OnTheWayOut

Joined

• started 589 topics
• posted 21,823 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by OnTheWayOut

• 
  57

  Finally time to introduce myself!

  by ZIL in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i have been a loooong time lurker on this board.

  i want to get in on the action now!!

  i was a jw for nearly 25 years.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  WELCOME TO THE BOARD.

  So glad to hear your family is getting a taste of true life.
• 
  19

  The "generation" teaching - just to clarify!

  by Beardo in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sorry to be a major pain in the ass - but could those " in the know " clear something up for me?.

  is the " generation " teaching that was redefined during 1995 still taught to " interested ones " or have the wtbts totally removed this generation idea from their new literature, which is used to indoctrinate a person leading up to baptism?.

  any enlightenment welcome.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  The home study book does not contain an explanation of current doctrine nor the doctrine itself.
• 
  9

  God's 'name'and the Bible

  by Gill in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  There are no original manuscripts for the NT in existence. The WTS inserts Jehovah based on a couple of premises-

  The NT quotes OT scriptures that had the tetragrammaton in them,
  so the name should have been there (They say it probably was there)

  Some scholar in the 1300's (or so) put the name in, so it's okay to do so. His reasoning is that
  some older Hebrew manuscripts of the NT put the tetragrammaton in them. They actually mention
  this reason somewhere.

  There must have been a great apostasy after the Apostles died, and the name was removed
  from all copies of the NT.

  WT thinking is absurd. If the writers quoted OT, but did not insert the name, we should write
  what they wrote in newer Bibles, never compromising but sticking to their original intent.
  They were highlighting a new focus on Jesus, so we are wrong to remove their intent.
  Somebody over a thousand years later did it, so it must be okay- come on. Some Hebrews
  took the liberty, so we should, too- wrong wrong wrong.
  Scholars have stated that there is no way that after these writings circulated for awhile, an
  effort to remove the name would have been 100% successful. There would be copies floating
  around of original writings with the name intact, and copies without. All the copies are without.
• 
  39

  Blood Transfusion Question - Dogs

  by Duncan in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  dear everyone,.

  there was a very interesting item on this morning's bbc breakfast news programme - to do with blood transfusions for dogs.

  a new website has been set up, along with an appeal to owners to type and register their pets as potential donors, should the need arise.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Perhaps we can get an update and new light from the GB. It seems that they are so busy
  re-thinking the position of humans and blood fractions, that they've forgotten about FIDO.
  I would say a letter with a new question from readers would be appropriate.
• 
  13

  "I Felt Really Betrayed When I Found Out it Was all a Lie."

  by scout575 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  "yes i have anger.

  i've been angry at christianity for years.

  that doesn't mean i don't love the people who've been brainwashed though.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  ditto. Nothing to add.
• 
  24

  Was the Watchtower Society Justified in Disfellowshiping Some Individuals?

  by The wanderer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  <!-- .style1 {font-family: arial, sans-serif} .style2 {font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; } .style3 {color: #0000ff} .style4 {color: #ece9d8} --> was the watchtower society justified in disfellowshiping some individuals?

  "but now i am writing you to quit mixing in company with .

  anyone called a brother that is a fornicator a greedy.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  If apostasy is proper grounds for DF, then ALL JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SHOULD BE DISFELLOWSHIPPED.

  Many have abandoned their religion- the one before they became JW's.

  All have abandoned their beliefs- that the Generation of 1914 would see the end, that blood fractions are wrong, etc.
  If you are a JW long enough, you must abandon your long-held beliefs, because you get DF if you don't.

  Therefore- ALL JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SHOULD BE DISFELLOWSHIPPED.

  Good call, Butters.
• 
  24

  Was the Watchtower Society Justified in Disfellowshiping Some Individuals?

  by The wanderer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  <!-- .style1 {font-family: arial, sans-serif} .style2 {font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; } .style3 {color: #0000ff} .style4 {color: #ece9d8} --> was the watchtower society justified in disfellowshiping some individuals?

  "but now i am writing you to quit mixing in company with .

  anyone called a brother that is a fornicator a greedy.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Jeff makes a good point here, also.

  In either case, the person who had doubts would never be cast out. The [unrepentant] sinner
  was a fornicator, idolater, etc. Clearly, a wicked person.
• 
  24

  Was the Watchtower Society Justified in Disfellowshiping Some Individuals?

  by The wanderer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  <!-- .style1 {font-family: arial, sans-serif} .style2 {font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; } .style3 {color: #0000ff} .style4 {color: #ece9d8} --> was the watchtower society justified in disfellowshiping some individuals?

  "but now i am writing you to quit mixing in company with .

  anyone called a brother that is a fornicator a greedy.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  No. Disfellowshipping denies mercy and love. Paul said a lot of things

  I agree with under_believer.

  If people have a definite belief in following this scripture, then there are plenty more things that Paul said and they should do.

  Before he said women should not teach, Paul said, "Let a woman learn in silence with full submissiveness."
• 
  38

  Should Charles Russell be credited as the founder of Jehovah's Witnesses?

  by slipnslidemaster in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this has been on my chest for a while and i would like to talk about it for a bit.

  i've been reading this essay: "the successor problem" and it's sparked this thought that has been reoccurring to me for years.. .

  i personally think that he should not.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  despite all the negative stories out their about him , Russell's reputation is still a whole lot better than Rutherford's.

  Rutherford's lust for power and dirty deeds are well-documented. So, while russell's legacy is a little tarnished, Rutherford's is in the sewer over its head. Who would want to claim that as its founder?

  Good points. Also, pointing to Rutherford would place the WTS roots after 1914. It's important for them to lie tospin inform the faithful that they have been proclaiming the truth since before Jesus appeared to bring destruction invisibly started his rule in 1914.
• 
  13

  NOOOOOOOOOO NO NO NO NO!!!

  by earthtone in

  1. social
  2. physical

  come on bears!

  they are kicking our azz.

  killing us with the short pass.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  As dissappointed as I am with the offense, at least the defense saved the day, and more important-

  At least I am not a Cardinals fan. What a let-down for them.

  GO BEARS.