"Basara basara, deshi deshi. Basara basara, deshi deshi..."
"What are they saying?"
"Rise."
--sd-7
Posts by sd-7
-
66He Is Risen, the axial component of christianity
by designs insunday hundreds of millions and possibly up to two billion people will join in some service in observance of the resurrection of jesus.
it is the central issue which takes the teachings of jesus from the philosophy of doing good to others to the ultimate truth which it claims.
it was the axial argument of the apostle paul in 1 cor.
-
-
-
68
Inquiry on GB 2.0 member - Did they get married?
by bats in the belfry init's been a while since we heard about their engagement.
did they break it off?
did they get married?.
-
-
sd-7
Is this an April Fool's joke? Aw, you guys! Thank you, you thought of me!
Seriously, though? For real? She actually looks a lot like someone I used to know, but that's definitely not her, she just has the generic, relatively young, I-would-probably-want-to-date-her-but-she's-probably-going-to-want-to-go-out-in-field-service-a-lot look. They'll be perfect for each other. Also, why is this our business again?
Also, why did I not date more women? WTF is wrong with me????
--sd-7
-
57
Logical Fallacies in WT Publications
by Oubliette in[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:documentproperties> <o:revision>0</o:revision> <o:totaltime>0</o:totaltime> <o:pages>1</o:pages> <o:words>858</o:words> <o:characters>4892</o:characters> <o:company>oak park</o:company> <o:lines>40</o:lines> <o:paragraphs>11</o:paragraphs> <o:characterswithspaces>5739</o:characterswithspaces> <o:version>14.0</o:version> </o:documentproperties> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-us</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>ja</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> <w:usefelayout /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><!
-
-
sd-7
Okay, this one is probably not an example I would have chosen to discuss logical fallacies, the quote in the original post, I mean. But then I'm just a doormat, so it's a moot point.
Anyway, they use an illustration about a physical disease, then relate it incongruously to 'apostates' who are said to be mentally diseased. False analogy, then, as a mental disease is not contagious in the same manner as a physical disease, at least not in the context of this discussion. Unless we're talking a sort of spiritual mad cow disease? I don't know. I guess you could argue that apostates are "mentally diseased" in the sense that they have an 'unhealthy fixation' on things like facts and truth. I generally like to know if Watchtower writers are maybe not being honest about the organization's history, teaching things that aren't Biblically supported, reading and quoting from apostate literature, sending people to their deaths. You know. So if that's my disease, don't cure me by any means.
The "disloyal teachings" of apostates should be easily dispatched with the "sword of the spirit", the Bible. Presumably, true Christians should have the cure to any such 'mental disease' that someone would threaten to spread if they really understand the Bible. Except that the Society is probably putting itself in the position of doctor here and insisting that its patients remain (1) ignorant of basic medicine and (2) dependent on the so-called doctor's expertise. No diplomas offered as credentials save invisible ones. And most definitely, never, ever, EVER try to get a second opinion.
Note that the Society refers to these "teachings" as disloyal. In the earlier paragraphs I'm sure they made their share of statements that such teachings are false, but using the word disloyal here brings a question to mind. Disloyal to who? To the writers of this article, of course! Because loyalty to them and loyalty to God are seen as one and the same.
Suppose a doctor told you that people you might come in contact with have a contagious disease. But he tells you also to never talk to anyone but him about this disease, never to get a second opinion from any other doctor, and never to read any books other than the ones he gives you about the disease. Also, he rarely if ever gives you any serious details about the nature of this disease other than that it's really bad and you should avoid it. And if you ask him too many serious questions about it, he then tells you you're infected with the disease and has you quarantined! That would be a more accurate analogy to use, would it not?
--sd-7
-
211
New light Watchtower magazine leaked from organization weeks ahead of general release
by cedars inhttp://jwsurvey.org/governing-body-2/new-light-watchtower-magazine-leaked-from-organization-weeks-ahead-of-general-release.
if doctrinal explanations are missing from the article, it is because they are also missing from the magazine.. i would like to give my thanks again to my source for supplying me with the magazine article weeks ahead of its scheduled release.
it showed remarkable courage, because risks were taken.
-
-
sd-7
Perhaps this was an intentional means of confusing people.
I'll bet it was. Just thinking about how the 'higher powers' understanding was presented, so you don't realize that they flip-flop-flipped on that doctrine by separating the anecdotes about the changes--that's a good example of that. Kind of thankful for some of the links and data Randy Watters posted on the Proclaimers book--that kind of helped me to realize just how all over the place it is.
Yes, there is a certain irony in that situation, namely that the four directors were thrown out for wanting to stick to the "governing body" arrangement envisioned by Russell and now in use (albeit in a perverted way) decades later.
Right. So the apostates wanted a governing body back then, and there really wasn't one, but apparently the Governing Body was part of God's will...he just didn't figure it out until the mid-70s or so? Well...I know Jesus said that he had stuff to say his disciples weren't ready to bear at the moment, but...I'm pretty sure this is not what he had in mind.
--sd-7
-
20
Arrghhhh just Shoot me!!
by BU2B inaargh just shoot me, my wife just came home from field service bi&*&ing about her friends inactive/faded husband.
the thing is he and his wife use the excuse that he is sick from irratable bowel syndrome.
however he works 50+ hours a week.
-
-
sd-7
Well...better to get it all over with, the way I see it. It's going to be horrible either way, why prolong it any further? You need to get out of there.
But...far be it from me of all people to recommend that. I was a schemer, I had plans...and look where that got me...
That said, I hope you'll find a bit more peace, though I don't see how as long as you're even remotely having to attend meetings. I can count my meeting/convention attendance on one hand over the course of the last year or so, but even that has been horrible and too much to bear. Trying to fade...I have to say, you must be pretty tough to handle it for a long period of time.
I do like how JWs bring you into their conversations on the assumption that you're in agreement with them on it all. Your story reminds me of how my mom was telling me about how a DF'd person she knows was going around saying hi to people, as if to say, "The nerve of him!" I just have to say, "I can't imagine what that must be like. What an idiot, really!" Except I didn't, I just found it amusing at the time.
Well...I hope you'll be okay, bro. Take it one day at a time and...do things that bring you comfort and hopefully it'll get better in time. You'll feel considerably better once you're out, though. That's going to be the best long-term solution.
--sd-7
-
18
Governing Body Members Appointed By Jesus Christ And Not Men?
by frankiespeakin inthis is an unfounded delusion or lie either one take your pick.
blondie quoted this on another post and i'm pasting it here.:.
*** w01 4/15 p. 29 do you remember?
-
-
sd-7
They were appointed by other Governing Body members, who were appointed by those on the Governing Body before them. That's the reality. But they need to say otherwise in order to preserve the illusion of being special and chosen. Wonder why?
February 15, 1994 Watchtower, "Cults--What Are They?", p. 4:
Their devotion to a self-proclaimed human leader is likely to be unconditional and exclusive. Often these leaders boast of having been divinely chosen or even of being themselves divine in nature.
--sd-7
-
211
New light Watchtower magazine leaked from organization weeks ahead of general release
by cedars inhttp://jwsurvey.org/governing-body-2/new-light-watchtower-magazine-leaked-from-organization-weeks-ahead-of-general-release.
if doctrinal explanations are missing from the article, it is because they are also missing from the magazine.. i would like to give my thanks again to my source for supplying me with the magazine article weeks ahead of its scheduled release.
it showed remarkable courage, because risks were taken.
-
-
sd-7
I always held the Proclaimers book in awe as a youngster, but the more I'm uncovering in my ongoing research the more I discover that
Watchtower's
version of events is almost a complete work of fiction - the type you would expect if the wrong type of people assumed power to begin with.
I didn't really hold it in awe, myself, but I did think it would equip me against 'apostates' who in my mind at the time, 'think we don't know our own history'. I figured that reading it would enlighten me on that history. Problem is just how all over the map it is--they include sort of timelines but their anecdotes are all over the place, so you have to look at a number of different pages all over the book to piece together a full story about certain events.
I was just reading the section of the Proclaimers book that discussed that whole shakeup in 1917 with Rutherford dismissing four board members. It is just amazing how dishonest that section is--at least compared to what those board members themselves had to say. I've been reading their response, that 'Light After Darkness' thing? They were saying the exact opposite, and given that it was abundantly clear that Rutherford wanted complete control, rather than sharing power with six other board members (and he changed the bylaws for that very purpose), it seems bizarre that the Proclaimers book actually accuses the other four board members of being greedy for power! And that sets it up so that anyone challenging Rutherford alone is challenging 'the organization'! It's very clear that Russell definitely did not want Rutherford to do what he did, and it's hard to imagine that it was somehow God's will for him to decide that he alone should run the show, especially if there was supposed to be a 'faithful slave class' like they claim, and not just one person.
Somehow it was considered hypocritical to the WT that those board members, who agreed to leave Bethel, didn't want Rutherford to step down as President, they just wanted him to share power with the board. Seems like a reasonable thing to ask for to me, especially considering that the Society would surely assert there was a Governing Body back then, but if Rutherford alone had all the power, then that's kind of a lie, isn't it? It seems pretty clear that the Proclaimers book accuses those board members of doing the very thing that Rutherford himself did--he wanted the power all to himself and persecuted those who disagreed with him. A common tactic of abusers, I suppose.
Of course, that said, even though to me, the Proclaimers book is outright lying about what went down back then, it would be hard to convince a JW of that. It's just interesting to finally get to see a different side of that era, and to really understand what, by Watchtower logic, Jesus himself would have observed in the process of his 'inspection'.
But...history, it is said, is often written by the victors, using the term rather loosely in this case. And since the JWs throw out anyone who dissents, there's no way to learn both sides of the story without going outside the JW box.
--sd-7
-
211
New light Watchtower magazine leaked from organization weeks ahead of general release
by cedars inhttp://jwsurvey.org/governing-body-2/new-light-watchtower-magazine-leaked-from-organization-weeks-ahead-of-general-release.
if doctrinal explanations are missing from the article, it is because they are also missing from the magazine.. i would like to give my thanks again to my source for supplying me with the magazine article weeks ahead of its scheduled release.
it showed remarkable courage, because risks were taken.
-
-
sd-7
Just finished reading the whole article, cedars. First let me say, a GIANT THUMBS-UP TO YOU, PAL! This is excellent stuff.
Particularly I was pleased by the chance to research in a little more detail about the transition to Rutherford--even reading the Proclaimers book as a teenager I found that part of JW history to be troubling. I couldn't put my finger on what was wrong with the picture back then, but I knew that (1) this seemed like what would happen in a business out in 'the world', not in the Christian congregation and (2) Rutherford seemed like a real jerk who basically did a hostile takeover and centralized power in himself. But realizing that he basically did some legal wrangling and that there wasn't some 'apostasy' going on like the Society makes it seem in hindsight....really makes them out to be Lying With a Little Extra Tasty Crispy In It. Sorry, it's the first thing that came to mind. Must be hungry.
It shouldn't amaze me every time they equate themselves to the apostles, to Jesus, or to God, or insert themselves in place of one of those three, but it always does. I'm just blown away at the fact that they used Matthew 4:4 to justify their authority. Matthew 4:4. And John 17:3. So they're saying that "man does not live on bread alone, but on every utterance coming through [the faithful slave's] mouth." And "this means everlasting life, taking in knowledge of you, the only [faithful slave], and of the one who [will give you authority over all his belongings], Jesus Christ."
Hmm. Maybe they do need to write a new Bible, or maybe they already have, and that's what'll be released at the convention. Because this taking of such unbelievable liberties with the scriptures is...well, blasphemy is the only thing that comes to mind. To me, this is actually worse than say if you just don't believe in God. To basically say you are God, you are the mouth of God, and are to be obeyed as if you're God...it's usurping the throne of God. And of the Lamb, 'cause salvation is now attributed to obeying you. Hmm. Now that I think of it, guess that means all JWs have removed themselves from the 'great crowd' if they obey the 'slave', because they're commanded to say or at least indicate by their actions, "Salvation we owe to the faithful slave".
The other factor here is that we have a 'faithful slave' that, at the time of its appointment by Jesus, was promoting to the world that someone else was the 'faithful slave', predicting the resurrection in 1925 that didn't happen, and basically effing things up. It didn't get any better when the baton was passed to the next [ahem, the same] generation, either. And then of course, Jesus appointed them, 96 years ago, so therefore that means we should obey you? Does not compute. Thus the, shall we call it modified apostolic succession?
It highlights one of the big problems of this religion. It's very interested in making sure every failing of everyone else is underscored, published, committee'd (just made up a word'd), but it can basically bend or break the very rules it condemns everyone else over. Of course, logical reasoning dictates that this doesn't mean they're wrong by definition; it merely means they are hypocrites. Hypocrites can be right, at least in the sense that a broken clock can be right twice a day, but in this case it just happens that they're utterly mistaken and hypocrites at the same time.
But clearly, in order for this to even fit together, they should've added that Jesus gave the 1919 members of the 'slave' the authority to appoint additional members as older ones died off. Except that they can merely rely on apostolic parallel (ie. appointing Matthias to replace Judas Iscariot).
It does seem convenient that despite Jesus saying people would be worshipping with spirit and truth and that location wouldn't matter anymore, apparently Brooklyn/Wallkill/Warwick/Upstate New York Somewhere is now the New Jerusalem of sorts, since apparently Jesus picked only the people who were stationed there in service. One does wonder why no one from the rest of humanity was ever picked. When you see such a specific application of a scripture that is only clear in that it is vague and non-specific, your brain has got to register that the square peg has been shoved into the round hole with a rather vigorous force, and there are a lot of cracks showing where there shouldn't be any if it actually fits.
I think the fact that four Watchtower articles were devoted to this subject--four consecutive Watchtower Studies, four hours of worship time--goes to show just how very serious all of this is for them, for the Society. And how troubling this really is for people who are awake and realize what's going on. I find it offensive that a meeting of this nature, opened and closed with prayers in Jesus' name, could be discussing and glorifying the acts of men and the authority of men--even going so far as to tell Jesus what he's going to do!
There is no 'faithful and discreet slave' class. There is only the Master, the Governing Body, cloaking itself in the garments of a slave, appearing to serve, appearing to be something they simply are not. It is inconceivable (I keep using that word, but it does mean what I think it means) that these men on the Governing Body could read these articles and approve their publication without being profoundly troubled in their Christian consciences as to what role they are assigning to themselves in front of the entire congregation. What sort of example is this setting for elders, for husbands, for the love of...
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGH!!!
--sd-7
-
42
Internet is right now mocking Memorial tract - hurry before taken down by BORG. Here is the link
by BluePill2 inremember the guys that started the shit storm with the deaf sign language video?
the multiple funny versions at youtube?.
this time they are mocking the tract (the guy that started this isn't even a ex-jw, but they are pretty good at taking down cults!).
-
-
sd-7
Oh, man. That is classic. You just totally made my Friday.
--sd-7
-
19
Is the WTBTS Responsible for What Attendees Do After an Assembly?
by PaintedToeNail inthis is in response to jim tx's comment on another thread.
the wtbts claims that the organizers of events such as a congregation picnic or a party are responsible for what the attendees do after the event has ended.
example: if several people meet and engage in 'fornication' afterwards, the organizer is culpable.
-
-
sd-7
Most of us adults accept responsibility for our own behavior because we don't have masters to explain to us what is proper and improper. If you're all grown up, you should know how to behave yourself and not accept being talked down to because you had an evening of relaxation and/or amusement. Life's too short for this nonsense.
Right. I think there ought to be common sense involved when a person has a party--not a "gathering", what is this, an alien abduction? "Gathering"?
Anyway, the main thing for such a person would be, not being responsible for the behavior of fellow adults as if they're to be policemen--oh, we would need that for the "cleanest people on earth"?--but to make sure that wherever you're having the party is a safe enough place for all invited. Nobody wants strangers crashing the party or for minors to get alcohol (if it's illegal for minors to drink where you live). Or for so many people to be there that your deck can't hold them all and there's an accident. Or your electrical setup is overloaded by sound systems and a fire starts.
But as for the other stuff, you can't make adults who want to do something stop doing it, and you can't watch everyone every second. But really, should we expect the Society to take responsibility even for the stuff they tell JWs to do? Of course not. Why would we? Even when you're expected to die for their teachings, it's still "your personal decision". Right? And they assume no responsibility for the consequences of that. So they're not going to assume responsibility for anything else.
That said, this may evidently mean that that young brother and sister who met at the convention and went back and hooked up at a hotel room were acting alone, and solely responsible. The Governing Body cannot be approached by local elders for a judicial committee for hosting the occasion where the young man and woman met.
We appreciate your inquiry and hope this clears the matter up for you.
Warm Christian Love,
sd-7
