i was just talking to my wife this morning about underlining or highlighting the wt paragraphs.. when i was 13 years old i would fight with my dad because i refused to highlight the answers.. the reason was because i wanted my comment to be genuine.
i felt that highlighting the "answer" made me lean on just using that as a crutch and not truly putting it in my own words.. i still hold that argument now, and i am 26. the only reason you would ever have to highlight something in a study book would be if you needed to remember it, maybe it is fairly complicated or subtle information that could be easily forgotten.. so many times in the wt the "question" has the same phrase that's in the paragraph!
it's literally like playing connect the dots.. so what i would do is not highlight during the family study.
I hated the no college rule. Whenever they'd discourage college, for years I'd always think "Who are YOU to tell ME where my kids will go to school?"
Having seen the benefits of a college degree I flat-out didn't believe in the WT's stance on college.
if your avatar could have a voice, (for the days when computers routinely read out posts audibly).
whose voice would you choose?.
a poster here thinks my avatar would speak with the mellifluous sexy "mel gibson baritone".
Borat would best represent my Avatar.
the wt of september 15, 2010 (kool-aid version) has two articles on unity.
one is titled: unity identifies true worship and the other christian unity glorifies god.
of course it is more uniformity, not true unity.
This is great stuff! This worship of the GB was my biggest source of dissonance before I left, so I hope this helps others leave the cult!
For me it wasn't any one 'thing', but there was the last straw.
First of all, in hindsight I was turning Atheist without knowing it directly, and I had a strong buildup of doubt and issues (dissonance) that caused me to snap.
The last major issue was the worship of the Governing Body. Every prayer, every WT article would talk about the GB, and I had major issues with it.
The final 'straw' was one service meeting, and someone made a comment about the JW's persecution in Nazi Germany, something I had a problem with, since relatively speaking very few JW's died (a few thousand versus 6 million Jews), and I just snapped. That comment made my mind finally realize this is all crap. That night I went home and researched if JW's ever became Atheist, and that's where I found JWD. So I never had any 'apostate' influence until after I mentall left the cult.
when a jw uses proverbs 4:18 what can you say to prove that he's wrong?.
"New Light" would imply that knowledge and understanding increases overall, meaning adds to what is known, not throwing out the old view and replacing with a different view. i.e. organ transplants bad, organ transplants now good. Even Russel said that new light does not replace old light.
New Light is cultspeak for "God inspired new opinions"
i have just started working my way through the new publication the origin of life 5 questions worth asking.
it is completely appalling.
it is at the very most six grade level and just the first references i verified (which most dubs dont do) have been taken out of context, are completely misquoted or in the example of using the encyclopedia britannica a dated version is used rather than the most recent one, to align with what they want to write, rather than aligned with the newest research.. .
I never was angry at the WTS because I just see them as misguided and mostly sincere. But this type of deception makes me angry! Twisting quotes to fit an agenda is flat-out lying and unethical.
seems to me that, despite the fact that the content of the wts literatrash is crap, i've never seen a typo or grammatical error in the lit.
anybody ever noticed this or ever found instances of errors?
and, if there are no errors, how do they manage that?
They need to have their proofreaders actually validate the facts of what's being written, instead of just focusing on grammer.
i started reading "apostate" books when i was a teen at the library.
it was more curiousity than anything else.
at home, i used to read all the old publications and i'd notice how beliefs had changed.. with ray franz's books that i read clandestinely, i started to realize the truth about "the truth".
I had a build-up of doubt until I decided I was no longer a JW. Only went to a few meetings after that, and stopped going completely about 3 months later.
My last meeting was the one where they announced the book study change. I was curious if the apostates on JWD were right, and they were
so i was speaking to a pastor friend of mine while i was explaining why i have a hard time beleiving how a loving god could send any of his creation to an eternal hell, and i brought up romans 6:23, which says in the nwt "the wages sin pays is death", and mentioned now when we die, our death covers our sins, according to jws.. he said, no, romans 6:23 says "the wages of sin is death".
very different meaning!
the jw translation means when you die, you sins are washed clean.
Leo, thanks. You are right that it's an interpretation. They twist things to fit their non-conventional beliefs, and as we all know it is tied around faithfulness to the organization and the FDS and not Jesus.
so i was speaking to a pastor friend of mine while i was explaining why i have a hard time beleiving how a loving god could send any of his creation to an eternal hell, and i brought up romans 6:23, which says in the nwt "the wages sin pays is death", and mentioned now when we die, our death covers our sins, according to jws.. he said, no, romans 6:23 says "the wages of sin is death".
very different meaning!
the jw translation means when you die, you sins are washed clean.
So I was speaking to a pastor friend of mine while I was explaining why I have a hard time beleiving how a loving God could send any of his creation to an eternal hell, and I brought up Romans 6:23, which says in the NWT "The wages sin pays is death", and mentioned now when we die, our death covers our sins, according to JWs.
He said, no, Romans 6:23 says "The wages of sin is death". Very different meaning! The JW translation means when you die, you sins are washed clean. The standard non-JW translation means you die because you sin.
Even further, I looked at the JW Interlinear translation, and the Greek side says "the for wages of the sin death", basically "the wages of sin is death", but on the right, the NWT version says "the wages sin pays is death".
The WTS completely changed the translation of the scripture to meet their doctrine. Yet another reason I do not trust the WTS!
Here is the text in the Kingdom Interlinear.
