Posts by Olin Moyles Ghost

31

i am posting a lot cause i am laid up a bit...and have few other friends!!

by oompa in

jw
friends

i know i prob piss of a lot of my near friends here cause i am posting so much!...but i am bored as crap and love this place...i may hit my limit today.....oompa.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Hey Oompa, being "laid up" is better than not getting "laid" at all, right?

8

the negligee

by bonnzo in

a husband walks into victoria 's secret to.

purchase a sheer negligee for his wife.

he is shown several possibilities that range.

i have been outed pretty badly as an evil apostate.......BEWARE!!!

by oompa in

jw
friends

and in a kinda funny way........this friend of mine.......who is very close friend of my df'd son and is much younger than me.....he has been dfd for ten years and shunned by his family and really reall misses them......and has been in a longterm gay relationship and i always felt bad for him because there is almost no way to come back in...then fade...if you are in a gay relationship.......so anyway he has heard me trashtalk wt a ton...and seemed to have zero problem with that and griped about his wt issues...... so i call him the other day and immediately respond with some comment about the damm cult.......we he says," wow oompa you prob don't know but i am going to all the meetings again!!

so i am just snap....."wow, that is amazing...i had no idea....are you just going back for family...and then try to fade?

" which is what i just knew had to be the case....and i even mentioned how that would be hard to do with his partner all it would be discovered.......get this....."oompa, i am doing this for me and not my family......they don't even know i am going so don't say anything"........so i am in shock and the more we talk the happier he sounds about da troof....and i mean he is like filled with the holy ghost......so i mentioned how many things we have talked about that they teach that we both dissagree about.......and he says he know they prob have some things wrong but all religions do.

Olin Moyles Ghost

And P.S.--I have to respectfully disagree with O.M. Ghost--the Catholic Church isn't nearly as intrusive in its members personal lives as the BORG is.

I agree that the WTS/FDS/GB is much more intrusive into its followers' personal lives than the Vatican. Perhaps I should have been more clear. My comparison of the "power" of the WTS/FDS/GB to the "power" of the Pope was in reference to the power to make rules and doctrine. The two religions diverge when it comes to the level of enforcement and its attendant effect on members' lives.

For example, the Catholic prohibition on birth control is "beyond what is written" just like the JW prohibition on wearing beards. But typically a JW man with a beard is going to catch a lot more grief than a Catholic who uses contraceptives.

So the effect on the individual is much more pronounced in the JW religion, but both religions are led by men who claim Biblical authority to create doctrine and rules. In that sense, there is ZERO difference between the two religions.

30

i have been outed pretty badly as an evil apostate.......BEWARE!!!

by oompa in

jw
friends

and in a kinda funny way........this friend of mine.......who is very close friend of my df'd son and is much younger than me.....he has been dfd for ten years and shunned by his family and really reall misses them......and has been in a longterm gay relationship and i always felt bad for him because there is almost no way to come back in...then fade...if you are in a gay relationship.......so anyway he has heard me trashtalk wt a ton...and seemed to have zero problem with that and griped about his wt issues...... so i call him the other day and immediately respond with some comment about the damm cult.......we he says," wow oompa you prob don't know but i am going to all the meetings again!!

so i am just snap....."wow, that is amazing...i had no idea....are you just going back for family...and then try to fade?

" which is what i just knew had to be the case....and i even mentioned how that would be hard to do with his partner all it would be discovered.......get this....."oompa, i am doing this for me and not my family......they don't even know i am going so don't say anything"........so i am in shock and the more we talk the happier he sounds about da troof....and i mean he is like filled with the holy ghost......so i mentioned how many things we have talked about that they teach that we both dissagree about.......and he says he know they prob have some things wrong but all religions do.

Olin Moyles Ghost

how do you think a diehard elder or pub would try to answer these questions?.......what could they come back with?

With apologies to Mencken, for every difficult theological question, the Witnesses have an answer that is simple, clear, and wrong.

Here are some possible answers:

(1) They're not really going beyond what's written...merely applying Bible principles to modern-day situations.

(2) The FDS was "appointed over all belongings" (and "belongings" includes you!). This gives the FDS the right and responsibility to use Bible principles to set standards in order to direct the world-wide kingdom preaching work.

(3) Must be obedient to those taking the lead (Heb. 13:17).

(4) And, if all else fails, "wait on Jehovah."

Remember, Oompa, it all goes back to one thing: the FDS/WTS/GB was appointed by J.C. over all his belongings in 1919. Thus, they have the right and responsibility to manage and direct those "belongings." In other words, the FDS/WTS/GB has exactly as much power over a JW as the Pope has over a practicing Catholic. There is ZERO difference.

47

How do you answer "you research just to criticize"?

by undercover in

jw
friends

minimus' thread about research got me to thinking about a friend who recently accused me of researching just to purposely find something wrong so i could justify my actions (of becoming inactive).. how would you answer this?.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Hey Undercover,

Lots of good thoughts on this thread. I'll add mine for what they're worth. Here are a few options. Which one to use (or combine) depends on the situation and person.

Combative Approach: Dismiss the question as cowardly and fallacious. Ask him why he's afraid to actually discuss the merits of what you've found. Don't the Witnesses research *other religions* "just to criticize" or to find holes in their teachings that can be exploited in the ministry? If this is *the truth* then it should stand up to at least as much scrutiny as Babylon the Great, right? Perhaps even throw some scripture at him (I love 1 John 4:1 about not believing every inspired expression, but rather testing what is said).
Softer Approach: Deny the accusation. Explain that you have sincere questions to which you have not received satisfactory answers. Remind them of the Bereans and also that Jesus said that God was to be worshipped "with spirit and truth." If the person asking the question is a convert, perhaps politely ask if members of his former religion could have accused him of the same thing (i.e., researching the Bible to prove his old religion wrong).
Full Disclosure: If the person asking the question is a close friend who may be receptive, ask him if he really wants to know why you do this research. Explain how you started researching certain issues and things didn't add up, leading to the inevitable conclusion that the WTS is not what it claims to be. Of course, this is a risky option...but I thought I would throw it out there.

79

Take the Beliefnet test... and post your results!

by Awakened at Gilead in

an atheist friend (never a jw) sent me a link to this fun test:.

http://www.beliefnet.com/entertainment/quizzes/beliefomatic.aspx.

turns out i am 100% secular humanist, but unfortunately i am still 5% jw!.

Olin Moyles Ghost

100% Unitarian Universalist

90% Liberal Quaker

88% Secular Humanist

...

23% Dub

49

can we do a list of jw things that go "beyond what is written?".....

by oompa in

or if there is one already...point me to it...the longer i am here...the more i realize that the fds/wt may have started with good intentions like maybe the pharisees did....but they went nutso and added a zillion things not even in the bible and so have the fds...some of these things are minor and some are not...like".

1. hatred of mens facial hair and sideburns (privileges witheld if you have too much or wrong style) also length of mens hair.

2. clothing requirements, ties/jackets/suits mandatory for ministry/talks/privileges....and sisters can freeze there ass of rather than wear a hilliary clinton pantsuit or they can not be on the school.

Olin Moyles Ghost

OOmpa,

Banning certain sex acts between marriage mates........................... believe me, if this was still a true ban or fobbiden it would make the list, but i do not believe they have a rule on this anymore

Believe it or not, that's still the rule! (Don't tell Mrs. Oompa). A couple years back (probably in the 2007 time frame) there was a study article that explaining that certain non-coital sex acts between teenagers were still "porneia" and a DF-ing offense. There was a footnote in that article that said something to this effect: 'for more information about these acts between marriage partners, please see this 1983 WT article.' The 1983 (I think) article basically says that these acts are sinful, and if it's known that you do them, then you don't get privileges...and if you "promote" these acts (whatever that means), then you could possibly be DF'd.

49

can we do a list of jw things that go "beyond what is written?".....

by oompa in

or if there is one already...point me to it...the longer i am here...the more i realize that the fds/wt may have started with good intentions like maybe the pharisees did....but they went nutso and added a zillion things not even in the bible and so have the fds...some of these things are minor and some are not...like".

1. hatred of mens facial hair and sideburns (privileges witheld if you have too much or wrong style) also length of mens hair.

2. clothing requirements, ties/jackets/suits mandatory for ministry/talks/privileges....and sisters can freeze there ass of rather than wear a hilliary clinton pantsuit or they can not be on the school.

Olin Moyles Ghost

A few more:

Disfellowshipping for gambling. The Society rationalizes this on the basis of Paul's inclusion of "greedy persons" in his 1 Cor 5 litany of people to DF. This is a bit of a stretch. If you put a few bucks on the Super Bowl, does that mean you're greedy? Again, this is the type of area where the Watchtower takes away an adult's ability to use his conscience.
Banning vasectomies. There's a QFR in a 1999 Watchtower that basically says that JWs should not undergo sterilization procedures such as vasectomies absent extraordinary circumstances. The scriptural support for this position is almost non-existent. This is not a DF-ing offense, but it is a basis for removal of "privileges" in the congregation.
Banning certain sex acts between marriage mates. Forgive me if this has already been mentioned. But even though it's difficult to get DF'd for engaging in certain sex acts (I think we all know the acts to which I'm referring) with your mate, these acts are still categorically condemned in the Watchtower. Again, there's zero scriptural support for condemning any consensual sexual acts between a married couple. None.
Requiring overseers to maintain "the national average" in field service. Paul explicitly set forth the qualifications for elders and deacons/ministerial servants in Timothy and Titus. These qualifications did not include door-to-door ministry and most certainly did not include a quota of hours to be met. But it is well-known that if a MS/elder remains below the 10-hour per month mark, he is liable to be deleted if he doesn't increase his share in this "life saving" work.
Not allowing women to carry microphones or work behind the literature counter. While Paul expressly forbids women from speaking in church (1 Cor. 14:34-35), he says nothing about their carrying microphones or handing out literature. But in the organization, women are not given these roles absent highly unusual circumstances (i.e., no "qualified brothers"). Perhaps a reason is that these jobs allow a man to be "tested as to fitness first" before being appointed as a MS...but that's still no reason to exclude women. The simple fact is that there's no scriptural basis for denying these jobs to women in the congregation.
Forbidding voting in political elections. Some may say that the 1999 (I think) QFR article on voting makes this a conscience matter. Even if this is the case (and I'm not convinced), if a JW made it known that he voted for one or more candidates in a political election he would lose any congregational "privileges" he once had (and may be marked/reproved/DF'd/DA'd). The JW support for this is Jesus' statement about being "no part of the world," the fact that Jesus refused the Jews' attempt to make him king, and that Jesus refused Satan's offer of all the kingdoms of the world. But they ignore the OT examples of faithful servants of God who held political roles in pagan governments (e.g., Joseph in Egypt, Daniel in Babylon). It's interesting how they pick and choose which OT accounts to apply to modern times. Anyway, the fact is that someone is going to get elected whether we vote or not. Just like JWs get involved in the Judicial Branch of government by fighting for their rights in the courts, there is no scriptural basis for forbidding Christians from exercising their right to influence the Executive and Legislative branches of government by voting.

49

can we do a list of jw things that go "beyond what is written?".....

by oompa in

or if there is one already...point me to it...the longer i am here...the more i realize that the fds/wt may have started with good intentions like maybe the pharisees did....but they went nutso and added a zillion things not even in the bible and so have the fds...some of these things are minor and some are not...like".

1. hatred of mens facial hair and sideburns (privileges witheld if you have too much or wrong style) also length of mens hair.

2. clothing requirements, ties/jackets/suits mandatory for ministry/talks/privileges....and sisters can freeze there ass of rather than wear a hilliary clinton pantsuit or they can not be on the school.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Oompa: I found some quotes from the literature stating that J.C. is only the mediator for the anointed.

Worldwide Security Under the Prince of Peace (circa mid-1980s), p. 10: "Jesus Christ is not the Mediator between Jehovah God and all mankind. He is the Mediator between his heavenly Father, Jehovah God, and the nation of spiritual Israel, which is limited to only 144,000 members."

Also QFR from 8/15/1989 WT goes into some detail on the question "Is Jesus the mediator only for spirit-anointed Christians or for all mankind?" The answer is no. The article states that J.C. is not the legal Mediator for JWs with an earthly hope, for they are not in the new covenant.

Also Insight Book, volume 2, page 362: "...Jesus' mediatorship operates solely toward those in the new covenant."

49

can we do a list of jw things that go "beyond what is written?".....

by oompa in

or if there is one already...point me to it...the longer i am here...the more i realize that the fds/wt may have started with good intentions like maybe the pharisees did....but they went nutso and added a zillion things not even in the bible and so have the fds...some of these things are minor and some are not...like".

1. hatred of mens facial hair and sideburns (privileges witheld if you have too much or wrong style) also length of mens hair.

2. clothing requirements, ties/jackets/suits mandatory for ministry/talks/privileges....and sisters can freeze there ass of rather than wear a hilliary clinton pantsuit or they can not be on the school.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Two more:

Requiring JWs to snitch to the elders if they know that another JW has committed a really bad sin. The JWs teach that if you know that a fellow JW has committed a really bad sin (fornication, drunkenness, stealing, etc.) then you have to inform the elders unless you can convince the sinner to confess. The scripture cited by the WT is Leviticus 5:1: ("Now in case a soul sins in that he has heard public cursing and he is a witness or he has seen it or has come to know of it, if he does not report it, then he must answer for his error.") The problem is that there is no corresponding scripture in the NT. Thus, this verse isn't binding on Christians.
Allowing JWs to bypass Matthew 18 and snitch to elders without confronting you first. Matthew 18:15-17 clearly states that if a Christian knows that his brother has sinned, he is to confront the sinner first. The Watchtower teaches that this passage only applies to sins against a person (such as fraud or slander), but does not apply to other serious sins (such as fornication, drunkenness, stealing, and apostasy). This is in the "Organized book" and perhaps in some Watchtowers, too. This is going directly opposite to what's written.