Posts by Fisherman

30

How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.

by Island Man in

watchtower teaches jws that christ's presence began invisibly in 1914. they also teach that the start of christ's presence coincides with the start of the last days.

whether you believe in the bible or not, watchtower claims these teachings come from the bible.

so does the bible actually agree with them?

Fisherman

Most JWs today aren't even aware

Fin, the jig is up, the internet has made it known and they know.

30

How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.

by Island Man in

watchtower teaches jws that christ's presence began invisibly in 1914. they also teach that the start of christ's presence coincides with the start of the last days.

whether you believe in the bible or not, watchtower claims these teachings come from the bible.

so does the bible actually agree with them?

Fisherman

JWs can capitalize on its vagueness

That is what you see and what do you know?

30

How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.

by Island Man in

watchtower teaches jws that christ's presence began invisibly in 1914. they also teach that the start of christ's presence coincides with the start of the last days.

whether you believe in the bible or not, watchtower claims these teachings come from the bible.

so does the bible actually agree with them?

Fisherman

"short period of time " juxtapose "I am coming quickly.."

30

How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.

by Island Man in

watchtower teaches jws that christ's presence began invisibly in 1914. they also teach that the start of christ's presence coincides with the start of the last days.

whether you believe in the bible or not, watchtower claims these teachings come from the bible.

so does the bible actually agree with them?

Fisherman

You only posted your conslusions which does not disprove Jw's.

56

Any former elders brains I could pick?

by BarelyThere in

jw
friends

i posted in another topic a few hours ago.

it is my first time on here or any website like this, ever.

i was dfed back in september for adultery.

I agree, but if you sign a marriage contract with someone are you not bound by its terms? Is it not proper to obey the terms of the contract agreement? Adultery is legal and scriptural grounds for divorce against the offending party. And why? But if a person gets a legal divorce on legal grounds, she cannot be charged with adultery by the State, or even by her mate (legally) later on if she remarries or has sex with someone else after the divorce (the congregation can). And frankly, who would want for force a spouse to stay married to him? And when she is divorced, should not the spouse see that she respected him and the marriage. Even the congregation does not view them legally married and are not allowed to have sex should they wish to return. But if a spouse cheats on her mate during the marriage, such conduct violates the marriage agreement, and that is not the proper thing to do.

56

Any former elders brains I could pick?

by BarelyThere in

jw
friends

i posted in another topic a few hours ago.

it is my first time on here or any website like this, ever.

i was dfed back in september for adultery.

Fisherman

Not the scriptural thing to do but the proper thing to do under the circumstances was to face your spouse and inform him of your decision to divorce and also the congregation and then get your divorce -defiantly, and after that your spouse cannot say to you that you cheated, he would have to respect you acknowledging that you cannot be forced to stay with him if you do not want him and were unhappy with him. Same consequences in terms of DF, however, DF is guaranteed doing it this way but you would have shown respect to your spouse and your marriage. Is that not the way you would have wanted it if the shoe was on the other foot?

56

Any former elders brains I could pick?

by BarelyThere in

jw
friends

i posted in another topic a few hours ago.

it is my first time on here or any website like this, ever.

i was dfed back in september for adultery.

Fisherman

An offending party is not always DF for the sin of adultery. Depends on the party. When DF then how long? 6 months or more. How soon? Depends on the stench, it has to die out to the extent of the cong.. About a year. Could be less or could be more but never less than 6 months and although not a written rule it is an observable constant. IF YOU QUALIFY FOR REINSTATEMENT is the qualifying factor. IF you do not, you are never going to be reinstated.

96

Is the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses really an inferior form of Christianity?

by nicolaou in

seems to be quite a few posters recently pulling down the beliefs of jw's as not biblical or truly christian.

maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong, i really don't care.. in some important ways though mainstream christians often behave better than jehovah's witnesses; most don't practice shunning or impose lethal medical prohibitions on their members.

many are far more tolerant of the lgbt community and a few even make the awkward attempt to square the fact of evolution with their faith.. please note that i'm saying some, not all.. so i suppose it's fair to say that differing forms of christianity can be better or worse for individuals, families and the wider community.

Fisherman

Uncantnome:

Conscience does not define a standard or a value. It only works to indicate deviation from a known or given value or standard.

7

I hope A JW win Powerball

by ShirleyW in

jw
friends

if so, they probably won't come forward for a while, then when they do, they'll probably be dragged into the back room for a talk about how the dubs don't gamble, then the winner says he'll donate some, and of course all will be forgiven, then the dub may finally see the hypocrisy of the cult and denounce them on national tv as they hold up that big giant check for all to see!

Fisherman

Out of the clear blue sky someone came up to me and gave me a powerball ticket in front of witnesses. Imagine that! I laughed and and refused to accept it but he kept insisting and finally I took it.

96

Is the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses really an inferior form of Christianity?

by nicolaou in

seems to be quite a few posters recently pulling down the beliefs of jw's as not biblical or truly christian.

maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong, i really don't care.. in some important ways though mainstream christians often behave better than jehovah's witnesses; most don't practice shunning or impose lethal medical prohibitions on their members.

many are far more tolerant of the lgbt community and a few even make the awkward attempt to square the fact of evolution with their faith.. please note that i'm saying some, not all.. so i suppose it's fair to say that differing forms of christianity can be better or worse for individuals, families and the wider community.

Fisherman

Pay close attention. DD

OK.

There are 2 variables in your comments.

1. Because God allows evil, is He doing evil somehow and hence not worthy of worship.

2. Can a JW leader exploit a teaching to justify some action?

I was responding to the first part of your post that deals with God not being worthy of worship. In response to your second post, the JW teaches that God having the power to bring relief to a particular hardship many times chooses to allow it inspite of pleadings from a servant. But JW never teach that He is the cause or source of it although some people can conclude that He is (derivatively)