DF'd
What about 1 Tim 2:6 saying the ransom was for ALL and if it was for all how is his ransom just limited for some and not others?
that people who discover the jehovah's witnesses and their watchtower bible and tract society are not nor ever have been approved by god to 'speak' for him and then leave the group are not going to be resurrected?
according to the bible everyone who has ever lived experiences a resurrection, so where does the wt 'no resurrection' teaching originate other than in the demented minds of the wt hierarchy?
DF'd
What about 1 Tim 2:6 saying the ransom was for ALL and if it was for all how is his ransom just limited for some and not others?
you've probably heard sentences that stuck with you.
quotes, one-liners.
you hear them and they make so much sense or touch you so personally at the time that they become part of you.
I would also add that the WTS lays guilt trips on the rank and file by saying there is also such thing as "sinning by omission" meaning it would be a sin not to spread "the good news" and if you dont enough you could be sinning by not going out in service.
If that is the case there is a such thing as "lying through omission" by trying to stop people from having a FULL disclosure of what they printed and taught years ago. Just vaguely mentioning a couple of things in the Proclaimer's book isn't what I would consider a full disclosure; so the WTS does not conduct themselves honestly in all things.
you've probably heard sentences that stuck with you.
quotes, one-liners.
you hear them and they make so much sense or touch you so personally at the time that they become part of you.
I would say that it ironic that so called "apostates" or "opposers" know more about the history of the WTS than the average JW; moreover they know what JWs taught around the time Jesus allegedly chose them in 1919; things the WTS could consider apostate and since tobacco use wasn't forbidden and many JWs smoked back then I guess Jesus or Jehovah didn't consider that unclean back then.
my husband and son and i stopped going to meetings about 18 months ago.
i still have a daughter, her husband, his mum and dad, my elderly mum, my 2 sisters and nieces still in.
i would love to tell them what ive found out but i think it would backfire so hold my piece.
Vitty:
I know in my case, as well as may be your case, nobody could tell me anything. I had to see and discover things for myself; but that is just me. You may just have to find a way to show them and let them see for themselves. As far as what would take the organizations place in their lives, the freedom from that organization is different for everybody so I dont know what it would be for them.
i have seen ( in various threads) many conflicting views about disfellowshipped people and thier families who are still witnesses.
does the society dissaprove of witness family members continuing to associate with disfellowshipped ones, or do they leave it up to each ones conscience?
i have been disfellowshipped for 13 years and my mom is still a witness.
It probably depends on the place and time. I had a great aunt who years ago was DF'd back in the 40s and 50s because she allowed her DF'd grown son move in with her and she never went back since she didn't think she ever did anything wrong. Today elders can allow their grown DF'd children still live with them without any reprisals from the congregation or the WTS; at least they could in the 90s back when I was active because that happened in a congregation I went to.
i love these type of people, because they are so easy to see through.
you know the type, they meet you and they're all nice and all, but because your not important enough they don't really want to be your friend.
in fact, they probably got introduced to you by someone who is important and to make that person happy they give you five minutes of conversation or maybe listen to a thought or two, and then they are off to the next person and your nothing.
"I couldn't stand it when my fellow single friends dumped me when they got married. No responses to calls or emails, though they strangely had plenty of time for their other married friends..." That happened all the time in the congregations I went to. If you were single didn't fit in with the single cliques (usually made up of very few young ones not married yet but grew up together since they were babies and parents had been in the organization forever and were pioneers, elders, etc.) and you weren't married you were completely out of the social loop with "the friends".
hey, this was your question for me yesterday .
"if the faithful and discreet slave can -- by their own admission -- make mistakes, and since they are the ones that identified themselves as the fds, isn't it possible that they were mistaken about their identity?".
i thought about it and this is my reply.
"Some people may CLAIM to be of the Anointed as a way to Misdirect Jesus sheep. It was donee in the past in the 1st Century Congregation...."
DFed:
I hope I am not taking your quote out of context but If Im not mistaken, according to the WTS teaching, ALL of the first century christians were of the annointed do they could not pretend to claim to be annointed since they were
.
which do you like better pepsi or coke?.
evanescence *wish there were voting polls on this forum
Coca Cola
i know i did.. we had a young fellow who used to live at my grandmother's place.
in may ways he was like family.
after he moved out of my grandmother's place i saw him frequently.
I shunned those who were DF'd although I didn't like it but I thought it was what I was suppose to do and the people who were DF'd didn't hold it against me since if the situation were switched around they would shun me so they didn't hold it against me.
.
.............. coc, of course.
when you were still in the org, or when you had already left.. i read it when i was still in and it had a profound effect on me.. lets take a poll .
I can relate to Defd:
While I was an active witness I knew there were anti-JW books out there and I wouldn't have dared looked at them or come to a site like this.