The WT study article for sunday was: A Law of Love in Hearts taken from Jerimaiah 31:33: "I will put my law within them and in their heart I shall write it." (Anyone who knows the basis for this scripture please let me know.)
This WT study really intrigued me b/c a lot of the points and even the comments that were made from the congregation a lot of times did not make sense or were just totally out of context. (My points made in red)
PAR. 14: "...We do not need to memorize an extensive code of rules to direct our every act; our love of God guide us." Funny because when I decided to research this statement using the WT I simply typed in the phrase RULES into the WT Cd-ROM subject box and found thousands of articles! Like this one:
WT 96' (p.14) Living by the Law of the Christ: "Indeed Christians are obligated to observe all commands in the Bible that are directed to followers of Christ. And there is more. Jehovah's organization, as well as individuals congreagations have to extablish necessary rules and procedures in order to preserve good order.
When I read this it reminded me of someone in Bible history so I typed in "PHARISEES" into the subject box. And found this:
WT 99' (par 15) "Jesus Christ denounced religious leaders who imposed a mass of rules saying: "They bind up heavy loads and put them upon the shoulders of men, but they themselves are not willing to budge them with their finger." -Matt. 23:2,4 He pointed out their burdensome man-made rules and traditions."
Par 22: Jesus said "You give the tenth of the mint and the dill and the cumin (anyone know what these are?) but you have disregarded the weightier matters of the vow namely justice, mercy and faithfulness."
Now back to the study article. This is my big question. Based on Paragraph 18 it tells the story of a missionary sister named Sonia from Senegal:
"She (Sonia) studied the Bible with a woman named Heidi , who contracted HIV from her unbelieving husband(of course they would point out that he was an unbeliever-I'm surprised they did not put it in bold capital letters) ...Soon her health failed and she was hospitalized with AIDS. Sonia relates: "The hospital staff did their best but they were few in numbers. Volunteers from the congregation were called on to take care of her needs at the hospital... The doctor in charge said: "Out biggest problem if that even relatives often abandon family memeber when they know they have AIDS. Why do you who are not related...agree to put yourself at risk? HUH? AIDS is not airborne?? Only way she would be putting herself at risk is if she was giving the woman her daily shots or they were having some lesbain affair or something. and our d
ear ol' Sister Sphie continues:"I expalined that to me. Heidi was my sister...I found it a pleasure to take care of her." Incidentally, Sonia suffered no ill effects from her loving efforts to care for Heidi. There it is again??? How would she of possibly "suffered ill effects" from taking care of an AIDS patient? She was just there to give her company and the aritcle even explained that she slept on a mat. Can someone explain this? Maybe I missed something. Cause I thought again, AIDS was Not an airborne diesease?? I was especaiily interested in what comments would be made. This one from the WT conductor made me barf:
"As we see from this paragraph, the bond we brothers and sisters have for one another is deeper many times then the own relationships we have with our wordly family memebers. Only we have that type of love for one another...the world cannot even comprehend it."
Unbelievable what you really learn once you do the research! I cannot believe how many contradictions and out of context points were made in this just on study article. I sat in that audience wondering if I really could be the only one smart enough to see it! (Anyone have add'tl points please feel free to reply.) Any links would be helpful also.
