some of those that remember me wonder what i've been up to so far this year.i made a post tonight on the kids teens parenting board that tells some of it.check it out.. plus i'll add this.. since i quit meetings cold turkey believe it or not i've not experienced even one withdrawl symtom!!yea!.
i was in shock at first and it took me awhile to grasp that i was truly free.not df'd or da'd.
i don't believe in either and do not believe any man or group of men have the right to take friends and family from us!most of our friends and family have labled us anyway but that's their choice.. shall i confess my sins?
Amen logical! Don't we all feel so much better..so unburdened?
How wrong can it be to help our fellow human beings?
How wrong is it to do something good to help a sick person? Does the "Good Samaritan" come to mind?
How wrong is it to try to help the community by voting on something of benefit?
As for the personal tryouts---who is it hurting?
You said it all---freedom without fear or guilt?
max, excuse the plagiarism of your thread heading.
royalties on the way!.
a few weeks ago maximus began a thread which he named nourishment for the spirit which resulted in a most interesting discussion of books that we had read and that meant much to us as individuals, some acknowledging that the books had added much to their lives.. now i would like to ask a question.. have any of you read or viewed a piece of art, read a poem, or heard a piece of music that actually changed an ethic in your life or adjusted a previously held viewpoint?
Just an added thought. I said I "liked" Ave Marie. Actually, it gives me goosebumps to hear it sung so hauntingly. I love it!
max, excuse the plagiarism of your thread heading.
royalties on the way!.
a few weeks ago maximus began a thread which he named nourishment for the spirit which resulted in a most interesting discussion of books that we had read and that meant much to us as individuals, some acknowledging that the books had added much to their lives.. now i would like to ask a question.. have any of you read or viewed a piece of art, read a poem, or heard a piece of music that actually changed an ethic in your life or adjusted a previously held viewpoint?
Hello hillary-step:
I wish I could tell you something about your question, but I've had a bit of a backwards reaction. Because of my changing of my life due to having my eyes opened about the borg, I have changed my own viewpoints on certain things.
In particular, I love classical music but as a JW, I always felt "Ave Marie" was taboo for me to even listen to given its religious flavour. Now that my eyes are opened, I feel free to open my ears to new "ticklings". I listen to it many times when I'm on the computer as my son has given me a CD with many of my favourites on it and included "Ave Maria" not knowing how much I secretly liked it.
Just thought I'd throw this "monkey wrench" into your survey. Hope you don't mind.
just wondering if anybody knows when the dateline program will air.
any set date yet?
Hi Francoise:
The "breaking news service" is found at http://www.msnbc.com/tools/newstools/default.asp?0bb=-k1
Just click onto download the "Breaking News Service" and it will download for you leaving an icon in the bottom right corner that will flash each time there is a news story. I just downloaded it too. Great idea!
since dunsscot claims he's leaving this board, and in answer to my specific request for a committment to answer all replies i might give to his latest replies to my previous dissections of his nonsense he said that he would not, i won't be giving a detailed reply to him.. however, dunsscot's posts contain a number of statements that prove how easily the watchtower society fools the jw community by lying to it, either outright or in so many words.. in this post we will examine a fiction that the society has managed to get poor people like dunsscot to believe with respect to c. t. russell, namely, that russell never claimed that he was "the faithful and wise servant" of matthew 24:45. the simple truth is that russell did indeed believe it.
the fact that he did was printed in the watch tower, and the society itself taught it until about 1927.. let's first look at the context of dunsscot's denial of this important bible student teaching.
in the set of exchanges below, the reader can see that dunsscot is attempting to deny that jw leaders claim to be god's exclusive earthy spokesmen.
I posted the following on another thread by Amazing to Duns about this subject. Since Duns has said here: "I have yet to see any evidence that Russell claimed to be the "slave",and "AF has not shown one quote from Russell that proves he thought he was the FDS." I thought I would post it here too.
We acknowledge the quotes that can be found in early writings of Russell making such statements as in the 1889 quotation you supplied and this one I found in the 1881 WT where he refers to the FDS as "that 'little flock' of consecrated servants".
However the WTS itself acknowledges the accepted beliefs of that time period, in its own Proclaimers Book pg.143, par.1, where it says, after the above 1881 WT quote:
Over a decade later, however, Brother Russell's wife publicly expressed the idea that Russell himself was the faithful and wise servant. The view that she voiced concerning the identity of the 'faithful servant' came to be generally held by the Bible Students for some 30 years. Brother Russell did not reject their view, but he personally avoided making such an application of the text, emphasizing his opposition to the idea of a clergy class commissioned to teach God's Word in contrast to a lay class that was not thus commissioned. {bold added)
In "not rejecting their view", he certainly contributed to the then-current belief in his being the FDS, even if it was started by his wife.By not saying anything against that idea, he was in effect giving the impression that that was his belief also.
Also on pg.626, par.2, of the Proclaimers book, the WTS states of the time after Russell's death that:
Many who were sifted out at that time clung to the view that a single individual, Charles Taze Russell, was the "faithful and wise servant".....Particularly following his death,The Watch Tower itself set forth this view for a number of years. In view of the prominent role that Brother Russell had played, it appeared to the Bible Students of that time that this was the case. He did not personally promote the idea, but he did acknowledge the apparent reasonableness of the arguments of those who favored it. He also emphasized, however, that whoever the Lord might use in such a role must be humble as well as zealous to bring glory to the Master, and that if the one chosen by the Lord failed, he would be replaced by another. (bold added)
So even if Russell didn't say the words "I am the FDS", he "acknowledged the reasonableness" of the idea, and certainly helped the idea to exist for a time even narrowing it down to using the words "the one chosen", at one time, instead of referring to the FDS as a collective body.
Additionally, in the Proclaimers book on pg.143,par.2, the WTS quotes Russell's own words from the July 6, 1906 WT pg.229 where he says:
The truths I present, as God's mouthpiece were not revealed in visions...... He did call himself "God's mouthpiece".
These points themselves support the claims that Russell accepted the belief he was the FDS even if he didn't say the exact words and even though his earlier quotations say otherwise.
dunsscot - more on russell as fds .
duns: alanf provided excellent source references to demonstrate that charles taze russell (ctr) was considered the exclusive faithful and wise servant (aka: faithful and discreet slave[fds]).
after reading the historical material he cited and quoted, i found this more recent additional confirmation:.
We acknowledge the quotes that can be found in early writings of Russel making such statements as in the 1889 quotation you supplied and this one I found in the 1881 WT where he refers to the FDS as "that 'little flock' of consecrated servants".
However the WTS itself acknowledges the accepted beliefs during that time period in its own Proclaimers Book pg.143, par.1, where it says after the above 1881 quote:
Over a decade later, however, Brother Russell's wife publicly expressed the idea that Russell himself was the faithful and wise servant. The view that she voiced concerning the identity of the 'faithful servant' came to be generally held by the Bible Students for some 30 years. Brother Russell did not reject their view, but he personally avoided making such an application of the text, emphasizing his opposition to the idea of a clergy class commissioned to teach God's Word in contrast to a lay class that was not thus commissioned. {bold added)
In "not rejecting their view" he certainly contributed to the then-current belief in his being the FDS even if it was started by his wife. By not saying anything against that idea, he was in effect giving the impression that that was his belief also.
Also on pg.626, par.2, the WTS states of the time after Russell's death that:
Many who were sifted out at that time clung to the view that a single individual, Charles Taze Russell, was the "faithful and wise servant".....Particularly following his death, The Watch Tower itself set forth this view for a number of years. In view of the prominent role that Brother Russell had played, it appeared to the Bible Students of that time that this was the case. He did not personally promote the idea, but he did acknowledge the apparent reasonableness of the arguments of those who favored it. He also emphasized, however, that whoever the Lord might use in such a role must be humble as well as zealous to bring glory to the Master, and that if the one chosen by the Lord failed, he would be replaced by another. (bold added)
So even if Russell didn't say the words "I am the FDS" he certainly helped the idea to exist for a time even narrowing it down to saying "the one chosen", at one time, instead of referring to the FDS as a collective body. That it itself supports the claims that Russell accepted the belief he was the FDS, even though his earlier quotations say otherwise.
have you wondered why god allowed the watchtower organisation to start in the first place?.
is it really god's organisation, that's just got corrupted?.
was it ever god's organisation?.
I'm grateful to all who have taken the time to answer this post as it is a question which hit me hard.
To Amos:
Thank you for your kind post. Its only been a few months since I started coming here and finding out so much more that the WTS has been wrong in or deliberately deceived us about. I have to admit it has been overwhelming at times as first the info hits the emotions and the feelings take first place sometimes over the reasoning powers.
I sometimes get impatient at wanting to see the whole jigsaw puzzle picture right away, but I appreciated your caution to go slow and let the pieces fall in place in their due time. I've taken note of your suggestions of research material and perhaps will have to take time away from here to do some reading. Thank you again.
To Older Tom:
I understand your perspective on this dilemma we are all faced with when realizing all we've thought was black and white truth, just isn't so.
You made an interesting statement: "What looks like truth to me may not be truth for you." That perhaps answers why different explanations on an idea can both make sense and both be right. It also allows us to come to a comfort zone on a subject as we grow in our search until that day when the absolute truth is known to all. Nice to hear your thoughts.
Hi Qzzie:
Good idea - interesting question.
So, just like Pharoah, was it God's intention for us to become JWs so that we could later become........?I haven't looked at that angle before and now makes me wonder too.Why did he allow the WTBTS to be?
If God allowed the WTS to exist for his purpose, what was his purpose? What do you think they've accomplished that other religions haven't? Couldn't we have gotten to this point of spirituality in our lives without first being a JW?
Cheers,
awhile back, i saw information on another web site about the wtbts's involvement with the swaggart case.
the information was presented in a way that depicted the wtbts as involved with the swaggart case and, therefore, false religion.. at first, i was shocked.
however, i did some research on what an amicus curie is.
Hello all again:
Thanks DocBob for supplying the WTS's own words about discontinuing asking for a specific "contribution".
BTW just as a sidenote: what is the difference between "asking for a contribution" and "asking if they would like to donate"? The only difference I see is that we used to say we'll "leave it for a contribution of .50" a specific amount, now they leave the amount up to the "buyer".
Anyway here the WTS slips in the sentence:
Additionally, many have noted that secular authorities are increasingly viewing certain religious activities as commercial.{bold added}
Most would not catch the meaning behind that word "commercial" because the next sentence highlights what we all liked to hear:
As in the past, the Society continues to see the need to highlight the spiritual nature of our theocratic organization and to clearly distinguish our activities from those of Babylon the Great.
So according to the WTS, to "distinguish our activities from Babylon the Great, they say:
To this end, the Society is pleased to announce that starting March 1, 1990, literature distribution procedures in the United States will be adjusted.(bold added)
They gave the impression that this was a measure to distinquish us from all other "false religion" yet they followed in the footsteps of Swaggart and patterned themselves after him. But who in the general r&f would notice that.
So many times the WTS would not get itself into this kind of situation of being called liars, if they would just be honest with its people in the first place. But I guess the gov't wouldn't have looked too kindly on them if they had come right out and said " We're no longer asking for a specific contribution because that means we'd have to pay taxes on that amount, so now we'll ask for a unspecific donation. We don't have to pay taxes on that".
I guess being honest would get them in trouble with those that really count....the ones making the rules on commerce.
Hmmmmmmm
i wonder how much of a trend this is, and what it means for the watchtower publishing empire.
hours up, placements down .... http://www.greatcrowd.com/159ubb/forum1/html/000234.html.
dedalus
Hey Pubsinger:
Great idea!
If you want to email the JW who was "lied to" by "manofwhatever" as Nelly suggested, I found these links to the original news releases that are posted on Kent's site at http://watchtower.observer.org/
But just in case they might be to "indoctrinated" to visit or stay and read on an ex-jw site, you could post these links below on his site. They will take her directly to the original news releases.
http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2001/08/08/ke080801s63099.htm
http://www.citizen.com/news2001/August/08/ap0808b.htm
Hope this works for her. Maybe she'll pass the info on...and so on and so on and......
hi gang, .
to make it easier for the out of towners (especially the ones driving in from the us), how does everyone feel about having our next get together on a saturday...say saturday, august 18th, starting at 4pm?
(i'll be working on the 11th and the 25th...).
Hi there Tina!
I don't think I can make the August one but am hoping for the one in September.
I'd love to get to meet you and Dana and Harmony there and any other new ones too. Sure hope you all can make it.
If you could email me sometime, I'd love to have your email addy to write you.
