Interesting to note from the time-line that WT is still teaching that Adam was created in 4026 BC.
'Teaching them good things?'. Ha ha.
so we must teach our jw children about destruction???
what is their definition of the word "good"???.
have you all seen the latest jw flashcards???
Interesting to note from the time-line that WT is still teaching that Adam was created in 4026 BC.
'Teaching them good things?'. Ha ha.
you see them all over the place now, 2 or 3 of them standing near a portable display of bible-based literature, chatting to each other.
counting time.. i've seen them in london, glasgow and cluj (romania).
the portable display is always the same.
BluePill2:
Actually, I have more respect for the workers you portray than for dubs-on-a-misssion.
There are no false promises.
What is offered is delivered (almost) there and then - no waiting for an indeterminate sometime/never.
What you see is what you get.
You only pay once - no lifetime commitment.
They don't want to control your thoughts.
You don't have to commit to a certain number of hours a month.
Your money may actually be helping someone.
You are less likely to feel bored during the 'meeting'.
how much did your congregation and its bank account get taken for?
share your horror story!.
These are just some idle thoughts about the accounting implications of all this. Presumably the WT, a 'legalistically-minded' conglomeration of corporations with large legal/accountancy departments will have considered this.
1. Were the loans to KH congregations secured by a 'charge' on the Title Deeds or were they effectively legally unsecured?
2. The loans would have appeared in WT balance sheets as assets.
3. In the UK each congregation is (as I understand it) an individually registered charity. The WT loan would appear as a liability.
4. If the loans are forgiven (would any legal charge on the deeds be removed? Must be, I would think.) the capital value of the WT would reduce (less assets), the capital value of the congregation would increase (less liabilities).
5. I understand that WT loans were interest-free, so as far as WT accounts were concerned the repayments were 'repayments of capital' rather than 'interest income'.
6. The 'new light' arrangements seek to replace the 'repayments of capital' with 'donations'. The one-off 'donations' from standing congregation accounts would affect local KH balance sheets by reducing their capital by the amount of that donation.
I'm just thinking out loud here, and without knowing all the amounts involved it's difficult to asess the impact. But you can bet that WT have considered all this and the amounts involved are substantial.
A simple example - I don't know how realistic it is : A congregation had a £30,000 WT loan, bank balance of £7,000 and the KH is worth £60,000. Capital value is £60k + £7k =£67k - £30k = £37k. After the 'new light' it's worth £60k + (£7k - £5k) = £62k. The WT has lost £30k in capital, gained £5k in 'donation income'.
Is there some reason why WT would want to shed capital value? Of course, any funds it did give to congregations for rebuilding etc. would show in the accounts as charitable distributions of donation income received.
I can't believe that WT would not have done all this without thinking it through and without it being to WT's advantage. This is big usiness, after all.
its all about context.
i never was a jw - i was raised in the gospel hall tradition (i.e.
fundamentalist evangelical) where every male (not you, sisters) was encouraged to be their own bible scholar.
Thanks, Kate honey. xx
JGnat: It can be awkward, especially if in a situation (e.g. a funeral) where words are spoken to console the grieving but in which I have no belief. Best, I've found, to keep my mouth shut. I have no wish to upset anyone especially at a time of bereavement. But if I'm asked for comment, I'll give it. Cosmic dust we came from and to cosmic dust we'll return.
its all about context.
i never was a jw - i was raised in the gospel hall tradition (i.e.
fundamentalist evangelical) where every male (not you, sisters) was encouraged to be their own bible scholar.
It is a huge responsibility, I think, to question someone's faith, especially if it's something they rely on.
My nephew died several years ago, a young teenager, in a senseless road accident. His mum (my sister) and his dad cling to their beliefs and this has no doubt helped them in their grief. I would not dream of saying anything to challenge them.
I now take the view that unless and until someone tries to push their views on me I will say nothing.
I have had many thoughts about islam, though. I realise that to challenge their core beliefs - scrutinise their source documents as one can freely do with OT and NT - is to invite death.
May be my next area of research!
its all about context.
i never was a jw - i was raised in the gospel hall tradition (i.e.
fundamentalist evangelical) where every male (not you, sisters) was encouraged to be their own bible scholar.
Thanks jgnat - interesting piece.
I am, I suppose, sometimes a little cynical (30 years as a police officer can do that to you). Most of my time was as a detective, and ten years was as a commander of a Fraud Squad. There one learns to dissemble b/s by careful, repeated, to-the-point questioning, noting the answers and not moving on until the question has been answered. Not so different, it will be noted, as the advice given here so many times when actively questioning JWs about their message.
But, as a human being with feelings, I never challenge someone's faith - it's theirs, however irrational and they may need it. Offer pointers, maybe.
My intellectual questioning is about people who in normal life are rational, even cynical, demand evidence, question everything and yet in their 'faith' persona can accept the unacceptable wearing the 'goggles of faith'.
its all about context.
i never was a jw - i was raised in the gospel hall tradition (i.e.
fundamentalist evangelical) where every male (not you, sisters) was encouraged to be their own bible scholar.
It’s All About Context
I never was a JW - I was raised in the ‘Gospel Hall’ tradition (i.e. fundamentalist evangelical) where every male (not you, sisters) was encouraged to be their own bible scholar. Unsurprisingly, divisions over minor (to outsiders) matters of doctrine and theology led to splits and divisions and so on and so on. (This is was happened, of course, in the early days of the Millerites leading to the Bible Students, Adventists, Christadelphians, et al). Not surprising except when one is taught about divine inspiration, divine protection of doctrines, etc. How could a god be so careless that he preserved his holy writings for thousands of years and yet couldn’t make his message so clear that there were all these divisions?
But I digress. As a child, I accepted what I was told – just as I would have done of any religion depending where I had been born. I never questioned the painted ‘God is Love’ banner at the Gospel Hall even as I listened to the OT stories – you know what they say.
My paternal grandfather was a coal miner in a small Welsh village. In his youth he was bare-knuckle boxing champion of his valley. He was ‘converted’ in the mass ‘Revival’ in the early twentieth century and he and a couple of others built a small gospel hall (we called it the ‘tin tabernacle’). Much was forbidden, and some of my earliest memories are of visiting his house as a small child. He had a plaque (‘Christ is the unseen listener to every conversation’ etc.) and his (uneducated but sincere) faith was such that if the bible (always KJV) said that Jonah had swallowed a whale, he’d have believed it. There was also, of course, a confusion between Temperance and the Revival. He was keen to teach me ‘God is Love’ in Welsh.
As a young teenager I went to a very small pentecostal church (AOG) and then to a Welsh (tradition, not language) chapel. Rebelled as a teenager, but in my early 20s came back to it.
And that’s where it started. I was now an independent thinker, keen to learn more – and why wouldn’t you, if your faith was so important to you? So I started researching, wanting to learn more. No internet in those days, so it was a long process.
So to the subject of this piece. I quickly learned that context is all important. What was happening, what were the influences, the pressures, the background, when something was written?
(As an example, I moved to live in Cyprus 2005-2010. The best reliable recent history of that troubled and new bankrupt island is the ‘Contexts’ section of the Rough Guide. History as taught on the island depends on which side of the divide you are, and the autocepholous Greek Orthodox church is far from a reliable source.)
I was always interested in the history of the Roman empire and looked for mentions of this in the NT. After all, Palestine was a hot bed of unrst, revolution, religious mania, etc. To my surprise, any mentions are minimal and guarded. The Roman occupation was as brutal and overbearing (or more) as, for example, the Nazi occupation of Europe and yet, and yet ...
Minimal references to ‘tax collectors’, ‘carry his coat an extra mile’, ‘render unto Caesar’ and so on. And, of course, the execution. Quite clearly the responsibilty of the jews in the NT, while the reality was that it was an execution for sedition – just like so many others.
And then, of course, the reality that if the NT didn’t start to be written until after 70AD – after the sack of Jerusalem, after Masada, and if you were Paul/Saul essentially starting and promulgating a new ‘gnostic’ religion (‘I never met him but this is what he told me in a vision, it’s not about overthrowing worldy powers it’s about a kingdom in heaven’) within the Roman Empire – you wouldn’t want to base it on the person of someone who was executed for sedition.
Those were my thoughts, and to be honest the internet has made research so much easier.
Some people – committed JWs and others, and we should include devotees of all religions in this, from muslims, buddhists, sikhs et al – will never (and may never, on pain of death) question their religion and its teachings. Those of us who live in liberal democracies and CAN question these things are lucky, I think, and have a duty to do so.
never was a jw, but been here long enough to have made some friends and respect opinions.. retired in 2004, lived in cyprus 2005-2010. back here in wales since then.. just back from a holiday in france (most recent of many).
love the country, the lifestyle, can get by in the language.. just seen an advert for a country estate (british-owned) they want someone to live on site, do a bit of handyman stuff, etc., look after (mainly brit) holiday visitors in return for zero rent (only utitlties).
family would be abe to come and stay for free.
Update.
Have discussed this with son and (estranged 'DIL). Main ties would be grand-daughters (5 mins away) but we have agreed that some weeks on holiday with quality time would make up for distance.
Have left message for owner, also for French friend just a couple of miles from this place.
As a returned ex-pat (2010) after five years in CY this has opened a can of worms.
Moving on appeals ...
And of course visitors would be welcome ...
isn't that just annoying?
can people even comment in their own words anymore?
how bad is it where you're at?
I've only ever been to one JW meeting (oh, and a 'memorial') - in about 2006 in Cyprus (nominally English-speaking). I was invited by my neighbours, lovely people but ardent dubs, who I think had hopes for me.
As an informed atheist (they knew this) I looked forward to it to hear informed discussion.
I was sadly disappointed, of course. I can't remember what the subject was, but it was mind-numbingly boring - perhaps deliberately made so by the format. The leader/preacher read from the magazine, an old guy* read the paragraph, now and then he read a quote from the bible, the printed questions were asked and various people responded by reading the paragraph back out loud. There was a frisson of excitement when one old lady answered a question by eulogising C T Russell but I got the impression that she was regarded as 'somewhat eccentric' (as we Brits politely say) and things moved quickly on. Some obviously better-off CY ladies (elderettes perhaps?) had brought their Filippina house-maids with them and there was much approval when the Filippinas commented. (Actually, the Filippinas tended to have better English than their employers).
There were a few moments when I wanted to comment 'Hang on - how do you reconcile what you/the paragraph says with (bible quote) or what JWs used to teach?' but I was dissuaded by my hosts. They would have lost status by being seen to have introduced a questioning voice, perhaps.
It reminded me very much of the TV footage you used to see of public demonstrations of thousands of Chinese waving aloft their 'little red book' (The Thoughts of Chairman Mao).
'Informed discussion' it was not.
I think I lost my attractiveness as a potential recruit when I lit up a cigarette outside after the meeting.
*The old guy (a Brit) who had been charged with doing the reading out loud later committed suicide by loading his pockets with stones and drowning himself in the swimming pool of our apartment complex. His widow (the stronger dub, I suspect) had been (still may be for all I know) charmingly and systematically ripping-off absentee apartment landlords for whom she acted as agent for years. When I left CY she was hosting sessions for Filippina ladies where they could 'study' the magazines. And yet (to my surprise, at least) when minor day-to-day stuff needed doing it was us 'worldly' neighbours who were called upon.
never was a jw, but been here long enough to have made some friends and respect opinions.. retired in 2004, lived in cyprus 2005-2010. back here in wales since then.. just back from a holiday in france (most recent of many).
love the country, the lifestyle, can get by in the language.. just seen an advert for a country estate (british-owned) they want someone to live on site, do a bit of handyman stuff, etc., look after (mainly brit) holiday visitors in return for zero rent (only utitlties).
family would be abe to come and stay for free.
It would be easy to move - I don't own my place here so could give 30 days notice and go.
Will call later.