Posts by Olin Moyles Ghost

91

Is the WTS compromising its stand towards preaching? Our kingdom Ministry 2009, Question Box

by LUKEWARM in

jw
friends

on page 3 the question box asks: what should you do if directed to stop preaching?.

the answer?

"in some instances, police have approached publishers who were sharing in some form of the ministry, informed them that they were violating the law, and directed them to stop.

Olin Moyles Ghost

As pointed out by others, this KM breaks no new ground. It does remind us of an interesting wrinkle in the WTS position regarding "preaching."

I think the WTS views the following two circumstances differently:

A small group being told to stop preaching in a particular place at a particular time (examples: a group of JWs is told to leave an apartment building or a shopping mall); versus
A government ordering all JWs in a particular country/state/city/etc. to stop preaching.

The KM mentioned by the OP is discussing situation #1. The modern WTS doesn't want to force its followers to stand up to every rogue cop or ornery building superintendent. I think this is a result of Knorr-era efforts to make JWs appear a bit more mainstream and acceptable to the outside world. This is in stark contrast to Rutherford-era tactics of deliberately violating local ordinances in order to force courts to rule on the Witnesses' constitutional rights.

Today, as long as the Witnesses are permitted to go somewhere else and preach, the WTS doesn't worry about #1 too much. In many parts of the US, there are large swaths of territory that are off-limits to the JW door-to-door work--particularly wealthy gated communities and certain apartment buildings.

If the modern WTS took the Rutherford-era approach, then Witnesses would be constantly fined (and perhaps jailed) for trespassing. This would be quite an expense...and perhaps that's why the WTS doesn't press the issue in such cases...

17

What Inventions Helped the JW's Recruitment Ministry

by OnTheWayOut in

jw
friends

on a thread called stupidest jw meeting answers, here was an answer by dissed:.

i don't remember other's stupid comments, just mine.. a co asked us during his service talk about inventions that have helped us in the ministry?.

several answers came forth, then i raised my hand and said.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Back in the day, I'd say the portable phonograph. The WT Society holds several (long-expired) patents for this technology. For example, see:

http://www.google.com/patents?id=gVlDAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false

http://www.google.com/patents?id=gllDAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false

http://www.google.com/patents?id=ZrRbAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false

19

What THEY think

by sweet pea in

jw
friends

this week's experience:.

ex close friend (jw) friends me on facebook by mistake.

realises and defriends me very quickly.

Olin Moyles Ghost

To the OP:

Not too many years ago, I felt the same way your friend does. I recall using similar words when speaking to a disfellowshipped friend--I asked him why he was choosing XYZ over being my friend.

In hindsight, I have a hard time believing I actually felt that way. But I really did. From my perspective, I had no choice but to shun my DF'd friend. It was all his fault.

But eventually I realized that I couldn't continue to take the cowardly approach and simply say "I have no choice." I did have a choice and I had to own up to my own actions.

Perhaps your friend will come to a similar realization one day.

96

How much apostate is in each JW ?

by inbetween in

recently i talked to some jw, even so called strong ones in the truth:.

i noticed, they do not believe everything from the wts, for example:.

one older sister, a close relative of mine, she has been pioneering for years, babtizes over 40 years ago, mentioned, that sometimes she wonders about certain teaching, but she can not say anything, because somebody would say, she speaks against jehovah himself..further she said, she remmebers 1975, and that the society tried to blame the brothers, but was clearly responsible itself... i was quit shocked to hear that from her, and i added some careful comments in the same direction.... other brothers do not agree with certain teachings, like resurrected ones will not marry, or animals will not eat each other etc.... maybe those are "minor" issues, but if you doubt one teaching of gods channel, doesnt that mean, you doubt the whole thing ?.

Olin Moyles Ghost

To answer the OP's question...

It depends on what you mean by "apostate." I don't think there's a JW alive who believes every single thing the WT teaches. For example, I know numerous "strong" JWs who don't believe that you have to be an active JW to survive Armageddon. Lots of Witnesses don't think there's anything wrong with birthdays...but they go along with it out of tradition and peer pressure. And anyone who thinks about the JW fulfillments of Revelation (for example, the 7 trumpet blasts being district conventions) has to know that's a bunch of bunk.

But I wouldn't say that these JWs necessarily "have any apostate in them." In order to have some "apostate" in you, there needs to be some questioning of the Society--particularly, its status as the God's sole channel of communication. As far as I can tell, the large majority of Witnesses don't question the authority of the Society.

Yes, there's a dichotomy present--on one hand they don't believe all the teachings, but on the other hand they don't question the Society's claim to be God's sole channel. But I think most of us have been there.

143

Does anyone think that maybe we're just wrong?

by paul from cleveland in

jw
friends

i was disfellowshipped in 1995. even though i lost my friends and family, i felt like i had been finally set free and was happy for many years.

while i was a jehovah's witness, i always felt so miserable.

i never felt like i was doing enough to please jehovah.

Olin Moyles Ghost

To the OP:

I actually agree with some of your points. The UN thing on its own would not be enough to get me to leave. Same thing with child abuse. I'm not excusing either of those courses of action by any means, but if you believe the rest of what the WT teaches (esp. that they were chosen by God), then that should cover over just about any "mistake" they make. Because no matter what bad stuff JW leaders do, they can always point to some Old Testament king (for example, Manasseh) who did something much worse!

So, to me, it boiled down to whether the WTS was chosen by God as they say they were. That's when I started looking into the parable of the FDS and realized what a slim reed the power and authority of the WTS was based on. Here are a few points to chew on:

In the Bible, whenever God chose someone to speak for him, he made it 100% abundantly clear. For example, he gave Moses, Jesus, and the apostles power to perform miracles. No honest-hearted person could doubt that these guys were chosen by God. So why is he so "cagey" today?
If the FDS of Matt. 24 and Luke 12 is really a class with responsibility for leading the Christian Congregation, why is that term not mentioned at all in the rest of the New Testament? Why didn't Paul, James, John, Peter, etc., refer to themselves and to other church leaders in that way? Probably because that's not what the parable means!
If, as the WTS alleges, the FDS existed from 33 A.D. until today, why is there ZERO evidence of any small groups of "true worshippers" (no Trinity, no hell, no immortal soul, using Jah's name, paradise earth, preaching work) between the 2nd century A.D. and C.T. Russell? Fact of the matter is that this doctrine is complete garbage and it falls apart quickly upon close examination.

Personally, I'm skeptical about whether the Bible is what it claims to be (the inspired word of an almighty God). But even if it is the inerrant word of an almighty God, there is little doubt that the JW faith is not what it claims to be (the only way of salvation). To me, the epidemic of false prophecy in the WTS history seals the deal. If you read the gospels, Jesus warned about false prophets (for example, Luke 21:8). The WTS has consistently predicted the end of the world and has been wrong every time. Why would God choose to use an organization that does exactly what his son warned against? That makes zero sense.

So, if the Bible is truly the Word of God, we are likely still in the time of the "wheat and the weeds." We aren't in the "last days" and there's no "invisible presence" of Jesus--this is a man-made doctrine that has tenuous basis in scripture. It's all very contrived and each passing year betrays its falsity.

48

What do you think about Revelation?

by wantstoleave in

how do you put the bible book of revelation into perspective?

do you see it as real?

metaphorical?

Olin Moyles Ghost

PSac wrote: So, what are we to conclude from Revelation? since the end was NOT at hand nor did it come quickly? or did it? or is it?

Perhaps the end came "invisibly"...sorry, just can't help myself...

48

What do you think about Revelation?

by wantstoleave in

how do you put the bible book of revelation into perspective?

do you see it as real?

metaphorical?

Olin Moyles Ghost

Revelation proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Bible is not what it claims to be.

1 Tim 3:16-17 says that all scripture is inspired of God ("god-breathed).
The Bible also says that God cannot lie (e.g., Heb. 6:18, Titus 1:2)

Thus, the Bible claims to be the word of a God who cannot lie. Therefore, if the Bible contains any lies, then it is not the word of a God who cannot lie. It is something else.

Here's where Revelation comes into play. Revelation was written at least 1800 years ago. But Revelation 22:7, 12 states that Jesus is "coming quickly." Well, 1800+ years have passed and Jesus hasn't shown up yet. 1800+ years isn't "quickly" by anyone's standards. Thus, this statement is false. Therefore, the Bible is not what it claims to be.

14

Why Apostate?

by wantstoleave in

this may have been discussed elsewhere on this board but is something i've become increasingly aware of, and that's the apostasy issue.

growing up, i don't think anyone ever explained what it meant, nor did i ask - i just knew it was 'bad' and punishable by disfellowshipping.

therefore it is fairly embarrassing to say that until a few minutes ago and looking it up in a dictionary, i did not know what the meaning was.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Wantstoleave stated: Ghost, you bring up a valid point. One I could use with my father, who resigned from his church when he became a Jw. His parents didn't abandon him or stop talking to him.

And you can take this line of reasoning one step further. Some JWs make statements such as "why can't ex-JWs just leave quietly--why do they have to criticize the Society after they've left?"

Well, isn't that exactly what Witnesses do after they leave their former church? Don't they go door-to-door telling people that other religions (including their former faith) are part of "Babylon the Great" and will be destroyed by God very soon? Don't they try to get their former church members to leave the church and join the JW religion?

14

Why Apostate?

by wantstoleave in

this may have been discussed elsewhere on this board but is something i've become increasingly aware of, and that's the apostasy issue.

growing up, i don't think anyone ever explained what it meant, nor did i ask - i just knew it was 'bad' and punishable by disfellowshipping.

therefore it is fairly embarrassing to say that until a few minutes ago and looking it up in a dictionary, i did not know what the meaning was.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Good points, Jeff. I've had discussions about this very subject with Witnesses. When one brought up the "A" word to me, I said that I'm the only one here who isn't an "Apostate." You (the believing JW) left the religion of your parents and sent a disassociation letter to your old church. Thus, you're an apostate Presbyterian. How would you feel if your parent treated you the way Witness parents treat a son/daughter who sends a letter of disassociation to the Kingdom Hall?

15

New Age Requirement for MTS

by garlic81 in

jw
friends

at our 2 day circuit assembly this weekend they made an announcement for those interested in attending the ministerial training school to meet with the do & co at 9:20 behind the stage this morning.

they said that there is a new revised age requirement, and it is 62 or older.

he again clarified 62 or older, single, and a ministerial servant or an elder.. do you think they feel they've put enough young brothers through the school and now they want old retired individuals who they can send anywhere?

Olin Moyles Ghost

Are you sure it wasn't 62 years or younger? I find it almost impossible to believe that the WTS would decide to only allow retirees to go to MTS. MTS has always been a program for young, single, brothers.

More than likely the announcement was that the age limit for MTS had expanded to include men up to age 62. (or perhaps the guy making the announcement messed up and said "over age 62" when he meant to say "under age 62") I'm not sure if there was an official age cut-off, but I've heard of unofficial age cut-offs of 50 years old in the context of entering the circuit work.

This would make sense. In the U.S and other "developed" countries, life expectancy continues to grow. Today, there are plenty of folks in their sixties who are active and healthy. The WTS is probably recognizing that fact, and is now going to allow single elders/MS in their 50s and early 60s to go to MTS.

Some of these single elders/MS in their 50s could be recently downsized Bethelites.