Wow, you wrote two books that more or less trash the JW's!! While I don't approve of shunning just for disagreeing with JW doctrine, I can kind of understand why they treated you like this. What do you expect when you publish books attacking their religion...hugs and kisses?
yadda yadda 2
JoinedPosts by yadda yadda 2
-
21
Letter to my in-laws regarding shunning over Easter period.
by jakes inover the easter period my family and i took a well deserved break.
we travelled to our hometown to celebrate my parents' 40th wedding anniversary.
however, the treatment we experienced from my in-laws was totally appalling.
-
-
-
20
Why does the Watchtower Society always choose harsh legalism over love
by yadda yadda 2 inone of the most disturbing aspects of the organisation for me is that the watchtower leaders prefer legalistic, harsh, pharasaical interpretations on a range of doctrines/policies that have the potential to severely harm peoples lives, when there are more loving and reasonable positions/interpretations that could easily be adopted by the governing body without feeling they were betraying the scriptures.. for example:.
1. blood transfusions a clear no-no scripturally, a gross sin worthy of disfellowshipment (harsh, pharasaical legalistic approach) - or - it's debateable and we can't be sure.
dogmatism not appropriate in matters of life or death.
-
-
yadda yadda 2
Great posts.
-
20
Why does the Watchtower Society always choose harsh legalism over love
by yadda yadda 2 inone of the most disturbing aspects of the organisation for me is that the watchtower leaders prefer legalistic, harsh, pharasaical interpretations on a range of doctrines/policies that have the potential to severely harm peoples lives, when there are more loving and reasonable positions/interpretations that could easily be adopted by the governing body without feeling they were betraying the scriptures.. for example:.
1. blood transfusions a clear no-no scripturally, a gross sin worthy of disfellowshipment (harsh, pharasaical legalistic approach) - or - it's debateable and we can't be sure.
dogmatism not appropriate in matters of life or death.
-
-
yadda yadda 2
One of the most disturbing aspects of the organisation for me is that the Watchtower leaders prefer legalistic, harsh, pharasaical interpretations on a range of doctrines/policies that have the potential to severely harm peoples lives, when there are more loving and reasonable positions/interpretations that could easily be adopted by the Governing Body without feeling they were betraying the scriptures.
For example:
1. Blood transfusions a clear no-no scripturally, a gross sin worthy of disfellowshipment (harsh, pharasaical legalistic approach) - OR - It's debateable and we can't be sure. Dogmatism not appropriate in matters of life or death. Is up to the conscience of mature, baptized Christians (reasonable, kinder approach).
2. Bible 'two-witness' rule applies to cases of alleged child sexual abuse, "We do not go beyond what is written" - Ted Jaracz (harsh, rigid, legalistic approach). - OR - In scripture the 'two-witness' rule only applied to sins against adults, not innocent children. Children need extra protection. Jesus said love and mercy more important than OT scriptural rules (loving, sensible approach).
3. Must totally shun all disfellowshipped/disassociated persons as if they're dead, no matter the reason for being announced as "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses", even if they're family (with rare exceptions) or close friends. 2 John 9-11 applies to all disfellowshipped persons (harsh, legalistic approach). - OR - 1 Cor 5 is clear on avoiding socialising/eating with them. If bump into them incidentally, be polite and can offer some encouragement in spirit of 2 Thess 3:14. Do not treat as a friend nor as an enemy. 2 John 9-11 only reserved for those now teaching disbelief in God and Jesus (more reasonable, less cruel approach).
The men who run the organisation could very easily adopt these more loving and reasonable positions using sound scriptural reasoning that is just as/more cogent than the reasoning they employ to support their current legalistic, fanatical interpretations. The rank and file wouldn't think twice if there was a shift to these more moderate positions. It would be quickly accepted as refreshing 'new light'.
Yet the few men who run the organisation, who have total and unquestioned authority over all JW doctrine and teaching, continue to uphold the harsh, legalistic positions. Why? Why do they stick with these cruel, rigid interpretations when there are sensible alternatives with sound scriptural arguments behind them. If they are presently ignorant to alternative interpretations then surely a spirit of love and intellectual curiosity should move them to investigate alternative interpretations that are more in accord with the godly law of love, particularly in matters concerning the health and safety of little children. Why they don't do this is very hard to fathom in light of Jesus' clear condemnation of the Pharisees legalistic, rules based approach to worship, insisting on strict adherence to rigidly narrow interpretations of scripture while shoving aside love, mercy, justice.
Like many ex-JW's, I will never contemplate returning to the organisation as long as these unloving, harsh, legalistic policies that are entirely debateable are upheld by the Watchtower leadership, policies that have harmed and even contributed to the death of many.
-
7
No big H No Borg??
by Luo bou to inif the threat was not always just around the corner would anyone join?
what would be the point?
they teach that everyone gets a resurrection onto a paradise earth and are judged on how they; then behave:so if you knew the end would not come in your lifetime ,why would you bother trying to be good now?.
-
-
yadda yadda 2
Perhaps, but a lot of contemporary churches hardly mention Armageddon and they are experiencing big increases. I think the attraction is more because of the need to be a part of a local 'community' of other people somehow (people are feeling more and more isolated from their neighbours and communities in the modern western Society) and the fear of being shunned.
-
4
UFC 97
by Deputy Dog inany ufc fans out there?
does thales leites have any shot against anderson silva?
does chuck liddell quit if he loses tonight?.
-
-
yadda yadda 2
I love UFC and used to do BJJ. For the record, Silva won comfortably in a very disappointing fight:
MONTREAL - The most action we saw in the first 14 minutes of the Anderson Silva-Thales Leites main event at UFC 97 was when the two middleweights touched gloves before the start of each round.
With one minute left in the third, we saw Silva come with a flying knee. The rest of the time we saw very little, unless you count Leites dropping the mat every 14 seconds to try and pull guard "action."
Seriously, we've seen better fights in the parking lot at the Meadowlands between Jets fans after the Jets won a game.
So boring was this fight, at the two-minute mark of the third round, the Bell Centre crowd started a "GSP" chant. Georges St-PIerre, Montreal's favorite son and a guest in the crowd. Not even on the fight card.
I felt bad for the crowd in the higher-up seats who had to watch this fight. At least I had a good view of Octagon girl Logan Stanton to help pass the time during the rounds.
Silva, defending his middleweight championship for a UFC record fifth straight time, picked up the offense in the fourth round, aiming leg kicks at Leites' ankle. At no point in time would he engage Leites when he lay on his back in an attempt to play jiu-jitsu. He just rolled his eyes and walked away.
The crowd did pretty much the same thing, trading boos and more choice words for walking away.
In the fifth and final round (thank you, sweet Jesus!), Silva finally punched Leites while he was on the ground. The crowd roared. It was the best thing they'd seen in 23 minutes.
We can't wait to hear Dana White apologize to the fans at the press conference. He's never been a man who's short on words. This should be an interesting post-fight interview.
Oh yeah, since every organized fight needs a winner, or at least a final scoring decision, I suppose we should oblige and give you that: Silva won the bout, his ninth straight, by unanimous decision. The judges scored it 49-46, 48-47, 50-46 for Silva.
-
15
Congregation Bible Study Comments - Week Commencing 20 April 2009
by LUKEWARM in*** lv chap.
4 pp.
"honor men of all sorts.
-
-
yadda yadda 2
Gagworthy stuff by the Watchtower but great comments by you.
-
4
WHAT ARTICLES HAVE APPEARED IN MAGAZINE PAST THREE YEAR?
by badboy inhaven't seen any magazines in that period.
-
-
yadda yadda 2
LOL!
-
5
Out of 6 Million JWs....
by cameo-d inhow many millions are aged 95 and over?.
if they were born in 1914 they would be 95, so chances are they didn't actually hear to comprehend that "millions now living will never die".. it could be a stretch, but possibly a 5 year old could have heard and comprehended the message.
they would be 100 yr. old.. but just to cut wt some slack, we will go with age 95 and above.. so how many jw millions left in that age range, folks?.
-
-
yadda yadda 2
No, no, no...the latest 'current truth' is that the generation is all the anointed remnant living in these last days, which was actually a reversion to current truth taught by Pastor Russell about 100 years ago. And you can add to that some more latest current truth that the calling of the anointed (the generation) did not end in 1935. How blessed we are to receive such fine spiritual food at the right time.
-
8
Last weeks Watchtower study - only Jesus & 144k "inherit the earth" ??
by yadda yadda 2 in"how jesus' sayings promote happiness".
- watchtower study, april 12, 2009. .
9. why are the mild-tempered ones happy?
-
-
yadda yadda 2
"How Jesus' Sayings Promote Happiness". - Watchtower Study, April 12, 2009
9. Why are the mild-tempered ones happy? Because "they will inherit the earth," said mild-tempered Jesus. He is the principal Inheritor of the earth. (Ps. 2:8; Matt. 11:29; Heb. 2:8, 9) However, mild-tempered "joint heirs with Christ" share in his inheritance of the earth. (Rom. 8:16, 17) In the earthly realm of Jesus' Kingdom, many other meek ones will enjoy everlasting life.--Ps. 37:10, 11.
It almost seems here that the Watchtower is saying that only Jesus and the 144k technically "inherit the earth" (Matthew 5:5)?
Bizarre.
-
32
The Issue of Christ as Mediator
by passwordprotected ini think i've hit on why the wts love to downplay christ's role as mediator.
it's not just so that they can have their two classes of christians.
they have to downplay this aspect of christ because it throws up the issue of his divinity.. who is christ mediating for?.
-
-
yadda yadda 2
Your post makes sense up until the non sequitur:"How could the mediation process work if Christ wasn't fully man and fully God?"
Why must Jesus be fully God and fully man to be a mediator between the two? This makes about as much sense as saying a mediator (like a judge) in a legal dispute between a husband and wife must be "fully husband" and "fully wife" in order to mediate between them. There is nothing about being a mediator between two parties that intrinsically demands that mediator be "fully" one party or the other.