You're right. What was I thinking? Let me stop shunning all my friends at the KH from now on...he said sarcastically.
--sd-7
it is not a cult!!!
if you weren't mesmerized by the internet since ya know it never lies!
read the bible how do they go against it.
You're right. What was I thinking? Let me stop shunning all my friends at the KH from now on...he said sarcastically.
--sd-7
well since the gb has announced itself as the fds, we have got to come up with a new name for the gb because they are the fds and a bag of chips now.
how about flower delivery service?
freekin damn servent?
I think the brand name for Feminine Deodorant Spray (FDS) has already been taken, though ironically the front of it says "Feminine. Discreet. Sensual." So it has one thing in common with the 'slave' already, that being discreet.
"The Slave" is a good enough mindfrak, since it's sort of the opposite of the reality. That seems appropriate to me.
--sd-7
i don't know of any do you.
i would think it a major leap in logic to not concider this first before expounding on it prophetically, why go thru the bother if we are missing this important link..
Actually, they just say that it's used in the context of Jesus' prophecy about the last days, and therefore, it's a prophecy even though it's also an illustration. Apparently this particular illustration is taken quite literally, while many of the others are not.
--sd-7
making people cling to the organization more.
when i found out it was up i told so many people frantically that there is a new study article up and that it had so many changes.
my mother started crying saying how happy she is to be a part of an organization that is truly directed by jehovah... only the true faithful and discreeet slave could have such insight.... another person began to say how great it is to see the celestial chariot on the move.. .
If the wheat "the anointed Christians" are being gathered since 1914/1919 to after Armageddon according to their graphic's time line, (which covers them as a GB for possibly hundreds of years) and the sheep and goats are NOT separated until the GT, then how do they explain an earthly class gathering,?
Guess the 'great crowd' is only 50% Whole Wheat, then...
--sd-7
not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but yeah.
they just posted up the new watchtower...with the confusing new information.. time for me to go dive into this "new light" and try to see what sense it makes.
of course cedars already nicely did a run down for us.. .
p. 17, par. 8: "With unwavering loyalty, they looked to the apostles to explain the words and deeds of Jesus and to shed fresh light on the meaning of the scriptures pertaining to him."
There's that buzz word--loyalty. I feel once more like I'm being mentally set up for something. Fresh light, huh? Well, there you have it.
p. 18, par. 11: "Notice that those congregations prospered as a result of their loyal cooperation with the governing body of Jerusalem. Is that not proof of Jehovah's blessing on the arrangement by means of which his Son fed the congregations?"
Well, gee, here I thought it was because of that thing called "holy spirit" that the congregations prospered, not loyal cooperation with the governing body. We might add, of course, that if anything, a lot of those congregations were pretty disloyal, 'cause Paul had to keep reminding them about the circumcision issue years after the decision was already made. Proof of God's blessing in the first century is no doubt going to be equated, at least in a JW's mind whether they're aware of it or not, with proof of God's blessing today, you guessed it, because of loyal cooperation (obedience) to the Governing Body. Subtle.
p. 18, par. 16: "The Bible Students' diligent study of the Scriptures yielded rich results. Those loyal men and women exposed false doctrines and spread spiritual truths, publishing and distributing Bible literature far and wide."
There's that word again--loyal.
Into the fourth article, it seems that everything hangs on Jesus becoming King in 1914. It's offered as if to be taken for granted as true. But then the audience will assume it's true, it's not like this is being directed at the public or something.
p. 23, par. 13: "Early in the last days, the domestics were all anointed ones. Later, the domestics came to include the great crowd of other sheep."
"Came to include"? They just became "domestics" like last year. I suppose that does qualify as "later", doesn't it? Much, much later. You could say that the domestics now include the great crowd, and therefore, the domestics always included the great crowd...
Still in par. 13: "What about the Governing Body members who today make up the faithful and discreet slave? Those brothers also need to be fed spiritually. Hence, they humbly recognize that as individuals they are domestics just like all the rest of Jesus' genuine followers."
You really think these guys actually study these articles with the same interest as the regular JWs? I mean, they presumably were the ones who wrote the articles in the first place. I think my efforts at writing The Beast-Tower demonstrate just how little spiritual feeding is required for the people who write the literature. But this line to me seems to suggest there may be a subtle jab being thrown at someone on the Governing Body who may think a little too highly of his own personal thoughts. I may be wrong.
Box on p. 24: "In effect, Jesus was saying: 'If the faithful and discreet slave were ever to mistreat his fellow slaves in these ways, this is what the master will do when he arrives.'...However, the composite faithful and discreet slave has continued to keep on the watch and to provide nourishing spiritual food."
What a relief! The 'faithful slave' has informed us that they have continued to keep on the watch and provide nourishing spiritual food. You know, when people are fed by someone, do we usually go on the opinion of the person who cooks the food or the opinion of the person who eats it? That can be subjective, of course. But imagine if you go to a restaurant, and you find the food unacceptable, so you send it back to the kitchen. Then, you find yourself surrounded by three men and escorted out of the restaurant! The reason you're given? Because you didn't like the food! This is the no-win situation a JW finds themselves in, a world with only one restaurant, run by the faithful slave. So if the slave says the food is good, you just have to pick the mold off and find the section that looks cooked enough and hope for the best.
Ah. Well, that's it for my thoughts. I'm sure I'm covering stuff that's already been covered...now to read over what I wrote and fix it up a little before clicking 'Submit'...
--sd-7
not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but yeah.
they just posted up the new watchtower...with the confusing new information.. time for me to go dive into this "new light" and try to see what sense it makes.
of course cedars already nicely did a run down for us.. .
p. 15, par. 3: "Then, rather than giving the food to the people directly, Jesus distributes it 'to the disciples, the disciples in turn to the crowds.'"
Well, that's certainly not setting up anything! Subtle. It's also a little condescending--who are you to think Jesus would actually give you anything directly, after all? John 14:24: "If anyone loves me, he will observe my word, and my Father will love him, and we shall come to him and make our abode with him." What a distinctly different relationship Jesus seems to offer to the individual from what the Society is clearly implying. But I'm jumping ahead again...
--sd-7
rather surprised--this is quite early.
usually it's not out until the 15th of the month.
one thing i noticed, which all the hubbub about all the other articles seems to have overshadowed, was on page 26, a brief article about mark sanderson, the newest member of the governing body.. sounds like he was on the career path of a company man.
We love you sd-7, dispite your double post and admire your passion.
"Love" is a strong word to throw around in a place like this. I think my passion about this WT issue in particular probably got a bit out of control. I should probably make my thoughts more coherent and less in-your-face next time. If a doormat can actually use an 'in-your-face' approach, that is, which seems unlikely 'cause it's kind of a reach...
I'm reading the third study article now...already see the subtlety building. These guys are really clever, I'll give 'em that.
--sd-7
sensible, safe sex, in my opinion, should be engaged in.
because, as you get older and are ready to settle down, you will look at your potential sole mate, not for sexual reasons, but for what they have to offer mentally and if they are compatible.
when religion restricts this, and yuo must marry to have sex, i believe that you doom a marriage at the outset, because these young folks marry out of lust, only to have the rose colored blinders pulled off later, and regret the entire arrangement... .
I'm not so sure it would work out that way. After all, some people might get married with the assumption that sex would continue after marriage, which it may, in fact, not. Some people may use sex as a recruitment tool, and then stop it altogether after marriage.
It does make a certain logical sense to know if you're compatible in that regard, of course, beforehand, but the solution to avoiding an unhappy marriage encompasses a number of variables, sex just being one of them.
--sd-7
so i went to the hall today for a funeral and took a look at the bulletin board.
i was surprised to see a letter stating the dc for michigan would be held at the local assembly hall instead of the big convention center in ohio where it had been held the past few years.
have you all heard about this?.
I don't think it's been called a "bulletin board" for 35 or 40 years. Didn't you get the "New Light" memo? LOL.
And Don't Call Me Shirley, there's a reason I don't use JW terminology most of the time. "Loaded language" is that reason. I don't generally like to use their words to describe things that in "regular language" would be something else. My departure was a very traumatic thing, so the fewer of their words I use, the better I feel.
I get that you were just pointing that out, of course, I'm just explaining. I do remember that it's the "Information Board". I haven't been out that long...
--sd-7
notice the explanation from the box on page 24. the parable they say is a prophecy is here confirmed to just be a parable regarding the evil slave.
how can a prophetic parable to be taken literally revert to a parable on an inconvenient part?
it's the same parable!!!!.
Jesus did not say that he would appoint an evil slave.
Why would Jesus appoint an evil slave? Why would you even need to state this? Shouldn't it be obvious that if there was an 'evil slave class', they were not appointed by Jesus? If anything, it would just be a result of either Satan corrupting them, or their own spiritual weakness corrupting them from within, thus making it a self-appointment, due to one's own false reasoning.
That just seems like a statement that really doesn't help support their point. He didn't say a lot of the stuff the WT says he said, so it's kind of a moot point anyway.
--sd-7