shunned, and such "apostates" who are baptized JWs are disfellowshipped.

Now, according to the Society itself, disfellowshipping is a declaring that someone has unrepentantly sinned against God, and reflects not mere human judgment, but a judgment that has already been made in heaven. Thus the Society teaches that disagreeing with JW leaders is disagreeing with God -- no exceptions. The April 1, 1986 Watchtower "Questions from Readers" explicitly declares this teaching and justifies the Society's actions in disfellowshipping dissenters. It argues that, because Watchtower leaders have been put in their places by God himself, to disagree with their teaching is to disagree with God and make the dissenter an apostate."

A good proof of "double meaning talk, one for the media and the
other for the rank & file.

Agape, J.C. MacHislopp

teejay

uncle_onion,

All those who are still JWs here should read the letters and
think very carefully about things.

A very serious challenge. What percentage of those who read
it do you think will take it up?

wobble

I came accross this old thread from Uncle Onion and thought it would be good for newbies to read to see the obvious duplicity of the WT

LIARS,and they know it! How can someone in Bethel sit at akeyboard and write lies,and half-truths and think they are serving God?

Love

Wobble

creativhoney

it basically sums up in three words the response by any witness to any question that shakes foundations...

errrrmmm

ask the elders.

fokyc

I just love the last 2 paragraphs,

...'keep in close contact with the elders in your congregation'...

...'we again encourage you to speak with the elders'...

The local elders are just as proficient liars as the branch brothers are.

fokyc

gubberningbody

Yup, it's this sort of lying and equivocation that makes me want to "keep in close contact" and "to speak with" those mouthing such tricky words with a baseball bat.

Ok, So it's Billy Jack, I was looking for Buford Pusser, but you get the idea

My latest letter to the org and their reply

Share this