what are the standard jw objections to thanksgiving?
do they claim there is any kind of a scriptural basis for condemning it?
i plan on asking someone about this and i'm curious what types of reasoning they might try to throw at me.
Blondie, it's stunning to me how easy JWs think it is to stumble other JWs. If they weren't set up to feel that way, they probably wouldn't be susceptible to being "stumbled" in the first place.
MJ - Like Yknot and Blondie, I've heard the nationalistic arguments.
i ordered both of franz books, and have received just by dumb luck the coc first, and will start reading it tonight.
my husband hates to read, and i could spend every waking moment doing so, so i have committed to reading the book aloud to him, and we will do so in the evenings for as long as it takes to go through the whole thing, and then start on the 2nd.
also, i've decided to start looking into getting my rn degree, i've always thought i'd be good at it, and it should follow me if i decide to move, nurses are needed everywhere.
Of course you can do it! Nursing is a great idea and will help you provide for your family and join a stable career field. Great idea!
disclaimer: your mileage may vary.
if you are a married, "active, in good standing" (tm), jw male who has recently discovered that the .
watchtower is not what it claims to be, this thread is for you.
so i was reading on the watchtower's site about the eucharist (i was actually trying to find out what they say about thanksgiving, the u.s. holiday) and i got to the beginning of their explanation on who should partake in communion.
primarily, though, the lords evening meal is a communion meal.
by partaking of the bread and wine, the latter show that they are fully united with christ.
So I was reading on the Watchtower's site about the Eucharist (I was actually trying to find out what they say about Thanksgiving, the U.S. holiday) and I got to the beginning of their explanation on who should partake in communion. How do they go from this:
Primarily, though, the Lord’s Evening Meal is a communion meal. Those involved are (1) Jehovah God, who arranged for the ransom, (2) Jesus Christ, “the Lamb of God,” who provided the ransom, and (3) Jesus’ spiritual brothers. By partaking of the bread and wine, the latter show that they are fully united with Christ. (John 1:29; 1 Corinthians 10:16, 17)
To this:
They also show that they are in “the new covenant” as spirit-anointed disciples of Jesus. These are the ones who will reign with Christ in heaven as kings and priests.—Luke 22:20; John 14:2, 3; Revelation 5:9, 10.
?????????????
Notice also how they provide no quick explanation of #3 of those involved (Jesus' spiritual brothers):
(1) Jehovah God ----> who arranged for the ransom
(2) Jesus Christ, “the Lamb of God,” ---->who provided the ransom, and
(3) Jesus’ spiritual brothers. ----> no explanation of how they came up with "Jesus' spiritual brothers
i do not believe there is any bible precedent for the wt teaching that the origin of some celebration is important...as in it is pagan...and back in 1914 holidays and b-days were ok...i know that changed, but why?...why did all of a sudden it matter the origin of it?...i tried to get wife to see the folly of the wt position of saying pinatas dont matter now despite an evil disgusting satanic wicked origin...to no avail.
on a side note of similar interest...who came up with the teaching inanimate objects could be possessed by demons when it never happened in the bible and how often do they do that anymore?.........thanks....see i can still be serious!.......oompa.
This is a frustrating question for me. Because it isn't a major issue in my church, they haven't really conducted any indepth spiritual investigation of it (unlike other things like the trinity or Jesus' role or homosexuality, etc. etc.). So I can easily research all the things they've said about homosexuality and biblical reasons for it, but not birthdays. To me the lack of information is due to the fact that the mainstream churches think it's a non-issue (same thing with Christmas not being Jesus' birthday), but of course to my Dub it's a sign of weakness or failure. Blargh.
Are any mainstream Christian views or commentary on birthdays, holidays, etc.? The only ones I've found online are fairly extreme or evangelical.
Chalam, Wobble, Narkissos? Anyone else?
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> </w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" latentstylecount="156"> </w:latentstyles> </xml><!
[endif] <!-- /* style definitions */ p.msonormal, li.msonormal, div.msonormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"times new roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"times new roman";} @page section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.section1 {page:section1;} --> [if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"times new roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif].
And I should also say, I L-O-V-E my Dub. I want it to work out for us so badly, and I would be heartbroken if it didn't but now that the honeymoon period is over, or has calmed down, I can more clearly see how making these sacrifices (=never celebrating Christmas again, dropping worldly friends, etc.) isn't compatible with me. That doesn't mean we're over. That means that HE is going to have to make some sacrifice, or rather, BOTH of us will have to compromise, which the JW faith doesn't endorse or support. So he has some major decisions to make too.
That's the other point I wanted to make: DO NOT let him put all these major decisions on you. It is true that you can easily become the one to make all the sacrifices and there's no reason for that to happen. Your beliefs are just as important as his, even if he and his entire organized religion say they aren't.
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> </w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" latentstylecount="156"> </w:latentstyles> </xml><!
[endif] <!-- /* style definitions */ p.msonormal, li.msonormal, div.msonormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"times new roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"times new roman";} @page section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.section1 {page:section1;} --> [if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"times new roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif].
Confuzzled, DGP is right. I'm further along in my relationship and I'm also a woman so I see the headship issue more from the viewpoint of how it would affect you.
Let me be clear: it infuriates me and there is ZERO chance that I would ever abide by a headship rule that is so obviously BS and not actually scripturally based. It was created because it suited the needs of the org. Look up the history of Russell and his wife who helped found the org and what happened when she stepped out of line. But I digress and I have a couple of points to make:
1. The problem is not that you as a nonJW will have to follow their headship rules (although they'll expect you to), but rather that HE will get a lot of flack from the congregation for not keeping you and his house in order. That includes any stepchildren, aka, your daughter.
2. DGP and GaryNeal, because they are males, have an advantage thanks to the JW headship rule in that they could mandate celebrations, holidays, possibly church attendance, etc. Their mates can hide behind that if they didn't really want to abandon all the nonJW traditions. Your man will either have to refuse to do any of that with you or your daughter (or try to prevent you from doing them too!), drop the religion (which you can see is not easily happening) or be seen as a weak JW and possibly face punishment if he's baptised.
3. I have found it pointless to discuss doctrine. They will have an answer or will cling to what they've been taught. Half the JWs I don't even think pay attention to doctrine they're taught until they want out of the religion or unless they were an elder or something that had to pay close attention and the GB introduced some BIG change. You might instead show some of the controversies they've been involved in like the pedofile problem (though, tread lightly, no one likes being called a pedofile!), but there are some articles on it from major news organizations that he might be receptive to. Others can tell you more controversies.
But as the others have said, before he's ready to hear it, he simply won't. That is why it's CRITICAL to take it slow. There is NO reason to get married anytime soon. And when someone else said you need to ask yourself if you can do this the rest of your life, you need to seriously think about that. THE REST OF YOUR LIFE is a long time. I'm not trying to be a Debbie Downer, but in the exciting days of love and infatuation, it's easy to think that all of it's doable and to not want to do it makes you selfish and shallow. It doesn't. It's not just religion, it's a whole culture. And if you take your time with this relationship, you can see how/if you can or would want to do it.
I am glad you refuse to talk to others. That is just so weird! And again, I don't know why they all try to get you to talk to others. Like they're bringing out their all-stars.
Thanks Gopher! Is there a link somewhere I can find the whole schedule? Some I know is itching to return to meetings. Sigh.
What's the meeting topic today?
with almost 50 years as a jw, i often heard jw's called a cult.
i now realize that to defend this, a kind of straw man has been created.
the wts has simply defined a cult for them as following men (namely ct russel).
Then two things, one question, one observation and question:
1. So how would you all talk to a believing JW about the cult issue? It seems to me that to them, people calling them a cult makes them more commited. This is just another argument to defeat, IMO, on how no you're not persecute, and no because someone calls you a cult doesn't actually make you the true religion. Do you see what I mean? I've seen it used as just another indicator of how they actually have it right (as twisted as that is). Could I say, "You're right, I think people take it too far when they call you a cult. However, I do think you'd qualify as a very high-control group." Would that fly?
2. Recovering, I get how JWs meet numbers 1-6, but how does 7 work? Maybe I don't know what auto-hypnosis is...
