Tal
I'm confused, and sad. Where are you going and when will we hear from you again.
i will soon have to be offline.
to those of you that knew of this, my friends, i'll talk atcha on email.
anyone who would like to keep in touch, my email is buggurlatgmaildotcom.. .
Tal
I'm confused, and sad. Where are you going and when will we hear from you again.
hi folks whats up?.
i grew up as a strict jw until my early 20's when an event happened that made me start thinking for myself, thank goodness.
what i mean by strict was i think most of you will undertsand that i really believed in what i was doing, baptised at the age of 13, seriously considered bethal, pioneered and was offered to be a ministerial servent.
Great to have you here. WELCOME
the times .
interesting.... but not suprising.. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printfriendly/0,,1-2-1798944-2,00.html.
societies worse off 'when they have god on their side'.
Tetra,
I know you could give NT quotes too, but it is very significant that all the scriptures quoted were OT. The general thrust of NT teaching is very different, alyhough some of the NT authors were still not fully 'getting it' and still too heavily influenced by the norms of the day eg in the role of women. I think Q makes some relevant points.
please offer any comments, critiques, insults, or suggestions.
first off, let me specify what i mean by a christian or group of christians.
"everyone believing that jesus is the christ has been born from god" (1 john 5:1).
CYP
A wonderful post, which I will be keeping a copy of. And great discussion with the others.
I have thought long and hard about the same things.
Where I am just now: To accept the Bible as the inspired word of God, which I do, how to I reconcile the errors and apparently contradictory teachings? The Bible itself does not teach that it is verbally inerrant nor that the teachings of its author's were infallible. In fact the contradictions, (and for example - why do we need 4 gospels which don't all quite agree) teach us that the Bible is made up of individual perspectives.
I believe taken as a whole, the Bible teaches many deep spiritual truths, but this does not work if we select individual portions or interpret literally. I believe we also have to work out which perspectives and 'truths'; sublate the others. There are many pointers to this, eg when Christ summarises the purpose of the law & the prophets, or how revelation says all prophecy points to Christ.
I also believe both James & Paul made mistakes. This suggests the 'church' had to keep evolving and gaining newer understandings. I am convinced Paul altered his position on milenialism from his first to his last letters, yet all his teachings are now part of the Bible. I believe this reaches us to change teachings, eg subjection of women, as we learn how this would go against deeper spiritual teachings. I believe that non-fundamentalist Christianity has a good grasp of the place that scriptures should play in Christian's lives.
Just my hurried two-penneth.
this is serious part of my research.
the watchtower articles from the 1970s help, but there are gaps in my understanding.
russell was the founder of the watchtower society, and presumably part of the faithful & discreet slave?
This is serious part of my research. The watchtower articles from the 1970s help, but there are gaps in my understanding. Russell was the founder of the Watchtower Society, and presumably part of the faithful & discreet slave?
WT 1975
“Jesus had said ‘look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of things.” (Matthew 28:20) Jesus Christ is the Head of the congregation, his slave, and his words show that he would strengthen them to feed his ‘domestics’ right down through the centuries. Apparently, one generation of the slave class fed the succeeding generation thereof, as well as continuing to feed themselves.
…Jesus Christ himself called attention to this method of feeding his people not as isolated, independent individuals, but as a close-knit body of Christians having real love and care for one another.”
By 1870 when CT Russell began his lone independent study of the Bible, the faithful & discreet slave class was over 1,800 years old. I see nothing wrong with him setting up a new society, but he must have done so because he saw the need to be different or separate from other religions of the day, even those that were presumably already part of the faithful and discreet slave class?
Guidance would be appreciated on this historical question, for my research please.
which of ray's books would you recommend someone read first.
coc does a great job of explaining ray's situation and the results.
while covering some major doctrines along the way.
I agree that Captives of a Concept is excellent. The author says in it, that its title is derived from that of Ray Franz' book Crisis of Conscience.
This is what sets them apart from any other religion,
I was once an SDA. We were pacifists - JWs reject that description, and describe themselves as neutral instead, which is different.
As I said I think the world of some JW friends of mine, but I doubt anyone could name more than 2 teachings that are peciuliar to the JW religion. They are all second-hand teachings of adventist, Christadelphian, arian, waldenses and others.
i used to think negativity was necessary in order to get a balanced view of a subject that i was analyzing.
part of a critical thought process.
i have decided that this is incorrect.
Joelbear,
When I was really depressed, my doctor told me all about it being a chemical imbalance in the brain that causes negative thoughts. I have subsequently learned it is more likely to be the other way round. The negative thoughts and outlook, and lack of positive actions, can all help to trigger the chemical imbalance.
It is so much more complicated than this, but from what I have researched, your approach is very effective. It has worked for me, most of the time.
i am definitely a generalist, i have a bit of interest in 1000 things.
this is one of the reasons i have always been so unhappy, because i have attempted to force myself to be a specialist.
it just doesn't work.
I am a generalist, but like Leolai I tend to get my teeth into something for a year or two, then move on to something else. I tend to be a jack of all trades but a master of none of them.
which of ray's books would you recommend someone read first.
coc does a great job of explaining ray's situation and the results.
while covering some major doctrines along the way.
These are two very different books. There are up to date editions of both books available (eg ISOCF mentions UN scandal). CoC is Ray's life story, which also deals with the Governing Body's inner workings and inevitably gets into some doctrinal issues.
I'm not a JW and read ISOCF first because it arrived first. For a JW perhaps it would be better to read CoC first, because it explains Ray's motives, cause and credentials. Then when you will know who he is and why he can be so sure many JW teachings are in serious error.
Yes, it disproves several JW doctrines using scriptures, using the Watchtower's own publicatons, and evidence of JW leaders under oath. It could lead one to Christianity, but this book is a must for anyone who has had, has now or may have in the future, any links to JWs.
OMHO ISoCF is a far superior book, and not just because I am a Christian. It disproves Watchtower doctrine far more effectively, backed up by every kind of evidence. I can debate doctrine with any JW having read this book, because Ray understood scriptures more than anyone else on the Governing Body, and they knew it. There is clear evidence that his uncle Fred knew "the truth" but chose to ignore it to pursue his worldly 'career' as President of the Society.
Why not read the whole of Chapter 9 free on the web?