two jws came knocking to my door.
instead of ingnoring the knock, i decided to answer.
with fixed smiles on their faces, one of the ladys offer me a flyer concerning the district convention.
I wonder what Red Cross would say about this? "They claimed that some of the blood fractions don't really come from blood.''
I think they would laugh!
I guess doctors really pulled one over on the WTBTS! :-)
I can hear a doctor talking with his nurse, "Shhhhh, he thinks blood components are not particles of blood."
i would like a simple step by step explanation that refutes the disfellowshipping policy as practiced by jehovah's witnesses.. obviously, i don't agree with the policy but i have had trouble making my explanations clear and straightforward.. any help would be appreciated..
Hoping For Change: It is interesting that I can read this subject again and again and still learn something new!
5 YOU hand such a man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, in order that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. I guess some can assume(WTBTS) that if one puts the wicked man out then he will be called to repent then at Judgement day he will be saved!
I know that the early congregation were not to associate with such a man the question should be for how long? or do we have the understanding of Paul. I guess in 2 Corinthians 1 Paul wrote his famous letter known as the Teary Letter of Paul. Does this letter express perhaps even Paul could have changed his harsh ways?
For this is what I have decided for myself, not to come to YOU again in sadness. 2 For if I make YOU sad, who indeed is there to cheer me except the one that is made sad by me? 3 And so I wrote this very thing, that, when I come, I may not get sad because of those over whom I ought to rejoice; because I have confidence in all of YOU that the joy I have is that of all of YOU . 4 For out of much tribulation and anguish of heart I wrote YOU withmany tears, not that YOU might be saddened, but that YOU might know the love that I have more especially for YOU . 5 Now if anyone has caused sadness, he has saddened, not me, but all of YOU to an extent—not to be too harsh in what I say.
I find this line rather odd that Paul would say to an extent not to be too harsh in what I say? Otherwise what I said in 1 Corinth you took too harsh!
6 This rebuke given by the majority is sufficient for such aman, 7 so that, on the contrary now, YOU should kindly forgive and comfort [him], that somehow such a man may not be swallowed up by his being overly sad.
Now, really what is Paul saying? I think it is clear to forgive the man and comfort him do not allow the man or woman to become too sad? Does the WTBTS teach this concept of forgiving? I think not! How many people have done something wrong yet not as delibrate as living with your fathers wife, did you become overly sad? sure! were you ever forgiven by the congregation who just did what the elders did? It is too painful to think about!
8 Therefore I exhort YOU to confirm YOUR love for him.
Now, I am sure that most people out there know that once one has been dfd one is never looked upon the same after reinstatement. Worse yet how many greet you with love back into the congregation?
9 For to this end also I write to ascertain the proof of YOU , whether YOU are obedient in all things.
WTBTS are they obedient in Paul's entire teaching or just a portion?
10 Anything YOU kindly forgive anyone, I do too. In fact, as for me, whatever I have kindly forgiven, if I have kindly forgiven anything, it has been for YOUR sakes in Christ’s sight; 11 that we may not be overreached by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his designs.
How many people have been swallowed up or overly sad due to the Jehovah's Witnesses harsh unforgiving ways?
And who are the ones overreached by Satan the one put out or the ones in any organization that does not learn to forgive.
I say this because the WTBTS has borrowed shunning from the Catholics and many churches teach it. That is why people are confused other churches teach it but do they have the right concept of Pauls!
Did Paul have the right concept of Jesus? or did he revert back to old ways then in his teary letter perhaps changed his mind!
I really do not know!
i would like a simple step by step explanation that refutes the disfellowshipping policy as practiced by jehovah's witnesses.. obviously, i don't agree with the policy but i have had trouble making my explanations clear and straightforward.. any help would be appreciated..
Some one posted about bad association! If a J.W. would take the time to read this in other bibles it is corrupt conversation and it has something to do with new christains questioned if Jesus was raised up. Why? because some where standing around who have not heard yet!non christains.
The bad association has something to do with talking against Jesus resurrection,and some were starting to doubt.
The JW use this scripture the wrong way! I mean if one is talking about Jesus the wrong way then you can say bad association but if someone is smoking then you could not use bad association.
i would like a simple step by step explanation that refutes the disfellowshipping policy as practiced by jehovah's witnesses.. obviously, i don't agree with the policy but i have had trouble making my explanations clear and straightforward.. any help would be appreciated..
I tracked the J.W. s reasoning down. In 1 Corith a man is living with his father's wife. O.T. that would be a sin to take your father's wife. So Paul said that they should not eat with him, to put him away. A year later in 2 Corith (which is not Paul's second letter but perhaps his third or fourth." he pleas with the congregation to let the person back or it would be the congregation fault if he stumbles.(Most cases J.W. are reinstated within a year)
I believe the test is on how the congregation should forgive! it is a must!
I believe some of Paul's letters are his own thoughts and not from God and that is a hard one.
I wonder if the congregations would eat together, love feast! Did Paul mean that after the congregations went home that they were not suppose to speak to the man?
Dfing could be something that was started with Paul and the first congregations, and it might not have anything to do with modern day.
Some were trying to get away from the law and did not know how far they could go. Since we are no longer under the law adn we are under Christ new law of love, let's commit unlawful sins.
Most these people knew what was wrong under the law, but how about under Christ law?
can anyone recommend which of his books to start reading?
.
regardsy besty
Yes, I agree about JBs writings his books are not that good! Sorry to say I guess he expects his readers to not understand simple psychological standards. Look at the majority of people who would read his books. Keep your money and read his on line article and let us know if you found them to be honest?
i would like some advice from any of you that have been there - a good friend of mine had an affair years ago, ended up working with the same guy and is now in love with her boyfriend instead of her husband ( several kids involved) the affair is now not a physical one but there is no doubt they are dating.
i wish i was unaware but i am - she says she has picked her family over the boyfriend but he is like a bumble bee around her- walking her dog past her house etc the boyfriend is older, married and has always been a tomcat - now he is truly in love and will wait.
i have told her it is going to blow up - and i know it is her deal to figure out - but i am from the happily married class and am at a loss.
I think that she should dump the boyfriend because he is a jerk for dating a married woman with children. Like you said a Tom Cat!
It really does not have anything to do with a boyfriend or husband but your friend.
on another thread someone posted about hearing a different set of baptismal questions than the ones they had at their baptism.
can someone elaborate on this?
i don't remember hearing anything about the questions changing and this really surprised me, though i don't know why!
I believe in the last chapter of an old "Jehovah" book written by Rutherford one had to admit that the United Nations was Satan organization! and the Jehovah Witness were God's spirit ran organization then a person was ready to get baptized. What does United Nations have to do with repenting!
there was yet another disfellowshipping going in my congo announce the other night.
that makes 6 i believe now, 5 i'm sure of that have been dfed in the past year or so in my congo alone, and they don't seem to be making any effort towards reinstatement.
i know the reasons behind all those, that's why i know they were dfed and not daed.
R.F. The society is a business. Russell use to pay people to give out pamphlets until someone decided to do it for free. Volunteer workers! :-) I
there was yet another disfellowshipping going in my congo announce the other night.
that makes 6 i believe now, 5 i'm sure of that have been dfed in the past year or so in my congo alone, and they don't seem to be making any effort towards reinstatement.
i know the reasons behind all those, that's why i know they were dfed and not daed.
There is somethng wrong about people outside the assemblies who do nothing but protest against J.W. worshipping. It was wrong for Rutherford and it is wrong for ex Jw to do it to J.W.
In the United States we have freedom to choose our way to worship!
Some might think that it is an okay thing to protest outside of an assembly hall, but something small is how hate starts.
I think healing starts when you realize that Jehovah's Witnesses are not the only ones who Dfs their people.
i was never a witness, i joined this site after my wife started studying with them, and i got upset over some of the things that resulted from that.
however, i grew up in a similar high-control group called the worldwide church of god.
much like the witnesses, in the mid 70s ( i forget the exact year, i was only in elementary school in those days, but it may have been 75, just like jws), there was a big push toward the end being at hand, the great tribulation is coming, etc etc.
There is no proof of any dates set armegeddon. It depends on what you call the end of the systems of things? That not armegeddon
I never believed they set armageddon dates!
Nor did they claim the Fall of Jerusalem was 607
Besides it was close enough I do not think that 587 was correct either.
And what about the other religions? Did they set dates? Did they kill people Jehovah's Witnesses never killed anyone!
