Posts by Fisherman

36

"Armageddon is already here"; "the preaching work is done" -- rogue teachings in your congregation?

by FatFreek 2005 in

one of my jw sons seems to be putting pressure on his non-jw brother apparently to scare him into accepting the troof and start coming to meetings.

wild statements like our topic title, which i know are not supported at jw dot org, have been made to my non-jw son several times over the past year or so.

while i haven't been privy to the actual phone conversations i tend to believe that the jw son is being pressured by the local elders to cut ties with the non-jw since their conversations seem to degrade into arguments -- therefore tending to weaken the jws faith in wt teachings.. either my jw son is lying about what i would call rogue teachings (and this would disappoint me greatly) or he is in some close knit clique in his congregation which has secretly chosen to go rogue on certain wt issues.. based on many of the recent posts here about drastic money and wt organization problems this could be a sign of pending splits of certain congregation members.. what do you think?

Fisherman

sign of pending splits of certain congregation members.

Talk and speculation and excitement but who wants to leave to start another religion? For what? Core JW have expectations and hope that the end will come in their lifetime and they have the mind frame that they will stick with wt whether or not the end comes. Changing things around doctrinally and saying that the GT is here or there or that it began 20 year ago or whatever does not change a thing. Babylon the Great must be attacked or some supernatural event or realization by hardcore atheists must occur: A change empirically coming from God that will impact everyone on the planet = "the end will come.." In the meantime, people are still dying and human suffering continues......

57

Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Randy Wall

by TerryWalstrom in

http://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/webcastview-webdiffusionvue-eng.aspx?cas=37273&id=2017%2f2017-11-02--37273&date=2017-11-02.

Fisherman

If we win

What remedies are you asking for?

10

February 2018 Watchtower

by Listener in

note the picture on the top right hand side.

the little boy in green is standing between the man's legs (jesus), face forward.

the picture is not appropriate at all and suggestive.

Fisherman

" They that know no evil, suspect none." - Ben Jonson

13

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS

by lastmanstanding in

christian legal fellowship (clf) seems to have a new member.

the jehovah’s witnesses aka the watchtower.the membership list does not seem to be public, but i am sure that with enough inquiries from the public -that clog the arteries of their email server- we can get at the truth.just like the watchtower affiliation with the un, it seems now the watchtower has affiliated with trinitarians.the clf brings legal action on behalf of the tower.. .

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57503f9022482e2aa29ab3af/t/59d6a60ba8b2b09201dd26bf/1507239436646/clf+-+wall+-+intervener+factum.pdfhttp://www.christianlegalfellowship.org/blog/2017/8/10/clf-applies-to-intervene-at-scc-in-religious-autonomy-caseto be a member with the clf, the watchtower... "must be able and willing to sign the statement of faith...."http://www.christianlegalfellowship.org/new-page/see item 2 of the clf "statement of faith"http://www.christianlegalfellowship.org/statement-of-faith2 "there is one god, eternally existent in three persons: father, son and holy spirit.".

Fisherman

The point is that the Court decision will affect the legal interests on the intervenor whether they are bedfellows or not with one of the litigants. Being bedfellows is a seperate issue and being an intervenor does not make such a bedfellow to one of the parties.

The Moslems Association lawyer, an amicus curiae at this related Appeal made the statement that the church uses a cloak as a front to disguise what they are really about, or something to that effect, Mr Gnam though, addressed that statement refuting it and stating that it was very offensive -not a bedfellowish things to say about each other. It is about the Court decision and not about the relationship between the parties, everyone can hang as far as anyone cares --after the favorable legal decision is rendered. It does not seem proper though if JW joined in with BTG to achieve a common interest, but that ain't what they are doing here. They didn't join forces sort of speak to get the Court decision passed.

110

Exjw activists protesting inside a Kingdom Hall today!

by Crazyguy in

spoonfed nomore, has uploaded a video on his youtube site, of exjw activists protesting inside a kingdom hall during this sunday meeting.

several people speak out.

if some one can put a link on here that would be awesome, i can’t figure out how to do it with an i phone.

Fisherman

At least 27 dead, 27 injured in Texas church shooting, officials say http://abc7ny.com/at-least-27-dead-27-injured-in-texas-church-shooting-officials-say/2606995/

57

Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Randy Wall

by TerryWalstrom in

http://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/webcastview-webdiffusionvue-eng.aspx?cas=37273&id=2017%2f2017-11-02--37273&date=2017-11-02.

Fisherman

I think they get more than just that. --OC

There is an insinuation by the Repondent and by the Court throughout the Hearing that the expulsion of a JW member is like the termination of contract employment of a minister by the Church and that a defrocked minister can bring the church to Court for damages but Mr Gnam argues that such contract must not only exist as it relates to JW but must at the same time be a legally enforceable contract to begin with ( not all contracts are legally enforceable), and that the church cannot be brought to Court for church doctrine only for property, civil rights, torts, or criminal matters -but not for religious process.

( I got confused too before listening to the whole appeal . I had figured that WT won at lower Court and that MR Hall was Appealing the decision, but the context of what you posted made it clear what you wanted to say anyway.)

57

Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Randy Wall

by TerryWalstrom in

http://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/webcastview-webdiffusionvue-eng.aspx?cas=37273&id=2017%2f2017-11-02--37273&date=2017-11-02.

Fisherman

Likewise in this situation. It isn't the WT's interpretation of JCs that should have the most bearing - it is the appellant's interpretation of the JC hearings that should carry the most weight.

OC, who is the appellant in the related SCC case?

OC, it is not wt interpretation that JC is Religious practice, up until now in Canana that is how the Court viewed it. I can't see how the Court will secularize JC church process, but anything is possible.

57

Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Randy Wall

by TerryWalstrom in

http://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/webcastview-webdiffusionvue-eng.aspx?cas=37273&id=2017%2f2017-11-02--37273&date=2017-11-02.

Fisherman

Whichever way it goes in this case, the Court cannot intervene without trespassing on religious freedom. Hall's attorney justified this, quantifying the intrusion in his argument as " just a little".

Could there be consequences from proceeding through a yellow light as if it was green to go? To get hit by another car having a green light.

As a remedy, what I have seen higher Courts do, is to find errors of law in the lower Court's adjudication and send it back down.

Reading Mr Hall's factum, he claims that the elders weren't doing their spiritual job and therefore he should not have be expelled from the group. He also claims that he experienced financial loss and emotional consequences resulting from his expulsion, as a remedy he wants a justiciable, secular standard of justice imposed on the church that the church should adhere to, and that church members should be able to, after exhausting all church administrative remedies, bring their grievances to secular Courts for secular justice.

7

JW view of apostates is of human origin

by venus in

god doesn’t take action against a person who has long history of faithfulness when he fails for the first time.

for example, satan is freely permitted to move in heaven and on earth even after many many sins he keeps on practicing.

israel as a nation was not rejected at the first instance of their disobedience.

Fisherman

The Bible mentions that kings also offered sacrifices to God. In this particular case, Sauls's sin was not based on him not being a priest. It was because he did not follow orders. Samuel told him to wait. Would the ritual of offering up the sacrifices to God please God? Is that what the king of Israel figured?!!!! Would not have God pleased if Saul only waited for Samuel... Laters on in the matter of Agag, Samuel rebuked Saul telling him: .. Does Jehovah take delight in sacrifices than in obedience in the voice of Jehovah?? To obey is better than a sacrifice..

57

Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Randy Wall

by TerryWalstrom in

http://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/webcastview-webdiffusionvue-eng.aspx?cas=37273&id=2017%2f2017-11-02--37273&date=2017-11-02.

Fisherman

What exactly was the ruling of the lower Court?