Posts by link

18

Reinventing the WBTS

by link in

i realise that i could well get shot down in flames here but it is my personal belief that the wbts will make a concerted effort to reinvent itself in the not too distant future.. i also believe that at this very moment they are working on ways to change the major doctrines that have become a millstone for them, without causing major problems and a mass exodus of the r&f.

as i see it they have to leave the vast majority of their teachings intact whilst removing or changing the problem ones.. by receiving some sort of new light on 607 b.c.e.

they would be able to change, or completely do away with, the significance of 1914. although this would need to be the ultimate aim i think it would be difficult to achieve without altering many of their current interpretations of scriptural prophesy.

link

Hi Analysis,

Do you think that the 1914 doctrine, based on 607 as the year of the fall of Jerusalem, is unimportant?

The reason that I ask is that it was this and the teachings connected to it that were my most important consideration when rejecting the religion. I also understand from other threads that this is true of a number of posters here.

Doing away with shunning would be an excellent step forward but you would still be asking people to believe something that does not stack up against the present known facts.

link

18

Reinventing the WBTS

by link in

i realise that i could well get shot down in flames here but it is my personal belief that the wbts will make a concerted effort to reinvent itself in the not too distant future.. i also believe that at this very moment they are working on ways to change the major doctrines that have become a millstone for them, without causing major problems and a mass exodus of the r&f.

as i see it they have to leave the vast majority of their teachings intact whilst removing or changing the problem ones.. by receiving some sort of new light on 607 b.c.e.

they would be able to change, or completely do away with, the significance of 1914. although this would need to be the ultimate aim i think it would be difficult to achieve without altering many of their current interpretations of scriptural prophesy.

link

I realise that I could well get shot down in flames here but it is my personal belief that the WBTS will make a concerted effort to reinvent itself in the not too distant future.

I also believe that at this very moment they are working on ways to change the major doctrines that have become a millstone for them, without causing major problems and a mass exodus of the R&F. As I see it they have to leave the vast majority of their teachings intact whilst removing or changing the problem ones.

By receiving some sort of new light on 607 B.C.E. they would be able to change, or completely do away with, the significance of 1914. Although this would need to be the ultimate aim I think it would be difficult to achieve without altering many of their current interpretations of scriptural prophesy. They would also need to utilise anything they had left to retain their appointment to the position of F.D.S. and additionally retain the threat of an imminent Armageddon.

Obviously this would be an enormous task but one that will need to be undertaken at some point. Does anyone with Christian beliefs and some knowledge of WT doctrine have any ideas as to what might be the best way that the WBTS could go about this?

link

13

A System to STOP the Preaching Work?

by NeonMadman in

as i was sitting in my living room staring at my christmas tree the other day, for some reason, my mind turned to a possible way for householders who don't want jw's to call on them to get them to stop once and for all.

i'm not sure whether it would work or not.

now, we know that putting oneself on the "do not call" list doesn't work, because they will continue to call at least once a year to determine whether the householder's "circumstances have changed".

link

Could I make a suggestion here?

Some years ago I lived in a country where Jehovahs Witnesses were very, very unpopular with the general public. Just about everyone had a large notice on their mail box which just said: NO JEHOVAHS WITNESSES and it worked like a charm.

Perhaps a smaller version of this sign placed by the door knocker or bell would save an awfull lot of time and effort in dealing with them.

link

19

Not intrested in Christmas

by sleepy in

jw
friends

.

i'm just not interested in celebriating christmas.maybe the witnesses had that one right.. if i had children i would probably give presents , just so they don't feel left out , thought not having them myself did me no harm , maybe it made me stronger.but christmas is just one big fake pushed by big businessess, i am not their pawn to be played with.. ok you can have a good laught a few drinks and all that but all the while we are being taken advantage of by the comercial world .imagine the money they would lose if their was no christmas.. can't wait for that big turkey tomorrow though.

link

I have to agree with you on this one sleepy although I do see others point of view. I never enjoyed Christmas even as a non JW kid and all my life I have thought of it as over commercialised hype. Its just one big scam for the big boys to make money as far as I am concerned.

Have to admit though, I like Birthdays!

link

13

Another WTdouble standards

by Stan Conroy in

jw
friends

i had the misfortune of looking through the june 8 2002 awake, and stumbled across an article on hawaiian luahas (pardon my spelling as i don't have it here in front of me).

the footnote said something along the lines of it originating with false religion, but now it's just considered a banquet, so many christians participate with a clean conscience.. wait a minute!.

what ever happened to "if it had pagan origins it's bad"?

link

There are many people on the board who are far more knowledgeable on this subject than me but I seem to remember that the word "pagan" does not refer to a religion but rather to any group of people that are not Christians. By this definition the early Hebrews would have had to be Pagans as Christianity had not been invented in their day.

Pagans could therefore be practising any other sort of religion.

As I understand it the Watchtower do not frown on activities that were practised by Pagans per se but only those activities that reflected or were in some way connected to their religious activities.

I am open to correction on this.

link

41

Russell the messenger

by Beans in

here is some interesting views of the former leader.. http://quotes.jehovahswitnesses.com/russell.htm.

*** watchtower 1917 november 1 p.323 ***.

[note: not available on 1993/1995/1999 cd-rom] .

link

rebel, I have to go along with you on this one.

I only ever got as far as Un-baptised Publisher because of this very thing. I just could not understand the extremely complicated ins and outs of it all.

I was told that it was not necessary for me to understand it, just believe it. "Have faith in us" they said, "would we ever lie to you", "just believe us" etc. I have found this to be exactly what makes the JW tick despite their protestations that they do understand it.

During my studies I searched for people who claimed to have a good understanding of the "truth". I asked a few of them identical questions on understanding scriptural matters and on many occasions got completely different answers to the same question.

Whatever they might say to the contrary they do not all have the same understand of it, however long they have been in it.

It is all based on new light and waiting on Jehovah.

Is it necessary, or even possible, to have a complete understanding? I dont think so. If it is how do you explain the JWs doctrines to an illiterate Batonka tribesman? Because if he doesnt understand it he cant join up to be saved at Armageddon.

The other problem that I had was that I was supposed to go out and convert others to beliefs that I could not even understand myself and everybody else in the congregation would probably explain differently. This bothered me but no one else in the congregation even gave it a thought. "This is the truth" they said "so it has to be right".

The fact that their Kingdom Message (1914 etc) was completely different to the message preached by Jesus just did not seem to bother them.

Whether it is the teachings of Pastor Russell or the Watchtower its just far too complicated to be believable for me and I guess many others who might think it is necessary to at least understand the principles of it before saying that they believe it and start preaching it to others.

link

39

How to help a JW using 607, 1914 stuff.

by apocalypse in

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.

link

hooberus you are right of course.

The original teaching about "new light" was not that it replaced old light but it added to it.

However "new light" apparently recieved the benefit of "new light" although exactly when and where I have never found out.

link

11

question about "talking" to JW concer...

by dryology in

i've been dating a jw for almost 3 1/2 years - about a month ago i found out that 3 elders from my boyfriend's kingdom hall we're going to have a meeting with my boyfriend about dating me.

when i asked why this meeting was going to take place, my boyfriend said that it was because he was dating someone who isn't a jehovah's witness.

this really hurt me, and it hurt even more when i found out that they had already talked to him once before, and he did not tell me about it.

link

Hello dryology.

Just want to give you some positive info on your problem.

I have never been a JW and I married my wife seven years ago even though she had been a hard line dub for 25 years. I would say straight away that it has never presented any problem for either of us and we are very happy together.

However she is a very strong person and takes no rubbish from the Elders or others in her congregation, in fact they are scared of her.

You have been given some very good advice in this thread. As someone who has "been there" I would suggest that as long as you do not try and overtly try and split your b/f from his religion at this point, you should not have a problem. A lot depends on his personality as to how he handles it and how the Elders handle him.

link

Edited by - link on 20 December 2002 9:16:17

16

Can JWs Be DF'd Just For Believing Differently?

by Yadirf in

jw
friends

the following is copied from off another forum, as i thought it ought to be given as wide a publicity as possible because it seems most people here don't have a really good understanding of the issue and policy of the wts.. can jws be df'd just for believing differently?.

http://www.channelc.org/cgi-bin/eboard30/index.cgiposted by questionfromviewer on thu - dec 19 - 01:30am: .

question from a viewer: .

link

The following is copied from off another forum, as I thought it ought to be given as wide a publicity as possible because it seems most people here don't have a really good understanding of the issue and policy of the WTS.

Yardif,

I very much suspect "most people here" still dont!

link

39

How to help a JW using 607, 1914 stuff.

by apocalypse in

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.

link

hooberus,

The standard reply to such remarks is that there has been numerous helpings of New Light since 1919! If your points are not the latest WBTS thinking they are not considered as valid.

link