many libraries do not have copies yet, as it is far from 'mainstream' reading for most people.
i propose that we can all do a small deed that can/might be a huge favor to our former 'brethren' in the 'truth'.
check with the local library, see if they have the books on the shelves.
Yup. Our donations are still being processed, however.
We also donated Combatting Cult Mind Control by Steven Hassan. This is good because it is not "apostate" (doesn't specifically mention the Watch Tower Society) and thus permissible for active Witnesses to read. They will be interested to discover that the WTS shares many characteristics with the "Moonies."
when i suggested to my jw sister that the wts has caused so much pain and division in our family, she told me it was because my brothers and i had made the choice to leave.
we were responsible for the division---not the society.
we are the ones that chose to leave the love and protective shelter of jehovah's organization and we are the ones that have the choice to return to the fold.. i need an intelligent comeback, preferably one that will plant a seed, not one too sarcastic.
If you are a Christian, you could ask her to read Matt. 10:32-39 and 19:29.
Then tell her that you will continue praying for her.
when jesus appointed the watch tower corporation as his only channel on earth in 1919, what did he appoint?
did he appoint the people?
they're all dead now.. did he appoint the printing equipment?
This also reminds me of a question that has come to my mind often.
Even if there was a 'first century governing body', where are we ever told that they appointed successors???
Well per the official teaching of the Watch Tower Society, the Apostles had NO successors.
In the Reasoning book, p. 37, under the subheading "Apostolic Succession" we find: "Definition: The doctrine that the 12 apostles have successors to whom authority has been passed by divine appointment. [...] Not a Bible teaching."
You might find this useful when discussing the Governing Body; I know I have found it so (and have used it, too!)
okay, before you say straight "no!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!1111111111111111" let us rethink.
lets say jehovas witnesses actually have the truth.
(Hebrews 13:17) 17 Be <b>obedient</b> to those who are taking the lead among YOU and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over YOUR souls as those who will render an account; that they may do this with joy and not with sighing, for this would be damaging to YOU.
When confronted with this Scripture, one could perhaps respond by reading 3 John 9,10 or Acts 20:29,30.
i have been emailing with a sister in my congregation regarding the qfr.
i told her i wasn't discussing it with most jws, because i didn't want to hear any of their "new light" garbage.
i told her this isn't new light; this just means that what we paraded out in 1935 as "new light" was wrong.. she sheepishly (no pun intended) agreed.
Ozziepost writes:
From another angle, by cutting themselves off from Joe Ratherflawed's scheme, they've opened up a real Pandora's Box - how will they stop the number of the "anointed"™ at a 'respectable' number so that they're still well under the 144,000?
I may well be wrong, but it seems that this QfR was almost unique among articles of the past four decades in not mentioning the number 144 000 in connection with the heavenly hope.
I think the WTS is interested in seeing the reaction to this article to determine whether or not they can feel free to "adjust" the teachings regarding the Anointed. Perhaps the number 144 000 may be tentatively suggested to be figurative, or they may wish to begin teaching that the 144 000 (as a literal number) were being gathered simultaneously with the Great Crowd (thereby countering the unspoken question many have regarding the length of time necessary for gathering the Bride Class). This latter option would be a partial return to the teachings of Russell.
i have been emailing with a sister in my congregation regarding the qfr.
i told her i wasn't discussing it with most jws, because i didn't want to hear any of their "new light" garbage.
i told her this isn't new light; this just means that what we paraded out in 1935 as "new light" was wrong.. she sheepishly (no pun intended) agreed.
Hmmm.
And in this QFR article, the number 144 000 was conspicuous -- by its ABSENCE.
what is the current policy on swearing an oath to tell the truth?
such as in court, affidavids, passport office and that sort of thing.
i thought they were not supposed to at one time has this changed?
The WTS' official teaching is that it is a conscience matter. They recognize that some may find swearing an oath problematic, due to Matt. 5:34-37 & James 5:12. The Courts will typically allow one to "affirm" that what is given as testimony is true; I have personally done this before giving testimony.
continuation of my first post: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/132283/1.ashx.
this past tuesday the jw lady came back, which surprised me.
she came with her husband and i told them that it wasnt really fair (one against two).
So what do Jehovah Witnesses really believe?
This is not unlike the question: "How long is a piece of string?". It really rather depends -- on the piece of string.
Officially, the Watch Tower Society's teaching is that Jesus serves as Mediator of the New Covenant, and consequently is Mediator only for those in the New Covenant, viz. the 144 000. The "Other Sheep" are said to be under [emphatically, NOT in] the New Covenant; therefore Jesus cannot be their Mediator. However, in my (limited) experience, very few Witnesses actually believe this.
In public prayer I not infrequently stated that the prayer was offered through our Mediator. On occasion (e.g. meals in our home), I actually apologized to guests for having done so. (I professed to be anointed while affiliated with the Watch Tower religion, and so did feel that Jesus was my Mediator.) Most Witnesses seemed entirely unaware of the Society's teaching. What was disturbing is how many also did not seem to care and would accept the Society's reasoning with no further consideration of the matter.
when i used to read the prophecies of revelation and see the society's interpetation i often thought to myself, "how could this be"?
i shelved a lot of things, hoping that maybe i'd understand over time or the "light would get brighter".. as an elder, i used to wonder how they (the society) could tell the elders one thing and put into print another thing.
while the rank and file were being told at the watchtower studies how the elders were to not judge unfairly at judicial committees, the elders were told to be safe rather than sorry when it came to "removing the wicked man from our midst".
I never agreed with the Society's teaching (1979) that Jesus was not Mediator for the "Other Sheep."
I did not find the new (1985) baptismal vow questions acceptable.
I found the QfR in the 01. April 1986 Watchtower disturbing.
I did not agree with the Society's pre-1995 timing of the separation of the Sheep and Goats.
I did not agree with the Society's claim (w 01/1992) that Jesus was not divine.
&c., &c.
for those who feel that i've hijacked your thread(s), i'm still relatively new here, so your forgiveness (based on this acknowledgement and apology) is appreciated.
i'm posting this link, http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/131766/2343640/post.ashx#2343640, on the other threads as soon as i can.
bear with me as i attend to the necessary housework involved.. fred/q..
A blast-from-the-past:
01. April 1986 QfR:Do we have Scriptural precedent for taking such a strict position? Indeed we do! Paul wrote about some in his day: "Their word will spread like gangrene. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of that number. These very men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some." (2 Timothy 2:17, 18; see also Matthew 18:6.) There is nothing to indicate that these men did not believe in God, in the Bible, in Jesus’ sacrifice. Yet, on this one basic point, what they were teaching as to the time of the resurrection, Paul rightly branded them as apostates, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship.
This is most fascinating. When the F&DS was supposedly appointed in 1919, the Watch Tower Society was still teaching that the Resurrection had begun in 1878 -- a teaching not altered until 1927 -- and which teaching the WTS now rejects as false. (Indeed, one would be disfellowshiped today for holding the pre-1927 view.) Does it not bugger the imagination to believe the Lord appointed over all his belongings an organisation that (by its own published standard) would be 'rightly branded apostate, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship'?
