Posts by done4good

9

My 5th anniversary today... No More Meetings

by xjwms in

jw
friends

this is my official day... five years ago ... when i decided to no longer attend regular meetings.. so, .. my wife comes home from the meeting yesterday and says..."elder.______ says to say hi to you" ... as we were talking after the meeting.. (this is the guy who was at my house telling me i should go to another hall, as i was no longer welcome there.).

i wish i would have thought to say...you should have told him that : ... i was celebrating five years of not attending.!.

but i did'nt think of it till later last night.

done4good

That's interesting that it was on 9/11. I know of a few "inactive" ones that actually started going back to meetings after 9/11. Don't really know why.

j

23

What musicians did JWs ban?

by love2Bworldly in

jw
friends

ok i don't mean to copycat the other thread on movies, but it got me thinking.

i remember throwing out all my beloved beatle albums because they did drugs.

elton john was bad because he was gay.

done4good

I can think of lots of bands different jws had issues with, not necessarily the "offical" list, but these were some of the more common ones...

1. Led Zeppelin (Jimi page's whole Alyster Crowley thing)

2. AC/DC (Rumor that this somehow stands for "Against Christ/Devil's Cult)

3. Styx (The Greek Mythological river that leads to Hell)

4. ELO (Backwards masking on "Face the Music", etc.

5. Rush, (Rumor that this meant Royal Ushers of Satan's House, or something like that)

Basically, they had a problem with everything I liked, so I never really bothered to care.

j

32

Watchtower Evolution Fraud

by Amazing in

jw
friends

the watchtower society first published a book on evolution in the late 1960s or early 1970s, simply known as the evolution book.

it is a small hardbound book, the same in size at the old "truth" book.

other than reading it, i never really studied it.

done4good

For interested readers, the latest versions of the material that Jim mentioned are available online:
"The WTS View of Creation and Evolution": http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/part-1-disagreements-about-evolution.html
"The Flood": http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/part-1-general-description-of-flood.html
AlanF

Thanks AlanF. That was a good read.

j

11

Getting Along With Family Members Still In TheTruth

by The wanderer in

jw
friends

getting along with family members

having had the experience of being a former jehovah's witnesses and understanding.

the position toward family members who have either left the "truth" or have been disfellowshiped,.

done4good

I really have to apologize concerning what I said in a different thread earlier today concerning family members still in the org. I just had about an hour and a half frank discussion with my sister over the phone, (a very gung-ho pioneer), actually, she was quite understanding of my differences with the organization, and had to agree with me on many points, in fact. Sometimes, it all in the presentation, IF you're allowed one.

j

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

done4good

Done4good: You're way off base here 3W. Not only does the WTS consider the UN "the disgusting thing that stands in an elevated place", a recent WT article pointed out that the "elevated" position it stands in will be in the form of REPLACEMENT of false religion at the beginning of the GT. If the WT goes as far as to consdier the UN a "replacement" for false religion, then that implies IT IS a "religion" of sorts, as far as the WT is concerned. Please don't try to use the excuse that somehow the UN is not currently in that status, so it dosen't matter. This is indeed how the WT views the UN. It is not THE POST OFFICE, FEMA, part of the SCHOOL SYSTEM, the JUDICIAL SYSTEM, WELFARE or SECTION 8. I said it before. You are intellectually dishonest.
Is this the question you are referring to? I didn't see a question in it but anyway your reasoning is wrong. The UN is not a replacement for false religion. It will destroy false religion. The UN is not a religious organization.
The Watchtower of October 1st, 1995 provides a clear description of how we should view the United Nations:
“In Bible prophecy, human governments are often symbolized by wild beasts. (Daniel 7:6, 12, 23; 8:20-22) Hence, for many decades the Watchtower magazine has identified the wild beasts of Revelation chapters 13 and 17 with today’s worldly governments. This includes the United Nations, which is depicted in Revelation chapter 17 as a scarlet-colored beast with seven heads and ten horns.
“However, this Scriptural position does not condone any form of disrespect toward governments or their officials. The Bible clearly states: “Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God. Therefore he who opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God; those who have taken a stand against it will receive judgment to themselves.”—Romans 13:1, 2.
“Accordingly, Jehovah’s Witnesses, who are maintaining strict political neutrality, do not interfere with human governments. They never foment revolution or participate in acts of civil disobedience. Rather, they recognize that some form of government is necessary to maintain law and order in human society.—Romans 13:1-7; Titus 3:1.
“Jehovah’s Witnesses view the United Nations organization as they do other governmental bodies of the world. They acknowledge that the United Nations continues to exist by God’s permission. In harmony with the Bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses render due respect to all governments and obey them as long as such obedience does not require that they sin against God.—Acts 5:29.”

No, it was not in the form of a question 3W, but you attacked my comment as a "stupid argument", with no factual backing. The fact still remains, that in spirit, the UN is an organization that (according to the WT), will "elevate itself" to the POSITION of WORSHIP, after it destroys false religion. Admittedly, I don't have the specific article, but it was much more recent than 1995. For reasons that are obvious to any cognisent person, the WT should not in any direct way, (i.e. becomming an NGO/DPI member), been associated with the UN organization, consdiering thier belief as to who the UN actually is. If the UN was aware of this teaching, I cannot imagine them as treating it as mere "disagreement". It is downright confrontational. Once again the fact remains that during the period of 1991-2001, no such inferences were made by the WT. Articles in the Awake magazine were clearly written to appease the UN, certainly NOT villify it as God's enemy. You're a smart guy, you need to learn to get passed the written "letter" of things, and see the "spirit" that is behind it. There's simply no more point in debating this.

j

60

Let's count the years together.....

by AK - Jeff in

jw
friends

.

my years in = 43 total of those on this thread = 43. .

make it progressive - add yours to the last one posted and keep adding - lets see how many years we have invested.. so we have 43 - now add yours and keep it going.

done4good

From time my mother started studying- 28 years.

From time of baptism- 18 years.

j

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

done4good

3W, If you're trying so hard to answer everyone's posts, why don't you answer mine???

j

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

done4good

Of course the WTS has always written articles about the UN since it began so this was no problem at all.

But never in a positive way, and rarely in a nuetral, (informatary), way. What was written in those articles in the late '90s almost praise. The tone was very different, an certainly THERE WAS NO MENTION of any "doctrinal" issues concerning the UN. Dishonesty by omission, period.

btw:Pleae address my above post.

33