please help with this: when i was in college, there was a lot of talk about university and how all who pursue that are wasting their time and all that.
even before going to uni, there was a lot of pressurr on me concerning my decision.
during that time, two elders sat with me for appointment as ms and asked me if i have freedom of speech in the org since i'm going to uni and i said no.
If you wish to remain a Witness, tell them forthrightly that you do not want the appointment. Quell questions as to why. Tell them you fell harassed over it and it's damaging your spirituality.
If you don't want to be a Witnesses, stop attending meetings.
as i have read before, one of the members of this forum noted that the writer of the website anointedjw is a master of pomposity.
i am not against them, as i am with jw.org (the watchtower society), but i see that they are trying to imitate the language of the old testament prophets.
for instance, this is what they have recently written:.
The site smacks of dementia.
this is what i found at anointedjw.org.
i don't know if it's true.
on august 25, 2014, we received the following comment and inquiry: .
The website in question would have made Goebbel's proud.
a little experience that happened very recently:.
another brother, an elder, and i were talking, i was explaining to him and giving him several examples of how a couple of the elders in our congregation were blatantly trying to run their own show, parading themselves around as "representatives" of the body, when the other brothers didnt know what the hell they were talking about.
they are using their "elder powers" to bully and push people around, causing a bit of angst and hurt feelings.
"Do I believe that Jehovah directs his organizaiton? Of course I do. The governing body and elders are imperfect men. If God gives them authority it is scripturally limited, as you should know. I look to God not men. Do you look to men?"
this is what i found at anointedjw.org.
i don't know if it's true.
on august 25, 2014, we received the following comment and inquiry: .
This is contrived.
the passage that narrates the three temptations appears in the synoptics, but is ignored in the fourth gospel.
furthermore, in the fourth gospel jesus could not spend 40 days in the wilderness after being baptized as told in mark 1:12-13 (which is the source of matthew and luke).
so, if the testimony of the author of the fourth gospel were true (read john 21:24), the story of the wilderness never happened.
The Hebrew word translated "evil" at Isa. 45:7 means calamity. It does not include the thought of wickedness, and it is not meant to be commentary on Satan's existence. You presume that the 19th Century Tübingen 'scholars' who found two authors of Isaiah had it right. It appears that you do not know why they suggested two authors, nor do you know why others reject that conclusion. Your comment is shallow. Hit the books.
we are supposed to have a new co effective this september.
what do you think about the guy that left?.
We haven't had a good circuit overseer since 1968.
in a letter in the 2013 yearbook of jehovah's witnesses, the governing body sign off with the words, "we love you all very much".
these words were later echoed by one of the governing body in an address to french jehovah's witnesses in july this year.
these words sound so marvellously compelling and heartfelt - goosebump inducing, even.. imagine the governing body wrote these words to you or expressed them to you in person- yes to you reading these very words.
Love is as love does. They love no one but themselves.
this is something i have wondered about, and our great poster stillin posed the question on another thread .
russell get the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 606/7 bce?
(he adjusted 606 to 607 when it was pointed out there was no year "0").. as in the main a plagiarist, rather than an original thinker, i guess he got it from someone else ?.
Rather than being a plagiarist, Russell was an adapter. Plagiarism implies the use of another’s words without attribution. Russell adapted other’s ideas for his own use. That’s not the same thing. But it is fair to say that Russell never had an original thought in his life.
Russell stuck to the 606 BC date. The 607 revision came later. But both dates have a history. Russell never read John A. Brown’s Even-Tide. Barbour did, but Brown does not point to 536 BC or 1914. He pointed to 1917.
The immediate source of the 606 date was E. B. Elliott’s Horae. The 607 date was advocated by Samuel Davies Baldwin. See his Armageddon: Or the Overthrow of Romanism and Monarchy’ The Existence of the United States Foretold in the Bible, Its Future Greatness; Invasion by Allied Europe; Annihilation of Monarchy; Expansion into the Millennial Republic, and its Dominion over the Whole World, Applegate and Company, Cincinnati, 1863, page 424.
Russell and his associates did not live in a vacuum. All this was discussed widely in the 1870s, not just by millenarians and Adventists, but by main-stream preachers. Russell, contrary to WatchTower claims, was not an independent Bible student. He read what others wrote and kept what appealed to his imagination, scriptural or not.
Some of this history is recounted in Schulz and de Vienne’s Nelson Barbour: The Millennium’s Forgotten Prophet. You should read both their books. Visit their blog here http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/
i just finished crysis of a conscience and all i have to say is wow!
showed how they sadly look for doctrine changes to fit their agenda vs what the bible says.
any new light or changes i'll be wondering the real motive behind them.
About Witnesses: Schulz and de Vienne: Nelson Barbour the Millennium's Forgotten Prophet and their Separate Identity.
Fiction? I've been re-reading David Eddings books. Rienhart's Circular Staircase is still good.
