Posts by DocBob

10

"Worldy" Event at Assembly Site

by MissBehave in

jw
friends

so last night i went to an event at the arena where i used to attend assemblies, most notably the four day summer district convention, many many moons ago.

i have been to a couple concerts there since fading but this one was different because the house lights were up the whole time so it reminded me more of the assemblies.

it was weird in a deja vu kind of way and liberating all at the same time.

DocBob

We used to attend circuit assemblies and district conventions at the Cumberland County Civic Center in Portland, Maine. I hadn't been there since my last convention in 1996. A year and a half ago, we returned to that civic center to see Steven Curtis Chapman, Chris Tomlin and Casting Crowns and then last year to see Chris Tomlin again with Louie Giglio and Matt Redman. The music was waaaaaay better :-)

23

Undeserved kindness versus Grace - does it matter?

by misspeaches in

just wondering if its just me or not.... does it matter to anyone else that the wtbts changed the word grace to undeserved kindness in the nwt?

in my opinion having changed it to undeserved kindness they use this as a way to guilt trip people into always doing more more more!

where as grace is just grace.

DocBob

Actually, O21 had a good point which I had never considered. Even when I was a JW. The expression "undeserved kindness" has not weaved its way into WT patois, like for instance, "system of things" or "memorial emblems" or "FDS" etc.

I think the use of the expression "undeserved kindness" or lack of it may be a regional thing. I'm in the northeast U.S. and during my years as a JW (1973-96) we used the term a fair bit. Of course it could be just that us really SPIRITUAL people used it. ;-)

23

Undeserved kindness versus Grace - does it matter?

by misspeaches in

just wondering if its just me or not.... does it matter to anyone else that the wtbts changed the word grace to undeserved kindness in the nwt?

in my opinion having changed it to undeserved kindness they use this as a way to guilt trip people into always doing more more more!

where as grace is just grace.

DocBob

Lots of good comments on this one. It always seemed to me that when the term 'undeserved kindness' was used that the emphasis was on how undeserving we were rather than on how kind God is.

To me the strangest use of the term is in the 12/93 'Our Kingdom Ministry', page 7:

"We want to give deserving ones the opportunity to learn of Jehovah’s undeserved kindness and the Kingdom hope."

11

I NEED A BOE Letter

by Sunspot in

i have been "debating" with a staunch wts defender who didn't know about the "donation arrangement" when (and why) it really went into effect.

i have shown the court docs about the swaggart & friends lawsuit, but now she wants to see "proof" that this had any tie-in with the change in donations.

quite simply, i cannot find this letter online although i know i have seen it!

DocBob

You can find the test of the letter from the WTS to the elders and the changed "Our Kingdom Ministry" for the announcement of the donation arrangement at my website at www.docbob.org - just go to scroll down the left side and you will find the Content section. Under that look for "Donation Arrangement".

8

Present Truth, when was term discarded?

by Wasanelder Once in

i know there was a question from readers in the 80's i think that asked if we believe in "present truth".

the answer was given that there is no "present truth", only the truth.

oh, great.

DocBob

Here is the most recent use of the term "present truth" that I found in the Watchtower magazine:

*** w66 3/1 pp. 146-147 The Additional Obligations of the Overseer ***
13 If one is an overseer, or is reaching out for the fine work of an overseer, it is good to know exactly which qualifications are needed. Primarily, there are the Scriptural qualifications as outlined at 1 Timothy 3:1-10 and Titus 1:1-9. He must possess the fruits of the spirit. (Gal. 5:22, 23) He must be a mature, well-balanced Christian, well grounded in the Scriptures and present truth.

And a reference to that phrase in the "Proclaimers" book:

*** jv chap. 10 p. 121 Growing in Accurate Knowledge of the Truth ***
Did they believe that they had all the answers, the full light of truth? To that question Brother Russell pointedly answered: "Certainly not; nor will we have until the ‘perfect day.’" (Prov. 4:18, KJ) Frequently they referred to their Scriptural beliefs as "present truth"—not with any idea that truth itself changes but rather with the thought that their understanding of it was progressive.

Finally, one from the "Revelation" book (1988)

*** re chap. 1 p. 8 Revelation - Its Happy Climax! ***
8 An even stronger reason for publishing this book is the need to keep up-to-date with present truth. Jehovah is continually shedding
greater light on the meaning of his Word, and we can expect that our understanding of Revelation, along with other prophecies,
will be sharpened as we draw closer to the great tribulation.

64

FRANCE-WTS BIG SCANDAL IF TRUE

by DannyHaszard in

vendors of paradise in district xvi

cafe babel - strasbourg,france .

jehovahs witnesses are often criticised.

DocBob

It's been a while since I checked it, but last I looked the WTS owned part of the J.P. Morgan Liquid Assets Money Market Fund. As of a couple years ago, their share of the fund was about $180 million.

13

War Bonds WWI - does anybody have info

by Klaus Vollmer in

once i have read that the wts made advertisings in the wt to buy war bonds.

that must have taken place about 1918.. does anybody have more information about it?.

thank you for research and scans.. .

DocBob

Ah, there's page 174 - and guess who posted it? ;-)

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/11/71805/1.ashx

13

War Bonds WWI - does anybody have info

by Klaus Vollmer in

once i have read that the wts made advertisings in the wt to buy war bonds.

that must have taken place about 1918.. does anybody have more information about it?.

thank you for research and scans.. .

DocBob

DobBob....Also post p. 168 and p. 174 if you can.

Did you mean p 168 from the May 15 or June 1, 1918? The June 1 has some on the same subject.

June 1, 1918 WT p. 168 (= WT reprint page 6268).

ESSENTIALS, UNITY -- NON-ESSENTIALS, CHARITY

There are certain principles, such as the "ransom for all," which are forever vital, but certain subordinate principles may from time to time, with changed conditions, new information, or a new viewpoint be clearly seen to be not necessarily vital. It was vital for a Hebrew to keep himself Levitically undefiled, but after Pentecost this was no longer a vital principle; it was vital that no one but a priest eat the "shewbread"; but "David when he was an hungered, entered into the house of the Lord and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, but only for the priests." (Matthew 12:3, 4) It is vital, according to Paul, for brothers in Christ to "avoid contentions" (Titus 3:9); but "Paul thought not good to take him [John Mark] with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. And the contention was so sharp between them, that they [Barnabas and Paul, who had `lived in all good conscience before God'--Acts 23:1] departed asunder one from the other."--Acts 15:38, 39.

In apostolic times some Christians made it a matter of principle to "observe the days, months, times and years" (Galatians 4:10) of the Hebrew ritual; others did not. "One believed that he might eat all things; another who was weak [in the faith] eateth herbs." (Romans 14:2) "And," says Paul, "he that doubteth is damned [judged] if he eat, because he eateth not of faith [with confidence that it is proper]; for whatsoever is not of faith, is sin." (Romans 14:23) In modern times one Christian can eat pork, another can not; one can observe Sunday, another Saturday, and still another can keep all days holy to God; one can engage in temperance work, another cannot; one can own an automobile, another cannot. At one time a Christian feels unable to do certain things; later, with additional knowledge or thought, he can do them with a good conscience.

A Christian might not have been able conscientiously to engage in the military activities of a country offering only combatant service; later, when the opportunity is enlarged so that he may choose some good work such as the hospital or ambulance service, he may with a free conscience take such service. A Christian to whom may have been presented the perverted viewpoint that the Red Cross work is only the aiding of that killing which is against his conscience, cannot help the Red Cross; then he gains the broader viewpoint that the Red Cross is the embodiment of helping the helpless, and he finds himself able and willing to help the Red Cross according to ability and opportunity. A Christian, unwilling to kill, may have been conscientiously unable to buy government bonds; later he considers what great blessings he has received under his government, and realizes that the nation is in trouble and facing dangers to its liberty, and he feels himself conscientiously able to lend some money to the country, just as he would lend to a friend in distress.

The Christian with the broadest mind is the one who is best informed Scripturally. That Christian who is able to see from but one viewpoint is in danger of being what St. Paul calls "weak," in the sense that his inability to see all around a question limits his sphere of action. Narrow-mindedness invites troubles and persecutions for causes not even indirectly connected with true Christianity. Such trouble may usually well be avoided, and should be avoided in order that such trials or persecutions which are our portion may come upon the clear-cut issue of faithfulness in the consecrated life and not for other causes. The true footstep follower of Christ will have enough to suffer as a Christian. He will do his best to study all sides of every question and remove from himself causes for offense, other than his truly Christian and religious beliefs and principles which are vital.

"If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you; on their part he [Christ in you] is evil spoken of, but on your part [in you as a new creature] he is glorified; but let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evil doer, or as a busybody in other men's affairs. Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God on this behalf."-- 1 Peter 4:14-16.

45

Elders teach "Don't raise your hat to a lady! - it's worldly."

by ozziepost in

back when i was a boy in the 1950s many men wore hats and so did my father.. one evening at the kh he was called in to the backroom by the elders for a 'meeting after the meeting',.

his crime?

he had been seen raising his hat when greeting women!!!!.

DocBob

*** w52 4/15 pp. 254-255 Questions from Readers ***

Questions

from Readers

•

Is it proper for men to tip their hats to women?—G. S., Missouri.

Some say hat-tipping started in the days of armored knights. In a book on customs we read: "In the presence of his superior officer the ordinary soldier would indicate his inferiority by removing his protecting helmet. Until the day that armor was laid aside forever no man dared appear helmeted before his king. Again habit became custom, and when equals met each knight removed his metal casque out of respect to the other." Another book on the subject indicates it started even before that time: "Some authorities suppose that this custom did not originate until the days of chivalry and knighthood during the Middle Ages, but there is evidence that it was common among the Greeks, Romans and certain other ancient peoples. At any rate, it is believed that later it became customary to remove the headgear to show deference to a superior or as a mark of respect to a person of distinction. It was only a step further to lift the headdress as an act of politeness or gallantry to ladies. After the introduction of men’s hats a few centuries ago, raising the hat or completely removing it became a general method of greeting women. The practice retains some of its earlier significance and many people still take off their hats to salute distinguished persons of either sex. Respect for the national flag is shown in the same manner."

Incidentally, not only is patriotic significance given to this gesture as shown by its being done for the flag, but also religious significance is accorded to it in that Catholic men tip their hats when they pass the Catholic church. They do this as an act of worship toward the bread and wine that is inside the church and which according to their belief becomes the actual flesh and blood of Christ. So in doing this they believe they are paying homage to Jesus Christ, who they think is inside the church in the consecrated wafer.

Man and woman were not created equal in power and glory; the man came first and was given special prerogatives. As Jehovah is the head over his wifely organization, and as Christ is the head over his espoused church, so the man is the head over the woman. It is the woman that is commanded to show respect and recognition of the man’s position of headship, and women who rebel at it are not so much rebelling against men as they are against God.—Gen. 3:16; 1 Cor. 11:2-10; Eph. 5:33.

But in his world Satan has reversed matters. Starting in Eden, he has pushed the woman ahead of the man, exalted her above man and used her to bring about the downfall of men dedicated to Jehovah. He has flouted God by reversing the position of the sexes. But he is very subtle about it, camouflaging his work under the guise of harmless custom. Many customs are harmless, but when they contradict a theocratic principle Satan is behind it to discredit God. He is a past master at such deception. (2 Cor. 11:14) In this particular matter of hat-tipping he appeals to the vanity of women and the so-called gentlemanly qualities of men, and any man who does not comply with the subtle custom is considered crude and discourteous, disrespectful of womanhood. So out of a fear of what others may think the majority fall into conformity.—Prov. 29:25.

To refrain from tipping the hat to a woman does not mean one disrespects her. Frequently it is the ones who are excessively courteous and gallant to women who show the least respect for womanhood. They use these flattering gestures and forms of outward courtesy hypocritically, as an opening wedge for improper advances that ultimately show disrespect and lead to misuse of women. It is not good to flatter people, to turn their head; it is to their harm. Specifically, why would a woman want this special show of respect from a man? One woman said in response to this question: "You don’t know how important it makes a woman feel to have a man tip his hat to her." That is sufficient reason for Christians to refrain from the custom. It is not in the interests of the individual to make him feel important, whether the individual is male or female.

Some might argue that the friendly nod of the head came from the practice of bowing—but the nod is given regardless of sex, by both men and women. It does not exalt the woman. If hat-tipping were done by both men and women to each other, as mutual greeting and show of respect for each other, at least it would not be exalting one above the other. When a customary show of respect is performed between men as well as between man and woman, when it does not set the woman apart for special honor because of her sex, then it does not seem Scripturally objectionable. Hat removal would be too inconvenient for the woman? Then why is it the man that is supposed to rise when a woman enters a room or comes to or leaves the table, and never the woman? Is it too inconvenient again? Is she pinned to the chair, as the hat is pinned to her head? What custom does exist whereby women show respect to men? The absence of any is not just by chance, but is by satanic design to untheocratically elevate the woman above the man. In many ways Satan has taken the woman from the position assigned her by God, taken her from the home and its duties and put her into politics and commerce and religious leadership, and thereby caused much of the modern breakdown on the family front.—Heb. 13:4; Rev. 2:20.

The surface courtesies that are flattering to human vanity are not what real Christian women want; instead they cherish the respect and love of one Christian toward another, and which are shown in weightier ways than the untheocratic customs of Satan’s lustful world. Both men and women should stay in the place God assigned them, in human relationships and divine worship. Only such as are content with these assigned places will live in the new world. Open or subtly disguised creature worship and exaltation will have no place there. It has no place with true Christians now.

13

War Bonds WWI - does anybody have info

by Klaus Vollmer in

once i have read that the wts made advertisings in the wt to buy war bonds.

that must have taken place about 1918.. does anybody have more information about it?.

thank you for research and scans.. .

DocBob

Here it is, straight from the horses ... um ... er ... mouth. ;-)

=================================================

May 15, 1918 WT p. 152 (=reprint p.6257);

"THE DUST OF HIS FEET"

In beautifully poetic language the Prophet Nahum describes Jehovah's part in the present distress of nations: "The Lord hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet."--Nahum 1:3.

Certainly clouds, which have long since ceased to be the size of a man's hand, hang thick over human affairs. To the worldly these clouds are sources of uncertainty, apprehension, dread; but to the watchful child of God these "clouds and darkness" are sure harbingers of the establishment of Messiah's reign. Like children at evening who watch for their father's return from the fields and know him from afar by the cloud of dust raised by his equipage, so the Lord's people now have keenest interest in all the happenings in the world, even though some of the dust is blowing into their eyes, ears, noses and throats. They recognize the Lord even through the clouds, first, because the time has come and, secondly, because of the character of the work which is being performed.

Our Master warned us and told us we need not expect to be spoken well of by all men, because the majority of men, being dominated by self interest and selfish institutions, lavish their approval upon "the false prophets." (Luke 6:26) Whatever the Lord's people do, they will not be understood by the world, because they have different standards of judgment, as well as different aims in life. But while the world is losing more and more even that measure of good judgment which was formerly possessed by it, the Lord's people should strive more and more to keep steady heads and to order their conduct with sobriety--giving no reasonable occasion for offense.

Our attitude on the war, Red Cross, Liberty Bonds, etc., has been misunderstood by many people. Few persons do much thinking in war time and what little they do is mostly in line with their natural emotions. We cannot therefore expect much calm and dispassionate thinking now from the worldly. Therefore in our honest effort to render our proper dues to the Government under which we are privileged to live we should be doubly careful not to "speak evil of dignitaries" nor to do anything which would avoidably embarrass them in the solution of their weighty problems. See Matthew 17:25-27; Luke 20:22-25; Romans 13:7; 1 Peter 2:13-17.

OUR STATEMENT TO THE PRESS

Statements have been recently made to several newspapers which requested an expression from us. But the statements, if printed at all, have been so garbled as to be well nigh incoherent. We therefore print below in full a statement prepared by the President of our Association for the _Brooklyn Eagle_ at its request:

"On my return to Brooklyn I learned of the unpleasant occurrence at the Brooklyn Tabernacle last Sunday, April 28th. Mr. W. T. Baker was in the pulpit and at the conclusion of his discourse a request was broguht to the platform that the congregation hear a speech by some one on the Liberty Bonds. Mr. Baker put the matter to a vote and the majority voted in the negative.

"I am sure this action was not intended as any reflection on the Government, nor to be taken as against the Liberty Loan. Those who worship at the Tabernacle believe in worshipping the Lord in spirit and in truth. To them a religious service is the most sacred; and while at religious service they always refrain from discussing temporal matters. This congregation at no time ever held a social tea, a grab-bag party, a bazaar, or anything of that kind in the church. The Tabernacle auditorium is used exclusively for religious matters, especially on Sunday. No previous request had been made to use the Tabernacle by any one in the interest of the Libery Loan campaign. The worshippers had just listened to a helpful spiritual lesson on the Bible. They desired to withdraw from the building with these sacred thoughts in mind and therefore deemed it inappropriate to discuss any temporal matters whatsoever, or to hear them discussed by any one else. We are pleased to grant the use of the Tabernacle for a meeting in the interest of the public when the same does not interfere with our religious services.

"The people of our Association are not against the Government, nor against the Liberty Loan. Our thought is that the Liberty Loan is not a religious question, but purely one pertaining to the affairs of the Government; and that each person should be left to the free exercise of his individual conscience as to whether he will or will not purchase Liberty Bonds. Our views are very well expressed in a statement given to the public press some weeks ago, as follows:

"`The International Bible Students' Association is not against the Liberty Loan. Many of its members have bought and hold Liberty Bonds. Some have not money with which to buy.

"`The Liberty Loan is not a religious question. It has solely to do with the Government. Every person who mails a letter supports the Government to that extent by paying the additional postage on account of the war.

"`The International Bible Students' Association is composed of Christians. Every Christian gladly obeys the law. The United States has always stood for religious liberty and freedom of speech. Every Christian appreciates the privilege of living in such a country and gladly meets his obligations in the payment of taxes. When the Government asks to borrow his money and gives its promise to pay in the nature of a bond, if he can do so he should buy the bond.

"`The Association has no power to direct members thereof with reference to buying Liberty Bonds. It certainly will not and has not advised any one to refuse to buy bonds. That is an individual matter which each person must determine for himself according to his ability. The Association believes in supporting the Government in every way it can and each one should do so according to his ability and his conscience.'

"Some members of the Brooklyn Tabernacle congregation had previously purchased Liberty Bonds. Doubtless all had been personally solicited before that time. They are surrounded on all hands by opportunities to purchase, and to them it seemed inappropriate to transact business in the church on Sunday. There are six days in the week for the transaction of business and Sunday is regarded by them as a day for sacred worship of the Lord.

"It is to be regretted that one representing the public press should so disgrace himself as publicly to encourage mob violence against inoffensive people. It seems that any one wearing the uniform of the United States Army would have more respect for that uniform and for law and order than to disturb the peace by loud and uncouth language and in encouraging mob violence. We cannot believe that any responsible person in the Government would approve of such action.

"As to the members of the Bethel Home, it is well known that those who labor there receive merely their food and lodging and a small allowance for incidental expenses. This was thoroughly aired in the _Brooklyn Eagle_ libel case, as the record shows. At that time the amount received was only $10.00 per month, which since, on account of increased cost of necessities, is now $15.00 per month. At the opening of the Third Liberty Loan cmapaign, a very elegant gentleman of the Borough of Brooklyn called on me with reference to soliciting the members of the Bethel Home to buy bonds. I invited him to see each one of them personally. He questioned me as to their ability to buy; and when I told him of the amount they received monthly he said, `Then they cannot buy on that amount and it is useless for me to see them. I am sure you must be doing much good here in your own way when men and women sacrifice their time for such a small allowance.' It is a well known fact that there are other institutions that are not asked or even expected to buy Liberty Bonds because of their financial inability.

"Members of our Association who have some personal means have bought Liberty Bonds, including Tabernacle workers who are paying 25 per cent. of their monthly allowance to purchase a bond. We do not believe the Government would expect any one to purchase bonds who receives barely enough for his daily expenses.

"The picketing of the Bethel Home on last Sunday morning and accosting every one who passed out and demanding that they buy Liberty Bonds seems to be a very uncalled-for and unusual thing, when any one authorized to solicit for bonds can have free access to the Bethel Home to interview any person there at any reasonable hour during the day or evening. As above stated, a gentleman had called for that purpose some days ago. The action of the men on Sunday morning seemed not only wholly uncalled for, but was taken designedly for the purpose of placing the members of the Bethel Home at a disadvantage. We cannot believe that order-loving, law-abiding people of Brooklyn at all approve such action or conduct."