Posts by Wonderment

13

Shipping items to the Philippines. Does anyone have experience shipping to other countries?

by adjusted knowledge in

jw
friends

i live in the usa and want to ship my game consoles (xbox, playstation, wi, ect), laptop, and other items to my wife's family in the philippines.

i've used a company locally that ships there at a fix price of $90 per box.

so whatever i fit in the box will ship at that rate regardless of weight.

Wonderment

Ship via USPS using Registered Mail. Multiple filipinos have mentioned that's the way to go when shipping to the Philippines.

Just about everything else is subject to being opened up, and valuable articles are kept (i.e. "stolen") by local postal workers there. Second choice is Express Mail, but Registered Mail is the most secure shipping method. The postal system there is horrible. One filipino woman sent a package to United States, and two months later it was still in the samemailing office she dropped it off. We found out because I asked the sender to inquire for the missing package, and they admitted it was still to being processed. A month later, I received the package.

I hope this helps.

44

Hebrews 10:25

by millie210 in

i was asked recently by a still in friend (it was meant sincerely not sarcastically).

"but what do you do with that scripture so far as not attending meetings?".

i typed hebrews 10:25 in to the search bar but didnt get much.. .

Wonderment

Many here have posted some excellent points, including one by Oubliette which offered good comments. However, I fail to see how the NWT (Revised and earlier editions) butchers this verse, as implied by some comments. Here is an interlinear reading by McReynolds:

"Not leaving behind the bringing together of ourselves, just as custom in some, but encouraging, and to such more as much as you see nearing the day." (Paul R. McReynolds Interlinear)

The right margin has the reading from the NRSV as so: "Not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching."

Jerusalem Bible: "Do not stay away from the meetings of the community, as some do..."

Good News Translation: "Let us not give up the habit of meeting together, as some are doing..."

New English Bible: "Not staying away from our meetings, as some do..."

This is a sample of various versions which communicate nearly the same thing, along with the NWT.

One version which goes beyond the literal reading by adding a bit of interpretation is this reading from The Living Bible: "Let us not neglect our church meetings, as some people do..."

As some of you have rightly pointed out, it is the common interpretation among JWs which is wrong, along the line of The Living Bible, not the translation itself of the NWT. It appears that the Revised NWT reading of Heb 10.25 is another effort to simplify the message, but I don't see it as a genuine deviation of the Greek text.

15

Sexually repressed and frustrated Jws....

by stuckinarut2 in

jw
friends

i wonder how many jws are sexually frustrated due to the repressive views of the org?.

im sure that there are millions of messed up witnesses who have been severely damaged due to the teachings and guilt that the org places on all members.. now, i'm not encouraging a reckless lifestyle, but i'm sure so many more problems are experienced by witnesses just because of the suppressed and guilt laden attitudes the org has perpetuated!

they can even be open in their marriages!.

Wonderment

Sexual frustration? Me? Heck yes!

Believe it or not, I was a sexual male virgin when I married at 20 years of age (Yes, because fear of Watchtower org, more than to God). To top it off, I felt, with my little experience gained in marriage, I found my wife was little or not sexually responsive enough to touch. I was so frustrated, I thought either that I sucked in the bed department, or that Jehovah was not fair in the administration of sexual hormones so that I, as a male, had plenty of sexual desire and feeling, but had an insensitive wife in sex. I suffered a lot.

Then I abandoned the WT organization, and one of the first things I did after divorce, was try sex with a different partner. Wow! What a difference! This woman was so sensitive to everything I tried with her that many a times, she had me beat. I could not believe this!

I asked myself, is this just a coincidence, or what? So I had to try again, and guess what, I was in bliss sexually speaking with my third partner. Boy, I tried just about everything "worldly" couples did in the bedroom, and it was sex like in the movies...sweaty, raw, capable of repetition, etc., ... so different to my JW wife who was perhaps "frigid" to a point. WT religion had to do with this for sure. Let me explain briefly:

My first partner (a JW) was not sensitive per se, but not totally frigid. She had no response to manual touch in her breasts (I have soft hands and feel I have a good technique.). Touching her all over her body didn't do much to arouse her. Penetration didn't help much either (Hey guys, I am normal). The only time I noticed a sexual response from her was by oral sex, which she liked, but everytime she came close to a come, she pulled my head away, and quoted "the Watchtower" as authority for the "guilt" of pleasure she was getting from it. She would not let me finish her off. She was the only woman that I could not please fully, in part because she would not let me all the way, coupled with the fact, she obviously had low hormones, or some other physical problem.

I put up with her for nearly two decades with this suffering. Since then, I have "sinned" by having sexual experiences with a good number of women. Sex with all the other women was remunerating, and fun, and produced visible results that brought back my manhood to a glorified state of content.

If only I had some sex before marriage, I would not have stuck with my first cold sexual partner for so long. The WT Society is guilty for wrecking a lot of marriages. I speak from experience.

I hope my experience helps someone out there. May God bless ya all!

30

Shunning Disfellowshipped & Apostate family Members. Scriptural?

by objectivetruth in

anyone who is a witness or was previously a witness, is aware of the written & un-written rules concerning association with disfellowshipped family members.. there are a multitude of quotes through out the watchtower publications, but these 2 will suffice.. "are you proving yourself holy by not associating with family members or others who are disfellowshipped?

"the clear instruction in the bible is: avoid them.

that means that we have to stay away from them... the bible says that apostates are mentally diseased and that they use their teachings to make others think like them... what must we do to avoid false teachers?

Wonderment

Oubliette: "PS: I hate this fucking religion. The rules, policies, practices and procedures have stolen my children from me. If I ever could find a way to get my hands on the people responsible for this, I would be sure to make them confront what they are and what they have done before I ended their pathetic lives."

I may not got as far as you stated, but my feelings are similar to yours. In their goal to control every facet of the organization JWs worship, WT leaders will not stop at anything from accomplishing their goals of full-control = "unity at all costs," as one WT official stated in the 1950s during a court case.

I for one have suffered so much for the last 24 years since I disassociated from the WT org. I have a big family which for the most part are absent in my life, and I feel the pangs of loneliness quite often. The hurt has been so great that I have found it difficult to be social with others. What the Society's practices do to these outcasts may not be direct physical murder, but they come very close to expunge the living spirit out of every moving ex-JW, just to save face before men.

Their control is extremely dangerous, and I wish governments would take a more active role in preventing religious groups from exercising so much damage. Like others noted here, the WT should know that the Bible does not support such drastic un-Christian practices. I believe they know it does not, but for the sake of the organization, they still do it. That's evil!

30

The Mosaic Law (Is it still Valid)

by objectivetruth in

i'm interested to know of some of your view points out this.. is the mosaic law still valid, and should it be followed.

or as many claim was it done away with?.

from my examination of scripture, i feel that it is still valid, and christ did not do away with it.. briefly here are the primary reasons i feel this way :.

Wonderment

The Jewish system with its laws were "a shadow of things to come," since the reality was Jesus Christ.

The new Christian Law opened the way for Gentiles to join Christianity. The wall between both groups came down. Many of the Judaic laws do not apply any longer. Do we still have to offer animal sacrifices? Do we have a "High Priest" other than Christ? Is there a physical temple to limit Christian worship to one locality? No!

Under Christian Law, the mosaic laws do not apply , but obviously some of the principles of the old system carry over to the new. Scriptures can guide us as to which principles are still valid, and which are not. The new arrangement is simpler, but requires greater conscience responsiblity from the individual than the old setup ever did, a principle expressed in Romans. Interestingly, some of the Bible books (Galatians; Hebrews) were written to warn others from falling back to the old system, which would negate Christ's sacrifice and its superiority over it.

30

The Mosaic Law (Is it still Valid)

by objectivetruth in

i'm interested to know of some of your view points out this.. is the mosaic law still valid, and should it be followed.

or as many claim was it done away with?.

from my examination of scripture, i feel that it is still valid, and christ did not do away with it.. briefly here are the primary reasons i feel this way :.

Wonderment

Romans chapter 14 seems to indicate that the old Jewish system with its sabbaths, specific diet, and special days observed were done away with.

The word "lawless" (or "unprincipled") of 2 Peter 3:17 refers to "a person who breaks through the restraint of law to satisfy selfish desire the lawless one, the licentious person (2P 2.7)." (Friberg & Miller) There is still a Christian law which Christians must abide by.

15

The word [other] in NWT

by apostate man in

sorry this is so long, but here is a series of e-mails i sent to the jehovah's witnesses united site and their response.

it has to do with the nwt inserting the word [other]in col 1:16,17 and phil 2:9. pick it apart as you may.

you may need an hour or two to read all of it.. (my original e-mail).

Wonderment

The scripture of Col. 1.16 is dealt with extensively here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/209607822/Colossians-1-16-Is-the-translation-all-other-things-appropriate

36

I'm tired of the org misquoting scholars to support there heretical NWT

by yogosans14 in

day after day jws are constantly fighting with me over the internet that the nwt is the most accurate translation and then they prove it by quoting scholars from the watchtower magazines.

they tell me i'm biased and there rendering of john 1:1 as "a god" is approved by scholars but i have researched there so called "supporters" and i have found they have tooken what they said out of context to twist the scriptures to there liking.. .

dr. julius r. mantey (who is even recognized by the watchtower as a greek scholar since they quote his book on page 1158 of their kingdom interlinear translation): calls the watchtower translation of john 1:1 "a grossly misleading translation.

Wonderment

yogosans14: "Jesus is both Man and God."

Can you name just one scripture which confirms that?

yogosans14: "If Jesus is a god then isn't that polytheism? If Jesus is a god and Jehovah is the only true God is Jesus a false or true God? If he is a true God then he is NOT the only true God. If Jesus is not God then why does he tell people to come to him and not the father (Matt 11:28)?"

It seems you are attempting to use the term "god" with the narrowed definitions of Trinitarians. But the Bible shows the term "god" has a few more connotations than generally acknowledged by churchgoers:

The International Standard BibleEncyclopedia explains: “This word [elohim] can in fact, be used for other gods (Gen. 31:30) and even for men (cf. Ex. 4:16; 7:1; cf BDB, p. 43)."

Robert Young: " God—is used of any one (professedly) mighty, whether truly so or not, and is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods, Magistrates, judges, angels, prophets, etc ., e.g. Ex. 7:1 ; ... John 1:1 ; 10:33, 34, 35; 20:28 ...." – Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible.

Was Moses a false god? Were angels false gods? Was Jesus a false god? No, they were not. The term "god" when used of anyone other than God conveys the sense that that someone is in a position of power, is godlike, or is serving as God's representative.

About John 1:1, although there is no hard rule, it should be noted that "when a Greek noun lacks the definite article, it normally will be translated as indefinite." ( A Primer of Biblical Greek) It is not shocking then to read "a god" in various versions of Jn 1.1c.

Harner showed that predicate nouns without the article normally are qualitative in nature. His study was so convincing that nowadays there is hardly any scholar insisting that such predicates are definite, turning around Colwell's earlier premise.

Of John 1.1, doctor BeDuhn had this to say:

" In John 1:1, the Word is not the one-and-only God, but  it is  a  god, or divine being . I know
 that sounds strange and even seems impossible coming from the pen of a Christian writer. 
 But  thefact remains that that is what John wrote . His purpose in doing so was, at least in
 part, to avoid the notion that God the Father himself incarnated as Christ. The one who
 incarnated was somehow distinct from ‘God’ while still being 'a god.' " Truth in Translation.

yogosans14: "If Jesus is not God then why does he tell people to come to him and not the father (Matt 11:28)?"

Jesus never said others should never go to the Father and only to him. He asked his disciples ‘to come to him’ to find relief from the many heavy religious burdens being imposed by religious leaders. Jesus was sent by God with a mission of the salvation of men. The Jewish people as well of the rest of the world needed to recognize that Jesus was ‘the way to the Father.’

This fact can remind us of Moses when as mediator between God and Israel said: " Moses answered him [Jethro], ‘Because the people come to me to seek God's will.’ " (Exodus 18.15) Does this account prove Moses was God?

Polytheism was never an issue when powerful men acted on behalf of God, not even to Jesus, God's Son. (John 10.33-36)

36

I'm tired of the org misquoting scholars to support there heretical NWT

by yogosans14 in

day after day jws are constantly fighting with me over the internet that the nwt is the most accurate translation and then they prove it by quoting scholars from the watchtower magazines.

they tell me i'm biased and there rendering of john 1:1 as "a god" is approved by scholars but i have researched there so called "supporters" and i have found they have tooken what they said out of context to twist the scriptures to there liking.. .

dr. julius r. mantey (who is even recognized by the watchtower as a greek scholar since they quote his book on page 1158 of their kingdom interlinear translation): calls the watchtower translation of john 1:1 "a grossly misleading translation.

Wonderment

ecan6:

You made some valid points about the uncertainty of some scriptural statements, and how many today bicker about without substance about many things not clear in Scripture.

yogosans14: "I no longer have to work for my salvation."

Whatever you meant with these words, I suppose you have weighted them carefully against Paul's own at Phil. 2:12, "Keep working out your own salvation with fear and trembling."

A couple of you wisely mentioned one reason why Mantey would carry the KIT translation with him, i.e. having the Wescott & Hort Greek Text handily in a small package. Very good! I missed that one when I made my comments.

Vidqun: Thank u for the J. W. Wenham quote regarding Jn 1.1.

36

I'm tired of the org misquoting scholars to support there heretical NWT

by yogosans14 in

day after day jws are constantly fighting with me over the internet that the nwt is the most accurate translation and then they prove it by quoting scholars from the watchtower magazines.

they tell me i'm biased and there rendering of john 1:1 as "a god" is approved by scholars but i have researched there so called "supporters" and i have found they have tooken what they said out of context to twist the scriptures to there liking.. .

dr. julius r. mantey (who is even recognized by the watchtower as a greek scholar since they quote his book on page 1158 of their kingdom interlinear translation): calls the watchtower translation of john 1:1 "a grossly misleading translation.

Wonderment

Mantey: "I have never read any New Testament so badly translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures.... it is a distortion of the New Testament."

According to Walter Martin, Mantey carried the KIT with him as he traveled. This brings up a question. Why would a scholar of his caliber bother to take the WT KIT with him if it was so badly translated? Me thinks, he found a lot of good in it which he did not want to admit publicly. If that wasn't the case, and his motive was to criticise it at every oportunity he got, it would show that Mantey was emotionally obsessed in proving the WT wrong, which would indicate he wasn't much different from WT and Evangelical fanatics.