after being reinstated in 2008, i was finally appointed ms last night.. i am so excited now that i have a certain measure of 'power'.. ex-ms's/elders, what types of challenges come with this priviledge?.
what will be expected from me?.
Reinstated in 2008 and MS in 2010 - as said by posters above - yeah right!
Rules/guidelines - at least 5 years from reinstatement to MS (3 years guideline for reproof)
Here's the kicker african gb - what 3 questions (yes it's three now) were you asked when the elders asked if you'd serve?
i just spent a few days with my dad.
i asked a few questions about the time when mum became a witness which i know is still, 38 years later, a painful thing for him to talk about.
in the course of it, he also learned some stuff that he did not know about the pressures of the times.. as i expected, mum and dad have different versions of this time, and it is pretty hard to find the real truth in it and in some ways it does not matter anymore.. mums version: she first was contacted in echuca late 1960s and dad put a stop to it.
I was 14 in 1975 and remember well the hype through my childhood from about the age of 5 onwards. I remember that 68 Awake and the buzz about 75 and how I wouldn't leave school. I was scared of demons and wet the bed until I was ten, but none of us realised the major cause of my anxieties. What a croc - I was only a kid and my gullible parents either sang 1975 from the rooftops and in the neighbourhood (my mother) or went a long with it and provided no alternative direction (my father). It was driven from the travelling overseers and it came to them from Fanatic Freddy and was efficiently managed by Nutter Knorr and his underlings.
Then it was "the middle seventies" and "we may be out by a year or two" because "we don't know how long Eve was created after Adam and the 6000 years starts from when they were thrown out of Eden but Eve hadn't had kids so it could only be a year or two at most".
And the "backstop" of the generation - so 70 or 80 years from 1914 might mean 1984 (and later 1994).
And then the generation change of 95' (by then mum had died and taken her irrational zeal to the grave). And I had the glimmerings of an awakening further fuelled by the wonderful internet and lurking on this site from 2003 which helped me realise I wasn't alone in my thinking.
So my UK town was no different from your Yankee city or your Aussie street or your German neighbourhood or your Italian piazza - and the current leadership tries to say it was a few brothers that ran ahead. Yeah right!
there's a few posts where the term "conscious class" has been in just recently.. i'm wondering if it means the same to most jws and exjws who post here.. what does the "conscious class" mean to you?.
ok, no funny business about 'being conscious' as in awake and fully cafeinated.. if you could answer the two questions it may help some here to understand what.
this term is a lot better.
What heaven and AlanV said - and I count myself among the conscious class.
what is the current "light" on this hairy subject?
is it okay for a jw to have a brazilian wax?.
Also known as a "landing strip"!
they had better wine glasses at this hall, but otherwise everything was the same.
we had one at our hall last year.
so the people in the side rows get to hold the wine glass twice.
"... plus I had the new song book"
At last years memorial?
for a period of time when i was a jw, i lived with a family of jws.
they had 2 young children under 12. the family were good friends with another jw family who had 3 children under 12. .
so were talking about 5 kids under 12, this will be important later.. .
I think it's a generation thing too.
As a kid I used to sit with a friend on a cushion in the very back of Dad's estate car (station-wagon) with no seatbelts while the grown ups sat in the 5 seats. No seatbelts in the rear but two in the front. We would travel on holiday or to assemblies like this - it was the norm.
Then when seatbelts and insurance limitations got stricter we might risk it for short journeys. Now I won't drive without a seatbelt done up and I won't carry anyone in the very back (if I had an estate car). It's legality and liability as well as safety that bother me.
I personally don't see a huge risk (in chances of a bad enough accident terms happening on that rare unbuckled journey) in riding unrestrained but it's a good habit to get into.
But it can get ridiculous - I had a car where we went to pick someone up and the seatbelt clip broke as one of my kids tried to buckle up. So I have a choice - make them walk with me or my wife for five miles home or take the chance. I took the chance and would again. But got the belt fixed immediately and only used the 4 working ones until it was repaired. My current car is 5 years old and has airbags too - the side impact ones are not a legal requirement and if one packed in I wouldn't worry about replacing it.
In the OP's situation with other peoples kids I would stand my ground or offer two journey's if it was a short hop like you did. No one - especially the car owner - should be forced to go against their personal wishes on health and safety.
this is prompted by barbara's new article at freeminds and a message someone sent to my youtube account a month ago.. there are rumours that there will be "new light" this year about blood transfusions.
if this happens, i for one will be speaking up and asking who is accountable for all the lives lost due to the wt's death dealing policy.
this is an opportunity for all those who still have some connections with jws to make people think..
Some good stuff in your posts guys and gals. Some of which mirrors my views below. Me? After the great Pio Hours reducing to 55 "certainty" I am a little more wary. But ...
What motivates the GB? - consciously or otherwise - as a collective whole. Imagine your body of elders as a board of directors with more talent for climbing the greasy pole and the ability to realise they will die as humans. They probably, as a group believe they are directed by Jehovah. Remember the GB do not believe they will live forever on paradise earth. Unlike we did.
In no particular order the first three are IMO:- 1. Retaining authority, power and position over a steadily increasing "organization"
2. Reflecting Jehovah's will (with a huge investment in old testament values) 3. $$$$$$! (Their control over it as a group)
Then certain individuals will wish to:- Care for the flock/Air their own pet peeves/have their own agenda
So where does keeping the blood ban fit in:
Plusses -
1. Doing Jah's will (according to their mad interpretation)/ keeping them in power and not having people leave
2. They have persuaded themselves that blood is medically bad for people (and this may be true in some elective non emergency situations)
Minuses -
1. Places like Russia and France use it to restrict jw expansion
2. It slows outside growth to a standstill in the West
3. It costs money/time in HLC's; lawsuits etc etc.
So what to do:-
Keep on as they are and slowly release the reins. The obvious one to me is to make the "four major components" acceptable as they have done with haemogoblin. In the West that opens up all the life saving measures of blood and they don't care as much about Africa (Malawi anyone?) do they?
Then later they can withdraw the HLC involvement to advice to tell the brothers they would be wise to follow their physicians' guidance as long as they do not have "whole blood". They can tell elders to back off.
They won't - because they are takers - but they could use old testament passages such as selling blood filled carcasses to the nations to justify giving blood or Saul's men eating along with the blood with little sanction in a non emergency situation to justify having large fractions too.
I would feel my family were much safer if they dropped the 4 main components ban and I hope they do - it's the most I can expect within the next, say five years and it will come with a "dealing with modern medical complexities" is not our focus justification.
breaking news on exjw cafe, anyone can shed any light on this?.
Bump
i have read that fred franz said armageddon would come by/in 2000.... been through search and the cd library but other than quotes of how bad the world will be by then, i cant seem to find anything.. any help?.
oz.
I have the single issue 1/1/89 printed in English. and it says "completed in our 20th century". Bound volume was changed.
here in the uk over the last couple of years i hear more about people leaving/being removed due to apostasy?
do you think this is true or is it because my radar is up and listening?.
.
Here in the UK over the last couple of years I hear more about people leaving/being removed due to apostasy? Do you think this is true or is it because my radar is up and listening?
How about where you are?
