Posts by moggy lover

11

When did Jesus return?

by 2112 in

i know this has been talked about before but i still find it ...interesting.. if jesus did return in 1914(invisibly) why do the jw still observe passover.

was it not to be observed until he arrived?

maybe that is the new light jesus did not come in 1914 he is coming now, and that would explain why this may be the last memorial.. just a thought

moggy lover

Darn... that last paragraph but one, should have had a Bible reference: Rev 1:7

Carry on

Cheers

11

When did Jesus return?

by 2112 in

i know this has been talked about before but i still find it ...interesting.. if jesus did return in 1914(invisibly) why do the jw still observe passover.

was it not to be observed until he arrived?

maybe that is the new light jesus did not come in 1914 he is coming now, and that would explain why this may be the last memorial.. just a thought

As Gumby has mentioned above, the WTS draws this hair-splitting difference between "Presence-Parousia" and "Coming-Erchomai" [Don't be fooled by the use of the word "arrive" at 1Cor 11:26, the verse we are discussing. The WTS "translates" this same word as "coming" at Jo 11:56, and 2Th1:10 - which incidently should put to rest the vaunted claim by the WTS that their "translation" is the most "consistent" in being a word-equivalent version]

According to WTS theology, Jesus had His "Parousia" in 1874, oops I mean 1914, but His "erchomai" will be at Armageddon. So the "anointed" will be partaking of the memorial till Christ "comes", ie at Armageddon.

Funny, that. Especially since the words "erchomai" and "parousia" are used interchangeably at several passags in the NT. Passages even acknowledged by the WTS.

At Matt 24:45, the most Sacred Text for the JWs in the Bible [I'm almost certain that the JWs genuflect or kiss their NWT Bibles everytime they read this passage], Jesus tells of the FDS which will be at His "erchomai" vs 44. [Notice how the JWs never actually connect the 2 verses of 44, and 45 together. If the "erchomai" of Christ is future, then inevitably,so is the FDS]

Since 1874, oops - again I mean 1914, Christ has been seen with "spiritual eyes of understanding", and his followers have been pierced for the sake of an invisible Christ, because he "came" [erchomai] when? at Armageddon? no 1914.

In maintaining artificial distinctions and propounding doctrines that reflect human wisdom, the WTS has shown how bankrupt its theology is

48

Hi

by UNCLEAR in

this obviously is my first post, i actually feel like i may be sick but i felt compelled to post.

only if to just say hello.. my life has been anything but boring, pioneered for years, brought several family members into "the truth", and find myself unable to have studies anylonger because i feel unsure about the stand i have taken all these years.. i was previously married, my husband left the organization for various reason, we divorced and i recently remarried another brother, he is a wonderful man and husband, i care for him deeply we and had been friends for 15 years.

i also have a son from my first marriage who is 4, he is the love of my life, recently my son had an opertion that could require a blook transfusion and to be honest i could never deny him that.

moggy lover

Hi Unclear and welcome to the Forum. Hope you will be with us a long while, because you will always be welcome as a true friend. Among the wonderful people that you will meet here you will see a wide range of views and a rich tapestry of ideas, all contributing to finding out the "truth" about the "truth"

Here thinking is allowed, and debate encouraged, dissent is not a sign of discord but of freedom and liberty. Heres hoping you will tell us more of yourself, and that you will feel at home.

The spiritual quest that you are now beginning will be long, sometimes hard, somtimes confusing, but it will ultimately be rewarding. If there is anything you need to know just ask. It is truly amazing the wealth of intellectual talent that is available on this Forum.

By the way, there are a couple of Aussies on this forum that I would be wary of if I were you. Mad as hatters. Completely bonkers. Drive you round the twist they will.

Cheers

25

Will the "Deliverance at Hand" convention cause the WT to release new book

by booker-t in

i am not sure but i think judge rutherford wrote a book called "deliverance" and i was wondering if the wt society will release an updated version of rutherford's book at the 2006 district convention "deliverance at hand" conventions?

moggy lover

They could revise the "Let God Be True" revision, perhaps calling it "Let God Be TruER"

Cheers

11

This would be a good Question from readers about Judicial Committees

by scrubmaster in

.

this would be a good questions from readers.......having read several scriptures about how the judges heard judicial case in the public court yard..so that all would see that true justice was served and know why a person was being stoned if it should come to type of punishment...what scriptural bases does the society have for conducting judicial cases in secret and then expect everyone to shun(stone) some one with out knowing what the crime was.

i would love so see what scriptures if any they could come up with.

moggy lover

Hmmmm..... Good point scrubmaster.

Interesting to note that in his book "In search of Christian Freedom" Ray Franz adresses this issue under the sub-heading: "A Course Unsupported By Biblical Precedent" [pg 324]

35

eBay auction - Framed Oil Painting of Fred Franz

by VM44 in

jw
friends

wow!

how about this hanging in your living room?

let the bidding begin!

moggy lover

Re the photos supplied by fjtoth: the bottom row, second from left [the one with the reddish tint] Freddy looks either:

1 Like the butler who dun it in a horrible b-grade murder movie of the 20s or....

2 A mafia hit man trying to remember where he left his violin case.

By the way, IW, the pictures yours... darned if I would pay more than a cent!!

Cheers

14

Without Sarcasm, How would a witness respond to this?

by Kristofer in

i plan on posing this question the next time my dub friends knock on my door..

what is the good news, the gospel you preach?

as a witness, what are the responses i can expect?

moggy lover

Basing themselves solely on the one text at Matt 24:14, the WTS has suceeded in deflecting the "Gospel" message away from a Person, Christ, and placing it on a concept, a thing, an abstraction - the "kingdom"

Whether Matt 24:14 [indeed the whole chapter] is taking place at our time is debateable, and even the WTS has had different interpretations of it. There are those who will argue persuasavely that Matt 24 only has one application, back in the 1CBC, and there are others who with equal conviction, feel that it has two such applications, one in the 1CBC, and the other at the time of the Great tribulation, which is still in the future. So focussing attention on just one text that is highly exegetical makes for bad theology. One must remember that since its inception in 1877, the WTS has used this chapter with different, and transcient meanings, simply to involve the people of the times in which they were dealing. Your great grandfarther would have been convinced by the WTS that the Chapter of Matt 24 applied to his times. And shamelessly they are now doing the same to us.

There are two texts, both in Acts, which describe the practical application of what it means to preach the "Kingdom" Stephen is said to have preached the "Kingdom" at Acts 8:12, and Paul, at Ac 28:31 is also said to have done this. At BOTH texts, however, the practical implication of this is indecently ignored by the WTS. And this is that when reading both those texts it becomes plain, that preaching the "kingdom" is actually preaching the "name of Christ"!! Nowhere is the Kingdom reduced to an abstraction apart from the Person of Christ. It is'nt just that He is a king of a kingdom that also includes 144K other kings, but that He IS the Kingdom, He embodies and articulates it, Personally.

I recall seeing this casually absurd picture drawn on pg 3 of the brochure called :"The Government That Will Bring Paradise" where a suitably contrite Jesus is made to point AWAY from Himself to a far-off sunlit majestic mountain, evidently symbolizing this abstract "kingdom concept". This is grotesquely at variance with the real attitude of Jesus which He stated at Jo 5:40

Cheers

18

What does the WTS mean when they talk about a human soul?

by Peter123 in

maybe this has been discussed here before.

(i'm relatively new and i don't read the site everyday/or week.

) but, if i remember correctly, the wts defined the human soul as being merely one's physical body.

moggy lover

Now that you've got me thinking...... I seem to remember something else that the guy I mentioned earlier said. To him [and by extension the WTS] the clinching argument for a fetus not receiving a resurrection was "God's memory" Remember that joojoo ber the god of the WTS is not self contained in knowledge, as would be expected in an infinite deity. In fact, "he" [it?] has to learn from experience and is dependant, like us, on an accumulation of facts.

OK, having said that, your "resurrection" would then be dependant on joojooetc having a memory of your antics. If you intentionally kicked a pesky JW up the arse one day, well that "memory" stays with "himself", and you will find yourself permanently dead. Get it?

Same difference with the fetus. It ain't done nothing to merit a memory. The tape is blank. Zilch. Sorry, mate, no record of so-and-so, therefore: no resurrection.

Yeah, right.

Evidently the WTS "god" is crass enough not to keep a living being, such as fetus in his[its] memory.

Cheers

5

Food requirements of the Law Covenant ??

by moomanchu in

.

"every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; i give all to you, as i gave the green plant.. if this is part of an everlasting covenant as jw's contend why didn't the israelites remind god of it when he instituted the food requirements of the law covenant?.

what is the jw explanation?.

moggy lover

I think that their explanation would go something like this: JHoover esq. did not change the rules with the Law Covenant, he merely ''modified'' them, particularly for health reasons. [I mean eating pork back then evidently caused all sorts of horribles]

Or something like that. The WTS rule is: Anything can be explained away as long as you have a captive audience conditioned to accept any explanation.

Cheers

8

Financial Statement Analysis of 2005 Australian Branch

by NewYork44M in

several weeks ago this board obtained a copy of the australian wt branch 2005 financial statements.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/103528/1.ashx.

i have had a chance to review the statements and would like to add a few comments.

moggy lover

Putting it in another way, if the average member of the Aust JWs is donating $257 a year, it means that this works out to $4.90 a week.

At first glance, it may appear to be particularly ungenerous, but one must consider the huge commitment it already takes to be a follower of the WTS - emotionally, socially,personally, etc.

Remember also that the WTS gets a double whammy out of the flock: 1 The publisher has to "donate" the value of the literature he is receiving - if, say, he takes 10 mags, then it is expected that he will "donate" $5 into the box. 2 He is also obliged to account for any money he does get from the public. So, in turn if I "donate" $5 to the publisher for the literature, the publisher is now obliged to put that money as well into the box.

As a consequence the personal donations tend to diminish. That $4.90 per publisher, per week may also not reflect the correct picture. Remember that the WTS receives largess from sources such as wills. The figure of $4.90 is arrived at without taking that into account. [$15 Mill contributed by 60,000 makes it $4.90 per week] However if a legacy of $2 mill to the society was part of a persons will for this year then the average per pub per week in donations would be as little as $2.15.

This lack of generosity would then appear to compare unfavourably with the corresponding generosity of those who are in such "Babylonish" religions as the Anglican Church or the RC Church

Cheers