Posts by inquirer

54

I can't get to grips with being shunned

by chuckyy in

my wife and i have been disassociated for about 2 months now.

every day in our small town we are being shunned by former friends.

one in particular annoyed me today.

inquirer

chuckyy ---

Hi

My wife and I have been disassociated for about 2 months now. Every day in our small town we are being shunned by former friends. One in particular annoyed me today. It was an elder who's wife left him a few years ago. He was devastated and I was there for him for months afterward, sacrificing my time to help him when he was low, always there when he needed to get his feelings out. Today, as I passed him he glanced at me with a disdainful look as if I were skum. I am so angry.....what is it with these people???....it is so opposite to true christianity.

How do you deal with shunning and the feelings of anger???

Yeah, sorry I am mad. I just can't help myself. :(

I wish Witnesses would use their brain, even if it is bi-polar... (:D ) Maybe he could have "Witnesses to you." And said something positive like "Jehovah remembers the good things you've done." And "how are you going?" "Are you giving the JW's a break now? That's alright, we'll see ya again soon when you are feelings better..." or something like that.

81

The King James Version is Perfect

by blabbermouth in

i don't know about anybody else,but i love the beautiful king james version.it contains no error and is perfect.there are no mistranslations in it,and none can be proven.i don't read or study anything else for spirituality.im like a tree that is planted by the water,i shall not be moved,amen,amen,hallelujah,praise jesus!!!!

!

inquirer

googlemagoogle --
hi inquirer, don't worry, i wont get angry that quickly... ;-)

People that wrote those Apocryphal books knew that they weren't from God.
how do you know? and then again: the bible-writers didn't know their writings would be viewed as "god's word" centuries later. if they would have known, they would have probably written more carefully.

You have to decide what is holy or what isn't.
so it's a subjective decision, right? not provable? that's good. because if there's any truth about it (and there is not), then noone is to blame for not believing.

*Well, I guess it's a bit of a shame that people don't view it as God's word centuries later. ...

*The Bible is big enough as it is, how many pages do you want to make it now? Remember that Ethiopian Enuch? He didn't know what he was reading, but one of the disciples helped him out! :)

*The Bible is all about faith, I think I said this before. We don't see with sight. A lot of people have faith/respect in Jesus Christ - Christians, Muslims and Buddhists. In the Reasoning Book, it talks about Jesus from a historical point of view. Very interesting.

"Was Jesus Christ a real, historical person?

The Bible itself is the principal evidence that Jesus Christ is a historical person. The record in the Gospels is not a vague narrative of events at some unspecified time and in an unnamed location. It clearly states time and place in great detail. For an example, see Luke 3:1, 2, 21-23.

The first-century Jewish historian Josephus referred to the stoning of ?James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.? (The Jewish Antiquities, Josephus, Book XX, sec. 200) A direct and very favorable reference to Jesus, found in Book XVIII, sections 63, 64, has been challenged by some who claim that it must have been either added later or embellished by Christians; but it is acknowledged that the vocabulary and the style are basically those of Josephus, and the passage is found in all available manuscripts.

Tacitus, a Roman historian who lived during the latter part of the first century C.E., wrote: ?Christus [Latin for ?Christ?], from whom the name [Christian] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.??The Complete Works of Tacitus (New York, 1942), ?The Annals,? Book 15, par. 44.

With reference to early non-Christian historical references to Jesus, The New Encyclopædia Britannica states: ?These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.??(1976), Macropædia, Vol. 10, p. 145."

And, even though it's wrong, well-intentioned people with the dating system said that the year 0 is Jesus birth, and this year 2005 is 2005 years after his birth. He had so much influence over people over all this centuries.

Also, that's why there are so many religions in the world. They deicide what's right and wrong. Someone choose to be a Jehovah's Witness, someone chooses to be Catholic, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, a Dreamtime believer... they just believe in it because of heritage, personal decision based on "truth" or because of being born into it. There are many Lords and gods.... and there are many different believes too.

Maybe with some people like you, you are just tired of religion at the moment, but you may think again and start believing something.

31

Elder said I could Lie

by Es in

jw
friends

last week my ex husband sent a letter to the elders telling each and every one of them just what he felt about them.

as they were d/f him he figured this was his last chance.

in his letter he stated that as i had scriptural reason for divoce, so did he.

inquirer

Yeah! Welcome to the board! Sorry I didn't say before, I just get caught up in this deep conversations on other threads. :D

72

Anyone like me where you still believe in MOST of their doctrines?

by inquirer in

like i don't like that un involvment, record keeping.

i don't know what to think about the paedophile stuff, because you could accuse the catholic church of that too.

but apart from those things i still believe that god's name is jehovah, his son is jesus, no trinity, and he died on a torture stake... i love reading the new world translation, i believe it's the best one, but i love reading other translations too!

inquirer

onacruse--

inquirer, thank you for taking my post in the way it was intended! I meant no disrespect to you, or to anyone who shows a willingness to think about their belief system (as you are doing)...and getting COC (mentioned in another of your threads) will go a long way in that regard. Kudos.

Re: your last post--

1) The cross vs. the stake: I said that "no significant historical evidence exists." I'm well aware of the appendices in the various NWTs and Interlinear, and they did seem to provide compelling evidence. However, I've subsequently learned that the great preponderance of evidence from other historical sources, combined with the fact that Jesus was executed under Roman authority, gives very good reason to reconsider the adamacy with which the WTS virtually demands that Jesus was executed on a stake. All said and done, though, that's really a relatively small issue.

2) Bias against the NWT: I said it was a "very stilted translation." Having done some small amount of study in the original Biblical languages, I can say that from personal knowledge. Yes, the NWT does (as do all translations, versions, and paraphrases) have some unique virtues. However, in various and many crucial theological passages, the NWT betrays a lack of scholarship and honesty tantamount to deliberate deception. ( Of course, this is just mho)

3) Preaching: The reason I took objection to "preaching" is based on the original meaning (and Biblical usage) of the Greek word. Kerygmos (translated 'preaching') is simply to announce something: no dialogue, no discussion--just a trumpet blast, and thence the wrath of God.

I submit that this sort of "communication" has no place in productive human relationships. The Ayatollahs do as much; has human life been thereby improved?

Again, respectfully...and with every good hope for you on your journey,

Craig

I don't know if you have the WT CD-rom, but it has all their publications on it. On further discussion of the cross, they quote these sources:

"?Various objects, dating from periods long anterior to the Christian era, have been found, marked with crosses of different designs, in almost every part of the old world. India, Syria, Persia and Egypt have all yielded numberless examples . . . The use of the cross as a religious symbol in pre-Christian times and among non-Christian peoples may probably be regarded as almost universal, and in very many cases it was connected with some form of nature worship.??Encyclopædia Britannica (1946), Vol. 6, p. 753.

?The shape of the [two-beamed cross] had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in that country and in adjacent lands, including Egypt. By the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the cross of Christ.??An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (London, 1962), W. E. Vine, p. 256."

So, the "cross" is a very pagan concept and unfamiliar to that very major incident.

2) I have looked at the KIT (Kingdom INterlinear -- Greek Scripture translation.) I have looked at the Westcott and Hort (sp?) and then looked at the New World translation. It looks pretty spot on to me. And regarding the Hebrew Scriptures, this was said: "The Hebrew scholar Professor Dr. Benjamin Kedar of Israel, in an interview with a representative of the Watch Tower Society, evaluated the New World Translation as follows: (Insight from the Scriptures)?In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what is known as the New World Translation. In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew. . . . Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translating. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain.?

3) About preaching. (Insight from the Scriptures.) "The Biblical concept of ?preaching? is best ascertained from an examination of the sense of the original Hebrew and Greek terms. The Greek ke·rys´so, which is commonly rendered ?preach,? means, basically, ?make proclamation as a herald, to be a herald, officiate as herald, proclaim (as conqueror).? The related noun is ke´ryx and means ?herald, public messenger, envoy, crier (who made proclamation and kept order in assemblies, etc.).? Another related noun is ke´ryg·ma, which means ?that which is cried by a herald, proclamation, announcement (of victory in games), mandate, summons.? (A Greek-English Lexicon, by H. Liddell and R. Scott, revised by H. Jones, Oxford, 1968, p. 949) Ke·rys´so thus does not convey the thought of the delivery of a sermon to a closed group of disciples but, rather, of an open, public proclamation. This is illustrated by its use to describe the ?strong angel proclaiming [ke·rys´son·ta] with a loud voice: ?Who is worthy to open the scroll and loose its seals????Re 5:2; compare also Mt 10:27.

The word eu·ag·ge·li´zo·mai means ?declare good news.? (Mt 11:5) Related words are di·ag·gel´lo, ?declare abroad; give notice? (Lu 9:60; Ac 21:26; Ro 9:17) and ka·tag·gel´lo, ?publish; talk about; proclaim; publicize.? (Ac 13:5; Ro 1:8; 1Co 11:26; Col 1:28) The principal difference between ke·rys´so and eu·ag·ge·li´zo·mai is that the former stresses the manner of the proclamation, that it is a public, authorized pronouncement, and the latter stresses the content thereof, the declaring or bringing of the eu·ag·ge´li·on, the good news or gospel.

Ke·rys´so corresponds in some measure to the Hebrew ba·sar´, meaning ?bear news; announce; act as a news bearer.? (1Sa 4:17; 2Sa 1:20; 1Ch 16:23) Ba·sar´, however, does not imply official capacity to the same extent."

So, this is much more than announcement. But I quoted (Maybe in this quote, can't remember now) about a Catholic official approving of their way of peraching because they grab any opportunity to let people hear the good news.

...

Anyway, thanks for your kind words. :)

23

I am getting that Crisis of Conscience book

by inquirer in

i am going to read this think you know.

a ex-bethelite (i've never been keen on jw titles!

) he should provide me with a lot of interesting information!

inquirer

Thanks for your help you people! Sounds like a flaming good book to me! Yeah, he's not perfect, but the main message in this thread is that Raymond opens up ya eyes. :)

But for goodness sake! He left the org AGES AGO!!!!! Why did he take this flipping long to write this book!!! I WAS SHOCKED TO FIND OUT HE ONLY WROTE IT A FEW YEARS AGO!!!

5

Can it work both ways?

by inquirer in

am i allowed to discuss to people why i belief in most of their doctrines still?

because i have noticed people always want me to believe in their stuff, can it work the other way around?

because you should be able to be on a "level playing field.

inquirer

Rightio people. Thanks for your help! :)

Yeah, I don't mind what people believe in, I just like to share what I believe too. I certain love to hear all the "bad stories" about what happened. Because these are people's experience. And I like to read about what the WTS has done when they shouldn't of... And you know you are not alone, that's one of the good things about this message board. :) (Well, On the Internet in general as well. :) )

23

I am getting that Crisis of Conscience book

by inquirer in

i am going to read this think you know.

a ex-bethelite (i've never been keen on jw titles!

) he should provide me with a lot of interesting information!

inquirer

FairMind --

Hello Inquirer! Some Good Books to read besides COC are:

1. Apocalypse Delayed James Penton

2. Captives of a Concept Don Cameron

3. Awakening of a Jehovah?s Witness Diane Wilson

4. In Search of Christian Ray Franz

I understand that you are looking for a critical analysis or perhaps other type insight into Jehovah?s Witnesses, not the Bible.

FairMind

Maybe I'll look dumb if I say this (and I wish I had more motivation regardting this) I am not a very good reader of books... I read them slow... However, this is non-fiction and I do find non-fiction easy to read.... so yeah I'll keep them in mind. :)

23

I am getting that Crisis of Conscience book

by inquirer in

i am going to read this think you know.

a ex-bethelite (i've never been keen on jw titles!

) he should provide me with a lot of interesting information!

inquirer

MungoBaobab --

Franz raises some interesting issues in the book, but take everything he says with a grain of salt. He comes off as a little self-centered. For example, he makes statements to the contrary, but to me he seemed to take little responsibility for Witness beliefs and practices even though he sat on the Governing Body for years. Look for a passage in which he criticizes himself, because I doubt you'll find one. Then he blasts the Governing Body for never admitting their mistakes. He seeks sympathy from the reader and sought sympathy from the Governing Body when he was being disfellowshipped after decades of service to God (and the Organization), yet rather harshly states that his uncle's decades of service will mean nothing to God when he faces judgement. That's blatant hypocrisy, and I feel it damages his credibility. Nevertheless, I do highly recommend the book; it contains a treasure trove of information from a unique source. Still, I wouldn't read In Search of Christian Freedom.

inquirer -- I'll keep that in mind! :) But I read heaps of amazon.com reviews, and the vast majority said some very supportive and positive things about this book.

23

I am getting that Crisis of Conscience book

by inquirer in

i am going to read this think you know.

a ex-bethelite (i've never been keen on jw titles!

) he should provide me with a lot of interesting information!

inquirer

ko38, under74. I have said sorry too many times now. But Jesus said it was alright. Anyway. I guess when you talk about The Witnesses (and associated topics) sometimes it makes some people (like me) hot under the colar.

I reckon all 3 of us had good intentions! :) Maybe it was a typo on my part. Most people come from the US (on this site and the Internet in general), so I can see how I can be misunderstood... etc etc.

23

I am getting that Crisis of Conscience book

by inquirer in

i am going to read this think you know.

a ex-bethelite (i've never been keen on jw titles!

) he should provide me with a lot of interesting information!

inquirer

under74 --

nobodys telling you not to get the book.

Sure it can be frustrating but that's the risk you take when posting or the internet or even e-mailing someone. If you think someone misread what you've written than just write "no, that's not what I meant." And then state what you meant. No offense intended.

All the best to you.