Dogpatch
JoinedPosts by Dogpatch
-
29
My updated profile...
by Billygoat ini finally decided after being here for over two years now, that i would finally get down in writing my jw history.
i've posted it in my new profile, but since there are so many new people here i thought i'd go ahead and post it too.
i do this to encourage you to pen your jw history.
-
-
-
9
cross or stake???
by minstrel incan anyone advise me as to the historical facts regarding the method of execution by the romans.
i have seen a documentary on the tele that stated that lemon trees fitted with a cross beam were used for executions as they were numerous in palestine.. best wishes.
minstrel.
-
-
Dogpatch
more at:
http://www.freeminds.org/doctrine/doctrine.htm
The Cross
(Greek: stauros)
Biblical Overview
Though the Bible does not specifically describe the instrument that Jesus died upon, tradition has it that he was put to death on a cross; consisting of a stake and a crossbeam. The Greek stauros is sometimes used to describe a simple stake, and other times a more complex form such as the cross. To determine what appearance the stauros took in Jesus' death, we need to consider what the Greek language tells us, what history tells us, and most importantly, what the Bible tells us. Furthermore, we must consider the significance of the stauros to the Christian, and whether it is a subject of shame or of great joy.
THE GREEK:
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology says this about the Greek stauros:
Corresponding to the vb. (stauroo) which was more common, stauros can mean a stake which was sometimes pointed on which an executed criminal was publicly displayed in shame as a further punishment. It could be used for hanging (so probably Diod. Sic., 2, 18, 2), impaling, or strangulation. stauros could also be an instrument of torture, perhaps in the sense of the Lat. patibulum, a crossbeam laid on the shoulders. Finally it could be an instrument of execution in the form of a vertical stake and a crossbeam of the same length forming a cross in the narrower sense of the term. It took the form either of a T (Lat. crux commissa) or of a + (crux immissa). (Vol. 1, page 391)
The Greek word xylon can mean "wood, a piece of wood, or anything made of wood," and can refer to a cross as well, as pointed out in Vine's Expository Dictionary, Vol. 4, p. 153.
HISTORICAL FINDINGS:
Historical findings have substantiated the traditional cross. One finding is a graffito 1 dating to shortly after 200 A.D., taken from the walls of the Roman Palatine. It is a drawing of a crucified ass; a mockery of a Christian prisoner who worships Christ. The Romans were no doubt amused that Christians worshiped this Jesus whom they had crucified on a cross.
In June of 1968, bulldozers working north of Jerusalem accidentally laid bare tombs dating from the first century B.C. and the first century A.D. Greek archeologist Vasilius Tzaferis was instructed by the Israeli Department of Antiquities to carefully excavate these tombs. Subsequently one of the most exciting finds of recent times was unearthed - the first skeletal remains of a crucified man. The most significant factor is its dating to around the time of Christ. The skeleton was of a man named Yehohanan son of Chaggol, who had been crucified between the age of 24 and 28. Mr. Tzaferis wrote an article in the Jan/Feb. 1985 issue of the secular magazine Biblical Archaeology Review (BAR), and here are some of his comments regarding crucifixion in Jesus' time:
At the end of the first century B.C., the Romans adopted crucifixion as an official punishment for non-Romans for certain limited transgressions. Initially, it was employed not as a method of execution, but only as a punishment. Moreover, only slaves convicted of certain crimes were punished by crucifixion. During this early period, a wooden beam, known as a furca or patibulum was placed on the slave's neck and bound to his arms.
...When the procession arrived at the execution site, a vertical stake was fixed into the ground. Sometimes the victim was attached to the cross only with ropes. In such a case, the patibulum or crossbeam, to which the victim's arms were already bound, was simply affixed to the vertical beam; the victim's feet were then bound to the stake with a few turns of the rope.
If the victim was attached by nails, he was laid on the ground, with his shoulders on the crossbeam. His arms were held out and nailed to the two ends of the crossbeam, which was then raised and fixed on top of the vertical beam. The victim's feet were then nailed down against this vertical stake.
In order to prolong the agony, Roman executioners devised two instruments that would keep the victim alive on the cross for extended periods of time. One, known as a sedile, was a small seat attached to the front of the cross, about halfway down. This device provided some support for the victim's body and may explain the phrase used by the Romans, "to sit on the cross." Both Eraneus and Justin Martyr describe the cross of Jesus as having five extremities rather than four; the fifth was probably the sedile. (p. 48,49)
In a followup article on this archeological find in the Nov/Dec. issue of BAR, the statement is made:
According to the (Roman) literary sources, those condemned to crucifixion never carried the complete cross, despite the common belief to the contrary and despite the many modern re-enactments of Jesus' walk to Golgotha. Instead, only the crossbar was carried, while the upright was set in a permanent place where it was used for subsequent executions. As the first-century Jewish historian Josephus noted, wood was so scarce in Jerusalem during the first century A.D. that the Romans were forced to travel ten miles from Jerusalem to secure timber for their siege machinery. (p. 21)
Similar are the details mentioned under "Cross" in the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology:
It is certain only that the Romans practised this form of execution. But is is most likely that the stauros had a transverse in the form of a crossbeam. Secular sources do not permit any conclusion to be drawn as to the precise form of the cross, as to whether it was the crux immissa (+) or crux commissa (T). As it was not very common to affix a titlos (superscription, loanword from the Lat. titulus), it does not necessarily follow that the cross had the form of a crux immissa.
There were two possible ways of erecting the stauros. The condemned man could be fastened to the cross lying on the ground at the place of execution, and so lifted up on the cross. Alternatively, it was probably usual to have the stake implanted in the ground before the execution. The victim was tied to the crosspiece, and was hoisted up with the horizontal beam and made fast to the vertical stake. As this was the simpler form of erection, and the carrying of the crossbeam (patibulum) was probably connected with the punishment for slaves, the crux commissa may be taken as the normal practice. The cross would probably have been not much higher than the height of a man. (Vol. 1, p. 392)
OTHER ARCHEOLOGICAL FINDS:
Aside from the most recent discoveries, there are a few others of interest we will note. Here is one involving a discovery in 1873:
In 1873 a famous French scholar, Charles Clermant-Ganneau, reported the discovery of a burial chamber or cave on the Mount of Olives. Inside were some 30 ossuaries (rectangular chests made of stone) in which skeletal remains were preserved after their bodies had disintegrated. . . . One (ossuary) had the name "Judah" associated with a cross with arms of equal length. Further, the name "Jesus" occurred three times, twice in association with a cross. . . .
It would be unlikely that Christian Jews would have been buried in that area after 135 A.D. since the Romans forbade Jews to enter Aelia Capitolina . . . after the second Jewish revolt. (from Ancient Times, Vol. 3, No. 1, July 1958, p. 3.)
In 1939 excavations at Herculaneum, the sister city of Pompeii (destroyed in 78 A.D. by volcano) produced a house where a wooden cross had been nailed to the wall of a room. According to Buried History, (Vol. 10, No. 1, March 1974 p. 15):
Below this (cross) was a cupboard with a step in front. This has considered to be in the shape of an ara or shrine, but could well have been used as a place of prayer. . . . If this interpretation is correct, and the excavators are strongly in favor of the Christian significance of symbol and furnishings, then here we have the example of an early house church.
In 1945 a family tomb was discovered in Jerusalem by Prof. E.L. Sukenik of the Museum of Jewish Antiquities of the Hebrew University. Prof. Sukenik is the world's leading authority on Jewish ossuaries. Note his findings:
Two of the ossuaries bear the name "Jesus" in Greek. . . . The second of these also has four large crosses drawn. . . . (Prof. Sukenik) concluded that the full inscriptions and the crosses were related, being expressions of grief at the crucifixion of Jesus, being written about that time. . . . Professor Sukenik points out . . . (that) the cross may represent a "pictorial expression of the crucifixion, tantamount to exclaiming `He was crucified!'" As the tomb is dated by pottery, lamps and the character of the letters used in the inscriptions--from the first century B.C. to not later than the middle of the first century A.D. this means that the inscriptions fall within two decades of the Crucifixion at the latest. (Ancient Times, Vol. 3, No. 1, July 1958, p. 35. See also Vol. 5, No. 3, March 1961, p. 13.)
BIBLICAL TESTIMONY ON THE CROSS
One cannot help but notice the series of events as recorded in Matthew 27:26, 31-37, Mark 15:14-26, Luke 23:26-38, and John 19:1-22 (regarding the death of Jesus) and their harmony with the method of crucifixion as described by the articles in BAR and other sources. It appears that Jesus carried the crossbeam, or patibulum to Golgotha. There, the patibulum was affixed to an upright stake, perhaps having a seat or footpiece, and Jesus was nailed onto the whole structure. Above him was placed the title, JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS.
A SYMBOL OF VICTORY
While the Jews may have considered the cross a shameful thing, the apostle Paul boasted of the cross of Christ. In Galatians 6:14 he says:
But may it never be that I should boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
The Greek word translated as "boast" is kauchomai, which is translated to boast or glory over something. Paul plainly gloried in the symbol of the cross; it was a sign of victory, not defeat. In 1 Cor. 1:17,18 he tells us that Christ sent him to preach the message of the cross, and that people would stand or fall according to their response to such a simple message! He goes on to say that some (like the Jews and the JWs) would stumble over the cross (because of its shameful significance in their minds), while others would consider it foolishness (verses 21-23). But to Christians the cross meant the power and the wisdom of God! He says that this is because God deliberately chose the weak, foolish and despised things of the world to make his point, so that his children could glory in what others consider despised!
Paul tells the Corinthians that he had decided to use the message of the cross of Christ as his main emphasis (1 Cor. 2:2); even to the point of avoiding more scholarly arguments or fine points. Why? Because of God's ability to weed out those with wrong motives by using a humble message as his calling card! He does not want to attract people to Christianity by giving them material or intellectual hopes, but he desires to reach those who realize the degree of sin in the world and who would appreciate Jesus' having died for their sins.
This has been the message of the church throughout the centuries--that Jesus died on the cross for our sins, and that he is alive and lives through us (1 Cor. 15:13; Luke 24:45-47). This message only appeals to certain people; most often the lowly and simple (1 Cor. 1:26-29).
Paul also uses the cross as a symbol for the cause of Christianity, as well as the death of the old nature. He speaks of the cross in various contexts. He tells us that some have become "enemies of the cross" (Phil. 3:18). He talks about the old nature and the Law as being "nailed to the cross" (Col. 2:14). He picks up on the theme of Jesus regarding the cross (Matt. 10:38; 16:24; Luke 9:23; 14:27) and talks about "crucifying the old nature" (Gal. 2:20; 5:24). Over and over, Paul considers the cross a sign of victory, not defeat! He boasted in the cross!
Christians are not afraid of the cross nor are they to worship it. It is rather a symbol of the greatest act of love ever!
Refuting Jehovah's Witnesses
While the Christian church has never considered the exact method of Jesus' crucifixion or impalement as a major concern, the WT has certainly made an issue of it. In doing so, they hold true to their pattern of majoring in minor issues; often distracting their followers from more important issues.
The WT considers the churches as "unclean" for using the cross as a symbol of the death of Jesus. While it is agreed that worship of the cross or any other symbol is wrong, the use of a symbol for illustrative purposes has never been wrong, either in the NT or OT records. For instance, cherubs (angels) were embroidered on the curtains of the tabernacle in Moses' time (Ex. 26:1). The Watchtower even uses a tower as their own special symbol.
Up until the late 30's the WT pictured Christ as dying on the traditional cross. However, while later eliminating the cross as well as the name of Jesus on their front cover, they continued to use a watch tower as their symbol. In the book Enemies, President J.F. Rutherford attacked the traditional story of the cross as wrong because "The cross was worshipped by the Pagan Celts long before the [birth] and death of Christ." (pages 188-189) With no accompanying historical or archaeological evidence, Rutherford stated his new doctrine as fact. Actually, what pagans did with crosses before the death of Christ has nothing to do with how the Romans crucified people. Besides, Jesus did not choose his instrument of death.
The current WT objections to the cross are:
1. The Biblical Greek doesn't suggest a cross, but rather a "pole" or "stake."
2. The cross was a pagan symbol later adopted by the "apostate" church.
3. Archaeology proves that Jesus died on an upright stake rather than a cross.
4. The cross is to be shunned rather than mentioned or displayed.
Let's consider the answer to these objections one by one:
JW: THE GREEK "stauros" DOESN'T REFER TO A CROSS.
As the years went by, "proof" was supplied by the WT to substantiate its position on the cross. In 1950 with the release of the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, the appendix (pages 768-771) first argues that the Greek words stauros (Matt. 10:38) and xylon (Acts 5:30) do not mean a cross, and stated that these words only mean an upright stake without a crossbeam, and that there is no proof to the contrary.
The Greek stauros has the primary meaning of a pole or stake, as the WT points out. What they don't mention is that the word often refers to more complex constructions, such as the cross. The Latin word crux usually translated "cross," was also at times used to refer to a mere stake. What the WT specifically ignores is that the Romans DID execute prisoners on crosses--an issue they are careful to sidestep in their presentation. The horizontal bar of such crosses was called the patibulum, and the slaves to be executed were customarily made to carry the patibulum to the place of execution. (Seneca, De Vita Beata 19:3; Epistola 101:12; Tacitus, Historiae, IV, 3) 2
Authoritative lexicons give the definition of stauros as a "stake sunk into the earth in an upright position; a crosspiece was often attached to its upper part." 3
Xylon, like stauros, can also be used to refer to a cross, a fact carefully side-stepped by the WT in their effort to prove their point. They thus fail to prove anything with regard to stauros and xylon. Therefore we must look to the historical record for more decisive proof on the method of crucifixion.
JW: "THE CROSS WAS A PAGAN SYMBOL LATER ADOPTED BY THE CHURCHES"
Whatever usage of the cross existed before or after the time of Christ is irrelevant to the issue. Additionally, there is no conclusive evidence that 1st century Jews or Christians looked upon the crucifixion cross as a symbol of false worship. It was used as a means to an end--the punishment or death of a criminal. Symbols mean different things at different times. Furthermore, Jesus did not choose his instrument of death.
While the Catholic church may have later capitalized on the imagery of the cross, and some people even today regard it as an idol, that does not affect the earlier, Biblical usage of the cross as a symbol of the gospel (see the fourth objection). Evidence reveals that as early as the first century there were Christians who used the cross as a symbol for Christianity. The Romans even mocked them by depicting Jesus as an ass on a cross (see appendix for illustration). Apparently the cross did not readily remind the first century Christians of previous pagan meanings, but stood for Christ and his message as far as believers and even non-believers were concerned. Today it is much the same. People usually consider the cross a sign of Christianity.
JW: ARCHEOLOGY SHOWS THAT JESUS DIED ON A STAKE, NOT A CROSS."
In the 1950 and 1969 editions of the New World Translation (in their appendix), the WT reproduces one of sixteen woodcut illustrations by the 16th century writer Justus Lipsius, who authored a work called De Cruce Liber Primus, Secundus and Tres. They reproduce his picture of a man impaled on an upright stake, failing to mention that Lipsius produced fifteen other illustrations (most of which picture various crucifixions on crosses). The WT makes the statement: "This is the manner in which Jesus was impaled." They then refer to an article in the Catholic Ecclesiastical Review of 1920 that states that the cross was not used until after A.D. 312 as the sign of the crucifixion. 4
The 1950 New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures (Appendix, p.770) states: "Rather than consider the torture stake upon which Jesus was impaled a relic to be worshiped, the Jewish Christians like Simon Peter would consider it to be an abominable thing." They then quote Paul's reference to Deut. 21:22,23 at Galatians 3:13 to prove that the cross was an abomination. They continue, "Hence the Jewish Christians would hold as accursed and hateful the stake upon which Jesus had been executed." The NWT makes its final point in stating,
The evidence is, therefore, completely lacking that Jesus Christ was crucified on two pieces of timber placed at a right angle. We refuse to add anything to God's written Word by inserting the pagan cross into the inspired Scriptures, but render stauros and xylon according to the simplest meanings. . . . The passing of time and further archaeological discoveries will be certain to prove its correctness. Even now the burden rests upon all who contend for the religious tradition to prove that Jesus died on more than a simple stake. (p.771)
In 1969 the Kingdom Interlinear translation's appendix contained much the same information, as does the 1984 New World Translation Reference Bible and the 1985 revision of the Kingdom Interlinear. The 1985 edition adds comments by Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words that supports the view that pagans before the time of Christ used the symbol T representing the Babylonian god Tammuz, and that this practice apparently influenced the Catholic Church in the issue of cross worship. Vine claims the Catholic ecclesiastical system adapted the symbol of the cross as a holdover from paganism.
The most amazing thing of all is that the WT could make a statement such as "evidence is completely lacking" that Jesus was crucified on a cross, when the VERY BOOK they use as "proof" to support their claims SAYS JESUS DIED ON A CROSS! One of the woodcuts of Lipsius not mentioned by the WT, shows a crucifixion on a cross. A partial translation of the Latin text alongside this woodcut says:
In the Lord's cross there were four pieces of wood, the upright beam, the crossbar, a tree trunk (piece of wood) placed below, and the title (inscription) placed above.
Also they hand down (this account by) Irenaeus: "The construction of the cross has five ends, two on the vertical and two on the horizontal, and one in the middle where the person attached with nails rested." (De Cruce Liber Secundus, pg. 661)
The earlier (1950 and 1969) editions of the NWT, after referring to Lipsius' picture of a man on an upright stake stated, "This is the manner in which Jesus was impaled." They thereby attempted to convey the idea that Lipsius' book was proving their point. Since then the exposure of their dishonesty induced them to leave this statement out of the 1984 and 1985 versions of the NWT; but they STILL use Lipsius' illustration to make their point, while failing to tell the real story! They are intentionally avoiding the truth.
Furthermore, their reference to the Catholic Ecclesiastical Review (1920) is outdated, as there have been further archaeological finds that indicate otherwise, such as mentioned in Biblical Archaeology Review of Jan./Feb. 1985.
This brings up another very embarrassing issue for the WT--that of recent archaeological finds. In the earlier editions (1950 and 1969) of the NWT they had said, "The passing of time and further archaeological discoveries will be certain to prove its correctness. . . ." Why did they omit this statement from the 1984 and 1985 versions of the New World Translation? Precisely because of the more recent archaeological finds! While the WT has made use of obscure and long-outdated sources in an attempt to prove their point, the bulk of the historical finds as well as the most recent excavations reveal substantial proof for the traditional crucifixion story, as long held by the churches.
JW: "THE BIBLE DOESN'T SAY THAT JESUS DIED ON A CROSS."
There is even greater evidence than Lipsius' works for the traditional crucifixion story, though, and this evidence comes from the Bible itself. When Jesus reappeared to his disciples in his resurrected body, he still bore the marks left by the nails in his hands. The disciples were afraid that this was a spirit form rather than their Lord in the flesh. Luke 24:37 tells us that "they were startled and frightened and thought that they were seeing a spirit." Jesus spoke up:
Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch me and see,for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have. (Luke 24:38,39)
The WT, incidentally, would have us believe that Jesus WAS a spirit at that time and actually DID just materialize a body so as to comfort them. How much better to believe the Word for what it says, that it WAS Jesus' body, and his hands still had the marks of the nails.
This brings up the most conclusive passage of all, which reveals that Christ was not killed as the WT portrays in their publications. The apostle John tells us that Thomas, who was not there when Jesus first appeared to the rest, refused to believe it was actually Jesus (he thought it must have been a spirit, too!). He told the others,
Unless I see in His HANDS the imprint of THE NAILS, and put my finger into the place of THE NAILS, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe. (John 20:25, emphasis added)
Note that Thomas knew there was more than one nail that punctured Jesus' hands. Yet, the WT always pictures Jesus as having ONE NAIL through both hands! When Jesus reappeared for the sake of Thomas, he showed him his hands so that Thomas could see and believe (John 20:26,27).
Apparently feeling that they needed to respond to this challenge, a "Questions From The Readers" article appeared in The Watchtower of April 1, 1984 (p. 31). They cloud the issue with a partial quote from The Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature (which doesn't support their claim) in an effort to make it appear as a "waste of time" to speculate on how many nails Jesus was affixed with. (They are right: We don't know; but we do know that there were at least two in his hands!) Then they try and imply that Thomas was sloppy in his speech--saying that even though Thomas only mentions the nail holes in his hands, he might have been referring to the nails in Jesus' feet as well. The article concludes with the statement:
Thus, it is just not possible at this point to state with certainty how many nails were used. Any drawing of Jesus on the stake should be understood as artists' productions that offer merely a representation based on the limited facts that we have. Debate over such an insignificant detail should not be permitted to becloud the all-important truth that "we became reconciled to God through the death of his Son." Rom. 5:10.
It appears that since the evidence has swung against them, they are resorting to their old technique of accusing the opposition of what they themselves are guilty of. They are the ones that have made statements such as "evidence is lacking . . ." that Jesus died on a cross.
As usual, they shift the blame to cover themselves. Remember, they are the ones who accuse people of "false worship" for using the symbol of the cross. As far as Christians are concerned, the exact method of crucifixion is not a big issue. Rather, the emphasis that the Bible puts on the cross is the real issue!
JW: "THE TORTURE STAKE (cross) WAS SHAMEFUL AND SHOULDN'T BE GIVEN ATTENTION."
It is true that the Jews viewed execution by the cross as an accursed way to die, for it meant shame, and no hope for a resurrection. Similarly, the WT views the whole concept of Christ dying on a stake in a negative light. Note these statements in the Awake! magazine of Nov. 8, 1972:
How would you feel if one of your dearest friends was executed on false charges? Would you make a replica of the instrument of execution, say a hangman's noose or an electric chair? Would you kiss that replica, burn candles before it or wear it around your neck as an ornament? "Of course not," you may say.
To the Jews and the Romans the manner in which Jesus died was humiliating and shameful. He was executed like a criminal of the lowest sort, like the wrongdoers impaled alongside him. (Luke 23:32) His death therefore misrepresented him in the worst way possible. To Christians the instrument of execution itself would therefore have been something very repulsive. Venerating it would have meant glorifying the wrong deed committed on it - the murder of Jesus Christ. (p. 27)
The WT is again confusing the issue by classing those who "venerate" or worship a cross with those who consider the cross as a symbol of Christianity. Certainly there is no justification for worshipping before a cross or kissing it; but there IS justification for considering the cross as a symbol of Christianity.
Footnotes:
1 Buried History, Vol. 9, no. 2, page 41 (June 1973, Australian Inst. of Archeology)2 Biblical Quarterly, Volume 13, Number 4, page 442.
3 A GreekEnglish Lexicon, Arndt and Gingrich, page 772.
4 The cross has been discovered in excavations of Christian tombs much earlier than the fourth century. (compare Awake!, Nov. 8, 1972, p. 27)
-
50
MY JC - I AM SO SICK
by rebel ini have never tried to hurt anyone in my life.
i have always tried to love others from my own childhood upbringing.. i have been treated like a traitor.
everything i said was twisted.
-
-
Dogpatch
Reb,
Here is some good medicine for ya! Randy
The Truth (as I seen it)
According to Jehovah's Witnesses
by Gary Busselman
GOD is the creator, but since he only created Michael,
and Michael created everything else, ("all other things")
that would seem to make Michael the real creator,
but only in a sense, since Michael is Jesus and Michael said to Satan,
"the Lord rebuke you" makes the Lord powerful over Satan,
however when Michael had to throw Satan out of heaven in 1914
he had to do battle with his own creations, Satan and His Angels,
and in 1918 when he selected Joe Rutherford to be his earthly channel
and had to put the truth in the mind of Joe
so Joe could write the truth in the Watch Tower
and build Beth Sarim.All this would be hard to understand if it were not for the "salvation" doctrine,
which is easy to understand since the living evildoers
will all be made dead at Armageddon
and the dead evildoers will be made alive at Armageddon,
thus the living sinners will die and the dead sinners will live,
except the dead who are made alive will not really be made alive again
but when they die God kinda makes a sort of computer chip, in a sense,
of all the information in their brains,
like their memories, thoughts, and personality
and keeps this stored in heaven
and the Angels that don't join up with Satan help
and then after Armageddon, God makes a perfect replica body,
and somehow inserts this memory chip in the perfect replica body
and then he will judge that new creation of the old person
who was dead but is now alive, sort of,
by how he treats the anointed who are mostly dead
but are represented by the Governing Body, who are not inspired
but only receive Divine direction,
and by how well he follows the directions of the Organization
and if he sins he dies.To survive Armageddon, the only way is to be serving God
in the only Organization that has the truth, Jehovah's Witnesses.
The truth is defined as the current teachings of the Governing Body
which largely consist of denying their own past teachings
and condemning views that are held by other groups
that the Governing Body will someday adopt as their "new light"
and "the truth". Serving God is defined as attending the five weekly meetings
of Jehovah's Witnesses, reading all of the weeks lessons before the meetings,
including underlining the answer to the questions at the bottom of the pages
in the paragraphs with a red marker, (yellow highlighter is optional
as long as it is used in moderation) answering any questions you may come up
with by yourself, while you keep those questions secret and to yourself,
by looking up the proper subject headings in the Index published by the Society
and referencing to the proper Watchtower article
while attending meetings for field service
and going out in cars to try to recruit new members into the group
and to solicit contributions to be turned into the group leaders
in exchange for Watchtower publications that members paid for
at the Kingdom Hall using the voluntary donation arrangement
that was adopted after the Society failed in their attempt to defend Jimmy Swaggert
in the Supreme Court of California
after the Superior Authorities fell out of love with him
and charged him with avoiding sales tax on literature sales
and all Witnesses must do this or they die.Loyalty to "Jehovah's Organization" is important
since surviving Armageddon is contingent on how well
we vindicate Jehovah's name which is really YHWH
and pronounced Yahweh by most Biblical scholars
only since that was changed to sanctify
and it now is to exalt Jehovah's Name, not to vindicate anymore,
and to announce the kingdom that was set up in heaven in 1914 after Jesus
returned invisibly in 1874
and again in 1914 for the separating of the sheep and the goats
by selling Watchtower publications door to door
and then in 1995 this was changed to
not separating the sheep from the goats
but to require all Jehovah's Witnesses to believe
that the separating of the sheep and the goats will be a future event
to begin after the start of the Great Tribulation
except that Jesus had to actually start his judging of the sheep and the goats in 33 AD
and that he only picked 144,000 Jehovah's Witnesses
and the number was filled in 1935
and then the earth was going to be used for the testing ground
for all the re-created dead sinners and Jehovah's Witnesses for 1000 years
because this all ties into the date of 1914
which was arrived at by Nelson Barbour by adding 30 years to William Miller's
failed Apocalypse expectation date of 1844 which was arrived at by adding a
year to the previously failed date of 1843, to arrive at 1874, which when
the end didn't come, he added 40 more years to come up with 1914 which
Charles Taze Russell adopted and changed to 1915 when the Apocalypse didn't
come in 1914 then to 1918 when it didn't come in 1915, then he died.This is all so simple that a child could understand
especially in view of the fact that the seven trumpets of Revelation
were the seven Jehovah's Witness District assemblies from 1922 to 1928,
starting with Cedar Point, Ohio and ending with Detroit, Michigan,
only they weren't called Jehovah's Witnesses then
but since Jehovah picked them in 1918 he waited until 1931
to give them his name while the generation living in 1914
and of the age of understanding, about 12 or 15, when World War One broke out,
except it had been breaking out for a number of years before 1914,
meaning that the generation that saw 1914 would by no means pass away
before Armageddon started and "by no means"
indicates that the majority would be living and never die
since Jesus told Joe Rutherford that "Millions Now Living Will Never Die"
by an angel and Joe wrote a book about the dead Princes,
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and others would be resurrected to the earth in 1925
and live in a house he built for them in 1929 in San Diego, California
except he lived in it himself
because he thought the start of World War Two would be the beginning of Armageddon
and then he died.Usually this is best understood by believing the truth as Nathan Knorr and Fred Franz
wrote about it in the Watchtower since they knew that service was the answer
and that six thousand years since Adam and Eve ended in 1975
and that maybe, might, could, should be the start of Armageddon
but they don't remember writing anything about 1975
and they couldn't say for sure when Eve was created
and besides so many were going to prison because they were loyal to God
by refusing alternative service to active military duty
and no one was taking organ transplants or buying Girl Scout Cookies
and then they died.Sometimes the truth comes as flashes of light and the vaccinations,
and organ transplants are now all okay and the drafted boys don't go to prison
but stay at home to be elders and pioneers instead of going to jail
and the sheep are waiting and the goats are waiting too
and the generation of 1914 waited too,
then they died. -
5
Prizes! Freeminds.org hits 1,000,000 visitors
by Dogpatch init finally happened, the old counter is about to hit a million visitors in about three hours (184 to go).. in celebration, the first fifteen people to email me gets either a free one year subscription to the free minds journal (printed newsletter since 1983) or $10 credit towards any purchase at the watchtower store or watchtower antiquarian.
(don't burst the doors down) :-)).
-
-
Dogpatch
It finally happened, the old counter is about to hit a million visitors in about three hours (184 to go).
In celebration, the first fifteen people to email me gets either a free one year subscription to the Free Minds Journal (printed newsletter since 1983) or $10 credit towards any purchase at the Watchtower Store or Watchtower Antiquarian. (Don't burst the doors down) :-))
Free Minds Journal
http://www.freeminds.org/journal.htm
Watchtower Store
http://www.freeminds.org/sales/menuframes.htm
Watchtower Antiquarian
http://www.freeminds.org/sales/tempsale.htm
Thank you all for your daily contributions to Net Soup! as well as do many good and crazy friends over the last 23 years I've been out of the Witchtower!
Love you all (well, most of you) :-O
Randy Watters
-
64
Did anything a householder said ever make an impression on you?
by Alleymom incoming at this as a householder rather than an ex-jw, i'd love to hear from any of you about comments from householders that made an impression on you, back when you were active in the door-to-door work.
since the jw's first knocked at my door 13 years ago, i've done my best to give them something to think about every time they knock at my door.
i always introduce myself by name and try to get their names.
-
-
Dogpatch
Hi Marjorie,
Good thread with some interesting responses!
Wishing you the best,
Randy Watters
Net Soup!
-
5
Setting Boundaries in a Relationship - Cult Test
by Dogpatch inreligions are basically extended families, with alternate parental figures and peers.
when a religion becomes abusive, secretive and controlling, it is often labeled a cult.
this article will help you understand part of the dynamic behind such abusive relationships.
-
-
Dogpatch
Religions are basically extended families, with alternate parental figures and peers. When a religion becomes abusive, secretive and controlling, it is often labeled a cult. This article will help you understand part of the dynamic behind such abusive relationships. Courtesy of Carol Giambalvo.
Randy Watters
Recovery Article of the Month
Setting Boundaries in a Relationship
From Captive Hearts, Captive Minds by Madeleine Tobias and Janja Lalich, Chapter 10
Learning to recognize and set personal boundaries is an important postcult exercise. Because of the restrictions on privacy that exist in most cults, it is likely that your boundaries were violated time and again – until you lost a sense of which boundaries were appropriate.
Boundaries help define who we are, what separates us from the world. We all have a personal, private physical space that we are not comfortable sharing with just anyone. The same is true on a psychological level, and a significant part of maturing emotionally involves learning how to define and maintain these invisible boundaries.
For many, the cult replaced the family. If you came from a family with a history of alcohol or other substance abuse, severe medical or mental illness, divorce, domestic violence, or other trauma, then what you found in the cult may not have been very different from the environment in your family of origin. Arnold Markowitz and other professionals who work with families of cult members at the Cult Clinic in New York City have found that in many cases where there is a cult-affiliated family member, there is evidence of an “enmeshed” family. In enmeshed families, personal boundaries between members are ignored and overrun.
Relearning respect for personal boundaries – your own and others’ – ins a crucial task. For some, this may mean learning to be emotionally independent for the first time. Failure to achieve this personal autonomy may result in a series of unhealthy and potentially destructive relationships, or in cult hopping.
The following list describes boundary invasions that are physical, emotional, and sexual. The distinction between the individual and the group is blurred. There is a loss of a sense of self. Becoming familiar with these signs of unhealthy boundaries may help you unravel the cult experience as well as steer you away from similar dangers in the new relationships you may be forming.
Signs of unhealthy boundaries
· Telling all
· Talking on an intimate level at the first meeting
· Being overwhelmed by and preoccupied with the group, leader, or other person
· Being sexual for others, not yourself
· Being asexual for others, not yourself
· Going against personal values or rights to please others
· Not noticing or disregarding when someone else displays inappropriate behavior
· Not noticing or disregarding when someone invades your boundaries
· Accepting foods, gifts, touch, or sex that you don’t want
· Being touched by another person without having been asked
· Giving as much as you can for the sake of giving
· Taking as much as you can for the sake of getting
· Allowing someone to take as much as they can from you
· Letting others direct your life
· Letting others define you
· Letting others describe your reality
· Believing others can anticipate your needs
· Believing you must anticipate others’ needs
· Practicing self-abuse, self-mortification
· Being subjected to sexual and physical abuse
· Living with food and sleep deprivation
· Being unable to separate your needs from others’ needs
The checklist below may also help you to evaluate your cult experience. How many items describe your cult experience? How many describe the new relationships you are forming now? The more items you check, the more you need to examine these relationships and their potential destructiveness. When using the checklist, also ask yourself the following:
1. Were there signs of unhealthy boundaries in my own family? What were they?
2. what signs of unhealthy boundaries existed in the cult?
3. Did these things make it more difficult for me to realize that my rights were being infringed upon?
4. What do I need to do to make my family or personal life more positive and rewarding now?
Checklist for evaluating relationships
q I assume responsibility for the feelings and behaviors of the leader, group, or other person
q I have difficulty in identifying feelings; am I angry? Lonely? Sad? Scared? Joyful? Ashamed?
q I have difficulty expressing feelings
q I worry about how the group, leader, or other person might respond to my feeling or behaviors
q I am afraid of being hurt and/or rejected by the group, leader, or other person
q I am a perfectionist. I place too many expectations on myself. I have difficulty making decisions and I am glad that I don’t have to make many decisions in my relationship with the group, leader, or other person
q I tend to minimize, alter, or even deny the truth about how I feel
q Other people’s actions and attitudes tend to determine how I respond
q I put the group’s, leader’s, or other person’s wants and needs first, believing that their needs are more important than mine
q I am afraid of the group’s, leader’s, or other person’s feeling (e.g., anger) and that determines what I say and do
q I question or ignore my own values in order to be part of the group or relationship
q I value the group’s, leader’s, or other person’s opinions more than my own
q I judge everything I do, think, or say harshly, by the group’s, leader’s, or other person’s standards; rarely is anything I have done, said, or thought good enough
q I believe that it is not okay to talk about problems outside the group or relationship
q I remain steadfastly loyal even when the loyalty is hard to justify and is personally harmful
q I believe the group, leader or other person knows what is best for me
q I believe the group or relationship is more important than my family or friends
q I believe the group, leader, or other person cares more about me than my family or friends do
q I believe the group. Leader, or other person has my interests at heart even when I don’t understand how
q Everything that is good and right is due to the other person, the leader, or the group’s philosophy
q Everything that is wrong or bad is my fault
Comments, questions, and suggestions: email us!
reFOCUS, P.O. Box 2180 , Flagler Beach , FL 32136 904-439-7541
Web site: http://www.refocus.org
The reFOCUS Board of Directors consists of:
Carol Giambalvo, President/Secretary
Rick Seelhoff , Vice President
Mary Krawiec, Treasurer
David Clark
Maureen Griffo
Nancy Miquelon
Vanessa Weber
Advisor: Madeleine Tobias
Email: [email protected] or [email protected]
-
12
Don't read this, there's nothing to see here
by RevMalk ini just received an email from randy @ freeminds, with the subject 'movie'.. .
it contains a zip file named your_details.zip.
i haven't contacted randy yet regarding the email, but i suspect it's not from him, because the name of the file is a known virus.
-
-
Dogpatch
Hey "Rev"
I have a hardware firewall and two other major programs on my email and internet, so it wasn't me. Obviously from someone who had MY email in their address book. Besides, why would I email you?
Perhaps you could find something more sensational to shout about.
Randy
-
20
Witnesses NOT a Cult.
by integ init has been mentioned on this board many times that the jehovahs' witnesses are a cult.. this connotation may not ring true with witnesses.
i have mentioned to certain ones that.
the witnesses fit the "definition" of a cult.
-
-
Dogpatch
There are several good files that help to identify the Witnesses as a destructive cult:
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/beel.htm
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/mindcont.htm
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/lifton.htm
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/propfail.htm
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/phobias.htm
Recommended reading on cult issues also:
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/recommended.htm
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/fatherimages.htm
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/club.htm
Of course, I am not qualified by some, as I have had my OWN CULT in the past:
http://www.freeminds.org/video/culthumor.html
Seriously, though, I have worked as an exit-counselor with Witnesses as well as the International Churches of Christ members, and the tactics are the same. In summary:
1. Religions are simply extended families, with new "parents" and peers. They can be healthy parents or abusive parents, whether it is one leader or several.
2. If the parental figures are abusive and controliing in the name of God, it is a cult. There are other definitions for the word cult, and I usually prefer "high control group," but the word is commonly used in society to mean exactly what the above files describe. Control is the key.
I don't say this just because I am an ex-JW. I am also a former pastor who travelled a lot and have had a lot of experience with high-contol pastors and other odd groups. There is always a big ego in charge somewhere, who is unethical when it comes to maintaining their fan base.
http://www.freeminds.org/mystory.htm
Randy Watters
Net Soup!
-
5
360 Furman Street could turn into half billion in apts.
by Dogpatch inlofty vision for bldg.. .
new york daily news, june 23, 2003. by melissa grace, daily news staff writer.
watchtower site may soon be up for sale.
-
-
Dogpatch
My post was not a complaint. I run a non-profit myself and fully understand your point. But the windfall to Brooklyn Heights is interesting news indeed! I lived at Bethel for 6 years and I know how much they want that property to make money for the city! Go Brooklyn!
Randy Watters
Free Minds, Inc.
-
1
UK: Looking for non-JW parent falsely accused of child abuse by JW parent
by Dogpatch inif anyone has this information, please contact paul at: [email protected].
hi randy,.
i was contacted last weekend by a producer from the bbc.. they are looking for non-jw parents who have been falsely accused.
-
-
Dogpatch
If anyone has this information, please contact Paul at: [email protected]
hi randy,
i was contacted last weekend by a producer from the BBC.
they are looking for non-JW parents who have been falsely accused
of child abuse by the jw parent. so far this is only UK based.
if you know of anyone who will be willing to talk to them, will
you give them my e-mail and i will pass on the telephone number
of the producer to them.
many thanks ,paul_____________
Randy Watters
The Watchtower Store!
