my sister called me tonight, and reminded me of this, i had forgotten.
- there was an engagement party and the whole cong was invited.
- the fourth of six kids, and it was in a function room with no bar.. everyone was allowed one glass of wine and no one was allowed to bring any.
I remember camping. This was with a bunch of super good JW. It was awful. They were singing kingdom songs by the camp fire.
I went on an over night hiking trip with some JWs one weekend. We carried on our backs everything we needed that weekend.
One bro not only brought his magazine and bible to study his watchtower lesson, he also packed in the aid book and two bound volumns, so he could really "research" the lesson.
if so...why?.
i don't know what i believe so i'm just curious.
/newborn.
I find it interesting that people would doubt the total existance of Jesus of Nazareth when No reliable bible scholar today has ever said that Jesus is merely a mythical character.
Your right, I think they usually say he is most likely to be a conglomerate of a number of real and mythical people.
Another reason that an actual historical person Jesus existed is that not enough time had lapsed between Jesus' death and the first writings about him to support an actual mythical person called Jesus being created. In other words, most of the people alive during his time were still alive and would have known whether stories about him were made up or not. And they certainly would know if such a person existed.
If you actually believe that A story can't be twisted and changed in a decade or two then I would like to tell you a story how the WTBS NEVER stated that 1975 would bring armegeddon.
Another point to ponder is this; why are the gospels being held in suspect "until proven true" to unbelievers anyway? I say the burden of proof lays on the unbelievers to prove the gospels are false. The Jews have always had a reputation for oral tradition and keeping accurate records so I do not see why the gospels would be held in suspect. Again, the burden of proof goes the other way my friends especially since no bible scholar claims the gospel accounts of Jesus are a fake.
First of all the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. period.
And second of all it always cracks me up whenever someone goes on about how accurate a groups oral tradition is! Really? How do you know that? How WOULD you know that? Please explain that to me!
Or is that another matter of "it's true because no one can prove it's not true"?
a question, maybe a dumbass one.
but i am reading about scandal, cover up and two witness policy.
- most of the cases seem to be not by the parent, but a trusted brother.. my question is this, - even if the elders might skirt round the issue, and come up with all this mouth of two witnesses stuff, why cant the parent simply go to the police - in this are they just as accountable?
well sphere apsotate is just a word they coined to scare people. they are as scared of apostates as they are of demons.
I thought apostates were those who joined other religions?
I can find no difinition that includes joining a new religion. You just have to be disloyal or leave and your an apostate according to all definitions I've found.
Even the society would agree with that difinition.
Of course JW's themselves are apotates, they left the "bible students" and became "Jehovahs Witnesses" and that makes them apostates. The Bible students are still alive and very active, google them, it's very interesting. They see Russell as there founding father just like JW's do. Russell was a Bible student he was never a JW.
When the JW's splintered off from the BS's, even though they took the majority of members with them, they became apostates.
I welcome anyone to prove me wrong.
a question, maybe a dumbass one.
but i am reading about scandal, cover up and two witness policy.
- most of the cases seem to be not by the parent, but a trusted brother.. my question is this, - even if the elders might skirt round the issue, and come up with all this mouth of two witnesses stuff, why cant the parent simply go to the police - in this are they just as accountable?
as for apsotate, I still cant really define what that even means.
By JW standards you already are.
But then again, I do not believe in allowing others to define us.
You are who YOU are, not who others say you are. One of my most difficult lessons after leaving the dubs.
a question, maybe a dumbass one.
but i am reading about scandal, cover up and two witness policy.
- most of the cases seem to be not by the parent, but a trusted brother.. my question is this, - even if the elders might skirt round the issue, and come up with all this mouth of two witnesses stuff, why cant the parent simply go to the police - in this are they just as accountable?
You have to remember, that JW's are constantly groomed to be dependant. And to learn not to trust themselves.
"Do not rely upon your own understanding"
We were constantly told that the FDS was our means to salvation. IF we did not follow the elders direction we were "running ahead of Jehovah"
These people that claim that they would go to the police first must not have been very good JWs.
No wonder your apostates now!
im working on my exit strategy out of the watchtower org.
ive set my mind to be out by the end of 2010 or mid 2011. .
id like to avoid getting df and disassociating my self is also an undesirable option.
An apostate elder on JWN is significantly less likely to cause damage in the cong than a true believer elder that 'knows' he has been appointed by the Holy Spirit to prince it over the rank and file.
That much is obvious to anyone with a semi-functional brain.
Have to disagree with you Besty.
If the elders had bent the rules and been a little more compassionate and loving I would still be a dub.
It was their hard nosed allegence to the rules that got me to wake up.
Gentle, kind-hearted, compromising elders just help people to stay stuck.
if so...why?.
i don't know what i believe so i'm just curious.
/newborn.
There is to much historic evidence that Jesus lived to denie it.
I would like to see some of this evidence.
Could you at least provide one example?
how many fit this description provided by no longer held captive?.
as a nurse, i can tell you that their lives wont go well.
usually abused females end up neurotics and suffer from personality disorders, and more often than not, anorexic.
I agree, I apprecaite Lady Lee taking the time to set the record straight.
I remember when I first began my recovery years ago, i was told by one social worker that survivers could never become counselors themselves because they were just to damaged. Only "un-damaged" people were capable of counseling other survivers.
Now, twenty some years later, I am proud to say that I have known several survivers that went on to become highly successful couneselors. I count Lady Lee among them.
I'm a survivor, and I have achieved a leval of success that i thought I was not capable of. Early on I was told I would not be capable of much because of my "damage", so of course it affected the levels of my goals. Low self-esteem comes with the territory so when a kind and helpful authority figure says something you tend to believe it.
i was just reading brenda lee's "out of the cocoon" and found an idea that i share just to let some steam off.. according to the fable, satan (this guy .
This is the real story on the debil.
i honestly think that if individual elders thought they personally might get sued, they would back off from talking to you or trying to hunt you down.
i know i always was nervous that i'd havv=e to hire a lawyer and pay $$$ out of my own pocket.. what do you think?
might that not discourage elders from violating your rights or harrassing you?
I agree it would be very difficult if not impossible to have a successful lawsuit.
But that's not the point, the point is to scare the elders off and it often works because all elders know that they are hangin out there in the wind and the society will not back them up.
So why on earth would any elder want to risk even a hint of an lawsuit? What would there motivation be if the society won't even back them?
