well, i was tempted but i decided not to go to the most bizarre religious ritual of modern times....how about you?.
isp
I was there tonight. I also considered celebrating it with my family at home, Misty. I had the red wine and some chapattis which I thought qualified as unleavened bread...I felt quite sure it would be more meaningful for us to have it as a family just as the Israelites did at passover. Maybe next year if all the family are comfortable with it then.
Earnest
the story takes up 2 pages in womans own magazine and has a photo of the j/w father who abused his daughter.. the story is entitled..... "church of shame".
and starts...... after being sexually abused for years by her father, alison cousins turned to her local church for help.
but she was turned away and told to keep quiet.
It is true that men have sometimes been falsely accused of molestation and rape. But this particular account has a ring of truth to it. The gradual escalation of intimacy, starting at puberty with a "french kiss". The sharing of it with her friends. The confrontation with her mother. Names of the people with whom she spoke. The fact that another girl was also molested. That a court heard the evidence and found him guilty. There can be little doubt that this girl has been alienated from her parents but there is no indication of exaggeration in her account. It seems an honest, forthright, rather sickening account of a not-so-silent lamb.
In a recent item on the radio it was describing churches as dangerous places for children. This is so because by its nature they are open and welcoming to all. Furthermore, even when a church member has such deviant inclinations they are seldom rejected as they would be from other youth organizations because the church appeals to sinners. It welcomes them and must try to heal both them and their victims. I do not join the clamour against the WTS because there are paedophiles in their midst. I fear you will find this in every church for the reasons I have mentioned above. But I am appalled that there was so little support in her time of need. And salute her for making it public.
Earnest
got a call late this afternoon: "your daughter was in a car accident along with four other girls.
you need to come to the emergency room.".
daughter not there yet.
Thanks for sharing, Alan. As one father (whose hair is rapidly greying) to another I can well imagine the emotional roller-coaster you must have gone through. Very glad that your worst fears were not realised...and she now has a story to tell her (future) teenage daughter to keep her safe. That is, of course, God's little joke on us wayward youths...that we become parents ourselves one day.
Earnest
these days it's pretty clear that the jw organization is running on autopilot.
charles taze.
russell, joe booze rutherford, nathan knorr and freddie franz all had a certain amount of vision.
Alan,
Thank you for so extensive a reply to the issues that I raised. As the contention that God has used and/or is using JWs is relevant to your thread I would like to expand on my somewhat ambivalent beliefs regarding the extent to which God is controlling things.
You say believers "in a God that is controlling things generally ascribe far more than is advisable to the workings of their God". An objective look at history in the past 1900 years would suggest that God has not directly intervened in man's affairs since the resurrection of Jesus. It is quite easy to see the cause and effect of the Reformation and it is purely the eyes of faith that will conclude that God had a part in it. The same goes for the rise of Adventism in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It can all be explained sociologically and there is no objective evidence it was inspired of God. That is the historian in me speaking. On the other hand, Jesus spoke clearly about God's concern for each one of us even counting the hairs on our heads. He is aware even of a sparrow that dies. In Israel of old it seems that everything that happened was directly instigated by God. If a woman became pregnant it was God's will. If she was barren it was a punishment by God. If there was a drought or a flood or any catastrophe it was specifically intended by God and was only relieved when he determined to do so. Well...do we just conclude that Jesus was using hyperbole ? And that the God of the OT was a tribal God worshipped by primitive people who had no clue about sperm counts and barometric pressure. If we attribute inspiration to the Bible do we pick and choose which parts God wants us to believe is true ? I do not know. I know enough not to be dogmatic but that is about all. But the believer in me inclines to see a pattern in the increasing availability and spread of the good news from the time of the early Christians till now and to conclude there has been a speeding up in my lifetime. And I do think JWs have been used in this respect although I reject the exclusivity they claim.
I quite accept that you are convinced by what you have seen and heard of Rutherford's alleged conduct but will have to wait for publication before reaching conclusions myself. However, I do think it is slightly disingenuous to suggest we are free to check with the Watchtower Society about any and all of these things. At the time that Raymond Franz was expelled from Bethel I was profoundly disturbed by events and corresponded with both RF and WTS to try to reconcile what I read and heard with what I believed. I was completely stonewalled by the WTS and there is no reason to suppose they would be more forthcoming about Rutherford's alleged peccadillos.
Earnest
these days it's pretty clear that the jw organization is running on autopilot.
charles taze.
russell, joe booze rutherford, nathan knorr and freddie franz all had a certain amount of vision.
Alan,
Thank you for your post which reflects some of my own conclusions – that the WTS is in the degenerate stage to which W. P. Brown refers. My own view is that Jehovah has always used people who were at the right place at the right time to accomplish his purpose and this is equally true of JWs and other movements in modern times. I found especially interesting your argument that Rutherford has shaped and continues to shape the WTS. It is certainly true that there seems to be a lack of the vision that existed in the past and this may be because “men of vision were weeded out” or it may simply be that we live in different times…it is difficult to think of any leaders with vision since JFK (except Mandela).
But while I have read allegations about Rutherford's problems with alcohol this is the first I've heard of adultery. I do not dismiss it entirely without considering the evidence but I would have thought his critics would have publicised it at the time if it was known, just as they publicised innuendos at Russell's divorce case. I respect the argumentation and documentation you provide in your contributions but I think in this instance you have detracted from your main argument (which is sound) with hyperbole (which is not).
Earnest
“Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun the frumious Bandersnatch!” – Rev. Charles Dodgson
<fluff> .
at the book studies?
they were the highlight of the month.. thing is, all the sisters would try to outdo each other making nice food, which amused me no end, and also kept my stomach filled up, but drove me nuts, because my mother would spend the entire afternoon making a giant racket in the kitchen and screaming @ my sister whilst doing it, just to bake a cool cake for the book study.. also, remember those last ~15 minutes before the end of cake night book studies?
Cake nights. That's the milk of the word. On the East Rand (east of Johannesburg) we supplemented our spiritual meal with liqueurs after the book study. Full attendance there too.
Earnest
48.98082191
Earnest
ok, this post isn't out to prove anything, other than i've got too much time on my hands, which alot of you know that already.. over my morning coffee this morning i decided to read the section of the bible dealing with nimrod and the tower of babel.
i have two bibles at home the nwt and the new american standard.
heres what th nwt says at gen 10:9.
The WTS is without any doubt correct in claiming that early copies of the Septuagint contained God's name in Hebrew characters and/or the Greek equivalent of that name. And so it is a reasonable conclusion that when the early Christians read the scriptures, the Old Testament, they would have read God's name either in the Hebrew or in Greek. But it is a leap of faith from there to insist they must have used the name when quoting those scriptures in the NT. I believe there is strong reason to suppose that would be the case in the gospel of Matthew which was written for a Jewish audience and was probably first written in a dialect of Hebrew. But the argument is less strong when it comes to Paul's letters to a gentile audience. But strong or weak the fact is that it remains an assumption because no manucript of the NT has been found containing God's name in Hebrew or in Greek. My opinion is that it would have been more sensible to translate it as 'Lord' and have a footnote indicating the alternative reading of 'Jehovah' and the reasons for it.
Earnest
"Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun the frumious Bandernatch!" - Rev. Charles Dodgson
ok, this post isn't out to prove anything, other than i've got too much time on my hands, which alot of you know that already.. over my morning coffee this morning i decided to read the section of the bible dealing with nimrod and the tower of babel.
i have two bibles at home the nwt and the new american standard.
heres what th nwt says at gen 10:9.
LittleToe:
I think we have much in common. I agree with you that we cannot be certain of the meaning in Genesis 10:9. To translate it "in opposition to" is a legitimate translation, and I believe it is the correct one, but it is not the only one. In fact, Brown, Driver, Briggs suggest the meaning here is "in the sight of" i.e. in the estimation of and include Genesis 10:9 with :
Genesis 7:1 - "...'you (Noah) are the one I have seen to be righteous before me among this generation.'"
Deuteronomy 24:4 - "...that is something detestable before Jehovah."
Nehemiah 2:5,6 - "After that I said to the king:'...if your servant seems good before you...'. So it seemed good before the king..."
Esther 5:14 - "...So the thing seemed good before Haman..."
Proverbs 14:12 - "There exists a way that is upright before a man..."
This is true with many passages in scripture or any translation from one language to another. The translators have the task of selecting the most accurate word or expression to convey the intention of the original writer and not all will agree just what that is.
But while I do not fault the NW Translation Committee on this verse I do agree it did not stick to its mandate of a literal translation when replacing 'Lord' with 'Jehovah' in the NT. No extant copies of the NT contain God's name and so this goes beyond the remit of a literal translation in my opinion.
Earnest
Pax tecum et cum spiritu tuo
should the uk toughen up on it's immigration policies?
should immigrants be able to speak english?
this is clipped from today's guardian:.
Englishman,
I thought you would be interested in this report from The Daily Telegraph of Wednesday, March 6, page 18 :
Austria sets exams for foreignersPerhaps we can learn something from that! Just nobody mention the war.The Austrian government has confirmed plans to force foreigners from outside the European Union to learn German or face expulsion.
By the end of the year, all non-EU citizens who have entered the country since Jan 1, 1998, will have to take at least 100 hours of language tuition and pass an exam.
Earnest
"Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun the frumious Bandersnatch!" - Rev. Charles Dodgson.
