link

Joined

• started 49 topics
• posted 424 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by link

• 
  2

  My first post this year

  by link in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  happy new year everyone

  .

  1. 
  2. 
• 

  link

  HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE
• 
  23

  facts about the JW religion

  by Dawn in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm putting together a brochure for release in my area - to local churches and bookstores.

  on the first panel i want to explain to the reader why the jw religion is not a "harmless" little church.

  so i decided to list in bullet format a few facts that the average person may not be aware of.. for example, bullet 1 will be information on the number of children who have died because of refusing blood (any ideas where i can find exact numbers??).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  c.m.

  I agree that non-J.W’s will have no interest in chronology but that is not my point. Anybody looking seriously at any religion will want to know at least a little bit about that religions doctrines and teachings. If the basis of these are easily disproved then further consideration must go out the window. Surely that is the intention of providing the information in the first place?

  Not everybody is just looking for a religion with a"feel good factor" and nothing else. It was this one thing above all others that turned me away from the Witnesses because it negates all their teachings re blood, and almost everything else thats mentioned by other posters on this thread as negative issues

  link
• 
  23

  facts about the JW religion

  by Dawn in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm putting together a brochure for release in my area - to local churches and bookstores.

  on the first panel i want to explain to the reader why the jw religion is not a "harmless" little church.

  so i decided to list in bullet format a few facts that the average person may not be aware of.. for example, bullet 1 will be information on the number of children who have died because of refusing blood (any ideas where i can find exact numbers??).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Any factual information regarding the Jehovah’s Witnesses has got to include a brief mention of the fact that ALL of their doctrines and teachings are founded on a false assumption that can be checked out at the local library. If any of the books in the library on the history of the Ancient Near East give 607 B.C. as the date for the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem, and not 586/87, then by all means go ahead and join the J.W’s. If not, thoroughly check out what effect this has on all of their teachings.

  link
• 
  15

  Is it the Organisation or is it the people in It?

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  like all non-jws with jw families i have to endure constant pressure to "accept the truth" and their latest effort comes from "ammunition" contained in two articles in the awake of 22 january 2004.. the article starting on page 3 "god has a name" is supposed to present evidence that gods name is jehovah but i can see no evidence of this in the article.

  in fact the article is quite balanced and clearly says on page 4 that ".....the name jehovah is widely accepted as the vernacular equivalent of the tetragrammaton".

  this is the extent of the articles assertions.. i find nothing wrong with this statement but it is an entirely different thing to saying that "gods name is jehovah", even though all of the language used in the article is steering the reader to accept this thought.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Two more prominent examples come to mind. 1975, when lots of definite statements were made verbally (some recorded on tape from Conventions), but nothing concrete in writing. And only very recently the R & F frequently claimed that it would be only Jehovah’s Witnesses that would survive Armageddon even though that bald statement does not appear anywhere in their publications.

  There must be lots more examples of "understandings" that are not actually written clearly anywhere (in words of one syllable or less).

  link
• 
  15

  Is it the Organisation or is it the people in It?

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  like all non-jws with jw families i have to endure constant pressure to "accept the truth" and their latest effort comes from "ammunition" contained in two articles in the awake of 22 january 2004.. the article starting on page 3 "god has a name" is supposed to present evidence that gods name is jehovah but i can see no evidence of this in the article.

  in fact the article is quite balanced and clearly says on page 4 that ".....the name jehovah is widely accepted as the vernacular equivalent of the tetragrammaton".

  this is the extent of the articles assertions.. i find nothing wrong with this statement but it is an entirely different thing to saying that "gods name is jehovah", even though all of the language used in the article is steering the reader to accept this thought.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Many thanks for your responses. It seems that I am not alone in my thinking, or the treatment I receive. Some of you have mentioned the fact that questioning is not allowed and I can confirm this. Also that immediately you open your mouth to get some background on the assumptions you are branded an "opposer".

  It is these techniques that allow someone like a Nuclear Scientist to get brain-washed. Maybe he did question the assumptions but was side tracked into disregarding them. Who knows?

  link
• 
  15

  Is it the Organisation or is it the people in It?

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  like all non-jws with jw families i have to endure constant pressure to "accept the truth" and their latest effort comes from "ammunition" contained in two articles in the awake of 22 january 2004.. the article starting on page 3 "god has a name" is supposed to present evidence that gods name is jehovah but i can see no evidence of this in the article.

  in fact the article is quite balanced and clearly says on page 4 that ".....the name jehovah is widely accepted as the vernacular equivalent of the tetragrammaton".

  this is the extent of the articles assertions.. i find nothing wrong with this statement but it is an entirely different thing to saying that "gods name is jehovah", even though all of the language used in the article is steering the reader to accept this thought.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Like all non-JW’s with JW families I have to endure constant pressure to "accept the truth" and their latest effort comes from "ammunition" contained in two articles in the Awake of 22 January 2004.

  The article starting on page 3 "God Has a Name" is supposed to present evidence that Gods name is Jehovah but I can see no evidence of this in the article. In fact the article is quite balanced and clearly says on page 4 that "…..the name Jehovah is widely accepted as the vernacular equivalent of the Tetragrammaton". This is the extent of the articles assertions.

  I find nothing wrong with this statement but it is an entirely different thing to saying that "Gods name is Jehovah", even though all of the language used in the article is steering the reader to accept this thought.

  I am also one of those poor unfortunate soles that do not accept the Societies chronology and an article starting on page 19 entitled "Why I believe the Bible" is expected to alter my thinking.The article is supposedly written by a Nuclear Scientist and if someone with brains can accept the chronology, why can’t I?

  On page 21 the writer says "….I was looking forward to doing a mathematical check on the Bible prophecy concerning the year 1914". And a few sentences further on he says " My mind was set on finding mathematical inconsistencies in the presentation, but I found none".

  Of course he will find none because there are none! The flaws are not in the numbers but in the faulty assumptions upon which the numbers are based. That Nuclear Scientist will have somewhat of a red face when somewhere down the line someone points out that a person in that profession and with that training always checks the assumptions.

  So my point is this; the organisation does not always actually put in writing, in an unequivocal and unambiguous way, exactly those things that the JW’s teach verbally and I have found this countless times. Does anyone agree?

  link
• 
  10

  LATEST! Society gets new light on circumcision!!!

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  its true i tell you!

  going into the hall today carrying a bowl, a razor blade and a packet of band-aid.

  he only had one razor so it would pay to get to the front of the queue.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  It’s true I tell you!

  I saw the P.O. going into the Hall today carrying a bowl, a razor blade and a packet of Band-aid. He only had one razor so it would pay to get to the front of the queue.

  I understand that the foreskins will be placed in pickle jars and kept in the Kingdom Hall libraries just in case the society gets "new light" on the "new light" and they need to be put back. This may well happen so it would be best to make a note of which one is yours – it would be awful to get one that didn’t fit.

  (Oh dear! Someone just told me the above mentioned items were for the talk he was giving – well never mind)

  link
• 
  20

  Awake on taxes asleep on chronology.

  by shotgun in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  if you have a copy of the december awake magazine dealing with taxes note the first page of the article.. the wt uses two quotes to show taxes have been a concern for thousands of years.. the first quote is from a babylonian artifact dated to 2300 bce.

  the problem that presents is that only 69 years previous the world had been destroyed by a global flood according to wt chronology.

  which means that in a mere 69 years noah and his three sons have produced a nation with sufficient infrastructure to require taxation.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  The math is all done for you in the Insight Book:

  **

  it-1 p. 460 Chronology ***

  The date of the attempt at building the Tower of Babel is not stated in the record. Genesis 10:25 indicates that the division resulting from the confusion of the languages there occurred sometime during ‘the days of Peleg.’ It does not necessarily follow that this event occurred at Peleg’s birth. The expression "in his days" would in fact indicate that the division took place, not at or immediately subsequent to Peleg’s birth, but sometime during his life span, which extended from 2269 to 2030 B.C.E. If each post-Flood male parent at the age of 30 were to begin fathering children at the rate of one child every three years, with an average of one male child every six years, and continued this until the age of 90, then in a period of about 180 years from the end of the Flood (that is, by 2189 B.C.E.) the population could have grown to a total of over 4,000 adult males. This conservative number would be ample to fit the circumstances relating to the tower construction and the dispersal of the peoples

  *** *** ***

  So you can see that in 2300 b.c.e. there were loads of people (well at least 1500) all sitting around writing proverbs such as "If I toil it is snatched away from me". That's how they spent their days - well that and making babies!

  link
• 
  16

  An example of inconsistency in Watchtower literalism....ABSTAIN FROM BLOOD

  by logansrun in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the practice of blood-transfusion refusel by jws has been a topic long discussed among even the public.

  i don't feel i have much of anything new to add to the arguments against such an extreme policy, but i will give "my take" on it.

  when asked to defend their position on blood, jws will most often quote acts 15:20, 29 where the words "abstain from...blood" are used.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  There are many examples where they do not do things "according to the book"And they will offer many spurious reasons for not doing so.

  Mat 28:18-20 reads :

  "And Jesus approached and spoke to them, saying: "All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded YOU".

  But JW’s put their own spin on this and are baptised into "Gods spirit directed organisation" not in His name.

  They put their own spin on verse twenty also.

  link
• 
  40

  To those desiring to be of the anointed..

  by kes152 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the invitation to be of the anointed is offered to anyone, for the scripture says, "many are called, but few are chosen" (matthew 22:14).. the call is to anyone who wishes to be of the anointed and many respond to the heavenly calling.

  but upon finding out what is needed and what is done, only few are the ones who choose to keep the anointing and remain in it.

  others do not want to give up their 'possessions' and 'return to the things behind' (luke 18:22, 23; john 6:66).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  What a load of old cobblers you all talk! The definition of anointing is to consecrate with oil.

  The anointing that you are talking about is just a mental aberration on the part of people who suffer from delusions of grandeur and religious mania.

  You just have to look at them to see this is true.

  If you think differently show me your evidence.

  link