There's no doubt about that. I just happened to mention it because someone I work with is a JW and they gave me a bunch of info about new light. The reform necessary for this org is too long to list and wouldn't be acted on if I did list it. Have a nice weekend everyone.
LayingLow
JoinedPosts by LayingLow
-
11
New Light Extravagansa!!
by jefferywhat ina lot of people are in a little fuss about the generation change, which as far as im concerned, doesn't change anything, it could be step one of a bigger adjustment down the track, but on its own, its been done.
but at the annual meeting of the wtbs, there wasn't 1 but 5 changes of thought, the light has literally exploded.
one that has caught my attention is the the change on the dragnet of matthew 13. if you have wt 92 6/15 read it!
-
-
-
-
-
LayingLow
I apologize for my post then. I thought it was only the title that was the post, not duplicated... The more you know...
-
11
New Light Extravagansa!!
by jefferywhat ina lot of people are in a little fuss about the generation change, which as far as im concerned, doesn't change anything, it could be step one of a bigger adjustment down the track, but on its own, its been done.
but at the annual meeting of the wtbs, there wasn't 1 but 5 changes of thought, the light has literally exploded.
one that has caught my attention is the the change on the dragnet of matthew 13. if you have wt 92 6/15 read it!
-
-
LayingLow
Leaven=corruption. A year ago I would have fought someone at the door to prove this point. If they tried to explain that mustard seed growing meant great growth for the congregations of God I would have told them that that plant grew to nest the birds. The birds=the birds that pick the seed by the road (so therefore Satan's agents, and therefore the tree is Christendom). Now, the birds are good and the leaven is good, and the mustard plant is not Christendom but the JW's. The funny thing about this is that about a month after I left I heard a woman on the radio explaining that the leaven was good and meant the growth of the congregations. She must have told the GB too. Always telling people the leaven was bad caused some issues in my mind (why did the high priest offer two leavened loaves at pentecost?) The birds being bad I had thoroughly believed. In fact, they had scriptural proof. Now I don't even think they have scriptural proof for saying that the birds are good.
-
-
-
LayingLow
I noticed that you said the truth. If you had quoted it like "the truth" I would know that you meant the org known as Jehovah's Witnesses and their doctrine as of November 29, 2007. But since you didn't, I'm assuming you mean actual truth, like facts, and accurate information. That being the case, I am interested in the truth, but I'm not interested in 'the truth' aka Jehovah's Witnesses. Could you please specify whether you mean people who have given up their search for truth or people who have given up association with the WTS? If its the former, I have no reply, but if its the latter, the reasons are many.
-
45
get rich quick schemes, multilevel marketing, pyramid schemes and JWs
by marmot infrom my experience growing up in the jws there were two big recurring themes when it came to making money: .
1 - window washing or other janitorial work .
2 - cheezy "get rich quick" schemes and other cult-like sales practices .
-
-
LayingLow
I remember several years back I had quit school to pioneer. I began looking through the 'help wanted' ads and ended up in contact with Primerica. I went to a few of their meetings (very nice, just like the hall...), I noticed their method for getting people in. They attacked the warm market, those that trust you the most. There were so many similarities it was scary. I read something online once that made me want to get out of Primerica. I remember when I read it thinking, "well the history of that organization shows me that they're cons, I wonder someday if I'll run into the same thing with the JW's[of course I didn't lookup JWs because they had warned me ahead of time that apostate liars filled the internet with their propoganda]". Now looking back, I really should have run then(I did quit primerica before becoming an associate), but I didn't(spent two more years in the WTS org). I've gained much experience through both of those encounters that I hope will help in life.
I noticed many others in similar things (Shaklee, the Cookware program[starts with a P I think], an elder sold some sort of mango juice in an mlm.)
I think when you are used to trying to make other people feel the same way you do about something, that it is easy for that to spill over into commercial things. My family [all grew up JW's but only some are still, all fight and always try to convince each other of everything, and often they don't agree.] This may however just be them. I believe that side of the family was a rather disagreeable bunch before any of them were witness, however. -
1
"End of the Gentile Times" Meaning Was Changed...
by deaconbluez ina good point that captives of a concept by don cameron makes is that during russell's time, the "end of the gentile times" which would take place in 1914 was to signify the complete end of world government's rule.
after that came and went, in order to not have to admit that they were falsely prophecying, they changed the teaching to mean that it was the end of their "uninterrupted rule".
therefore, they had to conclude that in 1914 an invisible jesus christ who was invisibly present as he was being invisibly enthroned to begin his invisible rule rom the invisible heavens.. .
-
-
LayingLow
That brings a question to mind. If the meaning then became "an uninterrupted gentile rule", how did God interrupt in 539 by overthrowing the Babylonians by means of Cyrus of Persia? I'm just beginning to research the 1914 topic.... In the past I've focused mainly on doctrine, not eschatology(which I suppose to some is the majority of their doctrine). Also, most of the other prophecies concerning gentiles for that time (Egypt, 40: Tyre:70) would not have acted without divine intervention until at least 548 B.C. and probably later than that (depending on your chronology).
-
3
On Armageddon....
by Sunspot insince leaving the wts i have come to appreciate that our lives need not be lived while centered around the "coming destruction" or that all our goals should be focused on this thinking 24/7.
when standing back and getting away from the stringent and narrow-minded views of the men of the wts.....and see what jesus actually said on this topic....we are in for a surprise.. when you read the bibles that show his words in red.....and take the time to go through and only read those....it is apparent that his focus was not directed on this "fearful coming destruction", but primarily on showing that he is the truth and the life, and that his followers are to be compassionate, kind and helpful in whatever ways they can.
we have only to look at the "two laws" and the "golden rule" he preached, to get an idea of what he lived and what he died to accomplish.
-
-
LayingLow
Amen. Christ-centered faith is so refreshing compared to apocalypse-centered faith. I've been impressed by the magnitude of what happened at Calvary and what a victory was won there over death and sin. I think that's expressed clearly in the early creeds of the church. Much emphasis on the personage of Christ and little on the "and I believe in the judgment to come" added at the end. An eschatology centered faith is so scary and depressing and frustrating (not that we shouldn't always be ready).
-
16
God cannot break his own laws!
by LtCmd.Lore inwhether or not he has actually done so is tangential to this topic.. my question is: why does the wts seem to think that god cannot break his own laws?.
there was recently a co at our hall, he was talking about religious stuff as they usually do.
but he said that the old saying: "with god, all things are possible.
-
-
LayingLow
Sometimes I'm driving down the road and I miss my turn, or don't see a sign, etc... and I think to myself, "I really regret that I hadn't seen that turn, it would have saved me thirty minutes of driving around (like this last Friday afternoon)." In that case, it is due to my own ignorance that I feel regret. I feel regret because of myself. When God created man, he created him "very good". But he could not really be in God's likeness if he chose no longer to be like Him. Was it for the better? Not for him. Very regrettable.
If you were helping a person recovering from drug abuse and you set him up so that he had everything he needed to for a recovery and he chose to reject the treatment and get all the other people you had tried to help in the past hooked again, that is a very regrettable thing. You now regret even taking him in to try to help, because in fact it has caused more damage, no fault of your own.
As far as God regretting the angels actions at that time, the fact that it doesn't mention it explicitly doesn't mean that its not true. We see from their later role that they are to help the seed of Abraham, which is truly helping in the restoration of mankind. They(the angels that fell) not only didn't help, they got all the other recovering junkies hooked again (not literally, but they made it worse). God didn't have the Bible written to tell the angels how he felt about their actions, he had it written for men to know. He may have just told the angels to their face for all we know, or he may not have.
As far as the different method for destruction, didn't that part you referenced about regret over destruction have to do with the fact that animals had been destroyed by the flood, and that in the future he would not allow them to suffer the same fate for the sake of man? This, not stating that man was no longer to be punished for his wicked works. -
16
God cannot break his own laws!
by LtCmd.Lore inwhether or not he has actually done so is tangential to this topic.. my question is: why does the wts seem to think that god cannot break his own laws?.
there was recently a co at our hall, he was talking about religious stuff as they usually do.
but he said that the old saying: "with god, all things are possible.
-
-
LayingLow
I've heard many times also that God cannot break his own laws. I would have to say that that seems to be a wrong statement. When a law is created it is with a group in mind to be subject to it. When God laid out the ten commandments (I'm not trying to start a separate thread on why whether or not we are still under them), they were addressed to the Jewish people. He had them in mind. He certainly didn't have himself in mind. When he created the laws of the universe such as gravity, he had material objects in mind, not himself. That is why he is not subject to gravity and decay, although everything in our material universe is. The idea that a lawgiver is necessarily subject to his own laws is not explicitly stated in the Bible, as far as I know.
Since all moral laws are really just a manifestation of God's love in how he would prefer men treat each other, we see that his principle is love. I do believe to an extent however, that it is sort of like the "How could God not have a beginning?" question.
This is just my opinion. But if I were to ask you, could you [insert the most disgusting action you could do to the most innocent victim imaginable]? You would certainly say "no", not because your body wasn't capable of performing it, but because consciously you would never allow it.
-my 2 cents -
10
Why I'm thankful for the ministry...
by LayingLow ini was sitting here thinking about it, and i'm sure some would disagree, but....
1. the ministry exposed me to alternative interpretations to scriptures that i likely never could have gotten past.
first-born in col 1:15, meaning ruler or heir instead of first creation).
-
-
LayingLow
That's funny. I felt the same way. I would doubt some teaching, pray for truth, then run into someone in the ministry who would pick out that point. I remember begging someone to argue a point with me, he kept declining, so I called him out on it (told him that I was expecting him to correct me should he feel he's right). He leveled me with certain scriptures and questions, I told him I enjoyed the conversation and I never went back. I'm really glad he consented to converse, however, because he helped me to see alternative interpretations of certain scriptures that proved momentous [of course, I never told him this because how could you tell someone in the ministry "well I think you're right, but I'm going to go on doing what I do because it'll cause me too many problems to do otherwise." ] Somehow, we can bury those doubts, but I remembered their arguments. And eventually put them all together.