Posts by Elder-Patrol

11

Is God so small?

by Doug Mason in

if a grieving muslim prays to her god, does he refuse to listen?

does god refuse to provide comfort because she did not say yahweh?.

if a person who believes in god calls him/her "allah", does god turn his back like a petulant child?.

Elder-Patrol

Perhaps this question was posed under the misbelief that JWs believe this. They do not.

JWs, like all Christians, recognize that the only absolute requirement for prayer is faith, which implies humility and persistence (see (Luke 11:5-13; 18:1-14).

JWs believe that a prayerful person of faith will eventually, somehow, receive Bible knowledge through the action of holy spirit and angelic direction, including knowledge about Christ and about Christian principles. At that point, the Bible teaches that certain human actions and willful inactions can block prayer.

(Proverbs 15:29) Jehovah is far away from the wicked ones, but the prayer of the righteous ones he hears.
(Proverbs 28:9) He that is turning his ear away from hearing the law—even his prayer is something detestable.
(Isaiah 1:15) Even though you make many prayers, I [God] am not listening
(Micah 3:4) At that time they will call to Jehovah for aid, but he will not answer them. And he will conceal his face from them

For example, the Bible says the following about a husband who doesn't respect his wife...

(1 Peter 3:7) You husbands, continue dwelling in like manner with [your wives] according to knowledge...in order for your prayers not to be hindered.

16

Anyone any profound experience?

by bez in

jw
friends

since leaving the borg a couple month back i have as some of you know seemed to get lower and lower.

my friends have slowly but surely drifted and we (my hubby and i) are treated very much like 'apostates' now and have been tried to be shoved out by them trying to get us to da ourselves.

and now i feel quite lost and am really struggling.. at first i continued to pray to god, believing he was listening and i could draw comfort from the inner peace i seemed to feel???

Elder-Patrol

Sadly, many former JWs would claim you feel nothing because there is nothing. Atheism doesn't seem useful.

JWs would likely note that a person who distances himself from the congregations thereby distances himself from God.

(James 4:6-11) God opposes the haughty ones, but he gives undeserved kindness to the humble ones.” Subject yourselves, therefore, to God... Draw close to God, and he will draw close to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you indecisive ones. ...Humble yourselves in the eyes of Jehovah, and he will exalt you. Quit speaking against one another, brothers

(James 5:14-15) Is there anyone sick among you? Let him call the older men of the congregation to him, and let them pray over him, greasing him with oil in the name of Jehovah. 15 And the prayer of faith will make the indisposed one well, and Jehovah will raise him up. Also, if he has committed sins, it will be forgiven him.

23

UN & NGO - PRO-WT Apologetics is TOP HIT on Google search!

by Essan in

i typed in 'watchtower ngo' into google search the other day and was shocked to see that the top result was for a pro-wtbts site called 'jehovahsjudgement'.

i'm very disappointed by this because it means that one of the first sites jw's searching for the truth about the society's involvement with the un are going to come across is this deceitful apologetics page which tries to make it seem like the society affiliating with the un is no big deal and perfectly acceptable!.

this pro-wtbts site is successfully debunked by a response site - http://jehovahsjudgmentexposed.blogspot.com/ - which takes apart their excuses and manipulative deceptions fairly expertly, but still, this site doesn't appear when you do a google search and i had to look really hard to find it.

Elder-Patrol

That website is hilarious! Check ths out:

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/appendix_prophet.html

Prophet

Dr. Evil

It's a very professionally-designed site, well presented and entertaining. Furthermore, it gets an impressive amount of traffic (not just click-throughs). It would be extremely hard to bump this site down in the Google results.

54

How to deal with "Whoe other than JW are preching today?"

by Simon Morley in

my bil (active dub) has begun to ask me why we are not "active" anymore.

after a few careful (non-dfing) comments and observations he asks "well who other than jw's are preaching the good news in fullfillment of matt 24:14?

i responded with the comment that billions of christ's followers worldwide, down through history for over 19 centuries have been selfless in preaching globally.

Elder-Patrol

This is where critics seem to have lost any semblance of objectivity. Criticize what you will about JWs, make ad hominem attacks on Rutherford (who died almost seventy years ago), argue that Christians aren't really obliged to spread "the good news".

But don't pretend there is nothing unique in the evangelism efforts of Jehovah's Witnesses. That just sounds ill-informed and bitter.

54

Can you "fornicate" with your marriage mate? I've heard the WTBTS says that you can. Is this true?

by ultrabimbo in

jw
friends

is it true that the current thinking of jehovah's witnesses is that you can "fornicate" with your marriage mate if you engage in sexual activity that is not approved by the writing department at bethel?

what are some examples?.

ultrabimbo.

Elder-Patrol

"Kidding"? No, its not a joking matter.

Likely The Watchtower commented on rape to discourage readers from ostracizing an innocent victim according to some outdated idea. In the 1970s (and still today) many backward parts of the world would ignorantly consider rape to have essentially ended the life of even a good victim!

Here in this forum, WT quotes are too often seen through an urbane prism rather than through the less-sophisticated eyes of rural readers in developing lands.

So what were WT readers told?
"Hey, if a woman resists her rapist, then she isn't a whore and you shouldn't treat her like she did anything wrong."

Comments like that weren't needed because JWs were/are mean, but because the religion drew and draws from an intercultural mass of humanity, some of which were in fact grossly misogynistic.

Bringing the discussion back to what most here are used to...
It's obvious that a woman who says "no" has resisted, and a man who ignores that and proceeds with sex acts commits "rape". And it's beyond obvious that resistance is not always possible (especially involving so-called "roofies").

Matters aren't always so cut-and-dried in practice. Globally (and in Europe/USA), I'd guess JWs want the best for their young women (and middle aged and old). Sadly, I have spoken with parents and with naive girls who did not quite agree to sex but who were certainly not forced into sex. Should such a girl be told that she was raped?

Or should she be comforted and consoled and taught ways to unambiguously communicate her future unwillingness to engage in sex? What about the second or third time she has sex even though she did not explicitly disagree or agree with it?

A woman who resists sexual advances hasn't committed fornication even if she is raped. She shouldn't be ostracized, but she should also be interested in making her unwillingness unambiguous. It's a disservice to tell a young girl otherwise.

15

Personal thoughts as a new parent

by Highlander in

i'm in the living room, watching my wife interact with our baby girl.

the pure joy and innocence emanating from my beautiful baby is beyond anything i could have every imagined.

i see the smile on my wife's face.

Elder-Patrol

Again, intelligently arguing against the biblicality or practicality of a particular JW position is one thing.

Saying that millions of JW parents don't love their children enough is another.

Perhaps an atheist would view the matter differently from a "believer", but I'd have thought it understood that principles have a special place in our humanity, whether a person's principles relate to her patriotism, devotion, idealism, or even nongod humanism. In any of those cases, it seems wrong to oversimplify principles as though they were no different from any other personal preference. A person's principles may seem foolish, but they may be in contrast with his preferences and do not indicate what he loves or doesn't love. A Christian might note that God does not love his ransom principle MORE than He loves Jesus, yet John 3:16 stands.

Have you ever studied the so-called "double effect"? The idea has always struck me as amazingly untrusting in God. As I already said, however, an atheist would likely view the matter differently.

54

Can you "fornicate" with your marriage mate? I've heard the WTBTS says that you can. Is this true?

by ultrabimbo in

jw
friends

is it true that the current thinking of jehovah's witnesses is that you can "fornicate" with your marriage mate if you engage in sexual activity that is not approved by the writing department at bethel?

what are some examples?.

ultrabimbo.

Elder-Patrol

The problem is that they used to teach that you were guilty of fornication if you did not scream or resist, and as recently as 2008 one of the GB stated that they think this is a reasonable position.

Except that "resist" doesn't mean what critics pretend it means. If a man seeks sex with a woman and she makes absolutely no statement or gesture of 'resistance', is it rape? It seems better for an unwilling woman to make her unwillingness unambiguous, no? Would it be better for her to 'resist' or be 'unresisting'?

Yes, JWs don't expect victims of bona fide rape to have been 'unresisting'. No, JWs have never required screaming as proof of resistance. It's simply that vocal resistance was thought to be unambiguous (and effective? and scriptural?), and available to an unarmed woman.

Here are two references from 1984 and 1968:

*** g84 6/8 p. 28 From Our Readers ***
For the victim to be considered guilty of fornication there would need to be proof of willing consent.

*** w68 6/1 p. 347 The Christian’s View of Self-Defense ***
So by no means would it be proper quietly to submit to rape, as that would be consenting to fornication.

Today, in 2010, neither statement seems particularly troubling to me. Even a mild protestation is different than 'quietly submiting to rape', isn't it?

15

Personal thoughts as a new parent

by Highlander in

i'm in the living room, watching my wife interact with our baby girl.

the pure joy and innocence emanating from my beautiful baby is beyond anything i could have every imagined.

i see the smile on my wife's face.

Elder-Patrol

To the true believer, the matter is more of principle than of the hereafter.

In any event, it's insulting and counter-productive to argue that JWs do not love their children, or to insist that a typical JW parent would not give his life for that of his child. Even if a critic has issues with JW leadership or some JW policy, why insult millions of rank-and-file Witnesses by claiming that they literally sacrifice their children for their own selfish well-being?

JWs claim that the primary reason for their obedience is to honor God, and there seems no objective basis upon which to question that conviction while not questioning the convictions of others.

What if soldiers demanded that a mother spit on the flag or her children would be killed?

What if a pregnant mother carrying triplets was told that all are in danger unless she aborts one?

It seems likely that many mothers would refuse to spit on the flag and would refuse to abort one of three unborn children. Yet, it seems intellectually dishonest and grossly oversimplified to say either mother crassly valued her own preference over her children.

54

Can you "fornicate" with your marriage mate? I've heard the WTBTS says that you can. Is this true?

by ultrabimbo in

jw
friends

is it true that the current thinking of jehovah's witnesses is that you can "fornicate" with your marriage mate if you engage in sexual activity that is not approved by the writing department at bethel?

what are some examples?.

ultrabimbo.

Elder-Patrol

The answer is unequivocally: No. Consenting sexual activity involving only a husband and wife cannot constitute "fornication" according to JWs.

Within a marriage, oral sex and anal sex are merely "uncleanness" (similar to the use of profanity or viewing of soft-core pornography). Officially, Jehovah's Witnesses eschew all uncleanness. Unofficially, a couple who occasionally dabble in the practices are expected to work on their own to overcome it. They can involve elders but they don't need to and it's not judicial.

Only eventually, such as if one spouse continues to force it upon the other, the harasser may be considered guilty of the serious sin of "gross uncleanness with greediness". Another hypothetical would be if either or both spouses seem to advocate the practices, then they may be considered guilty of the serious sin of "loose conduct" (that is, a brazen disregard for propriety). Neither form of serious sin allows divorce with the possibilty of remarriage, per JWs.

The fact that someone heard something from some elder somewhere is worse than useless information, since there's both hearsay and a good chance the original hick elder was wrong anyway. A recent letter to elders says that judicial committees continue to try to disfellowship people for soft-core pornography, even though in most cases it isn't considered a serious sin (the branch reverses disfellowshippings like that). Also, the Flock book clearly states that the victim of rape has not committed fornication; the fact that they have to spell out something so obvious is strong evidence that certain elders are so ignorant it's scary.

13

If I become a JW will I have to go door to door?

by Darth plaugeis in

of course not.

no one forces you to do that, it's totally your decision.. lol remember that!

!.

Elder-Patrol

Yes and no.

JWs allow any type of formal or informal ministry to be equally reportable. However, door-to-door has a special place in the Witness mindset and it will soon seem odd to others if a publisher seems to continually find excuses to avoid it altogether.

Though it's arguable, the scriptures certainly tend to support the idea of door-to-door evangelizing. After all, how can you shake the dust off your feet at an unwelcoming house if you never approach any houses?

(Matthew 10:14) Wherever anyone does not take you in or listen to your words, on going out of that house or that city shake the dust off your feet.