As far as you telling someone you weren't a witness anymore - there would have to be 2 witnesses to you making that statement and then the elders could announce that you had disassociated yourself. This would NOT free your husband to remarry. As long as he doesn't have witnesses to you being with someone else or you don't tell him you've been with someone else he can't remarry. Of course if he just tells the elders you said you were with someone else he will be free to marry. Sounds like he wouldn't have a problem telling the lie and the elders would believe it for sure. Best thing - forget all the abuse and try to move forwad building your new life - you can't protect people that don't want your help.
allelsefails
JoinedPosts by allelsefails
-
21
What happens when you pull an instant fade?
by bluecanary ini left the jws one year ago by moving accross the country and not going to a new hall.
the dubs in my last hall knew i was moving and they know i haven't requested my card for a new hall.
what do they usually do in such a circumstance?.
-
-
-
61
I agree with Jehovah's Witnesses!
by UnDisfellowshipped ini agree with jehovah's witnesses!.
(i bet reniaa will be shocked to see this thread!).
to jehovah's witnesses: i commend your zeal for god, your desire for accurate knowledge and truth of the bible, your goals of drawing close to jehovah, and following and obeying christ's teachings, and your time spent studying the bible.
-
-
allelsefails
That was well explained - Thanks.
I think the concept of agreeing with JWs - who think the actions themselves gain God's favor (in spite of what their literature says) Is the difficult part to this thread.
How would you express the concept of a Christian believer -saved thru faith in Christ - who tries to live a moral life with out sin, even tho he may fall short many times? Can you lose "the kingdom of God" thru sin even tho you have faith? Does the Bible say: “This is what the love of God means, that we observe his commandments; and yet his commandments are not burdensome.”—1 JOHN 5:3 - What commandments if not the moral code?
Thanks again
-
60
The truth is that the reason my wife and I left was bound up with "Making the Truth Our Own"
by gubberningbody inyou get contacted, you come in, you learn the bible their way, then you learn the bible your way and then you leave.. you make the truth your own..
-
-
allelsefails
Reniaa - Thank you for at least answering my question. I really appreciate it. I would like a little clearer definition of where authority of the WTS comes from in your thinking and research. Apostalic Succession seems to be the only legit scriptural claim to authority anyone has. (Again I DON'T believe anyone has this authority today.) What is the Scrpiptural grounds for authority that the WTS has in your mind?
Also I think it interesting that you can look at a group and find one doctrine you don't believe in and reject the entire organization based on that one doctrine. Chritadelphians = Satan / Mennonites = Trinity. (By the way I have made it clear I don't believe in "organizational" Christianity - I believe in "Congregational" Christianity = Power from the bottom up not from the top down.
Mennonites are recognized more universally than JWs as peacekeepers never wavering in their rejection of violence and war. They are also known far more than JWs for their relief effort in times of disaster.
Christadelphians reject the Trinity but do take some things in scripture as figurative - like Satan. But they take some things as more literal - like the returning of New Jerusalem to Earth in Revelation.
It would take no time at all to list a dozen things the FDS have written and approved that violate scriptural principles or were proven totally false.
Can't you see why rejecting them is even easier than your rejection of Christadelphians?
-
60
The truth is that the reason my wife and I left was bound up with "Making the Truth Our Own"
by gubberningbody inyou get contacted, you come in, you learn the bible their way, then you learn the bible your way and then you leave.. you make the truth your own..
-
-
allelsefails
Ren - That is what this forum is for. It is for those who have been abused by hypocrisy to find those who have a shared experience and not feel all alone. It is not designed for people like you to Judge us.
As far as Biblically accurate groups - I like Christadelphians over JWs. Maybe Mennonites as well. They don't make stuff up and say it is biblical (like the dates for the end)
Would you care to comment on the question I presented earlier? Spike has been unwilling to , but I would like your input if your willing
Truth on the march. That is the Catholic Church's claim to authority. They were appointed by the 12 Apostles and they appointed the next set of church leadership, etc...etc.... They belive that the "truth" was not given in the beginning but their was a progreessive revealing of truth to the Church from Christ. They believe that their ecumenical councils have the authority that your "Faithful Slave" does. The arguement doesn't hold water for either one of you. It is all a bunch of man-made crap. ........
In the scriptures progressive revelation always is in adding to existing knowledge - NEVER - does scriptural knowledge contradict previous knowledge. Like Russel said - "If future light should contradict current light then one of them is not light at all". The WTS continues to claim Jah is giving them "new light" that contradicts the "light" Jah gave them before - This concept is not scriptural nor acceptable to Christians.
Thanks Ren
Allelsefails
-
76
Oldest bible being put online - what will that mean for WTS teachings?
by Simon in(and of course for christianity as a whole).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7651105.stm.
the problem is ... the oldest bible shows that it's been changed significantly so all the claims about it being gods word are clearly bogus.
-
-
allelsefails
BTS - Perhaps I did not express my point properly. There was not a single list found that has the canon we use today until 330 years after Jesus death! Many early Christians quoted from some of these books, but not as scripture - just quotes. I see no evidence of a universally accepted NT list in history. Even tho Athanasius used the same list most do today he was not the "authority" on the subject. No Catholic Canon existed until the Coucil of Trent in 1545! As mentioned Luther (the inventor of Protestantism) did not accept Revelation or James as canonical. And up to today we still have conflict.
^ "Canon of the New Testament" . http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm .
Athanasius is also the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today. Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. A milestone in the evolution of the canon of New Testament books is his Easter letter from Alexandria, written in 367, usually referred to as his 39th Festal Letter. Pope Damasus, the Bishop of Rome in 382, promulgated a list of books which contained a New Testament canon identical to that of Athanasius. [citation needed] A synod in Hippo in 393 repeated Athanasius' and Damasus' New Testament list (without the Epistle to the Hebrews), and a synod in Carthage in 397 repeated Athanasius' and Damasus' complete New Testament list.
Scholars have debated whether Athanasius' list in 367 was the basis for the later lists. Because Athanasius' canon is the closest canon of any of the Church Fathers to the canon used by Protestant churches today, many Protestants point to Athanasius as the father of the canon. They are identical except that Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas. [ 16 ]
[edit] Augustine and the North African canons
Augustine of Hippo declared without qualification that one is to "prefer those that are received by all Catholic Churches to those which some of them do not receive" (On Christian Doctrines 2.12). Of course, this whitewashes the fact that by "Catholic Churches" he means those whose opinion he accepts, since many Eastern Churches rejected some of the very books Augustine upheld as universally received. In the same passage, Augustine asserted that these dissenting churches should be outweighed by the opinions of "the more numerous and weightier churches."
Augustine effectively forced his opinion on the Church by commanding three synods on canonicity: the Synod of Hippo in 393, the Synod of Carthage in 397, and another in Carthage in 419 A.D. (M 237-8). Each of these reiterated the same Church law: "nothing shall be read in church under the name of the divine scriptures" except the Old Testament (including the Deuterocanonicals) and the 27 canonical books of the New Testament. Incidentally, these decrees also declared by fiat that Epistle to the Hebrews was written by Paul, for a time ending all debate on the subject.
The first council that accepted the present canon of the books of the New Testament may have been the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa (A.D. 393); the acts of this council, however, are lost. A brief summary of the acts was read at and accepted by the Councils of Carthage in 397 and 419. Revelation was added to the list in 419. [ 71 ] These councils were convened under the authority of St. Augustine, who regarded the canon as already closed. [ 72 ] [ 73 ] [ 74 ]
Note - Revelation added in 419 not in 393 or 397.
Here is the info found on Wiki (Most have reliable references - too much to put here) on different canons still in use today.
[edit] Peshitta
Main article: Peshitta
The late-5th or early-6th century Peshitta of the Syrian Orthodox Church [ 86 ] includes a 22-book NT, excluding II Peter, II John, III John, Jude, and Revelation. (The Lee Peshitta of 1823 follows the Protestant canon)
McDonald & Sanders, Appendix D-2, lists the following Syrian catalogue of St. Catherine's, c.400:
“ Gospels (4): Matt, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Gal, Rom, Heb, Col, Eph, Phil, 1-2 Thess, 1-2 Tim, Titus, Phlm. ” The SyriacPeshitta, used by all the various Syrian Churches, originally did not include 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude and Revelation (and this canon of 22-books is the one cited by John Chrysostom (~347–407) and Theodoret (393–466) from the School of Antioch). It also includes Psalm 151 and Psalm 152–155 and 2 Baruch. Western Syrians have added the remaining 5 books to their NT canons in modern times (such as the Lee Peshitta of 1823). Today, the official lectionaries followed by the Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church, with headquarters at Kottayam (India), and the Chaldean Syrian Church, also known as the Church of the East (Nestorian), with headquarters at Trichur (India), still present lessons from only the 22-books of the original Peshitta. [ 87 ]
[edit] Armenian canon
The Armenian Bible introduces one addition: a third letter to the Corinthians, also found in the Acts of Paul, which became canonized in the Armenian Church, but is not part of the Armenian Bible today. Revelation, however, was not accepted into the Armenian Bible until c. 1200 A.D. when Archbishop Nerses arranged an Armenian Synod at Constantinople to introduce the text [ 88 ] . Still, there were unsuccessful attempts even as late as 1290 A.D. to include in the Armenian canon several apocryphal books: Advice of the Mother of God to the Apostles, the Books of Criapos, and the ever-popular Epistle of Barnabas.
The Armenian Apostolic church at times has included the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs in its Old Testament and the Third Epistle to the Corinthians, but does not always list it with the other 27 canonical New Testament books.
[edit] East African canons
The Coptic Bible (adopted by the Egyptian Church) includes the two Epistles of Clement, and the Ethiopic Bible includes books nowhere else found: the Sinodos (a collection of prayers and instructions supposedly written by Clement of Rome), the Octateuch (a book supposedly written by Peter to Clement of Rome), the Book of the Covenant (in two parts, the first details rules of church order, the second relates instructions from Jesus to the disciples given between the resurrection and the ascension), and the Didascalia (with more rules of church order, similar to the Apostolic Constitutions).
The New Testament of the Coptic Bible, adopted by the Egyptian Church, includes the two Epistles of Clement. [ 88 ] The canon of the Tewahedo Churches is somewhat looser than for other traditional Christian groups, and the order, naming, and chapter/verse division of some of the books is also slightly different. The Ethiopian "narrow" canon includes 81 books altogether: The 27 book New Testament; those Old Testament books found in the Septuagint and accepted by the Orthodox; as well as Enoch, Jubilees, 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, and 3 books of Maccabees; however, the three Ethiopian books of Maccabees are entirely different in content from the four Books of Maccabees known elsewhere.
The "broader" Ethiopian New Testament canon includes four books of "Sinodos" (church practices), two "Books of Covenant", "Ethiopic Clement", and "Ethiopic Didascalia" (Apostolic Church-Ordinances). However, these books have never been printed or widely studied. This "broader" canon is also sometimes said to include, with the Old Testament, an eight part history of the Jews based on the writings of Flavius Josephus, and known as "Pseudo-Josephus" or "Joseph ben Gurion" (Yosef walda Koryon). [ 89 ] [ 90 ]
-
10
District Convention Theme
by allelsefails ini just went to the first 2 days of dc.
hers is what i heard: ,........ .
you don't need to know the day or hour to serve jehovah well.
-
-
allelsefails
I love how they said the apostles were mistaken in their thinking when they ASKED A QUESTION of Jesus. That is the same as their false prophecies of 1914,1915, 1925, 1975 etc.... They even mentioned those "expectations some Christians had about those dates" Of course, never the FDS was wrong every time, but interesting anyway.
For my 2 cents asking a question is not the same as stating you have been led by God to reveal the time of the end and Christ's return. It is not the same as discouraging people from saving for retirement (lack of faith), getting educated etc.. Because the End is NEAR.
Throughout the Convention it was stated the end is "near", or "soon". It was even stated that the end will definitely come in "our day" . The most vague nonsense possible.
-
61
I agree with Jehovah's Witnesses!
by UnDisfellowshipped ini agree with jehovah's witnesses!.
(i bet reniaa will be shocked to see this thread!).
to jehovah's witnesses: i commend your zeal for god, your desire for accurate knowledge and truth of the bible, your goals of drawing close to jehovah, and following and obeying christ's teachings, and your time spent studying the bible.
-
-
allelsefails
"These things are not legalism, they are the law." Sorry I don't understand. What Law are you talking about? I do know that "perfect obedience" is beyond sinful men like me - I don't understand what you're trying to say. Are we not to TRY to follow Paul's statements on fruitages of the spirit and avoid the "works of the flesh"? (Galations 5:19-23) If you "have faith" but PRACTICE works of the flesh can you inherit God's Kingdom?
-
67
Does everyone like you?
by asilentone indo you have someone that dislikes you?
if you would like to share your story, i would like to see it.
thanks!
-
-
allelsefails
Everybody likes me. (Anyone who doesn't I just pretend they don't exist - like facts to a JW)
-
76
Oldest bible being put online - what will that mean for WTS teachings?
by Simon in(and of course for christianity as a whole).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7651105.stm.
the problem is ... the oldest bible shows that it's been changed significantly so all the claims about it being gods word are clearly bogus.
-
-
allelsefails
And Luther put Revelation and James at the end of his bible as unnumbered additions not a part of the text. The idea that the "canon" was settled at any point in history is ridiculous. The Ethiopian Church, and Syrian Church (one of the oldest in existence) use different canons to this day. Athanasius in 367 was the very first list of scripture to be the 27 we know today for the NT but he gave a different list of OT books than what we used today. And his voice was not definitive. A council met soon after that accepted his list of NT books but without Revelation. The idea of a NT canon having any historical basis is not based on any history I've read yet.
-
61
I agree with Jehovah's Witnesses!
by UnDisfellowshipped ini agree with jehovah's witnesses!.
(i bet reniaa will be shocked to see this thread!).
to jehovah's witnesses: i commend your zeal for god, your desire for accurate knowledge and truth of the bible, your goals of drawing close to jehovah, and following and obeying christ's teachings, and your time spent studying the bible.
-
-
allelsefails
Deputy Dog - I don't disagree not challenging you, but coming out of JWs is a slow painful process (I'm sure you know).
Does faith in God's grace not reveal itself in moral actions and choices? Did Jesus not say that looking at a woman with lust was adultery, that hating your brother was wrong? Did Paul not write that those who practice sins could not inherit God's kingdom? How is that Legalism?