It seems so foolish now looking back, that we felt we had the obligation to submit a "report" of our time!
I suppose that it what being in a cult does to us - makes us do ridiculous things without question!
i thought it was bad enough that jw`s put in weekly reports of fs hours every month in the d2d work when in fact the average publisher would never mention this "good news of the kingdom" to the householder .. more often than not it would be something like some mundane thing about what they have observed about the householders property whether they have kids ,what a lovely garden they have before being cut off by the householder with i`m not interested knowing jw`s are trying to convert them/sell them the watchtower and closing the door.. yet the jw goes away happily putting in a report telling jehovah they have spent so much time in the fs witnessing about him and the kingdom of christ jesus...... cart witnessing is even a worse lie ,why ?
because jw`s make no attempt to witness to anybody they expect people to come to them to be witnessed to which of course never happens .
they spend hours upon hours a month telling jehovah by their fs reports they hand in how much they have witnessed for him ,when in fact they have done nothing of the sort .. they chit chat among themselves witnessing to nobody for hours on end and then lie in their fs report they have been witnessing for jehovah ?.
It seems so foolish now looking back, that we felt we had the obligation to submit a "report" of our time!
I suppose that it what being in a cult does to us - makes us do ridiculous things without question!
loyalty appears to be the buzzword constantly promoted by the gb at the moment.
we hear it at conventions, assemblies, and meetings.. let's face it loyalty covers so much.
shunning of family, friends etc.
Ah yup! How convenient that the new new world translation had those words changed! Obviously it was by design, and tied in so well with the convention topic!
again with the pants... tony, if you can't stop looking at young men in tight pants don't take it out on the rest of us.
https://www.facebook.com/john.cedars.5/posts/868329653345317.
And when I was at bethel during the mid to late 1990's, we were repeatedly counselled on "baggy clothing being inappropriate for Christians"!
If our suits were deemed to be too loose, or not fitting, the Bethel elders would make it a point of concern!
Seriously, how times turn....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhq5viughny&feature=youtu.be.
quite frankly im disturbed at the lack of love and compassion.
especially for the first sister they talk about!.
Imagine how deflated and worthless that sister with health problems will now feel when the only things that validates her in the JW world is stripped away from her?
She is a "flaxen wick" and "crushed reed" who needs to be taken care of.
No crushed reed will he break; and as for a dim flaxen wick, he will not extinguish it. In trueness he will bring forth justice. —Isaiah 42:1-4.
Now she will be treated differently, and viewed differently now that her title has been removed.
(Now, to be honest this JW gold-fish bowl of "importance" is silly - we know, but I am trying to think of how she would feel)
Nope...those elders have a set of man-made stipulations from the Branch to implement...
again with the pants... tony, if you can't stop looking at young men in tight pants don't take it out on the rest of us.
https://www.facebook.com/john.cedars.5/posts/868329653345317.
And sadly, my very in Elder father doesn't believe this ever happened.
Australia has not had the "privilege" of ToMo3's rants, and until they hear it themselves here, they remain blissfully ignorant of the wackiness of the Society...In fact they deny something so wacky could ever have been said by a GB member. (and of course, the will not watch any videos from the internet)
is it vital for credibility to have the name of the writer of an article referenced?.
does this allow for honesty and accountability?
does this assist in ensuring that whatever is presented is as factual as possible, or not biased in some way toward the religion's ideas?.
Is it vital for credibility to have the name of the writer of an article referenced?
Does this allow for honesty and accountability? Does this assist in ensuring that whatever is presented is as factual as possible, or not biased in some way toward the Religion's ideas?
I know that some of our fellow forum members have written articles for the Society, so please do not feel that I am questioning your sincerity at the time.
These questions came up in my mind as I once again contemplated how the Society goes to great lengths to keep the writers of articles anonymous. This applies to actual "doctrinal" material (in magazines, books etc) as well as both internal and external branch letters and documents.
How much easier is it for them to present inaccurate or biased material when there is no ACCOUNTABILITY or TRANSPERENCY?
This is apparent especially when it comes to letters from the Branch of a legal nature (such as in the case of child abuse issues - eg the Palmer case) No one seems to have signed off on the directions from the branch. No one is taking accountability.
So would it make a difference if the Society referenced the writers by name? Would it create a culture of honesty and transparency? Would it even matter?
Thoughts?
again with the pants... tony, if you can't stop looking at young men in tight pants don't take it out on the rest of us.
https://www.facebook.com/john.cedars.5/posts/868329653345317.
If this isn't an example of behaviour like the Pharasees displayed, then I don't know what is!
"They bind up heavy loads on the shoulders of men"
"They disregard the law by means of their traditions"
"They make the word of God invalid"
etc...
dear tony morris and all the management at the unicorn ranch,.
since i know you are avid readers of our delightful posts here on jw discussion, i thought i would take the opportunity to ask you a few key questions but first a little background info about me.. when i joined your outfit many years ago i was a schoolboy and believed what your organisation told me to believe (i was not very bright) and i expected the end of the “old world system of things” to come in my youth as you had said.
of course it didn’t, it still hasn’t and i’m sure this fact must hang heavily on your conscience.. my father told me that jehovah’s witnesses break up families and defending the watchtower up to the hilt, i told him, ”rubbish!” how disrespectful of me.. i declined the offer of college education as you had suggested and later gave up my job to become a window cleaner, my father threw me out of his house for giving up a career and joining such a family- breaking cult but i wouldn’t listen to him, i just got on with it and pioneered like a good obedient jw zombie.. later still i got married and had three children, alas, i only have one of my children who speaks to me freely as one warm rational human to another, the other two remain jehovah’s witnesses.. ok governing body and other managers, i admit we mock you here, it may not all be justified but once you also wake up and leave the org, then you too will get to be as angry as we are, then you too, will understand us.
It may be too difficult for ToMo3 and his mates to read this...as their heads are too far up their own backsides...
i don't really need to explain anything really.
all i can say is that i was gob smacked at the sheer audaciousness of the entire study article.
i'm still speechless.
It is actually a GOOD thing that the Society and the GB act in such hypocritical ways!
It will help more and more Witnesses awaken to the fact that the org is a dangerous cult....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhq5viughny&feature=youtu.be.
quite frankly im disturbed at the lack of love and compassion.
especially for the first sister they talk about!.
OK, I have watched it right through now, and sadly I think it is legit!
I think it is actually a video designed to show them the CORRECT way of handling things! I had hoped it was a video showing how NOT to handle matters...but alas...they really are that arbitrary and legalistic and full of self importance!