Posts by dungbeetle

13

WHO shall survive Armageddon?

by Nathan Natas in

i need a little research help - .

i'm having an argument with a dub and a couple of dub sympathizers, and the dub refuses to say that only jws will live through armageddon.

he keeps repeating "only god can read the ehart" as if it was the new dub mantra.. i only have the 1995 cd, and i would really , really like to be able to offer some quotes from more recent wts books and magaziines that state that only dubs will survive armageddon.. if i'm wrong and the message has changed, i'd like to know that too.. if the message has changed, why bother preaching?

dungbeetle

so, Nathan, what does the 95 cd say?

don't forget to check the Kingdom Ministries, because that statement used to show up there on a regular basis.

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

14

The Faithful? Slave Class Substitutes Calculations

by TheOldHippie in

ok, here are the faithful slave class calculations, incorporating their substitues and the substitutes' substitutes.

a bit dull and heavy (hello, larsguy!

.......), but based on population statistics and mathematics.. in 1935, there were 52,465 proessing to be of the remnant.

dungbeetle

Well, of course it's SYMBOLIC, why would it not be? Why would their robes, the palm fronds, the blood, the Lamb and on and on be symbolic, and the 144,000 not be?

What gets me?

I hear something lik eonce a week from the platform, and sometimes the audience, that there are only about 4,000 'real' partakers.

HUH?

Translation: There are 4,000 lying JW's? RIGHT NOW?

"Oh, they aren't lying, they're just misled."

Why are THEY the ones that are misled? Why not the imperfect GB, who claim the door was closed, or the 144,000 a literal number?

"Well, the Socity says that the partakers are mostly Catholic converts, so they are used to partaking, and so they make the mistake."

So, you're saying you are allowing people to get baptised and become JW's who really don't know or understand the JW rules?

"Correct, well, maybe, I mean...uh..."

12

Update on "Shunned Father"/Blood

by hawkaw in

b.h., et al.. v.. the director of child welfare for the province of alberta, et al..

dated may 23/02 re: in response to b. bauer, q.c.

response to the motion to expedite the appeal, (joint with response to motion for stay)(bookform) the director of child welfare for the province of alberta .

dungbeetle

Hawk, I guess you won't get this untill Monday, but what is the info on the 'baby'?

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

24

WT at it again...cross or stake?

by dungbeetle in

just found this on the watchtower website:.

http://www.watchtower.org/library/rq/index.htm?article=article_11.htm.

cross: jesus did not die on a cross.

dungbeetle

I've reached a point that even atheists/agnostics/wiccans/JW/ whatever the *** can all live with:

1) Jesus would have TOLD us if it mattered whether God is a three-in-one, a two-in-one, or a HOLE-in-one.

2) Jesus would have TOLD us if it mattered whether he died on a light pole or a telephone pole.

Hugs to everyone who's posted on this thread.

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

12

Is this policy in writing anywhere?

by Mulan in

my mother and i have been continually discussing the pedophile issue, and the dateline show.

she insists that there is no official policy of going to the elders first, when this situation occurs in a family.

she said she feels it is a family matter, and she personally, would go to the police first, and let them handle it.

dungbeetle

funny, I hadn't caught that before. You are specifically not allowed to speak to anyone else about 'the sin' in the first place, then you can speak of it to 'two or three BROTHERS' who preferably are eyewitnesses to the sin, but at least eyewitnesses to the evidence.

What I have heard pro-watchterites say on this site, and they know who they are, that this does not preclude someone from reporting a crime to the police. YES IT DOES. If you are not to speak of a crime to OTHER WITNESSES, then you certainly are not authorized to speak of it to a NON-WITNESS.

One is no less a stretch than another.

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

16

Help needed for COURT CASE

by Quotes in

hi all, i received an email this morning that i was only partially able to help with.

perhaps the group here could fill in the missing pieces.. here is the email i received:.

i have a tape of a court hearing where i am the respondent.

dungbeetle

wow. they're old, tho, so update them if you get one

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

12

Is this policy in writing anywhere?

by Mulan in

my mother and i have been continually discussing the pedophile issue, and the dateline show.

she insists that there is no official policy of going to the elders first, when this situation occurs in a family.

she said she feels it is a family matter, and she personally, would go to the police first, and let them handle it.

dungbeetle

This probably doesn't help you, but here it is anyway:

organized to accomplish our ministry, 1983 (someone check the 1989 please) pages 143-144

If someone in the congregation has committed such a serious sin against you personally, do not be hasty to turn to the overseers, or someone else, requesting them to intervene in your behalf. First of all...speak with the one against whom you have a complaint...the one who has sinned will certainly appreciate the fact that YOU HAVE NOT TOLD OTHERS ABOUT HIS SIN AND HAVE NOT MARRED HIS GOOD REPUTATION AMONG OTHERS IN THE CONGREGATION. You will have "gained your brother."

...This facat shows that, although serious, the ofenses here discussed were limited in nature to such as could be settled between the individuals involved. This would not include offenses such as fornication, adultery, homosexuality, blasphemy, apostasy, idolatry and similar gross sins that should be REPORTED TO THE ELDERS AND HANDLED BY THEM.

But if you are convinced that your brother has sinned against you...then you should report the matter to the overseers of the congregation.

HAVING DONE THIS YOU HAVE TAKEN IT AS FAR AS YOU CAN.

LEAVE THE PROBLEM IN THE HANDS OF THE RESPONSIBLE MEMBERS OF THE CONGREGATION AND TRUST IN JEHOVAH THAT IT WILL BE RESOLVED.

NO, WATCHTOWER DOESN'T TELL US NOT TO REPORT CHILD MOLESTERS TO THE POLICE...

I REPEAT:

you have taken the matter as far as you can.

this is NOT rocket science...

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

16

Help needed for COURT CASE

by Quotes in

hi all, i received an email this morning that i was only partially able to help with.

perhaps the group here could fill in the missing pieces.. here is the email i received:.

i have a tape of a court hearing where i am the respondent.

dungbeetle

It's 'organized to accomplish our ministry' and 'organization for kingdom preaching and disciple-making'. Before that it was "Your Word is a Lamp to my Foot'

Interesting thing; the 'Lamp book' and the 'Organization' book contain explicit and graphic intructions for shunning. These were later removed from the 'organized' book and that is why it is important to have all three books.

And I do beleive the reasons for removal of the 'shunning' instructions from the 'organized' book WERE for the purposes of lawsuits.

In any case, these books are 'secret' books. They are for JW's only, they are not even shown or given to outsiders unless and untill one is suitable as a baptismal candidate, which used to mean he/she has studied 2 JW publications and whose life is in harmony with JW teachings and is already in field service.

It is so secret in fact, it is not even on the Watchtower cd ROM.

Strangely enough, the "Pay Atention" book states that normally a person is NOT disfellowshiped for associating with family members. That does not apply to elders tho.

NEW LIGHT, OLD LIGHT, STROBE LIGHT

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

3

Questions On JW Child Abuse Answered - 11/1/95 WT

by winsome in

questions on "dateline" and jw child abuse answered -- wt 11/1/95 pages 25, 28-29 .

many jws have raised questions about the recent dateline program on jws and child abuse policies of the wts.

many feel the perspective presented was not true or accurate.

dungbeetle

I put excepts up of this article, in fact lots of people have.

And I though about that too, about it being 'recalled' memories.

Bu the fact of the matter is, and you saw this on Dateline and we all saw it on the Watchtower website (sinece removed I think) and plus Watchtower revisited and reaffimed the issue in a 1995 WT I think and the fact of teh matter is, this WAS Watchtower policy for ALL child abuse allegations within the congregations.

WT spread it around so much, they can't lie about it anymore. They are are going to TRY AND SAY that it was all a MISUNDERSTNADING, that people are confusing the issue of actual child abuse and 'repressed memories' and I specifically said they would do that.

But they can't get away with this lie becasue I do believe elders admitted under oath in court that the two-witness-one-act-rule applied across the board.

Even now, they spread misinformation. They will TURN OVER AN ALLEGATION OF CHILD ABUSE, WITH ONE WITNESS,IN A REPORTING STATE ONLY. Bu tthey will not take congregational action without two witnesses, they will not even warn the molester's new congregational elders in writing.

MORE WORK TO DO MORE WORK TO DO.

Yeah plmcrzy, "Two rapes and you're out" cool huh?

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

16

Help needed for COURT CASE

by Quotes in

hi all, i received an email this morning that i was only partially able to help with.

perhaps the group here could fill in the missing pieces.. here is the email i received:.

i have a tape of a court hearing where i am the respondent.

dungbeetle

I suppose the elder could legally say that if he had never heard the term 'custody packet' or 'organization book', but first of all there ARE terms that are routinely used. If the elder KNOWS what is being referred to, regardless of the specific term, I'm pretty sure it is still perjury to deny it.

It would be helpful if we knew where this person was, perhaps you can find out what state, country?

the custody packet was on Randy's site, might still be.

BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.