Posts by passwordprotected

15

Mennoite Article (about SHUNNING) now on watchtower.org

by V in

http://www.watchtower.org/e/20050901/article_01.htm.

we cannot do as you ask, replied one of the family heads.

those people came to teach us the bible.

passwordprotected

I remember reading, while a committed JW, about the Mennonites in the Year Book and I didn't bat an eyelid at the time...

26

IF YOU STILL READ THE BIBLE WHAT VERSION DO YOU READ??

by Ohio Nana in

i have my jw bible but also have the good news bible that was used at the lutheran church i went to for about 8 yrs back in the 80's.. one (jw)is hard to read and understand some of the books and the (good news)other is to easy and leaves somethings out, well the jw one does to.. .

o.n..

passwordprotected

NIV and The Message.

65

Left the WT but why the loss of your faith in God?

by Luo bou to in

jw
friends

sure the wt deceived you with its claim to be god's channel but why for so many is there a subsequent loss of faith in god ?

it puzzles me and makes me wonder why they were jw's in the first place..

passwordprotected

@ sacolton - similar here, except in the WT I didn't have relationship with God. Now he's my Heavenly Father.

40

"And how old is the Proclaimers book?"

by passwordprotected in

i had a frank discussion with my parents yesterday that ended up in the cul-de-sac of "how did the organisation start?

" i told them that all they need to know about the origins of the org are in the proclaimers book, of how chuck started his own religion, or how he got his ideas from the adventists and a lovely fellow called barbour and how chuck preached that christ had returned in 1874 and that the last days had started in 1799.. my parents were unwilling to accept this, so i said, "read your proclaimers book!

y'know what my mum's answer to that was?.

passwordprotected

@ oldhippie, that's a good point, however I was trying to get them to focus on the origins of their religion. They said that they tell people my wife and I have 'left the truth'. I objected to that and said there's no way their organisation can be called the truth when it was founded on lies, hence the reference to the Proclaimers book.

31

They make me Sick!!

by wary in

jw
friends

it makes s me sick that the witnesses have such a hold over people.

ive told my wife and shown her all the crap about the society but she still insists ongoing to meetings.

shes off again this afternoon and taking the kids.

passwordprotected

@ reniaa - Jehovah's Witnesses are encouraged to allow their child to die rather than accept a blood transfusion. Surely it's worth freeing the mind of a JW spouse in order to protect the life of a child?

28

Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 3-22-09 WT Study (UNDESERVED)

by blondie in

jw
friends

ministering to one another.

how do we "use it in ministering to one another"?

"use it in ministering"-how?

passwordprotected

@ reniaa - Interesting that you choose Acts 1:8 to help prove Witness dogma. Did you notice who Jesus said his followers should be witness of?

Jehovah
Jesus

You may choose one.

40

"And how old is the Proclaimers book?"

by passwordprotected in

i had a frank discussion with my parents yesterday that ended up in the cul-de-sac of "how did the organisation start?

" i told them that all they need to know about the origins of the org are in the proclaimers book, of how chuck started his own religion, or how he got his ideas from the adventists and a lovely fellow called barbour and how chuck preached that christ had returned in 1874 and that the last days had started in 1799.. my parents were unwilling to accept this, so i said, "read your proclaimers book!

y'know what my mum's answer to that was?.

passwordprotected

@ Olin Moyles Ghost

We've just had a baby, their latest grandson. They've never really shunned us, although there was a stretch of a few months when they had nothing to do with me.

I was surprised at what I was able to say to them yesterday, but frustrated that they pull out all of the cognitive dissonance stops to defend their faith.

40

"And how old is the Proclaimers book?"

by passwordprotected in

i had a frank discussion with my parents yesterday that ended up in the cul-de-sac of "how did the organisation start?

" i told them that all they need to know about the origins of the org are in the proclaimers book, of how chuck started his own religion, or how he got his ideas from the adventists and a lovely fellow called barbour and how chuck preached that christ had returned in 1874 and that the last days had started in 1799.. my parents were unwilling to accept this, so i said, "read your proclaimers book!

y'know what my mum's answer to that was?.

passwordprotected

This is the email I want to send to my parents;

Hi,
Just a wee note on the Proclaimers book that might be worth mentioning to mum. The Proclaimers book was published in 1993 and it remains the only authoritative history book of the Watch Tower Society. In other words, the history of the Society as contained in the Proclaimers book is the official version of Society history. The Society values this book to the extent that every Gilead School studies the entire book in their history class, the lessons are called "Theocratic Organisation". To reject what's in the Proclaimers book just because you don't like what it says, is quite surprising. Pages 631-633 of the Proclaimers book are interesting as they candidly document the false predictions of the Society and the impact such had on the lives of thousands. Page 40 onwards talks about the very early history of the Society; how Russell independently studied the Bible and started his own study group which eventually grew into a religion. It also explains how Russell falsely preached such dates as 1799 (start of the last days), 1874 (Christ's return to heavenly power), 1878 (the date they believed they'd all be going to heaven) and 1914 (the date they said Armageddon would start, thus ending the last days). Of course, all of the above beliefs and teachings are now considered to be false. If Russell was to walk into a Kingdom Hall today preaching what he preached back in the 1880s he'd be counseled for apostasy, probably cited for promoting teachings of Satan. I should point out that none of what I'm writing is apostate; it's all fact and found in the publications of the Watch Tower Society. To view what I'm writing as apostate means that the publications of the Society - including the Proclaimers book - are apostate. The facts are; - Russell practiced a form of pyramidology that involved numerology; both are occult - The cover of the Studies in the Scriptures book featured the sun god Ra - The cover of the Watchtower magazine featured the cross and crown which is the symbol of the Masonic group Knights Templar - Masons are an occult group who worship Lucifer None of these facts are disputable and are all part of the roots and history of the Organisation. The Studies in the Scriptures series was viewed as being "The Bible topically arranged". In my opinion it's of note that on the front cover of all these books was the symbol of the sun god Ra, a god with importance in the Masonic movement. Another side note is the use of the cross and crown on the front cover of the Watchtower for many years. This is the symbol of the Masonic group 'Knights Templar' with whom Russell was a 33 degree member. For proof of this see Proclaimers book page 200. Masons all reject key Christian teachings regarding Jesus and worship lucifer. These books are part of the spiritual food that the Society say Christ found to be acceptable, yet they were absolutely steeped in the occult; see below. Russell wrote that if a man was to study the Bible on its own (as he had done...) he would drift into spiritual darkness within a year. However, if that same man was to study the Studies in the Scriptures series he'd remain in spiritual light for many years. Part of the teachings in this series of book was pyramidology, a patently occult teaching; Russell, and later Rutherford, measured the corridors and passageways of the Great Pyramid of Giza and used these measurements to calculate dates around which Russell made predications. Measuring pyramids is actually part of the practice of numerology which is an occult practice. Again, the Society says that Christ found all of these teachings and practises of the Watch Tower Society as being acceptable. The Studies in the Scriptures was part of the "spiritual food" being provided by Russell who was the self-confessed "faithful and wise steward" (the Watch Tower, April 15, 1904, p. 125). However, all of his teachings and beliefs have since been rejected by Jehovah's Witnesses. In 1928 Rutherford denounced pyramidology and Russell's 'Divine Plan of the Ages' (which I'm sure you've seen; it's all about pyramids and looks downright Masonic) as being inspired by the Devil, which they obviously were. It doesn't really matter that these teachings have been abandoned. It is on these very teachings that the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society was founded on. These occult and demonic teachings and beliefs are the roots of the Jehovah's Witness faith, whether you like it or not. And remember, it was in 1919 that the Organisation claims it was chosen as being the one true religion on earth, even though they were teaching false prophecies and practiced occult dogma. Remember you said you and mum and Anna all thought that Gail and I are under demonic influence because we no longer want to be part of the Watch Tower Society? We found that ironic. As I said yesterday, it is Jesus alone who is the WAY the TRUTH and the LIFE, not an organisation or group of imperfect, uninspired men. Salvation and life comes through Jesus. He said "“I am the bread that came down from heaven”, “I am the bread of life.". This is what the Bible teaches and has to be accepted as truth. John 6:53 Accordingly Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to YOU, Unless YOU eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, YOU have no life in yourselves. 54 He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I shall resurrect him at the last day; 55 for my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me forth and I live because of the Father, he also that feeds on me, even that one will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. It is not as when YOUR forefathers ate and yet died. He that feeds on this bread will live forever.” Life doesn't come from an organisation, let alone an organisation who's roots are in the occult and who now tell you you SHOULDN'T eat the bread or drink the wine, which Jesus patently says a person must do to get life! Goodness me!! Jehovah offers us life through Jesus and son-ship through Jesus, yet you and mum willingly allow yourselves to be told that neither are for you. Why?! Serious stuff. Life is at stake. M

40

"And how old is the Proclaimers book?"

by passwordprotected in

i had a frank discussion with my parents yesterday that ended up in the cul-de-sac of "how did the organisation start?

" i told them that all they need to know about the origins of the org are in the proclaimers book, of how chuck started his own religion, or how he got his ideas from the adventists and a lovely fellow called barbour and how chuck preached that christ had returned in 1874 and that the last days had started in 1799.. my parents were unwilling to accept this, so i said, "read your proclaimers book!

y'know what my mum's answer to that was?.

passwordprotected

I had a frank discussion with my parents yesterday that ended up in the cul-de-sac of "how did the Organisation start?" I told them that all they need to know about the origins of the Org are in the Proclaimers book, of how Chuck started his own religion, or how he got his ideas from the Adventists and a lovely fellow called Barbour and how Chuck preached that Christ had returned in 1874 and that the last days had started in 1799.

My parents were unwilling to accept this, so I said, "read your Proclaimers book! It's all in there!"

Y'know what my mum's answer to that was?

She turned to my dad and said in a slightly sarcastic tone, "hmmm, and how old is the Proclaimers book?"

It took me a moment to understand what she was driving at. I said, "oh, you've got to be kidding me! How old is the Proclaimers book?!"

My dad replied that he thought it dated back to the 80s, to which my mum replied, "Well, see, that's an old book, so..."

I said, "so what? Because it was written back in the 80s the stuff that happened back in the 1880s didn't actually happen that way?!"

Basically she's inferring that the Proclaimers book is old light rather than being the official history book of the Watch Tower Society. In other words it's more acceptable for my mother to completely dismiss the Proclaimers book than accept what's written in it about the origins of the Organisation she obeys.

Do we even have a word to describe that mindset?

17

In the Jehovah's Witness New Forum on face book they can't take the heat

by bob1999 in

i was just "removed" for this site.

i asked to many pointed questions.

at one point i left the most vocal jw with nothing to say.. in the end the moderator ask why i was there (on their website).. my reply was to ask what she was doing at the homeowners door.i'm not sure she understood what i meant.

passwordprotected

There was an open Facebook JW group until a couple of weeks ago. There were about 3 of us on their asking the awkward question. It must have gotten too much because the group was deleted.