kifoy

Joined

• started 11 topics
• posted 293 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by kifoy

• 
  12

  Witness Brother had baptism voided after fornication= Not disfellowshiped??

  by Witness 007 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  do you know about this loop hole rule?

  a short time after baptism a young man i knew commited fornication but told the elders he didn't know it was a sin, he didn't have full knowledge when baptized.

  his baptizm was voided and he had to study and be baptized again at a later date.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  FFM:
  "Maybe he convinced them that he wasn't "dedicated" before baptism (didn't dedicate himself in prayer first), thus making his actual baptism null and void."
  
  That argument did not work for me when I DA'd :-\
  
  kifoy
• 
  18

  Where was Adam?

  by kifoy in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  adam was somewhere else.

  so adam was *with* her?

  where was adam?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  Thank you for all your interesting answers.
  
  So, I find that there really is no definite answer to this question without doing some "if this" and "if that".
  I see the point in the privateness of the conversation between the snake and Eve. And that «with her» doesn't really _have_ to be "within arm's reach", if I understood correctly.
  
  This story was written down a long time after the events. So, it may also have been a little influenced by this writer's opinions. Right? (Unless one believes that it was 100% inspired...)
  
  I think the headship question is equally interesting. Why is one sin worse that the other? Although 1 Tim 2:14 says: "And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner". But then again (unless inspired), the woman had never been regarded highly. And I think it says it all when Adam is mentioned by name, but not Eve, who is only "the woman".
  
  Keep you thoughts coming :-)
  
  This kind of bible study I can like. Comparing translations, history, and finding strange things. Not the JW way. That's so boring! Right now I'm occupied with this subject, and the 587/607 subject. I could never have found these interesting things when I was a JW. Now it's all on a theoretical basis, and I like to keep it that way.
  
  Thanks for the link Curucu.
  If there are more links out there, I'd like to see :-)
  
  kifoy
• 
  18

  Where was Adam?

  by kifoy in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  adam was somewhere else.

  so adam was *with* her?

  where was adam?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  Where was Adam when Eve sinned?
  Was he with his wife or somewhere else in the garden -- out of sight?
  
  In the NWT, Genesis 3:6 says:
  
  "Consequently the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was something to be longed for to the eyes, yes, the tree was desirable to look upon. So she began taking of its fruit and eating it. Afterward she gave some also to her husband when with her and he began eating it."
  
  *Afterward*.
  So.... The snake tricked Eve to take a bite of the forbidden fruit. Then Eve went to her husband somewhere else in the garden and made him eat as well.
  
  This is how I always thought about these things. Adam was somewhere else. Eve was wandering around in the gardens by herself.
  
  Then I got a tip from my aunt. And I read the passage more thoroughly in my Norwegian Bible. My Norwegian Bible says pretty much the same as the New International Bible:
  
  "When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it."
  
  So Adam was *with* her? That brings up lots of questions like: Why did he not stop it? And why is it so important for some to point out that it was *afterwards*?
  
  The Interlinear Bible clearly (at least as far as I can se) shows that the words «with here» also was present in the original text: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen3.pdf
  
  So...
  Where was Adam?
  
  I googled and found this article: http://www.tlogical.net/adameve.htm
  
  The writer still concludes that Adam had to be somewhere else, not present. Though I think some of his arguments are somewhat thin...
  
  For instance, his first argument:
  
  "It is possible to be with someone and not actually in their presence. For instance, when I am at home "with" my wife, she might be in another part of the house and not visible to me. Adam could have been with Eve in the same way. With her in the garden but not in her presence."
  
  Well. Where could he be if not "in the garden with Eve". There was no other place to be, was there?
  
  And what about this one:
  
  "Adam and Eve before the fall had equal standing before God. There was no concept of headship or defined roles for their conduct. God's response to the sin of Eve was to change her relationship in respect to Adam and Himself. She was told that her desire would be to her husband and that he would rule over her. From this point forward in scripture we see man portrayed in a role of spiritual leadership and as the head of the wife. If Adam had been present during the temptation, and indifferent or deceived alongside Eve, it begs the question, why would God have given Adam headship?"
  
  So because Adam was tempted by a mere woman instead of the more powerful Satan, he proved himself more competent to the headship? Eh...
  
  What do you think?
  
  I was just thinking, If Eve had a long way to go to meet up with her husband after she had taken a bite. Why did she not "see that she was naked" before Adam ate? Because verse 7 says:
  "Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked".
  
  So *then* also Eve saw it. After Eve had wandered around looking for Adam and then persuaded him to eat? Was she a bit slow or was he nearby after all?
  
  kifoy
• 
  5

  Do JW's believe the third temple will be rebuilt?

  by Bob Loblaw in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  so i just read this article "strumming to the third temple" (http://www.infolive.tv/en/infolive.tv-6231-israelnews-strumming-third-temple) (beautiful harps btw) and it made me wonder if the wts believes that a third temple will be built.

  many religious jews and evangelical/ fundamentalist christians believe a third temple will be built,...so what about the jw's?

  do they have any teachings on the subject?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  The WTS talk about the "Jerusalem in Heaven" or someting, don't they?
  So the third temple is in heaven, maybe?
  
  kifoy
• 
  40

  Memorial Partaker totals for 72 years by request!

  by Atlantis in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  question from researcher: the other day you posted the australian peak publishers and i was wondering if it would be possible to post the numbers of the "memorial partakers" from 1935 to 2006. that would be about 72 years of totals.. my answer: yes, we can do that for you but it will take a few hours to get everything together and scanned.

  i will have to use different forms of wt literature to accomplish this.. unless indicated otherwise, numbers listed show partakers for previous year and some could show: "still incomplete" but they are still listed as a total nevertheless.

  cheers!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  I was somewhat surprized that the number did not decrease more after 1975.
  And it is interesting that the number in reallity has been the same for so long.
  The number will not go below 8000.
  
  I was just thinking about something:
  In the 20s they preached that "millions now living will never die".
  But didn't they at that time belive that they all were of the "annointed, heavenly class"?
  How could they go to heaven if they would never die?
  
  kifoy
• 
  16

  JW Jargon

  by Scully in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i mentioned in an earlier post that i had a visit the other day from a former friend, a jw woman, who wanted to invite me to the district convention on the weekend.

  i almost got the impression from her casual dress that it was a social visit, until she whipped out the tract.

  one thing that i noticed was her trying to soft pedal the jw jargon that is practically second nature to jws.. she talked about how one of her kids was "gone" for a few years, but had recently "come back to us" and that she was happy to have her child's company again.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  YC wrote:
  I remember well that I stopped referring to the elders as "Brother so and so" instead using their first and last names or only their last name. For example, if a certain elder would phone and say "Hi, this is Brother Doe, is Brother xxx at home?" I'd say "Just a minute," and then call my then JW husband: "John Doe is on the phone."
  ---
  
  In the areas I have lived, I can't remember having heard or used the "brother" and "sister" about anyone outside ordinary meetings and other organized cong. stuff. When talking about somone, or calling someone, I and everyone I knew would use the persons first name. If it was a total stranger, one might be using full name. Never "may I talk to Brother Doe". The "brother" thing was only used at meetings and similar.
  
  One could say "he's a brother" (meaning he is a JW), but not "I ran into Brother Doe today".
  
  It might be the socitey here in this country. Everything is very informal. The only people everyone in this country are naming very formally in third person are the royal family (king, queen, crown prince/princess). And of course the JWs at meetings -- between the prayers, not before and after.
  
  If I remember correctly, when I was a child, the book studies were so informal that the "brother/sister" thing were not used. Only first names.
  I don't remeber when this changed. But I think they use "brother this and that" now.
  
  This informallity can be really liberating. But it is also kind of weird when things suddenly are formal during meetings.
  
  But about the topic: I find it strange to hear words I used on a daily basis earlier, but have not heard in a long time. I sometimes find it difficult to talk about "Jehovah". I now only use "God".
  
  kifoy
• 
  25

  Well, it's June 12, 2007...

  by WTWizard in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  and armageddon is not here yet.

  in fact, i passed several churches of the catholic and protestent denominations.

  and i thought that those churches were supposed to be destroyed before the great tribulation which was supposed to culminate in armageddon.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  "Who came up with this June 12th thing anyway?"
  
  One "charismatic" person with the name Yisrayl Hawkins (http://www.yisraylhawkins.com/)
  
  kifoy
• 
  10

  ABOUT NAME CALLING.....................

  by juni in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in the congregation you attended/or attend, for new ones that come, did/do the members address them as "brother so and so" / "sister so and so" ??.

  or do new ones have to wait for a period of time to prove their "worthiness" of being addressed in that way?.

  juni ~~~~.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  In my cong. we were called "brothers" and "sisters" from the moment we officially became publishers. We did not have to wait a month or wait till after babtism.
  
  Then it was "sister + surname" or "sister + firstname surname" if there were more than one sister with the same surname.
  
  For non-publishers it was either "firstname" (mainly kids) or "full name" (grownups).
  
  Here in Norway titles like Mr./Ms./Mrs. is not used at all. Perhaps only when calling upon really old and/or upper class people, not that there are many of them left.
  
  kifoy
• 
  17

  JW Vultures!

  by Grammy in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my 45 year old son committed suicide in may, he was living in texas, i live in mississippi, he was raised here and had many family members and friends here so on june 4, i had his obituary run in our local paper...on june 6, i got a letter in the mail from a town 12 miles away, thinking it was from someone who knew him i opened it to find that it was from a jw who i do not know and it contained a typed note along with that damn when someone you love dies tract in it!

  i was furious at the person who sent it until i thought about how brainwashed they are and how important it is for them to get their time in even if it's done in such a disgusting manner as reading the obituaries and imposing their screwed up beliefs on people like myself who are in pain and grieving the loss of their first born son!

  i tore it to bits and put it in the trash where it belongs.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  Grammy, I'm so sorry for your loss!
  
  I've been that brainwashed myself.
  
  When I was about 16-17 years old, the father of a girl in my class died suddenly.
  I went to the funeral, and with me I of course brought the "dead-brochure" (the one with the beach/sunset on the front).
  
  First of all, I was not at all known to the church traditions on funerals, so I did not know it was a tradition for everyone to handshake the closest family of the deceased, and that the second closest would be the first in line, and that the rest of us would join in little by little.
  
  So when the first ones where giving their condolances, I saw my opportunity so sneak in behind my classmate and hand her a small plastic bag containing the brochure, and then sneak back.
  
  I was of course in my best intentions, as I have grown up to think that this brochure really would be of comfort and help. But all the years afterwards I've felt sick about how disrespectful I behaved.
  
  A few weeks ago I came across this girl again, and I finally got to say how sorry I was for what I did.
  
  She said she just tossed the brochure, and did not really think about it because they new I was beeing brainwashed, and that I should not think about it.
  
  I was soooo reliefed!
  
  So I can relate both to you, and to the one who send you this "comforting" tract.
  
  
  kifoy
• 
  32

  What is the most "American"

  by stillajwexelder in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  if somebody anywhere in the world were to ask what was very american -what would you answer?.

  apple pie.

  hamburgers.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  kifoy

  I've mostly seen the "American tourist", though...
  
  When we went on Interrail (in Europe) a few years back, we experienced that the only ones that would be rude enough to not first ask if we could speak English, where Americans. Everyone else would say "excuse me, do you speak English", and then go on with what was on their mind, but Americans would just assume that everyone around them new the language (and loved to converse in it).
  
  On the other hand, in Venice, we met a french couple that asked us if we spoke English -- in French...
  ("Parlez-vouz l'anglais?" "Eh... yes.")
  
  kifoy