Posts by glenster

212

WTS hasn't corrected mistakes in NWT on John 20:28.....

by A-Team in

nwt scriptures: john 20:28-29 .

28 in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

29 jesus said to him: because you have seen me have you believed?

glenster

I grew up in public school, not a monastary, and have had friends of different belief and non-belief outlooks. If one wanted to persuade another to their view, I hope it was friendly and they'sd still be friends later, whatever the other decided.

If it goes beyond differences that are harmless by general ethics, if the leader is shown evidentially to be cooking up a prophet routine and anyone is hurt or killed, the jet flies into the building, a kid is shot on the Palestine border, someone throws away their nitroglycerin or insulin after Popoff told them to while wearig a radio transmitter in his ear and pretending he was getting exclusive divine guidance (near the bottom of p.1a), and an evidential expose shows it to be so, a secular dislike of lying that causes harm should be common ground.

The JWs leaders current stance is that they're not prophets (p.1 of my article) but just exclusively good at a conservative interpretation of the Bible, although playing prophet can be shown with "Noah wore argyle"-type rules and requiring agreement for salvation beyond prediction attempts (which they also require agreement to for salvation--they don't give them as pure speculation), so it's a "have your cake and eat it, too" stance. My focus hasn't been to take one of the common belief choices and attack anyone who believes differently in a cranky intolerant way. But there are common secular ethical grounds for seeing that the JWs leaders play prophet, to be critical if there are signs of deception and not signs of God for it, and especially if anyone is hurt or killed. The JWs leaders claim to be the only 12 or so that can make the rules out of a literal 144,000 of all Christian history, and they use deceptive methods when meaning to establish their distictions, and harm and fatalities have resulted (exclusive rules on the medical use of blood, pp.12-42, results in Germany and Malawi, p.6, and divisions between people with unusually strict disfellowshipping rules, p.3). There's merit in spreading a warning about it, as about Popoff, without needing to appeal to a specific religious or non-religious choice.

19

christendom and war

by TIMBOB in

went to the bookstudy this morning.

the study talked about false religion and war and how other religions are killing each other and also jw's for not going to war.

there was many comment of how many early jw's served time or were executed for not going to war.

glenster

The usual deliberation is between Christians deferring to the government and
military to do good to combat crime or offensive military attacks (Rom.13:1-8)
and that the good the government does with that is something the Christian can
be a part of to minimize sin in the world or that they can't.

Christianity went from Judaism, in which you couldn't take the law into your
own hands but which had government for those things and followers could take
part in it as good, to being Christian citizens of anyhere who held government
in the same regard when upholding the common ethics Christianity maintained.
While holding government in that same basic regard, they could either take part
in it likewise or be complete pacifists about combatting crime (it's good if
someone else helps others, but I wouldn't), for some reason.

Another factor to see is that Christians went from being a small percentage
of the population with Roman leaders who were often anti-Christian to being a
big percentage of the population with leaders who weren't anti-Christian. The
change happened after the scriptures were written--how does that change the gen-
eralizations you could make? You have to imagine from the basics in scriptures
because it wasn't a present condition for scriptures to reflect directly.

The non-JWs leaders' stance is generally to leave conscientious objection as a
matter of conscience.

The last thing I have on the JWs leaders' stance is that JWs aren't pacifists,
("The Watchtower," June 1, 1968, p.347), but I could use an update about it. If
still the same, the JWs leaders' Golden Rule is pretty self-centered--JWs are
only to defend others if they're JWs.

Worldliness is usually taken to mean to not believe in God or the ethical
basics (don't lie, steal, etc.). The JWs leader' stance is too "144,000" exclu-
sive so the definition of "worldliness" is correspondingly over-expanded, and
they play prophet further with added rules about pagan connotations about things
(ironically, weak faith concerns--1 Cor.8:7). From Russell to the present,
Satan is taught to be in charge of more that way (Armageddon will soon destroy
all, including all government, but those who agree with the Watchtower leaders,
etc.).

The JWs leaders' play prophet in being inflexible about things they don't know
about any better than anyone else. A couple of tell-tale signs of it going
awry are that the JWs leaders' combination of Rom.13:1-8 and worldliness makes
it sound like God appointed the Devil to run government to do good in the world,
and it depreciates the "love thy neighbor" value of gold (if someone else helps
them, that's good--I wouldn't).

Another is that they aren't currently forthright about what their stances have
caused meant when push came to shove. To hear them tell it ("The Watchtower,"
May 1, 1996), they protected their flock with neutrality in the past and the
followers were persecuted during WWII for saying "Jehovah" or such.

I made a timeline about it to help me figure it out at the next link. Most JWs
were in the US and tried to talk any potential converts out of fighting Hitler,
with Rutherford's sound trucks damning all not Rutherford (I have it starting in
mid-'33), which I would think had a lot more to do with that being within the
peak of their US persecution. In Germany, the second biggest group of JWs fol-
lowers began being put into prison camps shortly after Rutherford threatened
Hitler, who had just harassed JWs as political pests, that, if the harassment
persisted, Rutherford would send unarmed JWs into the German streets with tracts
so critical of Hitler that God would destroy Hitler soon (the listing for Oct.7,
1934, about halfway down the page). What else could have resulted? The fat-
head's prophet-playing triggered hundreds of fatalities.
http://www.freewebs.com/glenster1/gtjbrooklyn6.htm

212

WTS hasn't corrected mistakes in NWT on John 20:28.....

by A-Team in

nwt scriptures: john 20:28-29 .

28 in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

29 jesus said to him: because you have seen me have you believed?

glenster

I cover what Paul calls "weak faith" (1 Cor.8:7) about the JWs leaders' rules about Christmas, agreement required for salvation, on pp.1a and 37-39. The JWs leaders' can't claim to be of an especially righteous 12 or so, the only ones of a most righteous literal 144,000 who can make the rules, and of weak faith about the imagined connotations of things at the same time. That's why rules about birthday parties, etc., are there--the leaders playing prophet about guarantees beyond or even in contradiction to the Bible to create the impression of exclusiveness.

It's to play prophet just as sure as it would be to say "Noah wore argyle" and require agreement for salvation. You don't have to make predictions to play prophet, to pretend you have an exclusive from God. I haven't seen any angels talk from shrubs about it, though--just what you'd expect to find if it were cooked up.

I like any JWs I've met. I see much good there. Where it goes wrong is with the leaders' claiming to be of a literal 144,000 then cooking up distinctive rules, all required for salvation, to establish it (especially if anyone is hurt or killed), and I've never met one of the followers who would dare say anything so ridiculously arrogant any more than I would. I've found it's reliable to focus on the leaders, etc. If they're teaching about one of those elitist rules and quote feom a book, look for the book. If they say, "That's what they say," go see what the most reasonable thing is they say--it's probably been misrepresented. If it sounds like a forced point, think about it or ask around--it probably is one.The evidence I have for that is in that dauntingly long article at the links given above.

There should be some kind of JWs Woody Guthrie "This Brooklyn is your Brooklyn, this Brooklyn is my Brooklyn," 6 million against 12 or so, unionize the workers, etc. Waiting to do it on the leaders' own terms, it's not going to happen--you can just get yourself thrown out. All I can think of is to spread the evidence around and maybe the leaders would change, if only for literature sales PR concerns. Then again, they've made so much money already, it could stop coming in tomorrow and they'd probably be set to retire for life. At least spreading the word around can help warn people and give them a better educated choice to make about what to most people is pretty obscure material.

If anyone has any material for it, please feel welcome to let me know.

16

Jehovah Witness confusing doctrine about abstaining from blood

by Blindbutnowisee in

why do jehovah witnesses say they abstain from using blood when they are now allowing their members to use certain blood fractions.

the answer i always get "if their concious allows them its ok it not for us to judge".

if that is the case, whole blood should also be allowed if their concious allows them to.

glenster

The blood rules are among the first things that bothered me about the JWs leaders' exclusive rules. What I have for that so far is on p.1 (the history of the rules) and 12-42 (the scriptural possibilities) of "Glenster's Guide to GTJ Brooklyn" at the next links. I called it that because I've written a couple of GTA walk-throughs, too.

If anyone has some more stuff about it to contribute, I'd sure appreciate it. (Blondie: I've credited you with where I learned of a thing or two already; one I remember is for "Archangel Michael" on p.8--thanks!) (PS--nice job in "Vice City").
http://gtw6437.tripod.com/
http://www.freewebs.com/glenster1/gtjbrooklynindex.htm

212

WTS hasn't corrected mistakes in NWT on John 20:28.....

by A-Team in

nwt scriptures: john 20:28-29 .

28 in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

29 jesus said to him: because you have seen me have you believed?

glenster

Please send me any helpful information for my site, whatever your religious or
non-religious preferences. My focus is:

- the 12 or so Jehovah's Witnesses leaders allege that they're part of a lit-
eral 144,000 (Rev.7:1-8; 14:1-5) most righteous Christians, all JWs, the only
ones who will go to heaven--all others of the afterlife are JWs who will live on
Earth.

- the JWs leaders allege that they lead God's sole God-guided religious organ-
ization on Earth--all others religions are condemned as Babylon, and that
they're the only ones of the 144,000 who can decide on the rules for the JWs.

So:

- the JWs leaders have a batch of distinctive rules meant to establish their
exclusiveness (a ban of the medical use of blood and major blood fractions, that
Jesus invisibly turned his attention toward the Earth in 1914, a ban of most
holidays as having worldly pagan or idolatrous connotations, a ban of most gov-
ernment involvement as being too worldly, that Jesus is archangel Michael and
not to be worshipped and the holy spirit is impersonal, etc.), all of which must
be agreed to for membership in the JWs and salvation.

- the JWs leaders allege that their distinctive rules are guaranteed by the
Bible and best related evidence and reasoning.

Catch 22:

- But the distinctive rules are too distinctive to allow that honestly or they
wouldn't be so distinctive.

So my focus is the methods they use to try to make them seem guaranteed
(quotes used misrepresentatively from research books, creating a false impres-
sion of the most reasonable alternatives, forced points, etc.),

especially if anyone is regarded or treated unfairly (persistent disagreement
with any of those rules can cause a JW to be disfellowshipped by friends and
family),

hurt or killed (in a hospital or when the JWs leaders' inflexible rules about
neutrality and worldliness run up against an intolerant political leader and put
followers in harms' way unnecessarily, for no better reason thanthe leaders'
elitism, as in Germany and Malawi).
http://www.freewebs.com/glenster1/gtjbrooklynindex.htm
http://gtw6437.tripod.com/

2

Criticism of the JWs leaders' blood rules

by glenster in

i put an article critical of the jws leaders' methods meant to establish the.

distinctive rules meant to establish their "144,000 most righteous" prophet-.

playing claim at the link below.

glenster

http://www.freewebs.com/glenster1/gtjbrooklynindex.htm

212

WTS hasn't corrected mistakes in NWT on John 20:28.....

by A-Team in

nwt scriptures: john 20:28-29 .

28 in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

29 jesus said to him: because you have seen me have you believed?

glenster

My updates are registering now at the 2nd link below.
http://www.freewebs.com/glenster1/gtjbrooklynindex.htm
http://gtw6437.tripod.com/

Some of the deliberations on phrasing possibilties I'm seeing here seem to
have to do with what I have for the section on "Prov.8:22-31" on p.8. First
century Jewish monotheism understood it and other wisdom literature to mean
God's own wisdom could be imagined as personified, with God, and sent to people.
This could be understood in "God and wisdom" phrasing, Jesus was called "wis-
dom," which the mainstream Christian view understands "God and Logos" and "God
and Jesus" phrasing with, and the JWs leaders just force the point with preten-
sions that the mainstream view isn't possible due to the phrasing.

Reaffirming the idea that John intended the mainstream Jesus idea was his cus-
tomization of the word "Logos" as a possible concern of his besides God and wis-
dom. The general thought then was that Logos meant the reason that caused the
cosmos or such. No one of the time is known to have thought it referred to Mi-
chael.

The JWs leaders' idea of Prov.8:22-31, that God created through another to in-
dicate the other was sent by God, is denied by God in Isaiah, which is to deny
that He used that method. The closest to that I know is of Philo considering Logos
an emanation of God that had a beginning but not as a seperate created being,
which he referred to figuratively as an angel or god, among other things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ_the_Logos

The Canaanite idea of supernatural and human gods, shown in verses like some
of the Psalms (p.4 of the article), was an early Mosaic law idea, then brought
up for God to condemn in various verses, and began being ruled out in Isaiah's
day. Non-Christian Jews generally considered Is.9:6 to just refer to King Heze-
kiah and inappropriate for a Messiah, while Christians thought of it as also re-
ferring to their Messiah in the monotheism that became the norm since Isaiah's
day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism#Abrahamic_religions

If that Christian interpretation is used, I think this means there's no gram-
matical reason Jesus couldn't be called "God" other than to make a case for it
being possible to imagine it figuratively.

Monotheism and the Shema, belief in "one God and one Lord," was the norm in
first century Judaism, and the Christian variation gave Jesus as the Lord in one
God and one Lord phrasing, like Thomas used, and Paul used at 1 Cor.8:6 and
Phil.2:11, while adhering to monotheism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shema#Shema_in_Christianity

What I have for that so far is that the main ways they distinguished their be-
lief in one God, notable to consider in Jesus' case, was with worship, prayer,
and the Shema. ("What Do We Mean by 'First-Century Jewish Monotheism'?" by
Larry W. Hurtado, p.42) Otherwise, the articles I've read that make a case for
an acceptable "god" in Jesus' day leave out the history of the Canaanite idea
becoming obsolete centuries earlier, let alone that this case of it would be an
idea of a god addressed those several ways, which is how you'd indicate the
mainstream Jesus idea, not Michael.
http://www.forananswer.org/Top_JW/Hurtado_Monotheism.htm

The JWs leaders' Jesus is easy to imagine, but it mainly takes God things
figuratively without nearly as good a case, or support from early witnesses, for
a reason to, though.

Does anyone have a link to a Watchtower article that explains why Stephen
didn't call Jesus "archangel Michael" to let the discussion continue without
rocks, and ends his speech with a prayer to Jesus, at Acts 6,7? I can't remem-
ber reading their explanation for that (or why nobody else called him that,
either). What I have for that so far is in the section on "Archangel Michael"
on p.8 of my article, which doesn't establish a reason for the JWs leaders to
insist a case against the maistream case.

2

Criticism of the JWs leaders' blood rules

by glenster in

i put an article critical of the jws leaders' methods meant to establish the.

distinctive rules meant to establish their "144,000 most righteous" prophet-.

playing claim at the link below.

glenster

I put an article critical of the JWs leaders' methods meant to establish the
distinctive rules meant to establish their "144,000 most righteous" prophet-
playing claim at the link below. It covers their rules about the medical use of
blood, looks at the scriptures involved, related history, etc., on pp.12-42. I
found it's easy to see they use the same sort of forced points, omission of per-
tinent evidence, etc., for it as the others, if that might have something help-
ful to someone.
http://gtw6437.tripod.com/

If anyone wants to help with it, please feel welcome. They've had over a cen-
tury to write their predictions that don't predict anything, etc.--I could have
used a newspaper staff for this!

212

WTS hasn't corrected mistakes in NWT on John 20:28.....

by A-Team in

nwt scriptures: john 20:28-29 .

28 in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

29 jesus said to him: because you have seen me have you believed?

glenster

PS: if anyone wants to check out the article I gave a link to before, please
use this web site (the other isn't registering the most recent updates, for some
reason):
http://www.freewebs.com/glenster1/index.htm

I called it "Glenster's Guide to GTJ Brooklyn" because I've also written a
couple of GTA walk-throughs, which are what the first ten links there are for.

212

WTS hasn't corrected mistakes in NWT on John 20:28.....

by A-Team in

nwt scriptures: john 20:28-29 .

28 in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

29 jesus said to him: because you have seen me have you believed?

glenster

Here's what I have so far about that so far (pp.4,7-10 at the next link): http://gtw6437.tripod.com/