Pleasing Jehovah or Pleasing the Congregation??

by worldlygirl 24 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  A Paduan

  Pleasing Jehovah or Pleasing the Congregation??

  Both - it's the same thing (though I think it's more like appeasing than pleasing)

  Appeasing the beast - do what it wants when it can see you and you'll be ok - and don't stick your head up too much or it'll be swiped at, particularly if you're another male (someone with a different word to impregnate the females, souls) - indeed this beast can't abide having another male among the group at all, so don't get found out

  jehovah or the cong, makes no difference - jehovah is just the image of the congregation elders
• 

  Maverick

  I am glad SOJ is over the hemorrhoids and feeling better!

  The key word is "appearances"! These publishing company zealots need to "look" the part. Image is everything. When in a committee meeting the BOE will ask, "Who knows about what you did?" The answer will have a large impact on the counsel. The corporate motto being, "tis more important to look spiritual then be spiritual". The first can be done with ease, the second is beyond their grasp! Maverick
• 

  JT

  The key word is "appearances"! These publishing company zealots need to "look" the part. Image is everything. When in a committee meeting the BOE will ask, "Who knows about what you did?" The answer will have a large impact on the counsel. The corporate motto being, "tis more important to look spiritual then be spiritual". The first can be done with ease, the second is beyond their grasp! Maverick

  you have clearly defined it so well, when we look at the wt for what it is , a Major Publishing Corp with a sales force of well over 6million person, it becomes much easier to understand them, than when folks try to make wt as some fullfillment of the bible being the antichrist, etc

  wt is a company pure and simple, they just realize the importance of masquarading around as some source of divine enlightment, that is their sales "sTICK"

  I know of very few companies esp those who are concerned about their image who don't respond much like wt does-

  most corp esp ones here in america are very concerned about the imagese of thier company

  the child abuse cases are perhaps the best example, concern over HOW WILL IT MAKE US LOOK is the driving force in many cases
• 

  BluesBrother

  For once I am going to weigh in with a view that is closer to Sword of Jah, on this one.

  All to often we highlight shortcomings that are the exception, and make out that this is the norm. As to shunning, no family member normally wants to shun another and so they wait until the last possible moment. After all, the sinner might get before the commitee and get away with a reproof. The exceptions are if they have been personally hurt by the wrongdoing , then they might shun from personal choice.

  The acts of total hypocrisy described in this thread are, I am sure individually true. But all my years of close association with dubs has shown me that they are mainly sincere people who do make an effort to do what they believe is right ,even if they find it difficult.

  Our target is the organisation that misleads the rank and file publisher, not the individuals themselves

  BTW there is no point raising a question unless one is prepared to get answers. You can tell me to go away as well,if you are only interested in posts that conform to your preconceived opinions
• 

  Faraon

  It's all about looking good.

  Why wouldn't someone be disfellowshipped for adultery if the spouse forgives them, and it is not made public. A sin is a sin.

  Also, in the eyes of Jehovah, a man who has sex with a single woman is not an adulterer. He is an adulterer only if he does it with a married woman. Women are properity.

  Tell me where in the bible does it say that a man can only have one wife? (Bishops or superintendents excluded).

  *** Watchtower 1972 January 1 pp.31-2 Questions from Readers ***

  Questions from Readers

  ? Do homosexual acts on the part of a married person constitute a Scriptural ground for divorce, freeing the innocent mate to remarry??U.S.A.

  Homosexuality is definitely condemned in the Bible as something that will prevent individuals from gaining God's approval. (1 Cor. 6:9, 10) However, whether an innocent mate would Scripturally be able to remarry after procuring a legal divorce from a mate guilty of homosexual acts must be determined on the basis of what the Bible says respecting divorce and remarriage?

  ?While both homosexuality and bestiality are disgusting perversions, in the case of neither one is the marriage tie broken. It is broken only by acts that make an individual "one flesh" with a person of the opposite sex other than his or her legal marriage mate.

  Another fine example of "a new light"