dust

Joined

• started 7 topics
• posted 163 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by dust

• 
  111

  A Moment of Silence For Linda

  by BFD in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  .

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust
• 
  28

  have you found it difficult?

  by 4digitcode in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  to make friends since you're out of the organization?

  maybe these things take time.

  it's hard to establish new friendships when ones i had for years floated away in an instant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  I've always been a "worldly" person. I don't have many friends. Apart from my wife, I have one very close friend + his wife, and a couple of not quite as close friends that I still trust as friends. And a lot of acquaintances that I wouldn't tell too much about myself. I don't know if this is of any consolation for you, though. :)
• 
  108

  Send prayers ,good vibes for TRev.Linda's gone

  by mouthy in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  to a better place he needs out love more than ever now

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  I am sitting here, trying to find the right words. But I am not able to find any. :(
  ((( Trevor )))
• 
  21

  A question from my wife: OTWO, what do you think about women on the Pulpit?

  by OnTheWayOut in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  out of the blue, my wife asks: what do you think about women on the pulpit?.

  otwo: why?

  (silly little paranoid me.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  So the Bible Apostle Paul says "I do not permit a woman to teach".

  As a matter of fact, this seems a little strange. In 1 Cor 11, Paul talks about how the congregation should organise their activities, and in verses 4-5 he suggests how men should expose and women should cover their heads whenever he/she "prays or prophesies", typical activities in a congregation. (To prophesy means not only to predict, but also to talk with divine inspiration). It would seem unreasonable that on one hand, Paul should tell how a woman should dress while speaking with inspiration in the congregation, and on the other hand that she should not speak in the congregation. Especially considering Gal 3:28: "there is neither male nor female".
  
  In his book Misquoting Jesus, Bart Ehrman mentions the prominent role of women in the early Christian congregations, and how this has been concealed by minor changes in later manuscripts, e.g. Acts 17:4, where the original wording probably talked about "some of the principal women", although newer manuscripts say "the wives of some of the principal men". (In fact, this is a verse where the NWT actually agrees with many other Bibles in using the "principal women" wording.)
  
  Ehrman also mentions 1 Cor 14:34-35 about women being expected to be silent in the congregation and be taught by their husbands. Not only is it strange for this admonition to appear in a letter where Paul has just told the women how to dress when they speak in the congregation. It is also strange to place this admonition inside a sequence that is actually about the role of prophets in the congregation, it looks like an unmotivated sidetrack. If we remove the two verses and go right from verse 33 to verse 36, then the text flows better. And surprise, the two verses about silent women are absent from some old manuscripts, and in others they are found at a different place (after verse 40). It simply looks like these two verses have been inserted at a later stage by someone who was not Paul. The two verses are rather similar to 1 Tim 2:11-12, and the verses in 1 Cor may originate from a marginal note in an old manuscript, referring to 1 Tim. But according to Ehrman, most scholars today would agree that 1 Tim was not written by Paul.
  
  Ehrman's account is more detailed and has more evidence than I have presented here. The book is relatively neutral to theological discussions, but I'd recommend it because it explains the science of textual criticism in a way that laymen can understand. Of course, fundamentalists don't like books like this one. Even though they base their Bible interpretations on Bible versions that have been edited on the basis of the exact same principles that Ehrman tells us about. :)
• 
  33

  Questions by JWs in 1976

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in 1976, my friend bruce price was in contact with jehovahs witnesses who had become disillusioned through the debacle with 1975. bruce was the leading voice among the sda ministry in working for jws.

  at the time, i was a member of the sda church.

  although i left them about 25 years ago, to this day bruce and i enjoy a strong and genuinely warm friendship.. so, in 1976 bruce invited me to a meeting with one of the jws who was leading the disquiet in his congregation in dandenong (victoria, australia).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  bttt
• 
  54

  Generation - Prep for bigger change?????

  by The Scotsman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this apparent change to the "generation" is pretty major i think.. when we consider all of the changes in understanding (i mean flashes of light!.

  the 1995 change extended this old system by detaching the generation from 1914.. then the may 2007 wt qfr detached the gathering of the anointed from 1935.. now the latest change detaches the generation from all mankind except the small group of anointed.. and because of the 1935 detachment this could run for quite sometime.. most r & f jws will embrace this with both hands.

  for me that is my greatest concern - millions will not even stop to think that we only had a flash of light about.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  Something struck me.
  
  This order would look suspicious:
  
  1) We have a new understanding: The Generation = the anointed. (People rejoicing: the end is near!)
  2) Only a few months later: And by the way, there can be new anointed ones forever. (Anticlimax.)
  
  This opposite order, on the other hand, would still have the same theological effect, but it is easier to swallow:
  
  1) There can now be anointed ones forever. (People rejoicing: a new understanding! And even I am allowed to have a heavenly hope!)
  2) Only a few months later: And by the way, the Generation = the anointed. (People rejoicing: the anointed ones are special! yet another proof!)
  
  It's important to do the things in the right order.
• 
  46

  I need some serious informational help from EVERYONE!

  by Thedirtysecret in

  1. social
  2. relationships

  i am new here and i joined honestly to collect information to understand something a little better.

  my boyfriend, well-now kinda boyfriend (were at a weird place) is a jehovah's witness and i am not.

  he waited a little "far" into our relationship to tell me he was, which created a mess, honestly an emotional dyfunctional mess.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  Give her a hug for me tonight.

  My wife was just waiting for the hug, as she read your post before me. ;)

  He will be advised, for instance, that he will be ignoring Paul's admonition not to be "unequally yoked"

  This is exactly what my present father-in-law told us both (not in direct words but by asking us to read such and such verse) the very first time he met me.
  
  What probably saved our relationship was that both my wife and I are very stubborn. We did not want to give up. The pressure from her family was there, but I am happy to say that she totally ignored it. If anything, the pressure just made her more determined to stay with me.
  
  Of course, every couple must do things in their own way. But the fundamental issue for all is trust in eachother, honesty and mutual respect. Respect is not the same as "obedience", though. Respect is acknowledging that the other one is allowed to be disturbed, afraid, in disagreement, etc., and still love eachother.
  
  Of course I was afraid that she would leave me if I was honest with my fears and problems. But I soon discovered that I had been wrong. :)
  
  When it came to questioning the WT Society, though, I am happy that she endured my questions and disagreements. I did try not to attack the Society, but I know that I did attack them more than once. In addition I had many small questions: "why does the WTS say this when the Bible says that? why is the number 144000 concrete when the 12 x 12000 are symbolic?" etc. (Thanks to Randy at freeminds.com!) These questions were not intended as attacks, only as questions, but she inevitably felt that I trod on her entire life simply by asking such difficult questions. In other words, she herself understood that something was wrong, but she identified with the WTS, and didn't like what the questions made her discover.
  
  I could have been more careful. But it ended well, with her an ex-witness and a reader of JWD.
• 
  46

  I need some serious informational help from EVERYONE!

  by Thedirtysecret in

  1. social
  2. relationships

  i am new here and i joined honestly to collect information to understand something a little better.

  my boyfriend, well-now kinda boyfriend (were at a weird place) is a jehovah's witness and i am not.

  he waited a little "far" into our relationship to tell me he was, which created a mess, honestly an emotional dyfunctional mess.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  Thedirtysecret,
  
  I am a non-JW man who met a JW woman. If you read my previous posts (especially the early ones), in some of them I tell about a few of the problems that we encountered. Perhaps you can even relate to my fear at the time. What is important, though, is to be able to talk about those emotions, without condemning the other, and without fear of being condemned. If you are afraid, then tell him that you are afraid. If you are afraid that he will mock you for being afraid, then tell him that you are afraid that he will mock you for being afraid. If you are afraid to lose him, then tell him that you are afraid to lose him. If you need to cry, cry.
  
  I see that some of the participants on this site have adviced you to run. I didn't run. I was terrified, but I stayed, and my girlfriend also stayed. We talked a lot, and we respected eachother. Her parents didn't approve of me (even though they liked me!), but we stayed together and eventually married. In our case, her parents have later stated, though, that they are so happy that their daugher found a guy like me. :) Nevertheless, as she has disassociated herself, the contact is minimal. :(
  
  Life is not easy. But if you really love eachother, then love is worth its difficulties. For my wife and me, our way of handling the difficulties only made our relationship stronger and better, and now we don't have any difficulties other than of the kind that every couple would have whatsoever.
• 
  39

  What is the key that unlocks the mental grip of the WT?

  by LennyinBluemont in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ive wondered this from time to time, especially in trying to figure out how i finally broke free and in looking at the stories of others.

  if you asked me a few years ago, i probably would have said either seeing too much hypocrisy or suffering the last straw of spiritual and/or emotional abuse.

  but i know in my case and others, even that wasnt enough to break the mental shackles.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  My wife used to be a JW. She went to a convention one summer, but hadn't been to the KH for some months because she had moved.
  
  She tells me that even during this convention (only a few months after her last visit to the KH) she felt that the convention was just plain boring.
  
  Anyway, she met me (not a JW) a few months later, and one year after the mentioned convention we were persuaded by her parents to go to the next convention. She had now been outside the grip of continuous indoctrination for more than a year, and I had asked her quite a few small questions about the religion of the JWs, and those questions kind of forced her to think on her own (even though this specific religious de-programming was not consciously intended by me).
  
  After this convention she told me that everything just seemed illogical. She almost couldn't believe that earlier she would have nodded and agreed with everything. Now she saw that the Bible verses referred to didn't support any of the claims that they were used to support. And now she saw the inconsistency in the reasoning.
  
  So it seems that staying away from the continuous indocrination is one of the keys. Another key is to -- for any reason -- be forced to think on your own. And when there is noone to tell you what to think, then you are in effect forced to think on your own. And especially if your boyfriend wants you to have your own opinions (about everything: cars, food, TV shows...) and not just mirror him. ;)
  
  Note the "about everyting" part. I don't know how many times I asked her to disagree with me or at least have an independent opinion instead of just agreeing with me because I had the same opinion (so, agree if you conclude to agree, but don't agree just to agree). You see, I had already got a glimpse of her as a person, and I thought that she was marvellous! I wanted to see more! Eventually she felt that it wasn't dangerous to be herself and form her own opinions. Wow! I just had to marry her!
• 
  14

  -How did you envision the FDS and GB did their work?

  by Awakened07 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the weird thing is - i almost can't recall what i once believed about the fds and gb ["faithful and discreet slave" and "governing body"], who they in fact were, and how they came to their conclusions and 'revelations'.. come to think of it, i think that was because i was conditioned to not ever question them, because to question them would be to question the organization, and to question the organization was to question jesus and jehovah.. but i've been trying to 'dig into' my brain to see if i can remember how i as an active jw saw them:.

  - i believed them to be inspired, just not in the same 'degree' (?

  ) as the biblical writers were.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dust

  Slightly off topic, although not completely:
  
  The New York Times reported on July 9, 1912 that the Bible Students' Association had reputiated the idea of hell-fire (almost eighty years before the pope did the same thing). I've mentioned this to my JW in-laws in a recent letter (in an innocent paragraph about the NY Times archive). It was brig. gen. William P. Hall who brought up the question, which lead to an "animated discussion" at the convention, before the 4000 delegates adopted the doctrine as formulated by Dr. L. N. Smith of Louisville. According to the resolution, most Protestant ministers had already privately reputiated the hell-fire theory.
  
  Of course, none of this is shocking, but the information may perhaps divert a little from their accustomed focus in such matters: There is no hell, the JWs are proud that they've known this for so many years, and the doctrine is simply there, given to them by the Society. They are probably not used to thinking of animated discussions prior to the adoption of resolutions. And they are certainly not used to thinking of the non-shocking fact that doctrines are formulated by individuals that even have names. Being reminded of this in an innocent way will hopefully make the Society a little more "human".