the following information was prepared for the benefit of those who are endeavoring to assist a close friend or relative who is a jehovahs witness.
it is intended to aid a person who wishes to, in a non-confrontational manner, approach the vital foundational issue with respect to the primary doctrine of jehovahs witnesses.
it can be done without the recipient of the information even becoming aware of your intentions.
Steady up uriah, youre batting on the wrong side here.
Aluminium is believed to have a connection with Altzheimers disease and X rays are known to be killers. Thats why there used to kill off cancerous tissue.
Now try hitting a six for our side old chap.
link
the following information was prepared for the benefit of those who are endeavoring to assist a close friend or relative who is a jehovahs witness.
it is intended to aid a person who wishes to, in a non-confrontational manner, approach the vital foundational issue with respect to the primary doctrine of jehovahs witnesses.
it can be done without the recipient of the information even becoming aware of your intentions.
Phew! Thats a relief.
Thanks for clearing it up.
I've got several relatives capable of writing that in all seriousness.
link
the following information was prepared for the benefit of those who are endeavoring to assist a close friend or relative who is a jehovahs witness.
it is intended to aid a person who wishes to, in a non-confrontational manner, approach the vital foundational issue with respect to the primary doctrine of jehovahs witnesses.
it can be done without the recipient of the information even becoming aware of your intentions.
uriah,
If thats a satirical post you just made its "a bit close to home"!
link
i had just decorated the first christmas tree that i had ever done by myself, my wife had to run over to her son for an errand.
she came in with our grandson and a friend who she had invited over for a bowl of soup.
while they were sitting there i remembered my son and this boys father sitting there over 20 years ago.
Sympathy now has to be politically correct?
THATS SICK
link
a couple of years back, 2 friends of ours decided that they would like to have their marriage vows renewed in our local church.
the main reason behind this was that they had married abroad some years back, and they thought that a sort of "second wedding" would be a nice thing for the mums and dads who had missed out on the original.
it was fine, very enjoyable.. hmm, i got to thinking, her ladyship and i did not marry in church, but settled for a registry office bash because of parental jw pressure, and also, because i had been married before it was, back then, very difficult to obtain a church wedding if one had been divorced.
In response to the answer to the question: I DID.
I met and married my childhood sweetheart, she was 18 and I was twenty-one.
It lasted seven years and we divorced. (Nobody else, just couldn't hack it).
Twenty-seven years later we met again and were remarried within a few months. I think it's fair to say that neither of us has ever been happier, and that includes the first time around.
link
a couple questions came to mind as i read some posts.
i know many of you are not jw's any longer.
my definition is one that abandons the true worship of jehovah both in action and word, inside and outside the congregation.
Hi again Joe,
Thought I'd just point something out to you.
There are some here (myself included) who think that its bad manners to start another thread whilst ignoring those who responded to your previous one.
Just a thought. No hard feelings.
link
the following information was prepared for the benefit of those who are endeavoring to assist a close friend or relative who is a jehovahs witness.
it is intended to aid a person who wishes to, in a non-confrontational manner, approach the vital foundational issue with respect to the primary doctrine of jehovahs witnesses.
it can be done without the recipient of the information even becoming aware of your intentions.
Everyone is arguing about what the WBTS says about the date for the fall of Jerusalem against what the historical facts as they are presently known tell us. This is wrong! What we need to know is what the WBTS really believes is the truth about the date for the fall of Jerusalem and this we can easily find out. I know because I have seen it done and this is how it was done:
A Witness in good standing in a congregation writes to the Society for clarification of a matter that the local Elders have not been able to clear up for him. His questions are (explicitly) as follows:
My notes: We know from Ray Franzs COC that the information has been reviewed during the past half century but we are giving them the opportunity to refute what Ray says.
For the sake of clarity and brevity, as I am aware that your time is extremely valuable, I would request that your response be limited to 'yes' or 'no' answers."
My notes: The response from the Society will reveal their true position. It is quite possible that they will completely ignore question (a) and proceed to change question (b) to read as if it were asking what the Bible said on the matter not what historical research reveals. Whatever happens they will not give a clear answer to either question.
This tells us that 'yes' they have done the research and 'no' it did not confirm 607 B.C.E. as the date for the fall of Jerusalem.
BUT DONT TELL ANYBODY.Unfortunately there is no JW in existence who is brave enough to ask the Society these questions because they could not cope with the outcome. That just about sums it up.
link
formatting
Edited by - link on 18 December 2002 8:7:11
it appears as if this is a haven for those who hate the jehovah's witnesses.
if that is too tough of a stance, then this place is a haven for those who hate the governing body of jehovah's witnesses.
many are apostates.
Hi Joe and welcome to the board.
It must take a lot of courage for a JW to post here and I admire you for that. However, I do hope that you stick around to discuss some of the points that you have made. Most JWs who come here just hurl rocks and disappear which does little for the credibility of the Organisation. I would just point out that if you do stick around you will find out what true persecution is all about, there are some heavies here as well as those who wish to seriously debate.
My first question would be about the following:
The 607/1914 controversy? When I was first taught this, I did not care too much about it. It was not something that effected my standing before God. As far as I know, it has been a controversy since 1983. While the FDS may, as the saying goes, serve food at the proper time, it is still up to the individual to research it to make sure that it is truth. I know of many who do not believe this to be a vital point in our Christian faith.
Since the 1914 doctrine is taught by the Organisation to be the basis for the entire JW faith, how can it be something that does not matter? The "Faithful and Discreet Slave" teaching stems from this doctrine and you can only be a JW if you agree to accept the Org as the FDS. Without 1914 the Org does not occupy the position of FDS as it claims because Jesus was not there to select them in 1919, unless you are going against their own teachings.
At this point I will leave the question simple but do hope you will respond.
link
the following information was prepared for the benefit of those who are endeavoring to assist a close friend or relative who is a jehovahs witness.
it is intended to aid a person who wishes to, in a non-confrontational manner, approach the vital foundational issue with respect to the primary doctrine of jehovahs witnesses.
it can be done without the recipient of the information even becoming aware of your intentions.
apocalypse,
You are quite right that the overwhelming majority of the evidence available today would support 586 BCE as the date for the fall of Jerusalem, however Scholar raises a valid point.
The WBTS have their own interpretation of the events of that period that are recorded in the Bible and it is this interpretation that they use to support 607 BCE not any of the known factual evidence.
Since you are then arguing their doctrine there can be no winners because they have moved the matter into a position whereby facts are irrelevant and it now becomes a matter of opinion whose doctrine is right and whose is wrong. It is this that need the research but do not let them get away with the argument that their version of events is the only one that fits the Bible account. That just aint true.
link
i have often wondered if many people would be better off if they stayed witnesses.
some people i have known have really gone off the deep end after they left the watchtower.
most all of my family have left now (not due to me as i was cut off from them for years) and many others i know who have left are now bitter atheists or have become pagans and worship stones or new ageers playing with crystals.
JB,
I rather suspect that you will get rather a lot of flak over this post so I would like to come out as a supporter of some of what you say.
I have never been baptised as a JW but I come from a background where all my closest relative are "in" and I have to attend most of the meetings in order to maintain the level of relationship that I need with my family.
Only as an outsider therefore, can I comment on this matter. Yes, I do personally believe that the JWs have much in their teachings which accurately reflects what the Bible says and what Christianity is all about. However they have taken on board so much rubbish during their history that the good stuff is almost submerged in it.
In my opinion anyone wanting to live a Christian life cannot totally ignore everything that the WBTS says just because they say it, even if some of it cannot be found in mainstream religion.
link
