Posts by XQsThaiPoes

14

New KM, With New Procedures!

by Doubtfully Yours in

in the newest kingdom ministry publication comes the information of how they're combining the 'no blood' card and the 'health proxy' document into only one card.. the card will have pertinent information according to the region where the person lives.

publishers will only need to change this card if personal information changes, otherwise one can keep the card forever instead of the nonsense of having to fill one out at the beginning of each year.. the wtbts sure is simplifying matters as time goes by.

good!!!

XQsThaiPoes

I know you will say its BS, but here goes. I have let my blood card lapse many a times with out problem or reprisal. Maybe elders in you guys neck of the woods are hyper vigilent, but here they barely do sheparding calls, or pass out the kms in time, let-lone running up to see if you need them to watch you sign a piece of paper.

14

New KM, With New Procedures!

by Doubtfully Yours in

in the newest kingdom ministry publication comes the information of how they're combining the 'no blood' card and the 'health proxy' document into only one card.. the card will have pertinent information according to the region where the person lives.

publishers will only need to change this card if personal information changes, otherwise one can keep the card forever instead of the nonsense of having to fill one out at the beginning of each year.. the wtbts sure is simplifying matters as time goes by.

good!!!

XQsThaiPoes

But we all know that it isn't truly optional. There are "expectations" that everyone will be busying about getting their documents signed, with an air of excitement. "Oooh, who can sign it, did we fill in all the boxes and get it signed in front of witnesses, are you watching me sigh it Brother Myopic? oooh..."

Hmm maybe it was just his oppinion, but he basically said that is careless and you should go over it alone, and with family, and then arange to have it signed instead of running up to the elders wanting a bunch of john hancocks. Thats why I want to see what they do when it is time to sign these things. If you remember June was when they rolled out the newest version of the fraction policy. Since they are turning two papers into one it seems like the changes are deliberate to reflect the new safer and less liable* yet oddly more theologically conflicting policy.

*Many people sue over the blood issue regularly. Even if the watchtower has never had to pay damages they seem lately to rather have their lawyers work on new tax code than a bunch of custody or civil cases linked to the blood issue. So i think they want to legally be close to unencumbered as they can with JWdom. Even if it means secretly changing how elders/hlc works while declawing their paper tiger.

26

Jesus/Michael Is there a change?

by aniron in

a neighbour of mine had jw's call.

they told her that jesus was not the archangel michael!!

have they changed or what?

XQsThaiPoes

"XQs, you don't underline the final sentence (the only one the average JW will remember):"

Lol the average JW would not remember this article. Because they never would have read it in the first place since its not a study article

Funny how the watchtower says it is not in the bible and that the bible olny implies something. Years ago they would have just started under divine revalation that it is so. Such as the Great crowd being metaphysically relocating to earth from their former place in the heavens. I guess you can call it a witness protection plan of sorts.

BTW this is the end of the debate because I produced the article and the originator of this post says that some JWs don't believe Michael is that archangel. So everything fits nicely.

14

New KM, With New Procedures!

by Doubtfully Yours in

in the newest kingdom ministry publication comes the information of how they're combining the 'no blood' card and the 'health proxy' document into only one card.. the card will have pertinent information according to the region where the person lives.

publishers will only need to change this card if personal information changes, otherwise one can keep the card forever instead of the nonsense of having to fill one out at the beginning of each year.. the wtbts sure is simplifying matters as time goes by.

good!!!

XQsThaiPoes

I have to go to a SM meeting before they read this to hear our PO (something came up so I hope they did not already do it). But this june he said signing these forms are "a conscience matter". meaning that they are optional. Now note this. In some areas (I am not naming them) but if you flash a blood card and say certain things some places will give you a discount. So I know many people will sign out of habbit/benefits, but I wonder about this new optional idea. Is it really optional, and if it is why?

26

Jesus/Michael Is there a change?

by aniron in

a neighbour of mine had jw's call.

they told her that jesus was not the archangel michael!!

have they changed or what?

XQsThaiPoes

This is the first article that dileberately injects doubt into peoples mind I lost a study behind it because he had finally conceded to the belief Jesus was Michael. After reding the less than direct article he returned back to his orginal stance.

Articles after this one slowly erode the absolute certainty that jesus is Michael, but it is hidden in weird one liners in articles that have nothing to do with J/M. This is the best I could dig up.

26

Jesus/Michael Is there a change?

by aniron in

a neighbour of mine had jw's call.

they told her that jesus was not the archangel michael!!

have they changed or what?

XQsThaiPoes

*** g02 2/8 pp. 16-17 Who Is Michael the Archangel? ***

The

Bible?s Viewpoint

Who

Is Michael the Archangel?

ACCORDING to the Bible, there are millions of angelic creatures inhabiting the spirit realm. (Daniel 7:9, 10; Revelation 5:11) From beginning to end, the Scriptures make hundreds of references to the angels that remain loyal to God. Yet, only two of these spirit creatures are mentioned by name. One is the angel Gabriel, who personally delivered messages from God to three different individuals over a period of some 600 years. (Daniel 9:20-22; Luke 1:8-19, 26-28) The other angel mentioned by name in the Bible is Michael.

Michael is clearly an outstanding angel. For example, in the book of Daniel, Michael is described as fighting wicked demons in behalf of Jehovah?s people. (Daniel 10:13; 12:1) In the inspired letter of Jude, Michael confronts Satan in a dispute over Moses? body. (Jude 9) The book of Revelation shows that Michael wars with Satan and his demons and hurls them out of heaven. (Revelation 12:7-9) No other angel is portrayed as having such great power and authority over God?s enemies. It is no wonder, then, that the Bible appropriately refers to Michael as "the archangel," the prefix "arch" meaning "chief," or "principal."

The

Controversy Over Michael?s Identity

Christendom?s religions, as well as Judaism and Islam, have conflicting ideas on the subject of angels. Some explanations are vague. For instance, The Anchor Bible Dictionary states: "There may be a single superior angel and/or a small group of archangels (usually four or seven)." According to The Imperial Bible-Dictionary, Michael is the "name of a superhuman being, in regard to whom there have in general been two rival opinions, either that he is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, or that he is one of the so-called seven archangels."

In Jewish tradition these seven archangels are Gabriel, Jeremiel, Michael, Raguel, Raphael, Sariel, and Uriel. On the other hand, Islam believes in four archangels, namely, Jibril, Mikal, Izrail, and Israfil. Catholicism also believes in four archangels: Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, and Uriel. What does the Bible say? Are there several archangels?

The

Bible?s Answer

Aside from Michael, no archangel is mentioned in the Bible, nor do the Scriptures use the term "archangel" in the plural. The Bible describes Michael as the archangel, implying that he alone bears that designation. Hence, it is reasonable to conclude that Jehovah God has delegated to one, and only one, of his heavenly creatures full authority over all other angels.

Aside from the Creator himself, only one faithful person is spoken of as having angels under subjection?namely, Jesus Christ. (Matthew 13:41; 16:27; 24:31) The apostle Paul made specific mention of "the Lord Jesus" and "his powerful angels." (2 Thessalonians 1:7) And Peter described the resurrected Jesus by saying: "He is at God?s right hand, for he went his way to heaven; and angels and authorities and powers were made subject to him."?1 Peter 3:22.

While there is no statement in the Bible that categorically identifies Michael the archangel as Jesus, there is one scripture that links Jesus with the office of archangel. In his letter to the Thessalonians, the apostle Paul prophesied: "The Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel?s voice and with God?s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first." (1 Thessalonians 4:16) In this scripture Jesus is described as having assumed his power as God?s Messianic King. Yet, he speaks with "an archangel?s voice." Note, too, that he has the power to raise the dead.

While on earth as a human, Jesus performed several resurrections. In doing so, he used his voice to utter commanding calls. For example, when resurrecting the dead son of a widow in the city of Nain, he said: "Young man, I say to you, Get up!" (Luke 7:14, 15) Later, just before resurrecting his friend Lazarus, Jesus "cried out with a loud voice: ?Lazarus, come on out!?" (John 11:43) But on these occasions, Jesus? voice was the voice of a perfect man.

After his own resurrection, Jesus was raised to a "superior position" in heaven as a spirit creature. (Philippians 2:9) No longer a human, he has the voice of an archangel. So when God?s trumpet sounded the call for "those who are dead in union with Christ" to be raised to heaven, Jesus issued "a commanding call," this time "with an archangel?s voice." It is reasonable to conclude that only an archangel would call "with an archangel?s voice."

Yes, there are other angelic creatures of high rank, such as seraphs and cherubs. (Genesis 3:24; Isaiah 6:2) Yet, the Scriptures point to the resurrected Jesus Christ as the chief of all angels?Michael the archangel.

26

Jesus/Michael Is there a change?

by aniron in

a neighbour of mine had jw's call.

they told her that jesus was not the archangel michael!!

have they changed or what?

XQsThaiPoes

On the Satan planet thing, carnivores in eden, or the Jesus/Michael schism?

10

Is the Watchtower unintentintionally breeding "false" witnesses

by XQsThaiPoes in

i noticed that at least in my area the jws are morraly corrupt.

now this is not traditional corruption where i bend the rules out of greed for power or money.

this is the total lack of moral judgement, or as the watchtower calls it "a bible trained conscience".

XQsThaiPoes

I noticed that at least in my area the JWs are morraly corrupt. Now this is not traditional corruption where i bend the rules out of greed for power or money. This is the total lack of moral judgement, or as the watchtower calls it "a bible trained conscience". Where basically the concept that what you are doing or allowing is not thought about.

I will be vague to protect the case:

A non-jw has a sick child that needs a blood transfussion. The non-jw does not believe in blood transfussions. They ask the jws for help avoiding a blood transfussion. The jws* look at the person as crazy, and says give your child a blood transfussion they may die without one!

* By JWs I mean a member of the HLC who is an elder along with a hand full of members in the congregation.

I have noticed several incidents in which it is apparent the JWs in question regardless of position can't understand basically "whats good for the goose is good for the gander". Matters such as child abuse, divorce, fornication, blood, and others. I also noticed the Awake! rarely agrees with the watchtower. For example they have an article recently that very crudely and awkwardly encourages younge women to initiate dating. They also rarely agree with the watchtower on chronology.

Also they say they are free from custom, fear of men/ goverment, or tradition yet many articles (at least nowdays) instruct JWs to live by their local customs before taking the watchtowers advice.

My question is why are JWs like this right now, or have they always been like this? Because I can't understand this many JWs recomending a transfusion when in theory they are supossed to do the opposite. Won't this corrupt the JW religion in the long run?

26

Jesus/Michael Is there a change?

by aniron in

a neighbour of mine had jw's call.

they told her that jesus was not the archangel michael!!

have they changed or what?

XQsThaiPoes

One of the few doctrinal freedoms JWs have was allowed a few years ago. You could believe Jesus was Michael or not. THe basically did the same thing they did with the animals not eating meat in the garden of eden belief. Saying that it appears preditors have always eaten meat, but there is no proof they did eat meat ing the garden (wow i guess that solved the problem). Followed by the classic WTBS disclaimer "there is no reason to be dogmatic about it like those other religions".

So in laymans terms yeah the watchtower changed their belief that Jesus was Michael, and only the old JWs probally hold that belief. note these people are probally in the same generation of JW that was thought Satan was appointed the God of earth by Jehovah (because back then Jehovah ruled from outer space and needed individual gods for each planet just like that captian planet cartoon) then got too haughty and rebeled because he did not like providing for adam and eve and not being worshiped for it. if you ask about this belief to a jw under 80 years old they probally will give you a blank stare and assume you are confusing them with LDS or are crazy.

17

What would it take to turn the military from a cult to a religion?

by XQsThaiPoes in

it is a part 2 to my "what makes a cult a 'cult'?

" thread.

so what would it take to trun the marines for example from a military cult to a mainstream religion.

XQsThaiPoes

Czar as for washington he was adimately oppossed to the loose revolutionary volunteer system. And in general "deserters" are always shot in war. But in the larger scope your "unit" or what ever the term was then was independantly funded and controlled (usually by whom ever the mogul of your town was). It was a big thing to even get some places just to reliquish thier troops to a larger battle. I assume like all things in life your freedom to "pack up and go home" was dependant on whom was in command and how much clout you had. Also as time went on the army became more concrete. I am sorry if i made it sound like it was 100% total anarchy

As for steve

But unlike a destructive cult, the military is accepted and valued by society.

Wrong the military is a destructive cult that is accepted and valued by society.

Military leaders answer to other branches of the government.

THe question was never about leaders it was about the military complexe. I stated in the other thread that a military can,t "awnser" or be "brought to justice" unless it is defeated. The individuals including leaders are expendable and can be chastized in any manner the military decides.

The military is also governed by ethical codes and structural checks and balances.

So are cults, and also many have checks, and balences. BTW many ethical codes are later decided to be unethical by other militaries or governments.

A modern example of an unethical thing done by the military in peace time will not in a state of war is the scorched earth practice spraying columbian farmers crops with weed killer (wtf are they going to eat) to kill the coca plants grown by other farmers. Now the cocaine is immune to weed killer btw and farmers now have no choice but to grow it so they can trade it for money to buy food.

People join the military for a specified length of time, and receive pay and benefits.

False. In many places you dont recive "pay", and the only benefit is food/shelter the same thing a cult offers, and many cults have monetary "pay" too. The concept that you join for a specified lenght of time is false even in the american military. At best this is a peace time aproxmation.

With a few unfortunate exceptions, the military does not use deception in recruitment.

This sentance is worthless special pleading. Example " With a few unfortunate exceptions, cults do not use deception in recruitment. "

When people join the military, they know what will be expected of them.

No they don't otherwise they would not need boot camp. They would just hand out ammo, supplies, weapons, designate a group leader, and go.

Soldiers are encouraged to maintain contact with their family and friends, and vacation time is given annually.

Cults do the same thing. Notice the soldier can't just go home to vistist when he wants to see his family and then go back to the military. He needs premission. All if not most of his mail is censored (ie read but the military). This is the same thing many cults do.

So steve hasan the cult expert is basically using speacial pleading or misinformation. Which means that the military is a destuctive cult, but it is socially acceptable. (no offense to this mans work or character he just is wrong)